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.

Production systems and supplier selection: a multi-phase process model

Purpose: This paper presents a combined multi-phase supplier selection model. The process repeatedly revisits the criteria and sourcing decision as the development process continues. This enables a structured adoption of product and production system innovation from strategic suppliers, where previously the literature purely focuses on product innovation or cost reduction. Design/methodology/approach: The authors adopted an embedded researcher style, inductive, qualitative case study of an industrial supply cluster comprising a focal automotive company and its interaction with three different strategic stamping suppliers. Findings: Our contribution is the multi-phased production and product innovation process. This is an advance from traditional supplier selection and also an extension of ideas of supplier-located product development as it includes production system development, and complements the literature on working with strategic suppliers. Specifically, we explicitly articulate the previously unreported issue of whether a supplier chosen for its innovation capabilities at the start of the new product development process will also be the most appropriate supplier during the production system development phase, when an ability to work collaboratively may be the most important attribute, or in the large-scale production phase when an ability to manufacture at low unit cost may be most important. Originality/value: The paper identifies a multi-phase approach to tendering within a fixed body of strategic suppliers which seeks to identify the optimum technological and process decisions as well as the traditional supplier sourcing choice. These areas have not been combined before and generate a valuable approach for firms to adopt as well as for researchers to extend our understanding of a highly complex process.