Institut for Statskundskab

Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action? The costs of consensus-building in Local Agenda 21

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Standard

Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action? The costs of consensus-building in Local Agenda 21. / Brandt, Urs Steiner; Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard.

I: Journal of Environmental Management, Bind 129, 2013, s. 266-273.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Brandt, Urs Steiner ; Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard. / Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action? The costs of consensus-building in Local Agenda 21. I: Journal of Environmental Management. 2013 ; Bind 129. s. 266-273.

Bibtex

@article{f042c72e37d64aaa89d419e9df7a2001,
title = "Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action?: The costs of consensus-building in Local Agenda 21",
abstract = "Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action? Here, Local Agenda 21 is a relevant case as it broadly calls for consensus-building among stakeholders. Consensus-building is, however, costly. We show that the costs of making local decisions are likely to rapidly exceed the benefits. Why? Because as the number of participants grows, the more likely it is that the group will include individuals who have an extreme position and are unwilling to make compromises. Thus, the net gain of self-organization should be compared with those of its alternatives, for example voting, market-solutions, or not making any choices at all. Even though the informational value of meetings may be helpful to policy makers, the model shows that it also decreases as the number of participants increase. Overall, the result is a thought provoking scenario for Local Agenda 21 as it highlights the risk of less sustainable action in the future.",
keywords = "Local participation, Sustainability, Local Agenda 21, Consensus, Free riding",
author = "Brandt, {Urs Steiner} and Svendsen, {Gert Tinggaard}",
year = "2013",
language = "English",
volume = "129",
pages = "266--273",
journal = "Journal of Environmental Management",
issn = "0301-4797",
publisher = "Academic Press",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action?

T2 - The costs of consensus-building in Local Agenda 21

AU - Brandt, Urs Steiner

AU - Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action? Here, Local Agenda 21 is a relevant case as it broadly calls for consensus-building among stakeholders. Consensus-building is, however, costly. We show that the costs of making local decisions are likely to rapidly exceed the benefits. Why? Because as the number of participants grows, the more likely it is that the group will include individuals who have an extreme position and are unwilling to make compromises. Thus, the net gain of self-organization should be compared with those of its alternatives, for example voting, market-solutions, or not making any choices at all. Even though the informational value of meetings may be helpful to policy makers, the model shows that it also decreases as the number of participants increase. Overall, the result is a thought provoking scenario for Local Agenda 21 as it highlights the risk of less sustainable action in the future.

AB - Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action? Here, Local Agenda 21 is a relevant case as it broadly calls for consensus-building among stakeholders. Consensus-building is, however, costly. We show that the costs of making local decisions are likely to rapidly exceed the benefits. Why? Because as the number of participants grows, the more likely it is that the group will include individuals who have an extreme position and are unwilling to make compromises. Thus, the net gain of self-organization should be compared with those of its alternatives, for example voting, market-solutions, or not making any choices at all. Even though the informational value of meetings may be helpful to policy makers, the model shows that it also decreases as the number of participants increase. Overall, the result is a thought provoking scenario for Local Agenda 21 as it highlights the risk of less sustainable action in the future.

KW - Local participation

KW - Sustainability

KW - Local Agenda 21

KW - Consensus

KW - Free riding

M3 - Journal article

VL - 129

SP - 266

EP - 273

JO - Journal of Environmental Management

JF - Journal of Environmental Management

SN - 0301-4797

ER -