ABSTRACT
My study analyzed 170 years of Everglades policy development and change from two theoretical paradigms in an effort to advance policy theory. By approaching the subject matter from an alternative paradigm, this study sought to demonstrate that mainstream policy research actually relies on a comprehensive set of assumptions that it fails to recognize. This paradigm paralysis hinders the field of policy studies from experiencing a paradigm shift. A variety of alternative paradigms from both political and social sciences exist including: modernism (i.e., Marx, Nietzsche), post-modernism (i.e., Foucault, Derrida), Lasswell’s garrison construct, and critical theory (i.e., Habermas, Marcus, Horkheimer, Adorno). As an alternative paradigm, Habermas’ critical theory provided the needed juxtaposition to the mainstream policy paradigms for multiple reasons. Habermas’ theory, which is highly critical of positivism and instrumental rationality, provides explanations for the information, data, and problems that do not fall within the currently accepted mainstream policy-studies paradigm. His theories are highly critical of the ‘dominating epistemological view of rationality,’ which is signified by the positivism currently used in the mainstream policy-studies paradigm (Eriksen and Weigård, 2003, p. 1). His theory provides the best juxtaposition between the dominant instrumental rationality of the mainstream policy-studies paradigm and his proposed communicative rationality. Specific to the Amer ican context of this case study, his view of the United States as an advanced capitalist state places the complex ‘economic dynamics of capitalism at the center of the analysis’ (Buechler, 2000, p. 79). For the Everglades, his analysis of these complex dynamics in advanced capitalism singles out environmental problems as intractable in the existing social formation. Therefore, the resulting analysis implies that environmental policies are likely to exhibit characteristics unexpected by the mainstream policy-studies paradigm. Other policy scholars have successfully applied Habermas’ critical theory to social problems, including the Great Society (deHaven-Smith, 1988), industrial crises (Shrivastava et al., 1988), transportation policy planning (Willson, 2001),
accounting reports for the Volta River Authority (Rahaman et al., 2004), public administrators’ use of social media (Knox, 2016a), and the planning process (Kelly, 2004). When using critical theory to retell the history of Everglades policy, we would expect to see contradictions between the language used by elites and their actions, land developers and environmentalists, and environmental and economic interests. For example, the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan is supposed to be ‘restoring’ the Everglades. However, it was not only pushed by the sugar and mining interests in the Everglades, but also called for the destruction of 20,000 more acres of wetlands. Another example involves the federal government considering the permitting of construction of a major airport in the Everglades while requesting money from taxpayers to restore this ecosystem. In this study, critical theory aided in finding communication blockages in the policymaking process. When studying the Everglades program under a different set of assumptions than those associated with the mainstream paradigm, I found evidence of Everglades policy being driven by industrialization and the interests of capital accumulation – not simply government’s actions in an incremental process of policy learning and improvement. In using critical theory to analyze the history of Everglades policy, this study made the case that other policies before and after the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) have also been rooted in capitalism, have symbolic value, are contradictory, and are leading to a possible legitimation or motivation crisis. The study also raised questions of to what degree the Everglades actually are being restored, and suggests that the policies represent a problematic, unstable, and possibly illegitimate compromise between economic and environmental interests. This chapter explains why I chose Habermas’ critical theory to study Everglades policy development and how this theory is an alternative policy paradigm. Then an overview of the Everglades case study is presented with details about applying Habermas’ critical theory to qualitative methods. Lastly, I discuss the challenges in conducting the research and how I overcame them.
