Article (Scientific journals)
Siting Controversies Analysis: Framework and Method for Questioning the Procedure
Rossignol, Nicolas; Parotte, Céline; Joris, Geoffrey et al.
2014In Journal of Risk Research
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
 

Files


Full Text
Rossignol et al - (Published) JRR - EOL Siting controversies analysis.pdf
Publisher postprint (297.65 kB)
Download

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.

Send to



Details



Keywords :
Siting Controversies; Windfarms; Participation
Abstract :
[en] Siting controversies are commonplace, as well against the construction of roads, railways, nuclear waste disposals, as against windfarms. Local citizens resist against siting decisions taken by the authorities, following a dynamics often quoted as ‘Not In My Back Yard’. Yet contested for its lack of analytical value, NIMBY is still used strategically by actors to qualify citizens as irrational and egoistic. Beyond this labelling, many factors are investigated to understand the dynamics behind siting controversies. In this paper, we focus on the impact of the legal procedure structuring the implantation of windfarms in the Walloon Region (Belgium), and its translations within different decision making processes in specific case studies. To that regard, we consider the legal procedure as a ‘public policy instrument’. It is neither neutral nor natural, and carry values and interests. It organizes inter-personal relations between actors, and is potentially catalyzer of frustrations. In addition, this legal procedure is the object of translations within different contexts, including different actors participating to specific decision making processes. The empirical approach of this paper is based on case studies data and on the use of an innovative methodology called ‘Open Process Workshop’. This methodology consists in a structured workshop with key stakeholders, during which the legal procedure is questioned. Overall, we demonstrate that the focus on the legal procedure - and its translations within different decision making processes - allows systemic analysis providing deep understandings of controversies and reaffirming the interlinks between ‘the social’ and ‘the technical’ in such controversies. In addition, we argue that the methodology used fosters the production of innovative knowledge, mutual understanding and collective learning between the participants.
Research center :
Spiral
Disciplines :
Sociology & social sciences
Political science, public administration & international relations
Author, co-author :
Rossignol, Nicolas ;  Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de science politique > Anal. et éval. des politiques publ.-Méthod. de sc. politique
Parotte, Céline  ;  Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de science politique > Politique européenne
Joris, Geoffrey ;  Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de science politique > Sciences administratives
Fallon, Catherine ;  Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de science politique > Département de science politique
Language :
English
Title :
Siting Controversies Analysis: Framework and Method for Questioning the Procedure
Publication date :
02 December 2014
Journal title :
Journal of Risk Research
ISSN :
1366-9877
eISSN :
1466-4461
Publisher :
Routledge, Abingdon, United Kingdom
Special issue title :
Siting Controversies Analysis
Peer reviewed :
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
Funders :
Electrabel GDF-Suez
Available on ORBi :
since 28 October 2014

Statistics


Number of views
189 (23 by ULiège)
Number of downloads
52 (9 by ULiège)

Scopus citations®
 
5
Scopus citations®
without self-citations
5
OpenCitations
 
2

Bibliography


Similar publications



Contact ORBi