Airport Governance, Politics and Protest Networks

Abstract

It is often alleged that governance networks offer policy actors an efficient practice of social coordination, which has the potential to be more inclusive of multiple stakeholders and more negotiated than its hierarchical or market alternatives (Kickert et al. 1997; Kooiman 2003; Koppenjan & Klijn 2004; Pierre 2000; Rhodes 1997a, 2000b; Stoker 1998). Thus far, however, the burgeoning literature on the techniques of network management has paid little attention to how best to release the democratic potential of governance networks (Hirst 2000; Olsson 2003; Sørensen & Torfing, 2005b). Of course, as Sørensen points out, much rests upon which particular version of democracy is endorsed (2005: 349). Here we adopt the theory of ‘agonistic pluralism’ as our yardstick with which to evaluate and justify putative democratic practices and processes (see Connolly 1991, 1995; Mouffe 2000, 2005; Tully 1999). In this model, actors in the policy process actively and passionately contest substantive issues as adversaries — and not simply as competitors, bargainers or enemies — recognizing each other’s right to differ and disagree.

This chapter builds upon aspects of earlier research presented in Steven Griggs and David Howarth, ‘A Transformative Political Campaign? The New Rhetoric of Protest Against Airport Expansion in the UK’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 2004, Vol. 9, No. 2.