Skip to main content

Transparency: aid or obstacle to effective defence of vulnerable environments from reservoir construction? Dam decisions and democracy in North East England

Buy Article:

$51.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)


Public participation in transparent decisionmaking has been proposed as a panacea for environmental protection. Bargaining theory suggests drawbacks to transparency such as hardening of attitudes and intransigence. Yet achievement of consensus on environmental values for integrated water resource management demands public involvement. Historical study of attempts to prevent reservoir construction in upland valleys designated for protection of nature suggests that ‘closed-door’ bargaining proved more effective for environmentalists than open, public debate. Records now open for analysis of disputes over Teesdale and Farndale, 1950–1970, allow comparisons to be made between behind-the-scenes deliberations and ‘open-door’ public discussion. The ambition of progressing from public participation to devolution of environmental decisionmaking and responsibility to the local scale demands more conceptualization of the process of decisionmaking on water resource development.

Keywords: Farndale; Kielder; North East England; Teesdale; Water Framework Directive; decisionmaking; democracy; public participation; reservoir schemes; transparency; water resources

Document Type: Research Article


Affiliations: Oxford University Centre for the Environment, School of Geography, Oxford OX1 3QY, Email:

Publication date: 2006-03-01

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more