The paper is based on a research project that engaged with and intervened in flood risk management in national policy and in two localities. Building on recent work in STS, we develop a framework for political analysis that complements existing understandings of environmental governance by focusing on the materiality of an issue and the ways in which it is articulated through various sites, shifting between different political modalities (its political trajectory). Each modality represents a different way in which an issue is framed such that it is opened to questioning and contestation, or subject to closure and containment. We conclude that differing understandings of what makes an environmental issue political mean that researchers need to pay close attention to how their own work is political and to different meanings and constitutions of ‘the public’, as well as looking for more ways of engaging with the politics of environmental issues in different modalities.
AmundsenH.BerglundF.WestskogH., 2010, “Overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation—a question of multilevel governance?”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy28276–289
2.
BarryA., 2001Political Machines: Governing a Technological Society (Continuum, London)
3.
BarryA.SlaterD., 2002, “Technology, politics and the market: An interview with Michel Callon”Economy and Society31285–306
4.
BeckU., 1996, “World risk society as cosmopolitan society? Ecological questions in a framework of manufactured uncertainties”Theory, Culture and Society131–32
5.
BendittT M, 1973, “The public interest”Philosophy and Public Affairs2291–311
6.
BennettJ., 2010Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things (Duke University Press, Durham, NC)
7.
BraunB.WhatmoreS J, 2010, Political Matters: Technoscience, Democracy and Public Life (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN)
8.
BulkeleyH.MolA P J, 2003, “Participation and environmental governance: Consensus, ambivalence and debate”Environmental Values12143–154
9.
BulkeleyH.SchroederH., 2011, “Beyond state/non-state divides: Global cities and the governing of climate change”European Journal of International Relations181–24
10.
BulkeleyH.WatsonM.HudsonR., 2007, “Modes of governing municipal waste”Environment and Planning A392733–2753
11.
ButlerC.PidgeonN., 2011, “From ‘flood defence’ to ‘flood risk management’: Exploring governance, responsibility, and blame”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy29533–547
12.
CallonM., 1998, “An essay on framing and overflowing”, in The Laws of the Markets Ed. CallonM. (Blackwell, London) pp 244–269
13.
CallonM.LascoumesP.BartheY., 2009Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy (MIT Press, Cambridge MA)
14.
Defra, 2005Making Space for Water: Taking Forward a New Government Strategy for Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management in England—First Government Response to the Autumn 2004 Making Space for Water Consultation Exercise March, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London
15.
Defra, 2009Appraisal of Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management: A Defra Policy StatementDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London
16.
De VriesG., 2007, “What is political in sub-politics?: How Aristotle might help STS”Social Studies of Science37781–809
17.
DeweyJ., 1927The Public and its Problems (Holt, New York)
18.
DonaldsonA., 2008, “Biosecurity after the event: Risk politics and animal disease”Environment and Planning A401552–1567
19.
Environment Agency, 2010Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Appraisal GuidanceBristol
20.
FischerF., 2003Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
21.
Flood and Water Management Act, 2010Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 29 (The Stationery Office, London)
22.
Foresight, 2010Land Use Futures Project: Final Project ReportThe Government Office for Science, London
23.
GomartE.HajerM., 2003, “Is that politics?”, in Social Studies of Science and Technology: Looking Back Ahead Eds JoergesB.NowotnyH. (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht) pp 33–61
24.
Hansard, 2011, “Flood Defences”, House of Commons Debates, 6 July, Volume 530, Part 183, Column 488WH (The Stationery Office, London)
25.
HayC., 2002Political Analysis: A Critical Introduction (Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hants)
26.
HecloH., 1978, “Issue networks and the executive establishment”, in The New American Political System Ed. KingA. (American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC) pp 87–124
27.
HM Treasury, 2003The Green Book (The Stationery Office, London)
28.
JasanoffS., (Ed.) 2004State of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and Social Order (Routledge, London)
29.
JessopB., 2002, “Liberalism, neoliberalism and urban governance: A state-theoretical perspective”Antipode34452–472
30.
JohnsonC LTunstallS MPenning-RowsellE C, 2005, “Floods as catalysts for policy change: Historical lessons from England and Wales”International Journal of Water Resources Development21561–575
31.
JordanG.RichardsonJ., 1982, “The British policy style or the logic of negotiation”, in Policy Styles in Western Europe Ed. RichardsonJ. (Allen and Unwin, London) pp 80–110
32.
LandströmC.WhatmoreS JLaneS N, 2011a, “Virtual engineering: Computer simulation modelling for UK flood risk management”Science Studies24(2) 3–22
33.
LandströmC.WhatmoreS JLaneS NOdoniN AWardN.BradleyS., 2011b, “Coproducing flood risk knowledge: Redistributing expertise in critical ‘participatory modeling’”Environment and Planning A431617–1633
34.
LaneJ-E, 1993The Public Sector: Concepts, Models, and Approaches (Sage, London)
35.
LaneS N, 2008, “Climate change and the summer 2007 floods in the UK”Geography9391–97
36.
LaneS NLandstromC.WhatmoreS J, 2011a, “Imagining flood futures: Risk assessment and management in practice”Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A3691784–1806
37.
LaneS NOdoniN.LandstromC.WhatmoreS JWardN.BradleyS., 2011b, “Doing flood risk science differently: An experiment in radical scientific method”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series3615–36
38.
LatourB., 2005Reassembling the Social (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
39.
LatourB., 2007, “Turning around politics: A note on Gerard de Vries' paper”Social Studies of Science37811–820
40.
LawJ., 2004After Method: Mess in Social Science Research (Routledge, London)
LawJ.UrryJ., 2004, “Enacting the social”Economy and Society33390–410
43.
LawJ.MolA M, 2008, “Globalisation in practice: On the politics of boiling pigswill”Geoforum39133–143
44.
LemosM CAgrawalA., 2006, “Environmental governance”Annual Review of Environment and Resources31297–325
45.
MarresN., 2007, “The issues deserve more credit: Pragmatist contributions to the study of public involvement in controversy”Social Studies of Science37759–780
46.
MarresN., 2010, “Frontstaging non-humans: The politics of ‘green’ things and the constraint of publicity”, in Political Matter: Technoscience, Democracy and Public Life Eds BraunB.WhatmoreS. (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN) pp 177–209
47.
MarresN.LezaunJ., 2011, “Materials and devices of the public: An introduction”Economy and Society40489–509
48.
MarshD.RhodesR A W, 1992, “Policy communities and issue networks: Beyond typology”, in Policy Networks in British Government Eds RhodesR A WMarshD. (Clarendon Press, Oxford) pp 249–287
49.
MichaelM., 2009, “Publics performing publics: Of PiGs, PiPs and politics”Public Understanding of Science18617–631
50.
MolA P J, 2007, “Bringing the environmental state back in: Partnerships in perspective”, in Partnerships, Governance and Sustainable Development. Reflections on Theory and Practice Eds GlasbergenP.BiermannF.MolA P J (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Glos) pp 214–233
51.
MooreA., 2010, “Review: Beyond Participation: Opening up political theory in STS: Mark Brown, Science in Democracy: Expertise, Institutions and Representation”Social Studies of Science40793–799
52.
MouffeC., 2005On the Political (Routledge, London)
53.
OST, 2004Future FloodingOffice of Science and Technology, London
54.
PittM., 2007Learning Lessons from the 2007 Floods: An Independent Review by Sir Michael Pitt. Interim Report (Cabinet Office, London)
55.
PittM, 2008The Pitt Review: Lessons Learned from the 2007 Floods. Final Report (Cabinet Office, London)
56.
RichardsonJ JJordanA G, 1979Governing under Pressure: The Policy Process in a Post-Parliamentary Democracy (Robinson, Oxford)
57.
RoseN., 1999Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
58.
SchubertG A, 1957, “‘The public interest’ in administrative decision-making: Theorem, theosophy, or theory?”The American Political Science Review51346–368
59.
SmithM J, 1991, “From policy community to issue network: Salmonella in eggs and the new politics of food”Public Administration69235–255
60.
TreschJ., 2005, “Cosmogram”, in Cosmograms Eds OhanianM.RoyouxJ-C (Lukas and Sternberg, New York) pp 67–76
61.
WalkerG.WhittleR.MeddW.WalkerM., 2011, “Assembling the flood: Producing spaces of bad water in the city of Hull”Environment and Planning A432304–2320
62.
WhatmoreS J, 2009, “Mapping knowledge controversies: Science, democracy and the redistribution of expertise”Progress in Human Geography33587–598
63.
WhatmoreS JLandströmC., 2011, “Flood apprentices: An exercise in making things public”Economy and Society40582–610
64.
WilkinsonK.LoweP.DonaldsonA., 2010, “Beyond policy networks: Policy framing and the politics of expertise in the 2001 Foot and Mouth Disease crisis”Public Administration88331–345
