Cited by 109Environmental and Social Impact AssessmentsRisk Perception and ManagementEnvironmental Philosophy and Ethics

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Companion to Environmental Studies

Stirling, Andy·2018·Routledge eBooks

Abstract

Environmental appraisal presents deeper and wider problems than are typically conceded in policy. Strong political pressures for decision justification routinely force the closing down of due deliberation over the real limits to knowledge. Even technical language can become warped – to imply that all environmental dilemmas are susceptible to apparently precise and definitive probabilistic risk analysis. The inconvenient messiness of less tractable aspects of incertitude (strict uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance) can thereby be suppressed. Reviewing the most serious problems, this chapter outlines practical methods for resisting these pressures and opening up a more rigorous, robust, transparent – and democratically accountable – environmental politics. Please note: we do not have permission to upload this as a record but you can follow the link to the full document externally.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4324/9781315640051

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 109

Metadata

Authors
Stirling, A.
Corresponding author
Stirling, Andy
Venue
Routledge eBooks
Publisher
Routledge
Published
2018-05-01
OpenAlex
W2897430557
Cited by
109
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 2
FWCI
14.53
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Routledge eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • OpenDocs (Institute of Development Studies) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental and Social Impact Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Environmental Philosophy and Ethics
Keywords
environmental assessment, environmental policy, risk analysis, uncertainty, ambiguity, ignorance, democratic accountability, political pressure, deliberation, environmental politics

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: Companion to Environmental Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9781315640051
The paper
Stirling, A. (2018). Companion to Environmental Studies. Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315640051