Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The violence of silence: some reflections on access to information, public participation in decision-making, and access to justice in matters concerning the environment

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The proposition put forth in this paper is that whether—and the extent to which—harm or potential harm to the environment (its natural resources, living beings, and their ecosystems) is identified, resisted, mitigated, or prevented is linked to the nature and scope of public access to information, participation in governmental decision-making, and access to justice—which are often referred to as “environmental due process” or “procedural environmental rights.” Using examples in the United States of attacks on law school clinics and denial of standing in court, this paper argues that restrictions on public access to information, participation in decision-making, and access to justice create legacies and “cultures of silence” that reduce the likelihood that future generations will be willing and able to contest environmental harm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In late September 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court to dismiss Kivalina’s case. On 4 October 2012, Kivalina filed a petition for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to rehear the case en banc.

References

  1. Agnew, R. (2013). The ordinary acts that contribute to ecocide: A criminological analysis. In N. South & A. Brisman (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of green criminology (pp. 58–72). Oxford: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Associated Press (2012). National briefing: West: California: Suit that called whales slaves is dismissed. The New York Times. February 9: A15.

  3. Beierle, T. C., & Cayford, J. (2002). Democracy in practice: Public participations in environmental decisions. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brisman, A. (2008). Crime-environment relationships and environmental justice. Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 6(2), 727–817.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brisman, A. (2012). The cultural silence of climate change contrarianism. In R. White (Ed.), Climate change from a criminological perspective (pp. 41–70). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Brosi, B. J., & Biber, E. G. N. (2010). Officious intermeddlers or citizen experts? Petitions and public production of information in environmental law. UCLA Law Review, 58, 321–400.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brosi, B. J., & Biber, E. G. N. (2012). Citizen involvement in the U.S. endangered species act. Science, 337(6096), 802–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bruch, C., Coker, W., & VanArsdale, C. (2001). Constitutional environmental law: giving force to fundamental principles in Africa. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, 26, 131–210.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cole, L. F. (1992). Empowerment as the key to environmental protection: the need for environmental poverty law. Ecology Law Quarterly, 19, 619–683.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Comer, R. D. (2004). Constitutional conflicts on public lands: cooperative conservation: the federalism underpinnings to public involvement in the management of public lands. University of Colorado Law Review, 75, 1133–1157.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cover, R. (1986). Violence and the word. Yale Law Journal, 95(8), 1601–1629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Crary, D., & Watson, J. (2011). PETA lawsuit seeks to expand animal rights. Associated Press/Yahoo! News (Online). (October 25th) http://news.yahoo.com/peta-lawsuit-seeks-expand-animal-rights-222219887.html

  13. Dernbach, J. C. (2002). Synthesis. In J. C. Dernbach (Ed.), Stumbling toward sustainability (pp. 1–42). Washington, DC: Environmental Law Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fleury-Steiner, B., & Nielsen, L. B. (2006). Introduction: A constitutive perspective of rights. In B. Fleury-Steiner & L. B. Nielsen (Eds.), The new civil rights research: A constitutive approach (pp. 1–14). Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Green, A. (2012). Silence in the courtroom. Law and Literature, 24, 80–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hampshire, J., Hills, E., & Iqbal, N. (2005). Power relations in participatory research and community development. Human Organization, 64(4), 340–349.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hunter, D., Salzman, J., & Zaelke, D. (2002). International environmental law and policy, 2/e. New York: Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hurley, L. (2011). Endangered species: Obama plan to cap funding for ESA petitions angers litigants. Greenwire (Online). (March 23rd) http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2011/03/23/2

  19. Irwin, F., & Bruch, C. (2002). Public access to information, participation, and justice. In Dernbach, J.C. (Ed.), Stumbling toward sustainability (pp. 511–539).

  20. Kemmis, D., & McKinney, M. (2011). Collaboration and the ecology of democracy. Sustainable Development Law & Policy, 12(1), 46–50, 69–70.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kirk, E. A., & Blackstock, K. L. (2011). Enhanced decision making: balancing public participation against ‘better regulation’ in British environmental permitting regimes. Journal of Environmental Law, 23(1), 97–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kuehn, R. R. (2000). Denying access to legal representation: the attack on the Tulane environmental law clinic. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, 4, 33–147.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kuehn, R. R., & Joy, P. A. (2003). An ethics critique of interference in law school clinics. Fordham Law Review, 71, 1971–2049.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Luban, D. (2002). Silence! Four ways the law keeps poor people from getting heard in court. Legal Affairs, (May/June), 54–58.

  25. Luban, D. (2003). Taking out the adversary: the assault on progressive public-interest lawyers. California Law Review, 91, 209–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lynch, M. J., & Stretesky, P. B. (1998). Uniting class, race and criticism through the study of environmental justice. The Critical Criminologist, 9(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lynch, M. J., & Stretesky, P. B. (1999). Criticism and clarifying the analysis of environmental justice: further thoughts on the critical analysis of environmental justice issues. The Critical Criminologist, 9(3), 5–8.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lynch, M. J., & Stretesky, P. (2003). The meaning of green: contrasting criminological perspectives. Theoretical Criminology, 7(2), 217–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lynch, M. J., Stretesky, P. B., & McGurrin, D. (2002). Toxic crimes and environmental justice: Examining the hidden dangers of hazardous waste. In G. W. Potter (Ed.), Controversies in white collar crime (pp. 109–136). Cincinnati: Anderson.

    Google Scholar 

  30. McInerney-Lankford, S., Darrow, M., & Rajamani, L. (2011). Human rights and climate change. Washington, DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mitchell, R. C., Mertig, A. G., & Dunlap, R. E. (1992). Twenty years of environmental mobilization: Trends among national environmental organizations. In R. E. Dunlap & A. G. Mertig (Eds.), American environmentalism: The U.S. environmental movement, 1970–1990 (pp. 11–26). Washington, DC: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  32. O’Connor, J. (1993). The promise of environmental democracy. In R. Hofrichter (Ed.), Toxic struggles: The theory and practice of environmental justice (pp. 47–57). Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Patlis, J. M. (2003). Riders on the storm, or navigating the crosswinds of appropriations and administration of the endangered species act: a play in five acts. Tulane Environmental Law Journal, 16, 257–329.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Pellow, D. N. (2004). The politics of illegal dumping: an environmental justice framework. Qualitative Sociology, 27(4), 511–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Pellow, D. N. (2013). Environmental justice, animal rights, and total liberation: From conflict and distance to points of common focus. In N. South & A. Brisman (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of green criminology (pp. 331–346). Oxford: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Peterson, L., Lininger, J. C., Bergoffen, M., Snape, B., & Bradley, C. (2011). Natural resource “Conflicts” in the U.S. Southwest: A story of hype over substance. Sustainable Development Law & Policy, 12(1): 32–35, 61–63.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Preston, B. J. (2011). The use of restorative justice for environmental crime. Criminal Law Journal, 35(3), 136–153.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Restani, M., & Marzluff, J. M. (2002). Funding extinction? Biological needs and political realities in the allocation of resources to endangered species recovery. BioScience, 52(2), 169–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Rowan, M. (2012). Democracy and punishment: A radical view. Theoretical Criminology, 16(1), 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ryall, Á. (2011). Access to environmental information in Ireland: implementation challenges. Journal of Environmental Law, 23(1), 45–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sarat, A. (2001). Situating law between the realities of violence and the claims of justice: An introduction. In A. Sarat (Ed.), Law, violence, and the possibility of justice (pp. 3–16). Princeton, NJ, and Oxford: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Schelly, D., & Stretesky, P. B. (2009). An analysis of the “path of least resistance” argument in three environmental justice success cases. Society and Natural Resources, 22(4), 369–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Schwartz, J. (2010). Courts emerging as battlefield for fights over climate change. The New York Times. January 27th: A1, A4

  44. Simon, D. R. (2000). Corporate environmental crimes and social inequality: new directions for environmental justice research. American Behavioural Scientist, 43, 633–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. South, N., & Brisman, A. (2013). Critical green criminology, environmental rights and crimes of exploitation. In S. Winlow & R. Atkinson (Eds.), New directions in crime and deviancy (pp. 99–110). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  46. The Stanford Environmental Law Society. (2001). The endangered species act: A Stanford environmental law society handbook. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Stephens, S. (1996). Reflections on environmental justice: children as victims. Social Justice, 23(4), 62–86.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Stretesky, P. B. (2003). Environmental inequity and the distribution of air lead levels across U.S. counties: Implications for the production of racial inequality. Sociological Spectrum, 23(1), 91–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Stretesky, P. B., & Hogan, M. J. (1998). Environmental justice: an analysis of superfund sites in Florida. Social Problems, 45(2), 268–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Stretesky, P. B., & Lynch, M. J. (1999). Environmental justice and prediction of distance to accidental chemical releases in Hillsborough County, Florida. Social Science Quarterly, 80(4), 830–846.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Stretesky, P. B., & Lynch, M. J. (2011). Coal strip mining, mountaintop removal, and the distribution of environmental violations across the United States, 2002–2008. Landscape Research, 36(2), 209–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Stretesky, P. B., Johnston, J., & Arney, J. (2003). Environmental inequity: an analysis of large-scale hog operations in 17 States, 1982–1997. Rural Sociology, 68(2), 231–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Stretesky, P. B., Huss, S., Lynch, M. J., Zahran, S., & Childs, B. (2011). The founding of environmental justice organizations across counties during the 1990s and 2000s: civil rights and environmental cross movement effects. Social Problems, 58(3), 330–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Sugg, I. C. (1993–1994). Caught in the act: Evaluating the endangered species act, its effects on man and prospects for reform. Cumberland Law Review, 24, 1–78.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Watson, J. (2012a). San Diego judge to decide future of whale case. Associated Press/Yahoo! News (Online). (February 6th) http://news.yahoo.com/san-diego-judge-decide-future-whale-case-201027887.html

  56. Watson, J. (2012b). Slavery protections for animals? Judge to decide. Associated Press/Yahoo! News (Online). (February 7th) http://news.yahoo.com/slavery-protections-animals-judge-decide-234713082.html

  57. Watson, J. (2012c). Judge tosses case seeking rights for orcas. Associated Press/Yahoo! News (Online). (February 8th) http://news.yahoo.com/judge-tosses-case-seeking-rights-orcas-231152842.html

  58. Waver, M. (2012). Where standing closes a door, may intervention open a window? Article III, rule 24(A), and climate change solutions. Environmental Law Reporter News & Analysis, 42, 10945–10959.

    Google Scholar 

  59. White, R. (2007). Green criminology and the pursuit of social and ecological justice. In P. Beirne & N. South (Eds.), Issues in green criminology: Confronting harms against environments, humanity and other animals (pp. 32–54). Cullompton: Willan.

    Google Scholar 

  60. White, R. (2013). Environmental harm: An eco-justice perspective. Bristol: The Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Justice Studies, College of Justice and Safety, Eastern Kentucky University, 467 Stratton Building, 521 Lancaster Avenue, Richmond, KY, 40475-3102, USA

    Avi Brisman

Authors
  1. Avi Brisman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Avi Brisman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brisman, A. The violence of silence: some reflections on access to information, public participation in decision-making, and access to justice in matters concerning the environment. Crime Law Soc Change 59, 291–303 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-013-9416-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-013-9416-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation