• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Geoforum >Capture and crush: Gas companies in the fracking dispute and deliberative depoliticization
【24h】

Capture and crush: Gas companies in the fracking dispute and deliberative depoliticization

机译：捕获和压制：天然气公司处于水力压裂争端和故意去政治化中

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Multi-stakeholder governance arrangements involving co-operation between public and non-state actors are a vital part of the governance landscape for addressing social impacts resulting from resources development. Yet, the current mantra for 'collaboration' has gained relative credibility and legitimacy without scrutiny of the democratic characteristics and quality of these institutional arrangements. This article responds to this normative concern by examining the implications for the democratic legitimacy of multi-stakeholder governance arrangements in cases where private resource extraction companies, who do not necessarily act in the public interest, exercise a 'metagovemance' role. We explore this topic through a qualitative case-study comparison of affordable housing governance in regions impacted by unconventional gas development in Australia and the United States. We argue that while multi-stakeholder governance arrangements convened by resource extraction companies can support situations of democracy under certain conditions, resource extraction companies structure the processes within these collaborative arrangements to the benefits of specific actors, notably the extractive companies themselves and other profit-orientated actors. In particular, we illustrate the depoliticizing effects of these institutions, whereby in some cases, they are used to constrain debates about the social impacts of extractives development, and circumscribe certain types of actors from participation in deliberative debate and decision-making. We underscore the importance of state intervention in ensuring communicative processes induced by corporate actors proceed according to the principles of deliberative democracy.
机译：涉及公共和非国家行为者之间合作的多方利益相关者治理安排是治理环境中解决资源开发所产生的社会影响的重要组成部分。然而，当前的“合作”口号已经获得了相对的信誉和合法性，而没有审查这些制度安排的民主特征和质量。本文通过研究在多方利益相关者治理安排的民主合法性方面的含义，来应对这种规范性关注，在这种情况下，私人资源开采公司不一定是出于公共利益行事，而是发挥了“监督”作用。我们通过对澳大利亚和美国非常规天然气开发影响地区的经济适用房治理进行定性案例研究比较，探讨了该主题。我们认为，虽然资源提取公司召集的多方利益相关者治理安排可以在一定条件下支持民主局势，但资源提取公司可以在这些协作安排中构建流程，以使特定参与者（尤其是采掘公司本身和其他以利润为导向）的利益得以受益。演员。特别是，我们说明了这些机构的去政治化作用，在某些情况下，它们被用来限制关于采掘业发展的社会影响的辩论，并限制某些类型的参与者参加审议性辩论和决策。我们强调国家干预对确保公司行为者所引发的沟通过程按照协商民主原则进行的重要性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号