Advertisement

Distributed Responsibility in Risk Governance

Chapter
First Online:
  • 1.1k Downloads
Part of the Strategies for Sustainability book series (STSU)

Abstract

The principles of responsibility and accountability have increasingly become a significant concept for the political capability to act independently and make decisions without superior authorization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Bäckstrand, K. (2003). Civic science for sustainability: reframing the role of experts, policy-makers and citizens in environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 3(4), 24–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society. Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Beierle, T. C., & Cayford, J. (2002). Democracy in practice. Public participation in environmental decisions. Resources for the Future: Washington.Google Scholar
  4. Bevir, M. (2011). Governance as theory, practice and dilemma. In M. Bevir (Ed.), The sage handbook of governance (pp. 1–16). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Forst, R. (2001). The rule of Reasons. Three models of deliberative democracy. Ratio Juris, 14(4), 345–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Funtowicz, S. A., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for a post-normal age. Futures, 25, 739–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goodin, R. E. (2008). Innovating democracy. Democratic theory and practice after the deliberative turn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goodin, R. E., & Dryzek, J. S. (2006). Deliberative impacts: The macro-political uptake of mini-publics. Politics & Society, 34(2), 219–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haas, P. M. (2004). When does power listen to truth? A constructivist approach to the policy process. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(4), 569–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hampel, J., Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2001). Beyond “red” hope and “green” distrust. Public perceptions of genetic engineering in Germany. Polite, 16(60), 68–82.Google Scholar
  13. IRGC, International Risk Governance Council. (2013). Risk governance guidelines for unconventional gas developments. Lausanne: IRGC.Google Scholar
  14. James, B. (1997). Deliberative democracy and effective social freedom: Capabilities, resources and opportunities. In J. Bohman, & W. Rehg (Eds.), Deliberative democracy. Essays on reason and politics (pp. 321–348). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Jasanoff, S. (1990). The fifth branch: science advisors as policymakers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Klinke, A. (2006). Demokratisches REGIeren jenseits des Staates. Deliberative Politik im nordamerikanischen Große Seen-Regime. Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publisher.Google Scholar
  17. Klinke, A. (2009). Deliberative Politik in transnationalen Räumen—demokratische Legitimation und Effektivität der grenzüberschreitenden Wasser- und Umweltpolitik zwischen Kanada und USA. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 50(4), 774–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klinke, A. (2016). Democratic theory. In C. Ansell & J. Torfing (Eds.), Handbook on theories of governance (pp. 86–100). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Klinke, A., Dreyer, M., Renn, O., Stirling, A., & van Zwanenberg, P. (2006). Precautionary risk regulation in European governance. Journal of Risk Research, 9(4), 373–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2002). A new approach to risk evaluation and management: risk-based, precaution-based and discourse-based strategies. Risk Analysis, 22(6), 1071–1094.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2010). Risk governance: Contemporary and future challenges. In J. Eriksson, M. Gilek, & C. Ruden (Eds.), Regulating chemical risk: Multidisciplinary perspectives on european and global challenges (pp. 9–27). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2014). Expertise and experience: A deliberative system of a functional division of labor for post-normal risk governance. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 27(4), 442–465.Google Scholar
  23. Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2012). Adaptive and integrative governance on risk and uncertainty. Journal of Risk Research, 15(3), 273–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liberatore, A., & Funtowicz, S. A. (2003). ‘Democratizing’ expertise, ‘expertising’ democracy: What does this mean, and why bother? Science and Public Policy, 30(3), 146–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. MacKenzie, M. K., & Warren, M. E. (2012). Two trust-based uses of minipublics in democratic systems. In J. Mansbridge, & J. Parkinson (Eds.), Deliberative systems. Deliberative democracy at a larger scale (pp. 95–124). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Mansbridge, J. (2006). Conflict and self-interest in deliberation. In S. Besson, & J. L. Marti (Eds.) Deliberative democracy and its discontent (pp. 107–132). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  27. Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Estlund, D., Follesdal, A., Fung, A., Lafont, C., Manin, B., & Marti, J. L. (2010). The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), 64–100.Google Scholar
  28. Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Christiano, T., Fung, A., Parkinson, J., Thompson, D. F., & Warren,M. E. (2012). A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In J. Mansbridge, & J. Parkinson (Eds.), Deliberative systems. Deliberative democracy at a larger scale, (pp. 1–26). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. National Research Council. (2008). Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making. Washington: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  30. Parkinson, J. (2006). Deliberating in the real world. Problems of Legitimacy in Deliberative Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Renn, O., Webler, T., & Wiedemann, P. M. (Eds.). (1995). Fairness and competence in citizen participation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  32. Renn, O., Klinke, A., & van Asselt, M. (2011). Coping with complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity in risk governance: A synthesis. AMBIO, 40(2), 231–246.Google Scholar
  33. Renn, O. (2015). Ethikkommission: Wie legitim ist die Legitimation der Politik durch Wissenschaft? In P. Weingart, & G.G. Wagner (Eds.), Wissenschaftliche Politikberatung im Praxistest (pp. 17–34). Velbrück: Weilerswist.Google Scholar
  34. Simone, C. (2012). Deliberation and mass democracy. In J. Mansbridge, & J. Parkinson (Eds.), Deliberative systems. deliberative democracy at a larger scale (pp. 52–71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Thomas, C. (2012). Rational Deliberation among Experts and Citizens. In J. Mansbridge, & J. Parkinson (Eds.), Deliberative systems. Deliberative democracy at a larger scale (pp. 27–51). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. WBGU. (2000a). German Advisory Council on Global Environmental Change. World in Transition. Strategies for Managing Global Environmental Risks. Annual Report 1998. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  37. WBGU. (2000b). German Advisory Council on Global Environmental Change. World in Transition. Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Biosphere. Annual Report 1999. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  38. Wildavsky, A. B. (1987). Speaking truth to power: The art and craft of policy analysis. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Memorial University of NewfoundlandCorner BrookCanada
  2. 2.Potsdam Institute for Advanced Sustainability StudiesPotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter