Geoffrey Joris

Siting Controversies Analysis: Framework and Method for Questioning the Procedure

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 labeling, 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 interpersonal 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 of 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.

O princípio da precaução como uma ferramenta estratégica para redesenhar a (sub)política: compreensão e perspectivas da ciência política de língua Francesa

O principio da precaucao esta inserido em um contexto decisional em evolucao, marcado por uma incerteza multidimensional com relacao as consequencias ambientais, economicas, sociais, eticas e politicas das inovacoes tecnologicas. Na ciencia politica de lingua francesa, o principio funciona como uma ferramenta estrategica, uma resposta politica ao surgimento de um novo fluxo de incerteza social, voltada principalmente para as insegurancas do mundo cientifico. Neste trabalho, afirmamos que o principio da precaucao redefine a forma de gerir a incerteza cientifica, em uma sociedade caracterizada pela indefinicao das fronteiras entre atores politicos e subpoliticos. Em sua aplicacao, ha uma linha de ruptura que reduz a margem de manobra decisoria de determinadas entidades subpoliticas, enquanto incentiva outras a agirem. Contudo, enfatizamos que, em um mundo cada vez mais globalizado e interligado, os efeitos da aplicacao do principio da precaucao sao temporarios e locais. Ainda assim, o principio pode contribuir para os importantes debates a serem desenvolvidos em espacos institucionais, para uma acao reflexiva antecipatoria e de apoio a decisao.

Gouvernance et politiques de santé: les chemins de la cohérence

Participation, intersectorialite, reseau et politiques locales sont des concepts-clefs mobilises par les pouvoirs publics dans le domaine de la promotion de la sante. Ces concepts sont mis en œuvre par les acteurs de terrain sans qu’il y ait necessairement une connaissance sur la maniere dont ceux-ci les comprennent.Une initiative participative organisee par le Centre Liegeois de Promotion de la Sante (Province de Liege, Belgique) a cependant permis de mettre en lumiere cette appropriation des concepts par les acteurs de terrain et de nourrir ainsi la reflexion pour tendre vers plus de coherence dans les politiques de sante.