The HABRI Foundation is calling for research proposals to investigate the health outcomes of pet ownership and/or animal-assisted activity or therapy, both for the people and the animals involved. To learn more, visit https://habri.org/grants/funding-opportunities/ close

 
You are here: Home / Journal Articles / Democracy at its best? The consensus conference in a cross-national perspective. (Special Issue: Ethical tools.) / About

Democracy at its best? The consensus conference in a cross-national perspective. (Special Issue: Ethical tools.)

By A. P. Nielsen, J. Lassen, P. Sandoe

View Resource (HTM)

Licensed under

Category Journal Articles
Abstract

Over recent decades, public participation in technology assessment has spread internationally as an attempt to overcome or prevent societal conflicts over controversial technologies. One outcome of this new surge in public consultation initiatives has been the increased use of participatory consensus conferences in a number of countries. Existing evaluations of consensus conferences tend to focus on the modes of organization, as well as the outcomes, both procedural and substantial, of the conferences they examine. Such evaluations seem to rest on the assumption that this type of procedure has universally agreed goals and meanings, and that therefore consensus conferences can readily be interpreted and applied across national boundaries. This article challenges this approach to consensus conferences. The core of the article is a study of national differences in ideas about what constitutes legitimate goals for participatory arrangements. The study looks at three consensus conferences on GMOs, which took place in France, Norway, and Denmark. Drawing on this study, the article discusses the ways in which interpretations of the concept of participation; the value attributed to lay knowledge vs. technical expertise; as well as ideas about the role of the layperson, are all questions that prompt entirely different answers from country to country. Further, the article analyses these national differences within a theoretical framework of notions of democratic legitimacy.

Date 2007
Publication Title Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics
Volume 20
Issue 1
Pages 13-35
ISBN/ISSN 1187-7863
DOI 10.1007/s10806-006-9018-5
Language English
Author Address Danish Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Rolighedsvej 30, Frederiksberg C, Copenhagen, DK 1958, Denmark. apn@kvl.dk
Cite this work

Researchers should cite this work as follows:

Tags
  1. Communities
  2. Democracy
  3. Denmark
  4. Developed countries
  5. Europe
  6. France
  7. Genetically engineered organisms
  8. Genetic engineering
  9. Mediterranean region
  10. Norway
  11. OECD countries
  12. participation
  13. peer-reviewed
  14. Public opinion
  15. Scandinavia
  16. Social psychology and social anthropology
  17. technology
Badges
  1. peer-reviewed