A Solution

The solutions to end health disparities are complex and involve introspection and confrontation with one's own perceived beliefs about our fellow human beings who are of a different socioeconomic status, sex, religion, age, gender, and physical appearance than ourselves. No person, even if of the same skin color and culture, is the same. Hence, the solution to health disparities is the societal decision to hold accountable those who harm others by withholding health information and treatment that can sustain and prolong life. The value of all human lives is priceless. Hence, access to healthcare and quality evidenced-based care is a right for all.

Deference and decision-making in science and society: How deference to scientific authority goes beyond confidence in science and scientists to become authoritarianism

Deference to scientific authority theoretically captures the belief that scientists and not publics should make decisions on science in society. Few studies examine deference, however, and none test this central theoretical claim. The result is deference is often conflated with concepts such as trust in scientists and belief in the authority of science. This study examines two claims key to conceptualizing deference: that deference (1) predicts anti-democratic views of decision-making and (2) relates to but is distinct from beliefs of science as authoritative knowledge. Analyzing US nationally representative data, we find deference to scientific authority does predict anti-democratic views, and this is its distinct conceptual value: trust in scientists and belief in science as authoritative knowledge strongly relate to deference, but both predict pro-democratic views, unlike deference. We discuss how these findings highlight deference as vital for understanding perceptions of science and societal decision-making and how we can better develop the concept.

Governing a just future: what and how to govern? – commentary to Jones

In dealing with the topic of “governing the future”, it is fundamental to understand how different practices define justice in content as well as in processual sense. Premises of justification can be seen as essential indicators of the future direction of societal decision-making in governance networks, as well as in determining whose realities play a part when defining future imaginaries. We are dealing with a complex entity and we need to ask whether a future as such can be distinguished from how it is produced in different governing practices? I would also like to emphasize that the concept of ‘governance’ needs to be taken under careful scrutiny. Governance has not replaced government, as most often both of these management logics are present simultaneously. This is creating tensions within the public sector. My comments to the issues presented in Rhys Jones’ article (in this issue) are grounded in planning theory and my ongoing research concerning justification of new spatial planning practices in the Nordic countries.

“These Grandmas Drove Me Mad. It Was Brilliant!”—Promising Starting Points to Support Citizen Competence for Sustainable Consumption in Adults

The article addresses citizen competence for sustainable consumption in adults. It discusses whether it is possible to develop educational offerings for adults (being by nature short and isolated) that effectively promote this competence and whether it makes a difference if sustainable consumption is approached by focusing on good life (quality of life) and justice or by focusing on natural resources and environment (as is suggested by, e.g., environmental literacy approaches). Taking the case of energy policy, it presents an educational intervention (EdIn) developed, implemented, and investigated by the authors. In data-analysis, three approaches were adopted (methodological triangulation), one analysing the deliberations’ cognitive structure, one analysing the participants’ perception, one analysing the participants’ reaction (in terms of the knowledge/concepts and values/concerns they voiced). The results show, firstly, that the didactical design of EdIn was successful with a view to supporting citizen competence in participants. Secondly, they show that in adult civic education sustainable consumption should be approached by focusing on good life and justice. Thirdly, they indicate that people do not necessarily perceive themselves to be part of societal decision-making, leading from the question of the design and content of civic educational activities to the question of their necessity.

Preface to Beyond Leviathan

The state cannot be other than Leviathan in imposing its structurally entrenched power on overall societal decision-making. Yet a way must be found to extricate humanity from the ever more dangerous, arbitrary, and alienated form of the Leviathan state. Indeed, the survival of humanity depends on it.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.

Crossroads in Alberta: Climate Capitalism or Ecological Democracy

This paper situates the current political moment in Alberta, Canada, within a broader analysis of the global crisis of fossil capitalism. Alberta’s political economy and ecology are deeply riven by the conflict between its heavy dependence for revenue and employment on the exportation of fossil fuels, on the one hand, and the multiple harms, risks, and forms of opposition to this development model, on the other hand. With the election in May 2015 of a social democratic party, a rare window for change has opened, and much is at stake in the choices and strategies that the new government will adopt. Two potential paths –which parallel what is emerging globally--are becoming clearer: rapid and deep decarbonisation underpinned by an equally deep democratization of citizenship and societal-decision making (ecological democracy), or a “climate capitalist” project to prolong the carbon extractive model.