Engendering Deliberative Democracy: Women's Environmental ...

Research in Human Ecology
Engendering Deliberative Democracy:
Women’s Environmental Protection Problems
Adrianna A. Semmens
University of Oxford
Queen Elizabeth House
International Gender Studies Centre
St Giles, Oxford, OX1 3LA1
Abstract
imperial officials and participated in (otherwise) all-male
public assemblies, was violently attacked on her journey
home. She was seized by an ecclesiastical group of black-
In this paper I consider the western, male-centred prac-
clad men, dragged and taken to a church where she was com-
tice of deliberative democracy and its suitability for address-
pletely stripped of her clothes and murdered with shards of
ing cross-border environmental problems that intersect with
pottery. Once they had torn her body limb from limb, her re-
the issue of women’s protection, featuring the use of threat or
mains were burnt. From a Bishop’s point of view associated
force (hereafter referred to as environmental-women’s pro-
with the church where she was taken, her punishment was de-
tection problems). Central to this paper is the consideration
served because of what he termed her paganism and satanic
of the extent to which the problem-solving practice of delib-
wiles; beguiling people through her enchantments! (Dzielska
erative democracy is relevant for processing such problems.
1995).
It is contended that although deliberative democracy as a
In scenario two, a man is engaged in writing public
political methodology in the form of inclusive participatory
lyrics. He writes: “In the beginning God made various kinds
designs is relevant for processing environmental-women’s
of women with various minds. He made one from a hairy
protection problems, it needs to take on board feminist envi-
sow... [and] one from the sea ... she holds you at a distance
ronmental insights from the broad area of feminist ecology.
like a bitch with pups. For woman is the biggest single bad
These would include: a focus on activism contesting struc-
that Zeus has made for us; a ball and chain” (cited in Lat-
tural injustices, relationships, ecological embeddedness, se-
timere 1960).
curity, women’s agency, gender training and culturally-sensi-
Hypatia’s plight in Alexandria (415 C.E.) and Se-
tive community development processes. Ultimately, such con-
monides’ prose in the 7th century are not historically isolated
siderations would make deliberative democracy more mean-
cases of violence or abuse against women. Nor are they used
ingful in a problem-ameliorating sense for such problems.
here as exemplars of environmental-women’s protection
problems. They are presented here for two reasons: First, to
Keywords: feminist ecology, democratic problem-solv-
illustrate in a western sense how women have been scripted
ing, problems of ecological security
as outside human-kind by reason of their sex; and second, to
suggest the importance of linking democracy4 to the protec-
Introduction
tion of women.5
My underlying premise is that, “the claims of nature and
people especially where these are relations of vulnerability,
But why my friends, must we deny our women any
require democracy both in order to recognise these claims
notion of reason or common sense?...I will not
and as a method of resolving the conflicts and problems these
cease to repeat it, woman’s most important duty,
claims raise” (Barry 2002, 135). Nevertheless, it is far from
apart from her social responsibilities, is to be a
clear whether democracy and democratisation can/will be
good mother. —Mustapha Kemal Ataturk2
sustained in polities throughout the world if the rate of envi-
ronmental decline continues apace. Thus, defending the ad-
I leave my native land. Unbinding my feet I clean
vancement/deepening of democracy is an important project,
out a thousand years of poison. —Jiu Jin3
as is the processing of problems associated with environmen-
tal degradation. But what sort of democracy is meaningful to
Consider the following scenarios: In scenario one, a
advance and deepen in the political order sense?
woman aged 60 who served as an adviser to municipal and
Procedural electoral democracy alone, which involves
96
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005
© Society for Human Ecology

---

Semmens
the “process of expressing one’s preferences and demands,
ronmental problems are increasingly represented as exhibit-
and registering them in a vote” (Young 1996, 120) is flawed
ing an environmental scarcity-violent conflict linkage (along
for several reasons. First, electoral democracy is not neces-
with intermediate and consequential effects such as migration
sarily able to effectively process the claims of muted groups
and poverty). That is, environmental problems are increas-
(i.e., those whose vocal and/or physical articulations have
ingly portrayed by a growing number of western scholars and
been rendered inarticulate by the dominant communicative
policymakers as problems in which nonlinear feedback link-
system of a society).6 Nor does it necessarily make its way
ages exist between resource scarcity and various intensities
into the public interstices of everyday life. Additionally, elec-
of [socio-political] conflict” (Homer-Dixon 1995, 2).
toral democracy is not the end state of democratic transition
The idea that environmental resource scarcities can con-
as some western and “newly democratised polities” (e.g.,
tribute in causally distant, yet powerful, ways to socio-politi-
Chile) assume; thus, advancing it at the expense of civility
cal conflict is a significant way to think about various politi-
and social responsibility and justice (Pearce 2004). Further-
cal conflicts across the world10 (particularly considering that
more, a wide range of scholars have shown that procedural
traditional political purviews built on the denial of the
electoral democracy can be disparaged for its casting of divi-
human-ecological relationship preclude this possibility
sions between public life and private life, its liberal individ-
(Plumwood 1993). For instance, consider the area of water
ualism (Phillips 2000, 513), as well as its embeddedness in
scarcity. It makes eminent sense for those of us with some ex-
exploitative market economies (refer to Fotopoulos and to re-
posure to ecological literacy or grounding in ecological sen-
lated Journals: Democracy and Nature and Periektiki
sibilities to contend that water, has both livelihood and polit-
Demokratia).7
ical importance (particularly if it is a shared resource be-
Before pursuing the topic of democracy further, howev-
tween two countries) so that its depletion — whether through
er, it seems appropriate as a starting point in this introduction
extensive agricultural irrigation and/or privatisation (and thus
to lead into a discussion of a particular set of environmental
inequitable distribution of its use) can become a source of
problems and how the issue of women’s protection is nested
local, national, or international conflicts,11 particularly if a
in them.
colonizer consciousness is involved. It also makes eminent
There are a host of cross-border environmental problems
sense to add that these conflicts can happen in the midst of
around the world involving the degradation, depletion, and/or
rural civilian populations, and that civilian protection issues
scarcity of water, forests, and agricultural land (Fox, Renner,
will be centrally involved. Yet, on closer inspection, accounts
and Westing 2001). These problems have been discussed in a
of environmental problems featuring the environmental
growing body of western environmental policy-related litera-
scarcity-social conflict nexus not only gloss over the issue of
ture which ranges from exclusively ecocentric, to exclusively
civilian protection, but glaringly leave out how this nexus in-
anthropocentric resource-use approaches.8 Generally, while
tersects with the pressing issue of women’s protection and the
the bulk of the literature from exclusively ecocentric and var-
urgent need for action to address this issue. For instance,
ious other anthropocentric approaches refer to environmental
countless rural women across the world are subjected to
problems in so-called northern contexts, problems document-
physical and verbal violence within environmental scarcity
ed toward the exclusive anthropocentric end of the spectrum
and its complex pathway to social conflict and beyond. Sure,
characteristically refer to so-called poorer rural southern con-
some of these women may be armed but myriad of others are
texts. This paper engages only with this almost exclusive an-
not. In this context, my paper will begin by foregrounding the
thropocentric analysis of environmental problems related to
intersecting issue of women’s protection within the environ-
so-called southern rural contexts.9 Given that these problems
mental scarcity-social conflict nexus. In short, it will begin
exist, it would be untenable to denounce any degree of dif-
with an overview of the central features of environmental-
ferentiated moral responsibility towards such problems, and
women’s protection problems. At the same time it will attend
to recommend abstention from any collective problem-solv-
to the issue of institutionalised problem-solving action with
ing efforts (Schmidtz and Goodin 1998). The argument that
respect to such problems.
nature “ought to seek its own balance,” as some deep ecolo-
It ought to be noted at the outset however that there are
gists in the past have advocated, is ethically objectionable.
numerous diverse ways that environmental-women’s protec-
(Obviously, such scholars would reserve a different judge-
tion problems can be processed in a problem-solving sense.
ment for their own families!)
One way, which appears consistent with advancing and deep-
The conventional study of cross-border environmental
ening the project of democracy, is the forging of democratic
problems related to so-called southern contexts is enormous
participatory practices in which affected or potentially af-
and difficult to categorise for comprehension efficiency. Nev-
fected people of a ‘polity’ can fairly and substantively partic-
ertheless, what is striking is that since the mid 1990s, envi-
ipate collectively in problem-solving rather than rely on pri-
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005
97

---

Semmens
vate ‘command and control’12 decision-making and electoral
or more precisely, the distinguishing features that the issue of
politics which poorly represent politically excluded con-
women’s protection brings to the environmental scarcity-con-
stituencies (Hager and Wagenaar 2003, 2). The strand in de-
flict nexus; secondly, to outline deliberative democracy as a
mocratic theory that suggests this is known as deliberative
pragmatic problem-solving framework; and thirdly,
to
democracy.
briefly discuss the limitations of practically oriented democ-
Generally speaking, deliberative male-authored democ-
ratic deliberation and to draw attention to the need for femi-
racy accounts,13 which emphasise the opening up of democ-
nist environmental insights from the broad area of feminist
ratic spaces in public spheres (including transboundary ones)
ecology. The following elaborates on these.
as well as an active public decision-making tied to realising a
‘common’ or collective good, rather than simply a narrow
The Characteristic Features of
self-interested one, appear particularly promising for partici-
Environmental-Women’s Protection Problems
patory problem-solving. So too does the conception of
‘Habermasian’14 processes they advocate which largely ap-
[H]er life was lived through overlapping interac-
pear gender-neutral in intent.15 For instance, as Young (1996,
tions between extended family (rural and urban),
122) concisely describes it:
the physical locality, the wider cultural and re-
source-using locality, development-defined groups
[I]n the ideal of deliberative democracy, partici-
(for sewing, saving, vegetable growing), the church
pants come to a political problem with an open
(a strong local and international ‘community’) and
mind about a solution; they are not bound by the au-
the school where she taught with its own networks
thority of prior norms or requirements. The process
of teachers, pupils and families...(Cleaver 2001, 45)
of political discussion consists of reasoned argu-
ment. Participants put forward proposals and crit-
A discussion of the features of environmental-women’s
icize them, and each assents to a conclusion only
protection problems — which imply making complex phe-
because of the “force of the better argument”...The
nomena tidy — inevitably obscures important nuances tied to
goal of deliberation is to arrive at consensus ... even
discrete problems in contextual situations. I cannot hope to
when this is not possible and participants resort to
make this a comprehensive briefing paper on such problems.
voting, their result is a collective judgment rather
What I aim for is simply to direct attention, in an overview
than the aggregate of private preferences.
sense, to the need for their consideration in the absence of
sufficient consideration in male authored accounts, rather
Within this spirit of deliberative democracy with its em-
than to engage monistically in comprehensive problem inves-
phasis on qualitative communication and participation, de-
tigations and definitions.
mocratic participatory designs, notably citizen ‘juries,’ pan-
An adequate approach to a discussion of the characteris-
els, or forums, as they have been variously called, are con-
tic features of environmental-women’s protection problems, I
ceived as among a range of practices conducive to collective
would suggest, requires the preliminary recognition that en-
problem-solving.
vironmental and social problems, although grounded in real
Laudable as this all sounds, borrowing an analytical lens
conditions, have an interpretive dimension with material ef-
grounded in the broad area of feminist ecology16 (rather than
fects, as distinct from merely discursive effects. What this
from analytics arising from within the discourse of delibera-
means is that while real social problems exist, these problems
tive democracy) cautions against accepting unequivocally the
are described, interpreted, and invested, with various mean-
institutionalised knowledges of male-authored texts when
ings by public policy enquiries and have discursive, but also
subordinated women are not sufficiently considered, and al-
material social change consequences (Bacchi 1999). This is
lows for a critique about what Plumwood (1995) refers to as
an important point aptly conveyed in an example provided by
“systems of rationality.”17
Bacchi (1999, 46). She writes: “[F]or the woman raped ...
In this light, while my paper will attend to outlining the
[h]er feelings will reflect the ‘lived effects’ of discourse and
characteristic features of environmental-women’s protection
it is sadly inadequate to suggest that she simply start to ‘think
problems, at the same time it raises the question of the extent
differently’ about sexuality. There are real bodies and real
to which the practice of deliberative democracy in the form
people living the effects of discursive conventions, and it is
of, for example, citizen juries and panels would constitute a
essential to attend to the harms they experience.”
meaningful problem-solving framework for addressing these
From the foregoing account it ought to be clear that a de-
problems in a problem ameliorating sense. Thus, it sets out to
gree of problem interpretation is at work in problem repre-
complete three tasks: Firstly, to briefly outline the character-
sentations, and that this ‘discursiveness’ has implications for
istic features of environmental-women’s protection problems
98
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005

---

Semmens
the lived material world; problems are not problems of dis-
ground water for the production of Coke [Coca-
course alone. Within this context, there are various ways to
Cola] and Maza. The police are giving protection to
approach the representation of environmental-women’s pro-
Coca-Cola, and the people waging struggle, espe-
tection problems in order to highlight the nature or character-
cially women and children, are behind the bars.
istic features of such problems. A more sophisticated way, I
That is today’s democracy. This is only one sample.
would suggest, is to draw attention to some systemic features
There are hundreds of ongoing struggles in India
which characterise problems (Semmens 2001). This view
and all over the world against industrial pollution
also resonates with Bacchi’s (1999, 110) understandings
mostly affecting the poorest of the poor marginaliz-
since they “bring attention to the holders of power and influ-
ing them further and further ... Rivers are major
ence, and would disrupt a version of the problem which in the
livelihood resources for the communities. For exam-
end holds those who are oppressed responsible for their op-
ple in Tamil Nadu, apart from being affected by the
pression.” Towards this end, Warren (1996) suggests that both
pollution by the industries, the rivers are facing an-
conceptual and empirical approaches are equally valid.
other problem of sand mining by powerful contract
On the conceptual level, diagnostically, environmental
companies ... Due to such extensive sand mining by
scarcity and the violation of women’s human rights and ca-
the river sand mafia and its corrupt tactics, the ad-
pabilities, which can feature in this, could be interpreted as
joining wells used for irrigation and drinking have
sharing intertwined forms of domination associated with
become dry as the ground water keeps going
ruthless exploitation (Salleh 1984; Plumwood 2000, 214).
down...
For instance, it could be argued that they centrally involve a
In the environmentally degraded regions of the Great
master or colonizer consciousness (let us recall Semonides!)
Lakes from the Eastern Congo to Burundi, such as rural Bu-
embedded in a constellation of social forces that instrumen-
jumbura, where environmental scarcity/degradation is en-
talise both the non-human biological realm and women (his-
twined with armed militia conflict and women carry the bur-
torically associated with this realm) treating both as the infe-
den of livelihood maintenance, it has been reported that, “the
riorised ‘other’ in a framework of oppositional reason (Plum-
most nauseating cruelty and ill-treatment imaginable on rural
wood 1993). In this respect, environmental-women’s protec-
women from utter misery to sadism” can be found. In nu-
tion problems are not merely problems that foreground the
merous cases, women are raped to death and/or buried or
need for environmental (non-militarised) security, but also
burnt alive as they venture out at night in search of food (Bag
the need for women’s security, since gender-based discrimi-
Essa 2004, 4). In Burundi in particular, the phenomenon of
nation would be a central facet in the intertwined forms of
sexual degradation is so great that unwanted pregnancies are
domination.
contributing to population increases and the spread of
Given this conceptual situation involving the colonizer
HIV/AIDS (Nivonizigive 2004, 7).
consciousness, agents like global and local political/cultur-
In cases where overt violent conflict is not intertwined
al/household economies predominantly based on patriarchy,
with environmental scarcity and women are not killed, envi-
large transnational company operations, armed rebel militia,
ronmentally induced social conflict can result through pover-
and armies and authorities attached to the state, need to be
ty and/or violence in women’s decisions to migrate into gen-
foregrounded rather than backgrounded as instigators in the
der-discriminating interstices in democratic polities to secure
ecologically degraded rural habitats that poorer resourceful
a livelihood. These sites can further discriminate against
women (particularly the widowed, the orphaned, the adoles-
them. Discrimination is evident in women’s experiences in
cent mother populations) inhabit. This point is often obscured
refugee settlements and in situations like slavery, trafficking,
in the environmental scarcity-social conflict literature, which
and dangerous and/or arduous working conditions in ob-
is more inclined to point to more generalised intermediate
scured political sites (e.g., economic free trade zones propped
and consequential agencies like poverty and/or resource cap-
by multinational companies, known as maquiladoras in
ture.
Mexico).
Yet transnational company operations, armed rebel mili-
Discrimination also appears in the indifference shown by
tia, and/or armies and authorities attached to the state can col-
numerous state officials who fail to adequately investigate
lectively or differentially be implicated in environmental
complaints or address this issue of justice. For instance,
scarcity, depletion, social conflict, and human rights viola-
women workers in the maquiladoras in Ciudad Juarez have
tions concerning women.
been exposed, because of poor working conditions and long
For instance, this is how Antonysamy (2003) tells it:
bus journeys, to horrendous crimes, which include domestic
In [a region] in India for the past five months ...
violence, abductions, and mutilations. Mexican state authori-
more than 65 bore-wells were sunk to extract the
ties are refusing to recognise the common features of such
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005
99

---

Semmens
crimes rooted in gender-discrimination (Amnesty Interna-
amination of the problem-solving turn in deliberative democ-
tional 2003).
racy. Thus, it is to this that I now turn.
Arguably, more than fragmentary case studies could be
used to convincingly establish the validity of these claims.
Deliberative Democracy as a
For instance, empirical and quantitative scientific-based stud-
Pragmatic Problem-Solving Practice
ies ought to be used to further assess the validity/merit of the
environmental scarcity-social conflict nexus and its intersec-
It is important that you know how to curb your anger
tion with the issue of women’s protection. Environmental
Especially when you are a woman
problems, however, are problems that become displaced
Hold back your laughter
across time and space (Dryzek 1997) making definitive
Only letting out correct amounts of it
causal inferences difficult. Also, geographical satellite map-
But most of all
ping methodologies are limited with respect to capturing
You’ve got to be prepared to show
problems associated with female mobilities in obscure polit-
... that you know how to remain silent
ical sites.
About what is done to others
Statistically also, data is thin with respect to the issue of
(Jastrzebska 1999, 134).18
women’s protection and its link to the environmental scarci-
The mainstream literature on classic deliberative democ-
ty-social conflict nexus, because women often do not appear
racy theory since the early 1980s is diverse. Nevertheless, it
on official local and international statistics and/or are mis-
has largely been preoccupied with the wider theorisation of
represented by authorities. Data omissions also apply in the
democracy and with debates centering on governance legiti-
case of particular agents such as transnational companies
macy issues for enhancing the quality of the public sphere, to
who are quite adept at practising the art of ‘submarining’—
the virtual exclusion of democracy as a social change prob-
a widely-used term that suggests an invisibility associated
lem-solving methodology for processing an increasing array
with their involvement in outsourcing operations under var-
of cross-border environmental problems. Feminist scholars
ious company names. Yet the absence of quantitative and em-
from within the deliberative democracy project have also
pirical data does not mean that the existence of environmen-
been engaged with this project on theoretical grounds in em-
tal-women’s protection problems ought to be considered sus-
phasising the making of polities more gender-sensitive with
pect. Evidence does not guarantee validity particularly in the
respect to themes such as communication, participation and
eyes of government authorities. In the words of Jordan
the recognition of difference (e.g. Phillips 2000; Young 1996;
(2002, 29):
2002).
[e]ven when presented with incontrovertible evi-
In recent work, a number of environmentally sensitive
dence of extensive trafficking of all forms, many
theorists and pragmatists (e.g. Fung 2003; O’Neil 2002)
governments still refuse to acknowledge that traf-
within the terms of a qualified form of Dryzek’s (1997, 84)
ficking is a problem ...Governments consistently fail
‘democratic and environmental pragmatism,’ have represent-
to consider ... the perspective of the trafficked per-
ed deliberative democracy predominantly as a political prob-
son and are particularly inept at understanding the
lem-solving method. None of these works, however, explicit-
problem from the perspective of trafficked women.
ly address the matter of environmental-women’s protection
problems so that one is left to presuppose that such an urgent
To summarise, environmental-women’s protection prob-
matter is subsumed, however uncomfortably, within wider
lems are located in the uncivil interstices of non-democratic,
environmental debates. Indeed much of the controversy about
but also in nominally democratic, polities; are problems of a
the character and meaning of deliberative democracy as prac-
colonizer/master consciousness; and involve violent and de-
ticed in this environmental context centres on: (a) whether it
grading gender discriminations. Given all this, and in view of
is radical enough to address the ecological problematic; (b),
my paper’s introductory ‘section’ on democratic practices in
whether it is ecologically rational or legitimate enough to
which public participation, deliberation, and action for prob-
admit and resolve ecocentric environmental interests (Zwart
lem-solving are foregrounded, it ought to be obvious why the
2003); (c), the decision-making problem of enabling environ-
problem-solving deliberative democracy methodology offers
mental outcomes under value pluralism (i.e., incommensu-
an appealing ‘design’; one which holds relevance for envi-
rable or incompatible values); and (d), the suitability of ad-
ronmental-women’s protection problems.
vancing the project of institutional public participatory de-
Undoubtedly the political problem-solving methodology
signs for institutional ‘designers’ through explicitly develop-
is relevant for environmental-women’s protection problems,
ing public participatory models for deliberation. Although all
but to what extent is it meaningful? This warrants a closer ex-
100
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005

---

Semmens
these controversial areas are relevant for a substantive exam-
sident policy professionalism,” with its emphasis on “revers-
ination of deliberative democracy as a problem-solving prac-
ing the order of policy discourse from a technocratic to a de-
tice, my own paper engages with the latter focus due to the
mocratic pattern” kept in check by forces and mechanisms
time constraints.
that would reduce or contain dominations in the interests of
The growing interest in the institutional participatory
“a democratic mode of policy/ planning discourse.” In this re-
practice of deliberative democracy can be attributed, on the
spect, it closely resembles the ‘multi-stakeholder approach’
one hand, to a sense that “practically inclined democratic de-
arising from participatory policy and planning discourses.
liberation” (Cohen and Rogers 2003, 240) provides a more
This is not necessarily a negative movement. In fact, multi-
responsive context for addressing social problems — includ-
stakeholder approaches appear to be an advance over admin-
ing environmental problems — than, to borrow Fung’s words
istrative sectoral problem-solving. Nevertheless, the point is
(2003a, 338), those ambitious plans for “plate-tectonic shifts
that they are not new, nor particularly deepening of democra-
in political and social organisation,” and on the other hand, a
cy in a critical deliberative empowerment sense.
widespread discontent with liberal democratic electoral poli-
For instance, ‘outside’ the context of practically inclined
tics (Smith 2003, 54). As noted by scholars like Fung (2003a,
deliberative democracy discourses, ‘multi-stakeholder’ ap-
339), individuals and organisations seldom have the time or
proaches have been promoted under various guises such as
the “wherewithal to affect” large-scale tectonic changes, and
inter-agency forums in gender and development and opera-
“the institutional forms of liberal democracy plus techno-bu-
tional relief contexts, and in urban safety contexts, on local,
reaucratic administration seem increasingly ill-suited to the
domestic, and international scales. They involve key statuto-
novel problems we face in the twenty-first century” (Fung
ry and non statutory organisations, as well as ‘ordinary citi-
and Wright 2003b, 3).We could add to this by saying that
zens’— once a problem has been interpreted or defined by
some newly created democratic polities, particularly in non-
the public professionals. In some cases female-citizen friend-
western countries are much less likely to fear inclusive
ly methodological tools have been used such as ‘women’s
democracy as understood by scholars like Fung.
safety audits.’ Arguably, however, these approaches are insuf-
Under practically inclined deliberative democracy, de-
ficiently critical when it comes to empowerment and involve-
mocratic participatory designs have been advanced under a
ment of affected women populations and lapse into the
model known as ‘empowered participatory governance’
administrative reasoning of efficiency; in some cases even
(which includes but is not restricted to designs such as citizen
stacking the odds against women ‘citizens’ participation. For
‘juries’ or ‘panels’ among a range of institutional design
instance, in one case, involving the issue of women’s protec-
choices). This empowered participatory governance model
tion from domestic and urban violence in Britain, the stake-
according to Fung and Wright (2003b, 15) “can be expanded
holders involved a local solicitor, a representative from the
both horizontally-into other policy areas and other regions-
probation service, a city council representative, a crown pros-
and vertically-into higher and lower levels of institutional and
ecutor, a health authority, a welfare agency representative and
social life” particularly as it promotes a range of deliberative
a local women’s refuge representative. (If you were a woman
fora for problem-solving. (So far so good with respect to the
who had experiences associated with environmental scarcity
introduction of meaningfulness for environmental-women’s
and conflict would you feel secure enough to participate?) So
protection problems.)
much for critical deliberative democracy’s emphasis on the
Arguably however, if we turn to Fung and Wright’s dis-
engagement and inclusion of the affected in “focussed prob-
cussion on countervailing power in empowered participatory
lem-solving ... and deliberation!” (Cohen and Rogers 2003,
governance (2003, 260-289) the model of empowered partic-
243; see Young 1996).
ipatory democracy exhibits enormous tensions between the
Given that environmental-women’s protection problems,
promotion of interest-based democracy and deliberative
if we recall, are open to a variety of problem constructions by
democracy in its movement towards institutional forms of
public enquiries due to their discursive dimension; have real
participatory governance. It ventures very closely to privileg-
material consequences; and intrinsically concern gender-dis-
ing existing representative democratic problem-solving struc-
crimination in areas beyond formal democratic sites, there is
tures that involve organisational representatives (informed by
a need to foreground the removal of gender-discrimination in
the countervailing power of civil society), rather than advo-
a substantive, rather than a nominal sense, closer to the
cating, empowering, and promoting the active participation
ground of everyday life if democratic participatory ‘designs’
of ‘citizens,’ particularly women, in problem-solving for
are to have any meaning in a problem-solving sense for envi-
problems that centralise the colonizer consciousness and gen-
ronmental-women’ protection problems. In this regard they
der discrimination. In other words, it resonates with what
need to engage with the promotion of authentically non-gen-
Torgerson (2003, 117) would call “the development of a dis-
der discriminatory participatory ‘designs’ in the form of ‘Cit-
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005
101

---

Semmens
izens Juries’ (or forums) for problem-solving. These have
they draw no distinction between men and women’s reason-
been understood by environmentally oriented authors as res-
ing capabilities and see no problem with the inclusion of
onating with the spirit of deliberative democracy (see for in-
women in participatory designs under the model of empow-
stance O’Neil 2002; Zwart 2003). What do we make of these
ered, participatory governance, or in the standard ‘Citizens
as they are currently conceived by male authorship?
Jury’ model (which has become somewhat sidelined in it). Yet
Fishkin and Luskin (2000, 17) concisely describe the
feminists have long highlighted that masculanisation of
essence of this political problem-solving method as follows:
thought can often pose as gender-neutrality in some cases by
“The shared idea is to gather citizens together in small groups
intent and in others by effect. Is this the case with participa-
to discuss policy issues face-to-face, thus providing both op-
tory designs associated with the model of empowered gover-
portunity and incentives for the participants to behave more
nance?
like ideal citizens.” Smith (2000) adds to this picture. He
Feminists like Young (1996) and Phillips (2000) have ex-
states:
pressed over the years dissatisfaction with the way certain
themes and topics with respect to communication, reason,
that citizen forums share a number of features. [A]
and participation get addressed or fail to get addressed in de-
cross section of the population is brought together
liberative democracy given that they have gender implica-
for three to four days to discuss an issue of public
tions. Hence they have proposed a re-thinking of deliberative
concern; citizens are exposed to a variety of infor-
democracy as ‘communicative,’ or more recently, ‘inclusive’
mation and hear a range of views from witnesses
democracy. They have noted, for instance, the need to admit
who they are able to cross-examine; and the fair-
a wide variety of communicative/speech styles including
ness of the proceedings is entrusted to an indepen-
forms of greeting, testimony, and narrative, noting also that
dent facilitating organization.
emotions are integrally connected to dialogical exchanges. It
We could add to this by being more specific. The insti-
is to the credit of male deliberative democracy scholars —
tute of Public Policy Research in Britain describes the
who are interested in furthering and deepening the delibera-
process along these lines: A representative group of 12-16
tive democracy project in new directions — that they have
people are selected with no formal alliances using a stratified
taken on board such insights over the years.
random selection method (this may be with respect to a com-
Yet for the area of environmental-women’s protection
munity or affected population). This group meets for approx-
problems, practically inclined deliberative democracy, and
imately four days. During the process it is briefed about a
the standard ‘Citizen Jury’ model which is embedded in it,
particular issue and engages in discussing possible approach-
may be too narrowly conceived and needs to pay more atten-
es towards problem outcomes by cross-examining witnesses
tion to themes like deliberative communicative content and
who introduce various aspects of a problem from various an-
process, since these may be covertly privileging maleness, as
gles. The ‘jurors’ collectively decide and report on the out-
Lloyd (2000) would put it.
come of their findings with the assistance of skilled modera-
For instance, arguably, for affected women populations
tors or facilitators. The decision need not be unanimous or
in their role as ‘jurors’ or ‘witnesses’ in ‘Citizens’ Juries,’ par-
consensual.
ticipation and inclusion is not merely about the right to speak
While the ‘Citizens Jury’ model appears to be more
and join in decision-making in predominantly male-designed
meaningful for environmental-women’s protection problems,
forums. It is about being secure enough to speak, being lis-
the standard conception of the Citizen Jury problem-solving
tened to in the fullest sense; and problem-solving from a wide
model is, I would contend, reflective of masculanised thought
empowerment rather than narrow deliberative base (that is
posing as gender neutrality, not so much in its logic-style
empowerment in all spheres of affected women’s lives). It is
(e.g., like Semonides) or intent, but by effect. The following
about taking substantive action and being met with a sub-
elaborates on this.
stantive responsiveness not only in national, but also trans-
national contexts by democratic facilitators and policy pro-
Making Participatory Designs Meaningful for
fessionals. This means access to material resources, and ac-
Environmental-Women’s Protection Problems
cess to further deliberative fora. Significantly, it is also about
opening up the procedural norms of participatory designs like
Unlike Hegel’s or Aristotle’s political philosophical
citizen juries and panels for discussion by ‘jurors’ and ‘wit-
works, which are blatantly sexist or intrinsically biased
nesses’ (Something that the standard model of ‘Citizen’s Ju-
against women, the ideas associated with deliberative partic-
ries’ leaves out). For example, it would allow the ‘jurors’ to
ipatory designs are not explicitly sexist. In fact, they can be
define and construct situational problems through the assis-
commended for their attempts at gender-neutrality in so far as
tance of skilled moderators or facilitators and to choose their
102
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005

---

Semmens
own witnesses. (Something which is not encouraged by the
democracy in a ‘design’ sense more meaningful for process-
Standard ‘Citizens’ Jury’ model because it may distract from
ing environmental-women’s protection problems? If we con-
objectivity and consensus.) It would also allow the framing of
sider the central project of feminist ecology to be “feminism
questions by jurors such as ‘does one need formal citizenship
that is ecological and an ecology that is feminist, as King
status to participate in ‘Citizen Juries’? What is the nature of
would put it (cited by Plumwood 2003, 213), then some im-
power in these designs? How have the boundaries between
portant themes, I would suggest, point in the direction of ac-
public and private been drawn? What forms/topics of discus-
tivism contesting structural injustices, attentiveness to rela-
sion and forms of communication have been deemed inad-
tionship-building, ecological embeddedness, security,
missible?’ (Benhabib 1989). Participants’ silence on these
women’s agency, gender training and culturally-sensitive
questions does not necessarily signify reduced awareness in
community development processes.
respect to their framing. As one poet so aptly put it: “I may
What direction would these take? Borrowing from the
be silent but I’m thinking. I may not speak, but don’t mistake
spirit of deliberative democracy ...
me for a wall” (Shigeji 1999). Women, regardless of ethnic
Why don’t we all think about it?
origin and/or literacy, can appreciate the need to ask such
questions (framed in non-academic terms, of course). It does
Endnotes
not require a Habermasian cognitive competence. In some
cultures, for instance, when domination becomes too much
1.
Author to whom correspondence should be directed:
for women to bear, their way of showing this is not through
E-mail: adrianna@coombs.anu.edu.au
dialogue. Consider this:
2.
Used here as an example of masculanised thought. Cited in Jayawar-
dena 1982, 170-171.
Grandmother used to drink like a man ... When
3.
Jiu Jin was a 19th century Chinese revolutionary feminist. This is part
grandmother was in a pub one night, a man with a
of a poem she wrote en route to Japan (Jayawardena 1982, 117).
long beard came in. He goes up to her and says,
4.
Used here to mean a macro and micro-political order aspiration that
‘Have you a light, my pretty? ... My grandmother
is not merely formalistic, is opposed to tyrannical rule, and is
gets some paper, rolls it up, pushes it in the fire, and
processed through principles of freedom of expression and tolerance
says, ‘Here’s a light, my pretty,’ and she puts the
of diverse beliefs, equality, transparency, and non-violent assemblage.
paper to his beard and it goes up in flames! (Okely
5.
In the sense used here, the protection of women means safeguarding
their human rights and human capabilities. Unfortunately, the notion
1975, 78).
of protecting women has been associated with men’s assumed role of
In sum, all this calls for gender-sensitivity, not gender-neutral
protector. ‘Protection’ has expressed itself throughout histories as
‘masculanised’ thought.
men’s control over women. In 19th century China, for example, ‘pro-
The idea that deliberative participatory designs, (includ-
tected’ women were financially kept by men for sexual and repro-
ing the ‘Citizens’ Jury’ model), may be too narrowly con-
ductive services. In many 21st century cultures, women are killed or
maimed in the name of protection. At the state-level, suggests
ceived for addressing cross-border environmental-women’s
Mohsin (2004, 43), male control “expresses itself through the state
protection problems draws support from a range of critical
ideology of nationalism.”
scholars from within the discourse of deliberative democracy
6.
I owe this term to an anthropologist named Ardener (1975, 22).
(e.g., Cohen and Rogers 2003), as well as from the environ-
7.
Fotopoulos belongs to the more radical inclusive democracy camp,
mental stream. Eckersley (2002), for example, although she
which can be termed ‘revolutionary inclusive democracy,’ for it pos-
is concerned with a wider ecocentric environmental project,
tulates that insofar as representative electoral democracy is grounded
nevertheless aptly captures the mood of deliberative democ-
in the market economy, then it must be supplanted entirely. This is
racy’s critics by suggesting three general limitations concern-
an understandable sentiment in terms of vision, but in terms of prag-
ing its problem-solving methodology. She argues that delib-
matism it is not feasible in the immediate future.
erative democracy is “insufficiently critical and emancipato-
8.
By this I mean that at one end of a continuum the environmental
ry when it comes to the perspective of oppressed and mar-
purview is ultimately on affected non-human (biological) populations
in the interests of exclusively non-human (biological) populations,
ginal groups,” that “it is too instrumentalist in the way that it
while at the other, on affected human populations predominantly in
seems to close off non-instrumental democratic encounters
the interests of human populations.
and the opportunity to engage in dialogue for dialogue’s sake;
9.
The traditional definition of southern contexts characteristically
and third, that it relies on a “liberal humanist, moral premise
refers to a diverse set of poorer countries in Asia, Africa, Latin Amer-
rather than on explicit environmental values.”
ica and parts of the Middle-East. Nevertheless, it can also refer to
Given practical deliberative democracy’s narrow base,
poorer regions within Eastern and Western European countries (e.g.,
what contribution can insights from the area of feminist
parts of Lithuania).
ecology bring that would make the practice of deliberative
10.
Nevertheless, while the environment-violent conflict nexus is a use-
ful one, positing the state as the explicit or implicit referent of secu-
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005
103

---

Semmens
rity and ultimate value that demands protection (as some theorists do
Cleaver, F. 2001. Institutions, Agency and the Limitations of Participatory
in the study of this nexus) is problematic when seen through a gen-
Approaches to Development. In B. Booke and U. Kothari (eds.) Par-
der lens.
ticipation: The New Tyranny, 35-55. London. Zed Books.
11.
Indeed, such a view has support from numerous case studies con-
Dryzek, J. 1997. The Politics of the Earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
ducted by researchers engaged in the Environmental Change and Se-
Dzielska, M. 1995. Hypatia of Alexandria. Cambridge: Harvard Universi-
curity Project at the Woodrow Wilson Centre in the late 1990s.
ty Press.
12.
By private ‘command and control,’ I mean, decision-making in which
Eckersley, W.R. Environmental Pragmatism, Ecocentrism and Deliberative
public authority is sidelined so that decision-making is made from
Democracy: Between Problem-Solving and Fundamental Critique. In
within companies or by bodies associated or dependent on them.
B.A. Minteer and B. Pepperman (eds.) Democracy and the Claims of
13.
Deliberative democracy is not a homogenous body of thought and
Nature, 49-70. London: Rowman and Littlefield.
theorists emphasise different concerns (see for instance Cohen 2002;
Fishkin, J. 1991. Deliberative Democracy. New Haven: Yale University
Dryzek1997; and Fishkin 1992). Nevertheless, this core emphasis is
Press.
shared by a number of accounts and chosen here for its relevance to
Fraser, N. 1992. Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Cri-
the problem-solving context.
tique of Actually Existing Democracy. In Craig Calhoun (ed.) Haber-
14.
Associated with Jurgen Habermas’ communicative ethics on cogni-
mas and the Public Sphere, 109-142. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
tive competence and morality.
Fox, W., Renner, and A. Westing. 2001. Environmental Degradation as both
15.
I say ‘largely appears,’ because among other things, the feminist ethic
Cause and Consequence of Armed Conflict, World Future Society.
of care (read as sensitivity and empathy) along with an emphasis on
Fung, A. 2003a. Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design
relationship-building is obscured. Arguably also, affected women
Choices and Their Consequences. The Journal of Political Philoso-
participants are not necessarily liberal individuals uninhibited by
phy 11, 3, 338-367.
norms or requirements.
Fung, A. and O.E. Wright (eds.). 2003b. Deepening Democracy. Institu-
16.
To say this is not without controversy. The area of feminist ecology
tional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. Lon-
consists of a voluminous, diverse body of eco-feminist literature. On
don; New York: Verso.
some accounts, an analytical frame may be antithetical to feminist
Homer-Dixon, T. 1995. Strategies for Studying Causation in Complex Eco-
ecological bodies of thought for ontological reasons to do with the
logical Political Systems. Toronto: The American Association for the
creation of objectification and othering. Nevertheless, I draw my sup-
Advancement of Science, University of Toronto.
port from eco-feminist scholarship which relies on insightful analy-
Hajer, A.M. and H. Wagenaar. 2003. Deliberative Policy Analysis. Cam-
sis to back their own claims.
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
For elaboration, see the ‘section’ on environmental-women’s protec-
Jastrzebska, M. 1999. The Good Immigrant. In J. Letts and F. Whytehead
tion problems.
(eds.) Captured Voices: An Anthology of Poems and Prose. London:
18.
Used here to make the point that problem-solving practices can
Victor Gollancz.
‘mute’ affected women by their seemingly gender-neutral construc-
Jordan, D.A. 2002. Human Rights or Wrongs: The Struggle for a Rights-
tions.
Based Response to Trafficking in Human Beings. In Rachel Masika
(ed.) Gender, Trafficking, and Slavery. Oxford: Oxfam.
References
Lattimere, R. 1960. Greek Lyrics, Chicago: University of Chicago.
Lloyd, G. 2000. Rationality. In A.M. Jagger and I.M. Young (eds.) A Com-
Amnesty International. 2003. Online Documentation Archives. AI
panion to Feminist Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwells.
INDEX:AMR 41/026/2003, 11 August.
Mouffe, C (ed.). 1992. Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Cit-
Antonysamy, L. 2003. Contours of Ecological Democracy. In Motion Mag-
izenship, Country. London and New York: Verso.
azine September 26.
Mohsin, A. 2004. Gendered Nation, Gendered Peace. Indian Journal of
Ardener, E. 1975. The Problem Revisited. In S. Ardener (ed.) Perceiving
Gender Studies 11, 11, 43-64.
Women. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Nivonizigive, A. 2004. A Worrying Increase in the Number of Rapes in Bu-
Bacchi, L.C. 1999. Women, Policy and Politics. London; New Delhi: Sage.
rundi. Dimitra Newsletter 9, 7.
Bag Essa, L.F. 2004. The Consequences of the War and Their Impact on the
O’Neill, J. 2002. Deliberative Democracy and Environmental policy. In
Life of Rural women in Conflict Zones. Dimitra Newsletter 9, 4.
B.A. Minteer and B. Pepperman Taylor (eds.) Democracy and the
Barry, J. 2002. Vulnerability and Virtue:Democracy: Dependency, and
Claims of Nature, 257-278. London: Rowman and Littlefield.
Ecological Stewardship, 133-152. London: Rowman and Littlefield.
Okely, J. 1975. Gypsy Women: Models in Conflict. In S. Ardener (ed.) Per-
Benhabib, S. 1989. Liberal Dialogue Versus a Critical Theory of Discur-
ceiving Women. New York: J.M. Dent and Sons.
sive Legitimation. Liberalism and the Moral Life. Cambridge, MA:
Pearce, J. 2004. Civil Society, the Market, and Democracy in Latin Amer-
Harvard University Press.
ica. In P. Burnell and P. Calvert (eds.) Civil Society in Democratiza-
Cohen, J. 2002. Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy. In D. Estlund
tion, 90-116. Oregon: Frank Cass.
(ed.) Democracy, 87-106. Oxford: Blackwell.
Plumwood, V. 1993. Feminism and the Mastery of Nature. London: Rout-
Cohen, J. and J. Rogers. 2003. Power and Reason. In A. Fung and E.O.
ledge.
Wright (eds.) Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in
Plumwood, V. 2000. The Environment. A Companion to Feminist Philoso-
Empowered Participatory Governance. London, New York: Verso.
phy, edited by A.M. Jaggar and I.M.Young, Oxford. Blackwell, 213-
221.
104
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005

---

Semmens
Phillips, A. 2000. Democracy. In A.M. Jaggar and I.M. Young A Compan-
Smith, G. 2000. Toward Deliberative Institutions. In M. Saward (ed.) De-
ion to Feminist Philosophy, 511-519. Oxford. Blackwell.
mocratic Innovation:Deliberation, Association and Representation,
Salleh, A. 1984. Deeper than Deep Ecology: The Eco-feminist Connection.
29-37. London: Routledge.
Environmental Ethics 6, 335-341.
Torgerson, D. 2003. Democracy through Policy Discourse. In M.A. Hajer
Semmens, A.A. Maximizing Justice for Environmental Refugees: A
and J. Wagenaar (eds.) Deliberative Policy Analysis. Cambridge:
Transnational Institution for the Deterritorialised. In N. Low and B.
Cambridge University Press.
Gleeson Governing for the Environment. Bassingstoke and New
Warren, K. 1996. Feminism and Peace: Seeing Connections. In K. Warren
York: Palgrave/Macmillan.
and D.L. Cady (eds.) Bringing Peace Home. Bloomington: Indiana
Shigeji, T. 1999. Silent But. Captured Voices: An Anthology of Poetry and
University Press.
Prose. London. Victor Gollancz.
Yayawardena, K. 1982. Feminism and Nationalism in the Third World in
Schmidtz, D. and R. Goodin. 1998. Collective Responsibility. Social Wel-
the 19th and 20th Centuries. Netherlands: Institute of Social Studies.
fare and Individual Responsibility For and Against, 145-154. Cam-
Young., M.I. 1996. Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Democracy. In S. Benhabib (ed.) Contesting the Boundaries of the
Smaoun, S. 2000. Violence Against Women in Urban Areas: An Analysis of
Political. New Jersey: Princeton.
the Problem from a Gender Perspective. UMP Working Paper, N17.
Young, M.I., 2002. Difference as a Resource for Democratic Communica-
tion. In D. Estlund (ed.) Democracy. Oxford: Blackwell.
Human Ecology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005
105

---