The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Enfranchising the Earth, and its Alternatives
Abstract
Greens have always favoured grass-roots participatory democracy, but it has never been clear in terms of their fundamental environmental ethic why they should. An argument for doing so is developed in familiar liberal terms of equal protection of interests. First it is shown that nature has ‘interests' as deserving of protection as anyone else's. Then it is shown that notions of ‘encapsulated interests’, discredited in other connections, are the appropriate way of conceptualizing those interests politically. Finally, it is argued that discursive participatory democratic practices are most likely to evoke such encapsulated natural interests and secure representation for them in political deliberations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations
Dryzek, J. S. (2002) · doi:10.1093/019925043x.001.0001 · Cited by 1,728
Saward, M. (2006) · Contemporary Political Theory · doi:10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300234 · Cited by 1,471
Enfranchising All Affected Interests, and Its Alternatives
GOODIN, R. E. (2007) · Philosophy & Public Affairs · doi:10.1111/j.1088-4963.2007.00098.x · Cited by 1,157
Self-citationRepresenting People, Representing Nature, Representing the World
O'Neill, J. (2001) · Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy · doi:10.1068/c12s · Cited by 305
Metadata
- Authors
- Goodin, R. E.
- Venue
- Political Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1996-12
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 835-849
- ISSN
- 0032-3217 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9248
- OpenAlex
- W2103936867
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Enfranchising the Earth, and its Alternatives. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00337.x
- The paper
- Goodin, R. E. (1996). Enfranchising the Earth, and its Alternatives. Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00337.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
