Discourses at Work: How Norms Still Matter in Politics
Do norms truly matter in politics? Many political scientists question the degree to which norms actually operate in political decision-making. Through an examination of environmental legislation in the US, this paper argues that while politics political maneuvering, electoral considerations, party wrangling, and so on-plays an important role in the development of policy, norms do, in fact, matter. While those involved in decision-making may not self-consciously articulate a moral conception of nature, policy debates are shaped by underlying normative conceptions ideas about what parts of nature matter, what kind of value nature has, who is being harmed and whether we care, what type of entity 'nature' is, etc. This paper considers federal policy - the Wilderness Act, Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the BLMs multiple use doctrine to assess the operation of environmental discourses. What concepts of nature featured in discussions over the design, passage, and implementation of these policies? Building on a typology of discourses that characterize the range of ways in which individuals and organizations express their sensibilities about the status of nature and the human-nature relationship, I analyze legislative history, media coverage, and other sources to illustrate the manner in which particular environmental discourses shaped the design and implementation of environmental policy.