Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
Theory for the practice of environmental assessment : mutual adjustment, critical rationality, and power in planning and decision making
This thesis develops theory for the practice of Environmental Assessment (EA) by integrating philosophies with theories and models from the fields of EA, decision making, and city and regional planning. The thesis articulates a theory of the political economy ofEA (a macro theory), which describes w...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Department of Environmental and Geographical Science
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1867613231590146048 |
|---|---|
| access_status_str | Open Access |
| author | Hill, Richard Charles |
| author_browse | Hill, Richard Charles |
| author_facet | Hill, Richard Charles |
| author_sort | Hill, Richard Charles |
| collection | Thesis |
| description | This thesis develops theory for the practice of Environmental Assessment (EA) by integrating philosophies with theories and models from the fields of EA, decision making, and city and regional planning. The thesis articulates a theory of the political economy ofEA (a macro theory), which describes why and how EA works to regulate proposals through a set of relations between the state, the economy, and civil society. 1 Implicit and explicit theoretical models from the EA literature are analysed to identify facets of EA vital to its success in influencing planning and decision making. The facets are used together with a range of philosophical insights to develop a theory of the EA planning process (a middle range theory). This theory interlinks two primary concepts, namely, critical rationality and mutual adjustment. Derived from modernist planning theory, critical rationality is most pertinent to the assessment and decision taking stages of EA. Poststructural and postmodern critiques have disparaged rationality as an inappropriate approach to decision making. The thesis argues that a reinvigorated, intersubjective, and critical approach to rationality is essential in EA, and may be beneficial in planning. A formalised process of mutual adjustment, sourced from theories of public sector decision making and the impact statement strategy of the United States, is most appropriate in the decision making (or decision shaping) that occurs in scoping and evaluation. In multi-actor decision making, participants adjust to each other's interests in agreeing on a course of action, in a process that embodies social learning. Where mutual adjustment fails and consensual action is not possible, a decision must be imposed subject to the conditions of critical rationality. Two further concepts from theories of decision making have a subsidiary role in this theory. The extent of inquiry in an EA is decided somewhere on a continuum from comprehensive to satisficing, as a function of the significance of impacts and a desired level of precaution; and mixed scanning provides advice on how to go about the iterative processes in EA. The theory of the EA planning process is elaborated for each of the stages of scoping, assessment, evaluation, and decision. A significant addition to the theory is the notion that sequential versions of a continuously evolving, living document should be prepared as the EA process advances, eventually forming the basis for an EA report. The theoretical models sourced from the EA literature are synthesised into two main models that reflect the dialectic of EA - its inherent contradiction. The inquiry-inpolitics model provides an aspiration for practice as the way in which the EA planning process ought to work. The second EA model - the power-in-politics model, acknowledges that power determines the extent to which rationality will be respected, or corrupted. The model draws attention to the need for EA to address issues of environmental justice and environmental democracy. A number of measures to curb power and advance justice in EA are presented, including analyses of actor configurations and power relations, and the adoption by EA professionals of a moral obligation to the disadvantaged and to the environment. |
| format | Thesis |
| id | oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/40109 |
| institution | University of Cape Town (South Africa) |
| language | eng |
| last_indexed | 2026-06-10T12:32:51.499Z |
| license_str | Not specified — see source repository |
| provenance_str_mv | Harvested via OAI-PMH from UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| publishDateRange | 2024 |
| publishDateSort | 2024 |
| publisher | Department of Environmental and Geographical Science |
| publisherStr | Department of Environmental and Geographical Science |
| record_format | dspace |
| source_str | UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository |
| spelling | oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/40109 Theory for the practice of environmental assessment : mutual adjustment, critical rationality, and power in planning and decision making Hill, Richard Charles Environmental and Geographical Science This thesis develops theory for the practice of Environmental Assessment (EA) by integrating philosophies with theories and models from the fields of EA, decision making, and city and regional planning. The thesis articulates a theory of the political economy ofEA (a macro theory), which describes why and how EA works to regulate proposals through a set of relations between the state, the economy, and civil society. 1 Implicit and explicit theoretical models from the EA literature are analysed to identify facets of EA vital to its success in influencing planning and decision making. The facets are used together with a range of philosophical insights to develop a theory of the EA planning process (a middle range theory). This theory interlinks two primary concepts, namely, critical rationality and mutual adjustment. Derived from modernist planning theory, critical rationality is most pertinent to the assessment and decision taking stages of EA. Poststructural and postmodern critiques have disparaged rationality as an inappropriate approach to decision making. The thesis argues that a reinvigorated, intersubjective, and critical approach to rationality is essential in EA, and may be beneficial in planning. A formalised process of mutual adjustment, sourced from theories of public sector decision making and the impact statement strategy of the United States, is most appropriate in the decision making (or decision shaping) that occurs in scoping and evaluation. In multi-actor decision making, participants adjust to each other's interests in agreeing on a course of action, in a process that embodies social learning. Where mutual adjustment fails and consensual action is not possible, a decision must be imposed subject to the conditions of critical rationality. Two further concepts from theories of decision making have a subsidiary role in this theory. The extent of inquiry in an EA is decided somewhere on a continuum from comprehensive to satisficing, as a function of the significance of impacts and a desired level of precaution; and mixed scanning provides advice on how to go about the iterative processes in EA. The theory of the EA planning process is elaborated for each of the stages of scoping, assessment, evaluation, and decision. A significant addition to the theory is the notion that sequential versions of a continuously evolving, living document should be prepared as the EA process advances, eventually forming the basis for an EA report. The theoretical models sourced from the EA literature are synthesised into two main models that reflect the dialectic of EA - its inherent contradiction. The inquiry-inpolitics model provides an aspiration for practice as the way in which the EA planning process ought to work. The second EA model - the power-in-politics model, acknowledges that power determines the extent to which rationality will be respected, or corrupted. The model draws attention to the need for EA to address issues of environmental justice and environmental democracy. A number of measures to curb power and advance justice in EA are presented, including analyses of actor configurations and power relations, and the adoption by EA professionals of a moral obligation to the disadvantaged and to the environment. 2024-07-02T09:37:22Z 2024-07-02T09:37:22Z 2004 2024-07-01T08:03:08Z Thesis / Dissertation Doctoral PhD http://hdl.handle.net/11427/40109 eng application/pdf Department of Environmental and Geographical Science Faculty of Science |
| spellingShingle | Environmental and Geographical Science Hill, Richard Charles Theory for the practice of environmental assessment : mutual adjustment, critical rationality, and power in planning and decision making |
| thesis_degree_str | Doctoral |
| title | Theory for the practice of environmental assessment : mutual adjustment, critical rationality, and power in planning and decision making |
| title_full | Theory for the practice of environmental assessment : mutual adjustment, critical rationality, and power in planning and decision making |
| title_fullStr | Theory for the practice of environmental assessment : mutual adjustment, critical rationality, and power in planning and decision making |
| title_full_unstemmed | Theory for the practice of environmental assessment : mutual adjustment, critical rationality, and power in planning and decision making |
| title_short | Theory for the practice of environmental assessment : mutual adjustment, critical rationality, and power in planning and decision making |
| title_sort | theory for the practice of environmental assessment mutual adjustment critical rationality and power in planning and decision making |
| topic | Environmental and Geographical Science |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/11427/40109 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT hillrichardcharles theoryforthepracticeofenvironmentalassessmentmutualadjustmentcriticalrationalityandpowerinplanninganddecisionmaking |