Democracy at risk: A theoretical case for reasonable environmental liberalism

Nicholas Peter Guehlstorf, Purdue University

Abstract

Although many political scientists have decried the undemocratic practices of environmental policymaking in America few, however, have investigated the political theories of liberalism that address the paradox of democratically responding to environmental concerns that appear to be perceptible to experts, but not to ordinary citizens. The purpose of this study is to question whether liberal political theories ought to inform the way policymakers and administrators analyze risk in proposed courses of environmental practice. In order to explore the relationship of liberal theory and rational practice in environmental policy, this project examines the risk analysis used to approve the genetically engineered bovine growth hormone in American agricultural policy. This thesis suggests that American environmental public policy is attempting to assess danger with an incomplete notion of utility, to eliminate the hazards of society with an inadequate contractual justification of political authority, and to publicly debate accepted levels of risk with an unfulfilled critical social theory. Environmental risk analyses are incorrectly perceived as technically rational and socially apolitical, resulting in practices that are muddled and misdirected. Making theoretical foundations explicit, however, could lead to improved practice. Public policy and administrative decisions regarding agricultural biotechnologies should function with more concern for democratic values.

Degree

Ph.D.

Advisors

Weiss, Purdue University.

Subject Area

Bioengineering|Political science|Environmental science

COinS