Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBond, Alan
dc.contributor.authorPope, Jenny
dc.contributor.authorRetief, Francois
dc.contributor.authorMorrison-Saunders, Angus
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-12T12:18:56Z
dc.date.available2018-03-12T12:18:56Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationBond, A. et al. 2018. On legitimacy in impact assessment: an epistemologically-based conceptualisation. Environmental impact assessment review, 69:16-23. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.11.006]en_US
dc.identifier.issn0195-9255
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10394/26582
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.11.006
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925517303001
dc.description.abstractImpact assessment (IA) is carried out as an ex ante process to inform decision-making. It includes requirements for engagement with stakeholders (including the public) regarding actions proposed by a proponent. A key issue with the various stakeholders involved is the perceived legitimacy of the IA, which can have implications both for the reputation of the proponent, and the likelihood of conflict over the decision. But the understanding of legitimacy in the IA literature has changed over time in line with an ontological shift from positivism (that scientifically generated information leads to better informed decisions) to the post-positivist acknowledgement of the limitations of scientific method whereby assumptions must be subject to transparency, deliberation and openness. This has led to an epistemological shift towards greater subjectivism which, we suggest, has created new opportunities (which have been realised in political decision-making) to subvert knowledge through the increased use of the Internet and social media. To address the potential for such subversion of legitimacy, we seek to conceptualise legitimacy in the IA context through framing IA around a critical realist ontology and a reliabilist virtue epistemology. This allows us to identify ‘knowledge legitimacy’ as an equally important component of IA legitimacy along with organisational legitimacy. We conceptualise knowledge legitimacy through literature review drawing on rich understandings of knowledge from IA and other fields of research in order to develop a four-dimensional typology. This includes the dimensions of: knowledge accuracy; knowledge restriction; knowledge diffusion; and knowledge spectrum. This is the first theoretically grounded attempt to understand legitimacy in IA. It is hoped that it will provoke discussion in the IA community to further advance theoretical understandings of IA and legitimacy of practiceen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.subjectKnowledgeen_US
dc.subjectTheoryen_US
dc.subjectReliabilist virtue epistemologyen_US
dc.subjectCritical realist ontologyen_US
dc.subjectLegitimacyen_US
dc.subjectConceptualisationen_US
dc.titleOn legitimacy in impact assessment: an epistemologically-based conceptualisationen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.contributor.researchID23920084 - Bond, Alan James
dc.contributor.researchID24889717 - Pope, Jennifer Margaret
dc.contributor.researchID12307807 - Retief, Francois Pieter
dc.contributor.researchID21168032 - Morrison-Saunders, Angus Neil


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record