Justice as Parity of Participation

References

• Arnstein, S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224. doi:10.1080/01944366908977225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baber, W., & Bartlett, R. (2005). Deliberative environmental politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baird, J., Plummer, R., Haug, C., & Huitema, D. (2014). Learning effects of interactive decision-making processes for climate change adaptation. Global Environmental Change, 27(July), 51–63. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blue, G. (2015). Representing global public concern: A critical analysis of the Danish participatory experiment on climate change. Environmental Values, 24(4), 445–464. doi:10.3197/096327114X13947900181077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blue, G. (2018). Scientism: A problem at the heart of public engagement with climate change. ACME: An International Journal for Radical Geographies, 17(2), 544–560.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blue, G., & Dale, J. (2016). Framing and power in public deliberation with climate change: Critical reflections on the role of deliberative practitioners. Journal of Public Deliberation, 12(1), Article 2. Retrieved from http://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol12/iss1/art2/
   Google Scholar
• Blue, G., Medlock, J., & Einsiedel, E. (2012). Representativeness and the politics of inclusion: Insights from WWViews Canada. In M. Rask, R. Worthington, & M. Lammi (Eds.), Citizen participation in global environmental governance (pp. 139–152). London, UK: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, N. (2004). New state spaces: Urban governance and the rescaling of statehood. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, P., & Caldeira, K. (2017). Greater future global warming inferred from Earth’s recent energy budget. Nature, 522(7683), 45–50. doi:10.1038/nature24672
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bryson, J., Quick, K., Slotterback, C., & Crosby, B. (2013). Designing public participation processes. Public Administration Review, 73(1), 23–34. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02678.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulkeley, H., Edwards, G., & Fuller, S. (2014). Contesting climate justice in the city: Examining politics and practice in urban climate change experiments. Global Environmental Change, 25(1), 31–40. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.01.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burman, A. (2017). The political ontology of climate change: Moral meterology, climate justice and the coloniality of reality in the Bolivian Andes. Journal of Political Ecology, 24(1), 921–932. doi:10.2458/v24i1.20974
   Google Scholar
• Calvert, A., & Warren, M. (2014). Deliberative democracy and framing effects: Why frames are a problem and how deliberative mini-publics might overcome them. In K. Grönlund, A. Bächtiger, & M. Setälä (Eds.), Deliberative mini-publics: Involving citizens in the deliberative process (pp. 203–224). Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.
   Google Scholar
• Capire Consulting Group. (n.d). The engagement triangle: Understanding the purpose of your engagement. Retrieved from https://capire.com.au/communities/publications/
   Google Scholar
• Cardullo, P., & Kitchin, R. (2018). Being a “citizen” in the smart city: Up and down the scaffold of smart citizen participation. GeoJournal, 84(1), 1–13. doi:10.1007/s10708-018-9845-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpentier, N. (2016). Beyond the ladder of participation: An analytical toolkit for the critical analysis of participatory media processes. Javnost—the Public, 23(1), 70–88. doi:10.1080/13183222.2016.1149760
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castree, N., Adams, W., Barry, J., Brockington, D., Büscher, B., Corbera, E., … Wynne, B. (2014). Changing the intellectual climate. Nature Climate Change, 4(9), 763–768. doi:10.1038/nclimate2339
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, K., & Ison, R. (2009). Jumping off Arnstein’s ladder: Social learning as a new policy paradigm for climate change adaptation. Environmental Policy and Governance, 19(6), 358–373. doi:10.1002/eet.523
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, S. (1998). Spinning the wheel of empowerment. Planning, 1262(April), 14–15.
   Google Scholar
• Derickson, K. (2016). On the politics of recognition in critical urban scholarship. Urban Geography, 37(6), 824–829. doi:10.1080/02723638.2015.1105483
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J. (2013). The politics of the Earth: Environmental discourses (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J., Bächtiger, A., & Milewicz, A. (2011). Toward a deliberative global citizen’s assembly. Global Policy, 2(1), 33–42. doi:10.1111/j.1758-5899.2010.00052.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eley, C. (2017). Planning for equitable development: Social equity by design. Retrieved from http://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/document/PASMEMO-2017-03-04.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Elwood, S. (2002). Neighborhood revitalization through “collaboration”: Assessing the implications of neoliberal urban policy at the grassroots. GeoJournal, 58(2/3), 121–130. doi:10.1023/B:GEJO.0000010831.73363.e3
   Google Scholar
• Fainstein, S. (2000). New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review, 35(4), 451–478. doi:10.1177/107808740003500401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fainstein, S. (2009). Spatial justice and planning. Spatial Justice, 1(1), 1–13. Retrieved from http://www.jssj.org/article/justice-spatiale-et-amenagement-urbain/
   Google Scholar
• Fainstein, S. (2010). The just city. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fainstein, S. (2014). The just city. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 18(1), 1–18. doi:10.1080/12265934.2013.834643
   Google Scholar
• Few, R., Brown, K., & Tompkins, E. (2007). Public participation and climate change adaptation: Avoiding the illusion of inclusion. Climate Policy, 7(1), 46–59. doi:10.1080/14693062.2007.9685637
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fincher, R., & Iveson, K. (2008). Planning and diversity in the city: Redistribution, recognition and encounter. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (1998). Habermas and Foucault: Thinkers for civil society?. The British Journal of Sociology, 49(2), 210–233. doi:10.2307/591310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forester, J. (1999). The reflexive practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, N. (1997). Justice interruptus: Critical reflections on the post-socialist condition. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, N. (2009). Scales of justice: Reimagining political space in a globalizing world. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, N. (2013). Fortunes of feminism: From state-managed capitalism to neoliberal crisis. London, UK: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Friedmann, J. (2000). The good city: In defense of utopian thinking. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24(2), 460–472. doi:10.1111/1468-2427.00258
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fung, A. (2003). Survey article: Recipes for public spheres: Eight institutional design choices and their consequences. Journal of Political Philosophy, 11(3), 338–367. doi:10.1111/1467-9760.00181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gay-Antaki, M., & Liverman, D. (2018). Climate for women in climate science: Women scientists and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(9), 2060–2065. doi:10.1073/pnas.1710271115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodspeed, R. (2016). The death and life of collaborative planning theory. Urban Planning, 1(4), 1–5. doi:10.17645/up.v1i4.715
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1985). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society. (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hale, T. (2016). “All hands on deck”: The Paris agreement and nonstate climate action. Global Environmental Politics, 16(3), 12–22. doi:10.1162/GLEP_a_00362
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, R. A. (2008). Stepping back from “the ladder”: Reflections on a model of participatory work with children. In A. Reid, B. B. Jensen, J. Nikel, & V. Simovska (Eds.), Participation and learning: Perspectives on education and the environment, health and sustainability (pp. 19–31). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. (2009/1973. Social justice and the city. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heeg, S., & Rosol, M. (2007). Neoliberale Stadtpolitik im globalen Kontext - Ein Überblick [Neoliberal urban policy in a global context—An overview]. Prokla. Zeitschrift Für Kritische Sozialwissenschaft, 37(149), 491–509. doi:10.32387/prokla.v37i149.495
   Google Scholar
• Hobson, K., & Niemeyer, S. (2011). Public responses to climate change: The role of deliberation in building capacity for adaptive action. Global Environmental Change, 21(3), 957–971. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Innes, J. E. (1998). Information in communicative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 64(1), 52–63. doi:10.1080/01944369808975956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2010). Planning with complexity: An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• International Association for Public Participation. (n.d). Spectrum of participation. Retrieved from https://iap2canada.ca/Resources/Documents/0702-Foundations-Spectrum-MW-rev2%20(1).pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. (2010). A new climate for society. Theory, Culture and Society, 27(2–3), 233–253. doi:10.1177/0263276409361497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaijser, A., & Kronsell, A. (2014). Climate change through the lens of intersectionality. Environmental Politics, 23(3), 417–433. doi:10.1080/09644016.2013.835203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lane, M. (2005). Public participation in planning: An intellectual history. Australian Geographer, 36(3), 283–299. doi:10.1080/00049180500325694
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, C., McQuarrie, M., & Walker, E. (2015). Democratizing inequalities: Dilemma of the new public participation. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leszczynski, A., & Elwood, S. (2015). Feminist geographies of new spatial media. The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe Canadien, 59(1), 12–28. doi:10.1111/cag.12093
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Machin, A. (2013). Negotiating climate change: Radical democracy and the illusion of consensus. New York, NY: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, M., Dale, J., & Schraeder, D. (2014). Looking under the hood of citizen engagement: The citizens’ panel on Edmonton’s energy and climate challenges (Alberta Climate Dialogue Working Paper). Retrieved from http://www.albertaclimatedialogue.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/ABCD_WP_PractitionersReflecitons_2014-09-02.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Martello, M., & Jasanoff, S. (2004). Globalization and environmental governance. In S. Jasanoff & M. Martello (Eds.), Earthly politics: Local and global in environmental governance (pp. 1–30). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H., Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P., & Waterfield T. (Eds.). (2018). IPCC summary for policymakers. In Global warming of 1.5 °C: An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Geneva, Switzerland: World Meteorological Organization.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, B. (2018). Alter-globalisation movements and alternative projects of globalisation. In R. Kloosterman, V. Mamadouh, & P. Terhorst (Eds.), Handbook on geographies of globalisation (pp. 402–411). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Niemeyer, S. (2013). Democracy and climate change: What can deliberative democracy contribute? Australian Journal of Politics & History, 59(3), 429–448. doi:10.1111/ajph.12025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pallett, H., & Chilvers, J. (2013). A decade of learning about publics, participation, and climate change: Institutionalising reflexivity? Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 45(5), 1162–1183. doi:10.1068/a45252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paterson, M., & Stripple, J. (2010). My space: Governing individuals’ carbon emissions. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28(2), 341–362. doi:10.1068/d4109
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, L. (2012). Communicating about climate change in a citizen consultation: Dynamics of exclusion and inclusion. In L. Phillips, A. Carvalho, & J. Doyle (Eds.), Performing public participation in science and environment communication (pp. 139–162). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Purcell, M. (2009). Resisting neoliberalization: Communicative planning or counter-hegemonic movements? Planning Theory, 8(2), 140–165. doi:10.1177/1473095209102232
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quick, K., & Feldman, M. (2011). Distinguishing participation and inclusion. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 31(3), 272–290. doi:10.1177/0739456X11410979
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rask, M., Worthington, R., & Lammi, M. (2012). Citizen participation in global environmental governance. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, G. (2017). Posthuman agency in the digitally mediated city: Exteriorization, individuation, reinvention. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 107(4), 779–793. doi:10.1080/24694452.2016.1270195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosol, M. (2010). Public participation in post-Fordist urban green space governance: The case of community gardens in Berlin. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 34(3), 548–563. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00968.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosol, M. (2012). Community volunteering as neoliberal strategy? Green space production in Berlin. Antipode, 44(1), 239–257. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8330.2011.00861.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosol, M. (2015). Governing cities through participation—A Foucauldian analysis of CityPlan Vancouver. Urban Geography, 36(2), 256–276. doi:10.1080/02723638.2014.952542
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosol, M., Blue, G., & Fast, V. (2019). Social justice in the digital age: Re-thinking the smart city with Nancy Fraser (UCCities Working Paper no. 1). doi:10.31235/osf.io/wkqy2
   Google Scholar
• Schlosberg, D. (2004). Reconceiving environmental justice: Global movements and political theories. Environmental Politics, 13(3), 517–540. doi:10.1080/0964401042000229025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlosberg, D., & Collins, L. (2014). From environmental to climate justice: Climate change and the discourse of environmental justice. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5(3), 359–375. doi:10.1002/wcc.275
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, J. (1998). Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Princeton, NJ: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shue, H. (2014). Climate justice: Vulnerability and protection. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tritter, J., & McCallum, A. (2006). The snakes and ladders of user involvement: Moving beyond Arnstein. Health Policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 76(2), 156–168. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.05.00
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations Women. (2018). Turning promises into action: Gender equality in the 2013 agenda for sustainable development. Retrieved from www.unwomen.org/sdg-report
   Google Scholar
• Whitmarsh, L., O’Neill, S., & Lorenzoni, I. (2010). Engaging the public with climate change: Behaviour change and communication. London, UK: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox, D. (1994). The guide to effective participation. Brighton, UK: Partnership Books.
   Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. (2007). Public participation in science and technology: Performing and obscuring a political-conceptual category mistake. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal, 1(1), 99–110. doi:10.1007/s12280-007-9004-7
   Google Scholar