15 Fakultätsübergreifend / Sonstige Einrichtung
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/handle/11682/16
Browse
4 results
Search Results
Item Open Access Public participation in decision making : a three-step procedure(1993) Renn, Ortwin; Webler, Thomas; Rakel, Horst; Dienel, Peter; Johnson, BrandenThis article introduces a novel model of public participation in political decisions structured in three consecutive steps, the model is based on the view that stakeholders, experts and cItizens should each contribute to the planning effort their particular expertise and experience. Stakeholders are valuable resources for eliciting concerns and developing evaluative criteria since their interests are at stake and they have already made attempts to structure and approach the issue. Experts are necessary to provide the data base and the functional relationships between options and impacts. Citizens are the potential victims and benefactors of proposed planning measures, they are the best judges to evaluate the different options available on the basis of the concerns and impacts revealed through the other two groups. The three-step model has been developed and frequently applied as a planning tool in West Germany. We compare this experience with the model's first application in the United States, and conclude that the three-step procedure offers a limited, but promising future for democratizing policy making in the United States.Item Open Access Public participation in hazard management : the use of citizen panels in the U.S.(1991) Renn, Ortwin; Webler, Thomas; Johnson, Branden B.Americans increasingly question decisions of professional risk managers. This trend is most apparent in the areas of nuclear, hazardous chemical and solid waste management. Professionals and the general public strongly disagree about the seriousness of many risks. The professionals use the expected losses per time unit as the major yardstick to evaluate risks. The public is more concerned about long term effects, inequitable siting, lack of personal control, and the pace of technological diffusion into their cultural environment. Citizens also distrust the ability to monitor and control unintended consequences. Decision making should assure that risk management is both efficient and sensitive to public concerns. This paper discusses a novel way to meet both needs. The model was developed in West Germany and, after some alterations, was first applied in the U.S. in a sludge disposal question in New Jersey.Item Open Access Anticipating conflicts : public participation in managing the solid waste crisis(1992) Renn, Ortwin; Webler, ThomasA major problem of environmental policy making is to anticipate potential conflicts among the major participants and to reach a suitable understanding or compromise that meets both competence vis-a-vis the decision problem and fairness vis-a-vis the affected population. This paper introduces a novel model of public involvement in decisions about solid waste disposal in specific and environmental management in general. Structured in three consecutive steps, the model is based on the philosophy that stakeholders, experts, and citizens should each contribute to the environmental planning effort their particular concern and experience. In a first step, the research team elicits the values and criteria for assessing and evaluating policy options from all relevant stakeholders; in a second step, experts are asked to provide performance assessments for each option on each criterion; and in a third step, randomly selected citizens are given the opportunity to evaluate each option on the basis of the concerns and impacts revealed in the previous two steps. This involvement process is illustrated with an example about sewage sludge management.Item Open Access A novel approach to reducing uncertainty : the group Delphi(1991) Webler, Thomas; Levine, Debra; Rakel, Horst; Renn, OrtwinA variation on the conventional Delphi was used to assemble an informational summary of expert opinion regarding the risks involved with the application of sewage sludge to farmland. The aim was to reduce uncertainties surrounding the associated health and environmental risks so agreement among citizens, farmers, and regulators could be reached. An expert panel was assembled for one day to take part in a structured communication process modeled after the Delphi. A two-part questionaire using Likert scaling and open questions was iterated among rotating subgroups to build consensus and define disagreement. Plenary discussions were held between iterations to foster peer review. There was consensus about the risks of heavy metals, pathogens, and nutrients; but clear disagreement about the risk of organic toxins. Existing state regulations were deemed inadequate only for lead and some organic toxins. Expert quantitative ratings were found to differ radically for two hypothetical contexts: academic and public.