Esther Turnhout

How Participation Creates Citizens: Participatory Governance as Performative Practice

Participation is a prominent feature of many decision-making and planning processes. Among its proclaimed benefits is its potential to strengthen public support and involvement. However, participation is also known for having unintended consequences which lead to failures in meeting its objectives. This article takes a critical perspective on participation by discussing how participation may influence the ways in which citizens can become involved. Participation unavoidably involves (1) restrictions about who should be involved and about the space for negotiation, (2) assumptions about what the issue at stake is, and (3) expectations about what the outcome of participation should be and how the participants are expected to behave. This is illustrated by a case study about the Dutch nature area, the Drentsche Aa. The case study demonstrates how the participatory process that took place and the restrictions, assumptions, and expectations that were involved resulted in six forms of citizen involvement, both intended and unintended, which ranged between creativity, passivity, and entrenchment. Based on these findings, the article argues that participation does not merely serve as a neutral place in which citizens are represented, but instead creates different categories of citizens. Recognizing this means reconceiving participation as performative practice. Such a perspective goes beyond overly optimistic views of participation as a technique whose application can be perfected, as well as pessimistic views of participation as repression or domination. Instead, it appreciates both intended and unintended forms of citizen involvement as meaningful and legitimate, and recognizes citizenship as being constituted in interaction in the context of participation.

Conservation policy: Listen to the voices of experience

The intergovernmental body for biodiversity must draw on a much broader range of knowledge and stakeholders than the IPCC, say Esther Turnhout and colleagues.

The effectiveness of boundary objects: the case of ecological indicators

Nature conservation policy relies on ecological indicators to assess ecosystem quality and to evaluate the effectiveness of policy and management. Ecological indicators are science-based instruments that classify nature into different (ecosystem) types, each of which is characterised by specific parameters and references. This paper draws on classification and boundary object theory to analyse two case studies about the role of ecological indicators in nature conservation. The cases show that interpretative flexibility is an important factor explaining the effectiveness of ecological indicators as boundary objects. However, rather than a characteristic of the indicator itself, this is a social achievement, which depends on a common culture of shared values and preferences. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for the concept of boundary objects. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

‘Measurementality’ in biodiversity governance: knowledge, transparency, and the Intergovernmental Science–Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)

Current policies and practices in biodiversity conservation have been increasingly influenced by neoliberal approaches since the 1990s. The authors focus on the principle of transparency as a self-proclaimed basis of neoliberal environmental governance, and on the role of standardized science-based measurements which it purportedly affords. The authors introduce the term ‘measurementality’ to signify the governance logic that emerges when transparency comes to stand next to effectiveness and efficiency as neoliberal principles and to highlight the connections that are forged between economic, managerial, and technocratic discourses. The example of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is used to discuss the role of measurementality in global biodiversity governance. The analysis suggests that IPBES aims to coordinate the science–policy interface in order to optimize the generation of user-friendly knowledge of those elements of biodiversity that are considered politically and economically relevant: At the current economic juncture, these being in essence ecosystem services. Based on these findings, the authors proceed by critically reflecting on the ways in which the measurementality logic of IPBES may not only result in an impoverishment of the biodiversity research agenda, but also in an impoverished understanding of biodiversity itself. To conclude, the authors argue that measurementality is part and parcel of the neoliberal paradigm in which science produces the raw materials for subsequent control and exchange and that, as a result, the intersection of science, discourse, policy, and economics within these governance systems requires sustained critical scrutiny.

Databases, scaling practices, and the globalization of biodiversity

Since the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992, biodiversity has become an important topic for scientific research. Much of this research is focused on measuring and mapping the current state of biodiversity, in terms of which species are present at which places and in which abundance, and making extrapolations and future projections, that is, determining the trends. Biodiversity databases are crucial components of these activities because they store information about biodiversity and make it digitally available. Useful biodiversity databases require data that are reliable, standardized, and fit for up-scaling. This paper uses material from the EBONE-project (European Biodiversity Observation Network) to illustrate how biodiversity databases are constructed, how data are negotiated and scaled, and how biodiversity is globalized. The findings show a continuous interplay between scientific ideals related to objectivity and pragmatic considerations related to feasibility and data availability. Statistics was a crucial feature of the discussions. It also proved to be the main device in up-scaling the data. The material presented shows that biodiversity is approached in an abstract, quantitative, and technical way, disconnected from the species and habitats that make up biodiversity and the people involved in collecting the data. Globalizing biodiversity involves decontextualization and standardization. This paper argues that while this is important if the results of projects like EBONE are to be usable in different contexts, there is a risk involved as it may lead to the alienation from the organizations and volunteers who collect the data upon which these projects rely.

Democratic Legitimacy in the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive in the Netherlands: Towards Participatory and Deliberative Norms?

The European Union (EU) increasingly shapes environmental policy in its member states. By including public participation requirements in environmental directives, the European Commission aims to open up the policy-making process and move from an administrative to a more participatory approach. Participation is considered to contribute to democratic governance, but has been associated with democratic problems as well, as the bases of democratic legitimacy do not automatically change when a participatory approach is implemented. This article uses a discourse-theoretical approach to analyze how participation in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive in the Netherlands took shape and what the implications were for the construction of democratic legitimacy. Our findings show how market and agricultural groups succeeded in dominating the debate by articulating a hegemonic discourse that marginalized environmental demands. Environmental groups did not succeed in turning the debate around, as the participatory and deliberative norms that they ascribed to were not taken up. The case study demonstrates that although the administrative policy-making process was opened up, political dynamics limited the scope for participation. The article concludes by reflecting on the potential of EU governance to promote democratic legitimacy and fulfil participatory and deliberative norms.

Shifting nature conservation approaches in Natura 2000 and the implications for the roles of stakeholders

This paper analyses Natura 2000 as a shifting configuration of different approaches to nature conservation and discusses the consequences of these shifts for the roles of the stakeholders affected by this policy. Natura 2000 started with a technocratic approach that privileged conservation experts and marginalised socio-economic stakeholders. Over time, this approach has been complemented with participatory and economic approaches that offered scope for the inclusion of land users and business actors. However, the analysis also shows that the selective inclusion of economic values and stakeholders in the Natura 2000 framework risks marginalising other important socio-environmental actors.

The Role of Views of Nature in Dutch Nature Conservation: The Case of the Creation of a Drift Sand Area in the Hoge Veluwe National Park

Nature conservation requires choices about what sort of nature should be protected in what areas and includes value judgments on what nature is and/or should be. This paper studies the role of differing views of nature in nature conservation. A case study on the creation of a drift sand area in the Netherlands illustrates how nature conservation disputes can be understood as a conflict in views of nature.

The construction of legitimacy in European nature policy: expertise and participation in the service of cost-effectiveness

In environmental governance, the European Union draws on norms of effectiveness, decentralisation, and participation to ensure that its policies and regulations are considered legitimate. This article analyses how the construction of legitimacy in European nature policy has changed over time. Although the norms of participation and decentralisation are increasingly evoked to address the needs of stakeholders and member states in the implementation and financing of Natura 2000, the norm of effectiveness continues to dominate the construction of legitimacy. Effectiveness first acquired its meaning in the context of a science-based approach to Natura 2000 to emphasise the importance of achieving its conservation objectives. More recently, it has become increasingly re-articulated as cost-effectiveness, which reflects a growing influence of neoliberal discourse. The article concludes by discussing the implications of the findings for the legitimacy of European environmental governance.

Forest and Nature Governance

Problems such as deforestation, biodiversity loss and illegal logging have provoked various policy responses that are often referred to as forest and nature governance. In its broadest interpretation, governance is about the many ways in which public and private actors from the state, market and/or civil society govern public issues at multiple scales. Examples range from the United Nations’ Convention on Biological Diversity to national forest programmes. In studies of forest and nature governance the dominant approaches are rational choice and neo-institutionalism. This book takes another perspective. Departing from ‘practice theory’, and building upon scholars like Giddens, Bourdieu, Reckwitz, Schatzki and Callon, it seeks to move beyond established understandings of institutions, actors, and knowledge. In so doing, the book not only presents an innovative conceptual and methodological framework for a practice based approach, but also rich case studies and ethnographies. Examples are participatory forest management in the tropics, REDD policy at global level, European water policy, forest certification and the construction of global biodiversity databases. Taking social practices as the key unit of analysis, this book describes how different practitioners, ranging from local forest managers on the ground to policy makers at the global level, work with trees, forests, biodiversity, wildlife, and so on, and act upon forest policies, environmental discourses, codes of conduct, or scientific insights. It is also about how communities, NGOs, stakeholders, and citizens get involved in forest and nature governance.