Chapter 7 cultural context
Harding, R., Hendriks, C. M., & Faruqi, M. (2009). Environmental decision-making : exploring complexity and context. Annandale, NSW: Federation Press.
~~~(2002) ” ———” pp. 607-XXX in (below citation)
Bechtel, Robert B. and Arza Churchman, eds.(2002) Handbook of Environmental Psychology, New York: John Wiley & Sons http://www.ebookee.net/Handbook-of-Environmental-Psychology_149169.html ebook
In this chapter (chapter 4), we examine how such contextual factors affect the success of public participation. We focus on three key factors: issue type, levels of preexisting conflict and mistrust, and institutional context (i.e., differences across local, state, and national decision-making processes, or across agencies).3个重要的areas：
1.Type of issues: ” …..appeared to play a very limited role in whether public participation was successful””…” the result has less to do with difference among issue types than with the kinds of public participation processes used…”
2. Preexisting Relationships：” the history of relationships among citizens and between the public and government.” Peelle et al.(1996) and Gould (1991b) argue that ” good preexisting relationships are conductive to public participation success” Landre and Knuth (1993) suggest that an agency’s reputation is also an important factor for success.”………
Despite the plausibility of expectations that the quality of preexisting relationships may influence results, the case study data show little correlation between success and preexisting conflict or preexisting mistrust. 很小的关联between 长久以来的积怨和PP的成功性
We infer that preexisting conflict and mistrust have more impact on the success of public participation when the PP processes are less intensive. In other words, robust participation processes do a better job of transforming poor preexisting relationships than do less robust processes, but a history of conflict is not itself a significant barrier to the prospects of success.（所以历时已久的积怨没什么大不了的，重要的是PP的过程，如果well-sourced/organised/robust PP还可以有积极的改观）
3.Institutional Context：“ the identity of the lead agency and its level of government might play a role in explaining the success of stake holder processes. Agency reputation, organisational culture, funding, capacity, and various other factors may be important…”
….the number of cases for each institution is relatively small, and the results are only suggestive. ….agencies had either delegated responsibility for running the process to another institution or were simply the audiences for decisions or policy recommendations generated by decision processes largely outside of government oversight and responsibility.(委托给别人，自己逃脱责任和职责） Although these distinction affect our conclusions about some aspects of the public participation process in Chapter 5, they make little apparent difference in the success of the cases.
Context and Success（Conclusion）——-
Differences among environmental issues, preexisting relationships, and institutional contexts all appear to play surprisingly small roles in determining whether public participation is successful. These contextual issues certainly play a role in how participatory processes play out, but they do not appear to predetermine outcomes.(只是细节上过程上有变化，对最后结果作用很小）
Much more work on the role of context can be done, ad much of ti can use data from our case study database. A short list of priorities for future research includes examining the complexity of decisions, the degree of scientific uncertainty, the geographic scale of the issue, the complexity of jurisdictional authority, and the degree of programmatic authority.(未来的方向）
Beierle, Thomas C. and Jerry Cayford. (2002)”Chapter 4 : The Context of Public Participation” pp34 in Beierle, Thomas C. and Cayford, J. (2002). Democracy in Practice: Public Participation in Environmental Decisions. Resources for the Future Press
Google books online reading: click….
Aarhus Convention. (2000). Good Practice Handbook., “Public Participation in Making Local Environmental Decisions.” The Aarhus Convention Newcastle Workshop. Department of Forestry, Environment and Regions. UK http://www.unece.org/env/pp/ecases/handbook.pdf
From《Democracy in Practice》—
Democracy in Practiceis unique in clearly describing and analyzing all three existing models of democracy: participatory democracy; referenda and initiatives; and representative or liberal democracy…………
…….The challenge for democracy in the 21st century is not how democracy is achieved but which decisions are taken democratically and which group of people participate.