A game theory perspective on environmental assessment: What games are played and what does this tell us about decision making rationality and legitimacy?

A. Bond; J. Pope; A. Morrison-Saunders; F. Retief

doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2016.01.002

Back

A game theory perspective on environmental assessment: What games are played and what does this tell us about decision making rationality and legitimacy?

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

A game theory perspective on environmental assessment: What games are played and what does this tell us about decision making rationality and legitimacy?

A. Bond, J. Pope, A. Morrison-Saunders and F. Retief

Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Vol.57, pp.187-194

2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2016.01.002

Files and links (2)

pdf

game_theory_perspective_on_Environmental_Assessment.pdfDownload View

Author’s VersionCC BY-NC-ND V4.0, Open Access

url

Link to Published Version *Subscription may be requiredView

Abstract

Game theory provides a useful theoretical framework to examine the decision process operating in the context of environmental assessment, and to examine the rationality and legitimacy of decision-making subject to Environmental Assessment (EA). The research uses a case study of the Environmental Impact Assessment and Sustainability Appraisal processes undertaken in England. To these are applied an analytical framework, based on the concept of decision windows to identify the decisions to be assessed. The conditions for legitimacy are defined, based on game theory, in relation to the timing of decision information, the behaviour type (competitive, reciprocal, equity) exhibited by the decision maker, and the level of public engagement; as, together, these control the type of rationality which can be brought to bear on the decision. Instrumental rationality is based on self-interest of individuals, whereas deliberative rationality seeks broader consensus and is more likely to underpin legitimate decisions. The results indicate that the Sustainability Appraisal process, conducted at plan level, is better than EIA, conducted at project level, but still fails to provide conditions that facilitate legitimacy. Game theory also suggests that Sustainability Appraisal is likely to deliver ‘least worst’ outcomes rather than best outcomes when the goals of the assessment process are considered; this may explain the propensity of such ‘least worst’ decisions in practise. On the basis of what can be learned from applying this game theory perspective, it is suggested that environmental assessment processes need to be redesigned and better integrated into decision making in order to guarantee the legitimacy of the decisions made.

Details

Title: A game theory perspective on environmental assessment: What games are played and what does this tell us about decision making rationality and legitimacy?
Authors/Creators: A. Bond (Author/Creator)
J. Pope (Author/Creator)
A. Morrison-Saunders (Author/Creator)
F. Retief (Author/Creator)
Publication Details: Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Vol.57, pp.187-194
Publisher: Elsevier
Identifiers: 991005540901607891
Copyright: © 2016 Elsevier B.V.
Murdoch Affiliation: School of Veterinary and Life Sciences
Language: English
Resource Type: Journal article

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

Source: InCites

Metrics

558 File views/ downloads

139 Record Views

46 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Domestic collaboration; International collaboration
Citation topics: 6 Social Sciences; 6.153 Climate Change; 6.153.2227 Strategic Environmental Assessment
Web Of Science research areas: Environmental Studies
ESI research areas: Social Sciences, general