Ends, means, beginnings: environmental technocracy, ecological deliberation or embodied disagreement

Technocratic attitudes suggest that decisions about environmental policy should be led by scientific experts. Such decisions, it is expected, will be more rational than any arrived at by a democratic mediation between the narrow, short-term interests and uninformed preferences of the general public. Within green political theory, deliberative democracy has emerged as the dominant repost to technocracy, offering an account of how democratic polities can deal with complex scientific and technological decisions through the emergence of communicative rationality. This article argues that neither appeals to expert knowledge, nor communicative rationality, are likely to deliver the optimal green outcomes that proponents suggest, but rather will cover up the inevitable disagreements over environmental policy making. Instead the article suggests that more ecologically-sensitive and democratic decision making about complex scientific and technological issues can emerge if we acknowledge the differently embodied perspectives of decision-makers – from scientists to citizens. This prioritises democratic means over green ends, yet incorporates the environment at the beginning of the decision-making process. The article aims to sketch out the theoretical and practical implications of such an embodied turn for responding to the anti-democratic tendencies of environmental technocracy.

Consumers' willingness to pay for ethical attributes

Purpose: In recent years, there has been a big increase in the use of ethical attributes as marketing appeals. This paper examines consumers’ willingness to pay for three selected ethical attributes, namely ‘Organic’, ‘Recyclable Packaging’ and ‘Fairtrade’ in monetary terms. Design/Methodology/Approach: A modified choice-based experimental design with manipulation of the key constructs was used to estimate the mean value of how much consumers are willing to pay for the selected attributes attached to a box of premium chocolates. The results are based on the responses of a total of 208 consumers. Findings: Of the three attributes, ‘Recyclable Packaging’ has the strongest influence on the purchase decision, although this attribute generates the least additional value. The aggregated result shows that although consumers are willing to pay more for the product with ethical attributes than the one that is without, still around a half of them are not willing to pay more. In terms of demographics, the results show no significant differences between the two genders or different age groups in their willingness to pay for ethical attributes. As might be expected, willingness to pay was correlated with the level of consciousness of the ethical attributes. Originality/Value: The findings of this study help management to think practically about the value consumers willing to pay for the selected attributes. The results show a significant synergy in a combination of ethical attributes in products.