Evaluation of public debates in environmental impact studies

Pletikosić, Merica. (2015). Evaluation of public debates in environmental impact studies. PhD Thesis. Filozofski fakultet u Zagrebu, Department of Information Science
Department of Information Science > Chair of media and communicology.
(Poslijediplomski doktorski studij informacijskih i komunikacijskih znanosti) [mentor Prelog, Nenad and Tafra-Vlahović, Majda].

PDF (Croatian) - Repository staff only Download (5MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Public informing and participation in the processes of assessing the effects on the environment is becoming the new paradigm in environmentalism - the concerned public changes the social legitimacy of policies and sees as acceptable only those that have the approval of all parties involved. A project can be deemed unacceptable if the concerned public sees a potentially harmful effect on human health or the environment, or if it believes that it was not given the opportunity to affect the decision-making process and was only informed (which is often the source of scepticism). Public participation in the treatment of environmental issues and access to information is not an environmental standard in Croatia, but sets the rules for public availability of information that is handled by public institutions, as well as for public participation in certain processes related to giving out permits. The international legal framework dealing with access to information, public participation in policy-making, and the involvement of the justice system is detailed in the 1998 Aarhus Convention. By ratifying the Convention, a state obliges itself to make information related to environmental issues freely available to the public, as well as to make public participation in related policy-making and access to the justice system possible. In order for this to be achieved, the public has to be aware, informed, and involved in decision-making processes. Scientific research methods were used in this paper to analyse the possible differences in public informing and participation between public debates on policies related to spatial planning and those related to environmental impact assessment. The aim of the study was to determine how information and participation in public debates on spatial planning in a community affects the understanding of the issues which emerge in the later stage of assessing the environmental impact of a particular project. The research material consisted of two dependent variables, which were defined according to target and sector group, and thirty-six independent variables, which were defined by the 36 questions in the questionnaire and divided into 6 thematic groups. 1. Sustainable development in the plan-making and decision-making processes related to spatial planning on a local level; 2. Public participation and access to information and data in the spatial planning process; 3. Parties involved in the system of informing and public participation in the processes of environmental impact assessment; 4. Reliability of information and the quality of environmental impact studies; 5. Methods of public participation and informing in the process of environmental impact assessment; 6. Taking into account public opinion and that of other parties involved in the policy-making process. Participants were chosen based on the following criteria: a purposive, non-random sample for an empirical study consisting of those considered to be the concerned public in the processes relevant to the study due to their professional or voluntary involvement. The sample consisted of 100 people. The participants were divided into 10 subsamples (target groups) which were qualitatively defined to include 10 people each. Three new control sectors (clusters) were qualitatively defined based on the ten subsamples. The following methods were used to collect empirical data: 1. A problem-driven, in-depth interview - structurally, an open or indirect interview. Both standardised and non-standardised interviews were conducted with the 100 participants divided into 10 target groups. 2. Participant observation - sequential analysis was used to gain insight into social changes through several periods of time or sequences. The following were used in the analysis of empirical data: 1. Grounded theory: open or initial coding, axial coding, selective coding. Final analysis and the categorisation of key terms allowed for the construction of a conceptual matrix within an integrated theoretical framework. 2. Quantification of qualitative empirical data and its transformation into a numerical form in order to be subjected to further statistical analysis were performed using the STATISTICA software package, ver. 11.00. Descriptive statistics was used to determine the frequency and absolute and relative cumulative value of every coded answer. The results were then subjected to parametric ANOVA variance analysis, with post-hoc analysis of the Turkey HSD test, and discriminant analysis. Descriptive analysis revealed the frequency of every coded variable assigned to each question, as well as their absolute and relative cumulative values. 3. PESTEL analysis and SWOT analysis - based on the results of the qualitative and quantitative processing of empirical data, both PESTEL and SWOT analyses were conducted. The results of the study showed that there were significant differences in information access and participation in the public debate processes dealing with spatial planning and environmental impact studies. Differences of statistical significance between the participants classified as belonging to previously defined control groups were not registered in the cases of only 5 coded variables out of the 36 used in the entire study. Out of 12 discriminant functions, statistically significant differences between previously defined sector groups were registered in the case of 9. The overall result of the PESTEL analysis was negative, while SWOT analysis of all the thematic groups and all the empirical data has shown that the weaknesses override the strengths, as well as that the threats override the opportunities, contributing to a limitation strategy. Statistically significant differences were registered between participants assigned to different target groups in the case of 11 out of 12 coded variables for the first and second thematic group (those related to spatial planning). Discriminant analysis of the results related to these two thematic groups has registered statistic significance between sector groups in the case of 3 out of 4 discriminant functions. SWOT analyses of the first and second thematic group have shown that the weaknesses override the strengths and that the threats override the opportunities, contributing to a limitation strategy. The result of the PESTEL analysis was positive. The informing and involvement of the concerned public in the public debate processes related to spatial planning are both at a low level, amounting to consulting and tokenism. Communication models present in the first two thematic groups are the public information model and the two-way asymmetrical model. The models of non-public and latent public can be used to describe the level of public involvement in policy-making related to spatial planning. In the case of non-public and latent public, the level of participation is very low and inefficient, the lack of information on the process of spatial planning results in a decreased interest in the problem and the public is not aware of its relation to other concerned groups. When looking at the level of activity the public shows in the policy-making processes related to spatial planning, the models of an apathetic public and an all-issue public can be registered. Statistically significant differences were registered between participants assigned to different target groups in the case of 20 out of 24 coded variables for the thematic groups 3 to 6 (those related to environmental impact assessment). Discriminant analysis of the results related to these two thematic groups has registered statistic significance between sector groups in the case of 6 out of 8 discriminant functions. The overall result of the PESTEL analysis was negative, while SWOT analysis of the thematic groups 3 to 6 has shown that the strengths override the weaknesses and that the threats override the opportunities, contributing to a maintenance strategy. The informing and involvement of the concerned public in the public debate processes related to environmental impact assessment are both at a low level, amounting to pacification and tokenism. The communication models present in the thematic groups 3 to 6 is the two-way asymmetrical model. The models of active public and informed public can be used to describe the level of public involvement in policy-making related to environmental impact assessment. When looking at the level of activity the public shows in the policy-making processes related to environmental impact, two types can be registered. The first is that of the single-issue public, one that is only concerned with a single issue or several smaller, but related issues. The single-issue public is not against the process itself, but against particular activities that go against its stances on a certain problem. The second is that of the hot issue public, one that becomes involved after the single-issue public, but only if many representatives of the all-issue public are present and if the particular activity has attracted significant media attention. The results of this study are a sort of novum, as they introduce and provide a starting point for further research in the fields of information and communication sciences and public relations on the interdisciplinary topic of information access and public participation in the processes of debate related to spatial planning and environmental impact assessment.

Actions (login required)

View Item