The ‘Heathrow’ Case: Polycentricity,Legislation, and the Standard of Review

The recent Court of Appeal decision in the ‘Heathrow’ case, Plan B Earth v Secretary of State for Transport is an illustration of the challenges of reviewing polycentric and expert decision-making. The issues raised in the case concerning the Planning Act 2008 are an illustration of a court's expository role in such contexts. The Court tackled directly a series of interpretive questions concerning the Planning Act 2008's obligations regarding the consideration of climate change. The Habitats and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive issues raised in the appeal, in contrast, were presented with the question of the intensity of review foregrounded in legal argument. The Court therefore sought to articulate the ‘standard of review’ and to apply it to the government's decisions. This way of framing the issue unfortunately sidelined the courts’ expository role in relation to intepreting the Habitats and SEA Directives, leaving key provisions under-analysed.     

Methods and mindsets: Towards an understanding of the tyranny of methodology

This article attempts to examine familiar things through a different comparative focus. The results given here are preliminary and intended for comment and further development. The article takes as its basis the tradition which has arisen from the export of methods to developing countries in all manner of scientific and technical development projects. In the area of global development the traditions of technology transfer and development intervention by donor agencies and their related consultancy groups is well documented. Not so well covered in the literature is the related issue pertaining to the export of the methods which accompany and, to some extent, confer respectability upon all manner of technology, intervention and work towards nation building. The article is concerned with what might be called the ‘tyranny of methods’, which, it is argued, are applied often uncritically in development work. The mindsets which are invoked by traditional western scientific methods are reviewed using a psychological model. Following from this, the article investigates two areas of existing experience in the adoption of methods and then goes on to develop a critical perspective of one particular form of information systems development method, drawing on the experiences related. The article briefly investigates traditional, linear methods and makes links to the experiences of fanning systems research and rapid rural appraisal. Although no definitive conclusions are made, observations relating to an action plan are provided. The core of this relates to self-analysis and points to be conscious of in the export of any method.