Suchergebnisse

Like radioactive waste, municipal solid waste (MSW) requires consideration of a complex mix of intergenerational and intragenerational risks surrounded by uncertain science. Unlike radioactive waste, MSW is a common problem and hence one often perceived to be controllable, at least until a required facility is proposed in a particular community. The intragenerational risks focused on local communities rouse intense public pressures for management. Although some of the risks can be quantified, the risk assessment process cannot deal with all questions. This article examines the multiple dimensions of the decisions required to be made and the weaknesses of a number of decision tools traditionally used. A case is made for the need to integrate decision tools appropriate to the risks into reflexive and iterative decision processes open to public involvement. It is argued that this presents the best hope of both optimizing decisions about the intragenerational risks as well as raising public debate about the importance of sustainable waste management in transgenerational terms.

An emerging point of agreement is that environmental policy efficacy and implementation efficiency are most likely to be achieved by an appropriate balance between command-and-control and self-regulation methods. The author uses data from a unique survey of individuals, both management and nonmanagement, in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in England and Wales to ascertain whether the corporate perspective is equally supportive of such an empathetic balance. Multiple research methods including interviews, a questionnaire, and focus groups with individuals were used to explore management and nonmanagement attitudes to the importance of compliance with, and the effectiveness of, regulation. Compliance with regulation is viewed as morally right both by management and by nonmanagement; however, the effectiveness of regulation is questioned. Nonmanagement in particular demand strong enforcement and penalties; management demand consistent regulation to ensure a 'level playing field'. Both question whether all regulation is relevant to environmental protection. Although self-regulation is supported in theory, this is because of the perceived weakness of reactive regulation. Individuals suggest that the majority of SMEs are not taking any, or only minimal, steps to self-regulate. The potential for a balance between command-and-control and self-regulation approaches receives only cautious support from management and nonmanagement.

This paper explores the relations between different forms of knowledge and urban environmental policy arenas. It briefly considers the evolution of the urban environmental agenda and growing interest in questions of knowledge transfer. It then explores reasons for an apparent knowledge – policy 'gap', including familiar explanations, such as the problems of communicating research findings, as well as those based on more subtle and complex interpretations of both knowledge and policy processes. It concludes with some proposals for thinking about the boundary between knowledge and policy and constructive ways to enhance the sustainable urban environment agenda. The paper introduces the other contributions in this theme issue—concerned with diverse aspects of knowledge transfer in the context of urban environments—and draws upon insights from a seminar series at which these papers were first presented.

Assessing the social risks associated with climate change requires an understanding of how humans will respond because it affects how well societies will adapt. In the case of rapid or dangerous climate change, of particular interest is the potential for these responses to cross thresholds beyond which they become maladaptive. To explore the possibility of such thresholds, a series of climate change scenarios were presented to U.K. participants whose subjective responses were recorded via interviews and surveyed using Q methodology. The results indicate an initially adaptive response to climate warming followed by a shift to maladaptation as the magnitude of change increases. Beyond this threshold, trust in collective action and institutions was diminished, negatively impacting adaptive capacity. Climate cooling invoked a qualitatively different response, although this may be a product of individuals being primed for warming because it has dominated public discourse. The climate change scenarios used in this research are severe by climatological standards. In reality, the observed responses might occur at a lower rate of change. Whatever the case, analysis of subjectivity has revealed potential for maladaptive human responses, constituting a dangerous or rapid climate threshold within the social sphere.