ABSTRACT
Introduction:
We examine how informational asymmetry can be a disruptive factor to deliberative proceedings, as it severely compromises the capacity of the actors involved and the prospects and limits for good decision-making in deliberative systems.
Materials and methods:
Through an interpretative approach, we examined the informational constraints and asymmetries in mining-related environmental disputes in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. We conducted a systematic monitoring of institutional participation arenas (public policy councils) and civil society activism (Movement for the Mountains and Waters of Minas). Through 45 semi-structured interviews, we spoke to members of civil society affected by mining, bureaucrats, and employees of mining companies, among other actors.
Results:
The analysis enumerates a series of critical issues, such as: the risk of market actors monopolizing the production of information about public affairs; suppressing or spreading fragmented information to prevent opponents from taking an informed stance on new mining initiatives or regulation changes; the use of technical and scientific terminology which hinders the participation of civil society.
Discussion:
Two layers of epistemic injustices constrain the debate and involve informational asymmetry: i) structural elements such as the provision of information and the regulations/formats of participation arenas; and ii) more contingent factors related to strategic actions, ranging from premeditated content manipulation to the strategic use of existing rules. In our conclusion, we suggest ways to promote different perspectives in the discussion surrounding this matter.
Keywords
deliberation; informational asymmetry; mining; environmental conflicts; participation