Naslov
Public opinion on the methods of financing environmental impact studies

Autori
Pletikosić, Merica

Vrsta, podvrsta i kategorija rada
Radovi u zbornicima skupova, cjeloviti rad (in extenso), znanstveni

Izvornik
2016 M-sphere / Book of papers selected papers presented at 5th International M-sphere conference for multidisciplinarity in science and business / Vranešević, Tihomir - Zagreb : Accent Press, 2016, 160-166

ISBN
978-953-7930-11-0

Skup
5th M-Sphere Conference 2016 Multidisciplinarity in Business & Science

Mjesto i datum
Dubrovnik, Hrvatska, 27.10.2016. - 29.10.2016

Vrsta sudjelovanja
Predavanje

Vrsta recenzije
Međunarodna recenzija

Ključne riječi
crisis management, public opinion, study financing

Sažetak
Public trust in environmental impact studies is a growing issue in assessment procedures for planned projects. The public is concerned about the influence of contractors on the outcome of the procedures and the objectivity of the study makers themselves. As an unplanned and unwanted process that takes time, but can only be acted upon in a limited manner and with varying results, the issue ultimately presents a management crisis. The parties involved in environmental protection proceedings are often unprepared and cannot recognise the initial signs of a potential crisis, significantly hindering the achievement of set goals. This paper presents the results of an empirical study of public awareness and opinions in Croatia on the arrangement in which the contractor commissions the study. In-depth interviewing and participant observation were used to carry out the qualitative study on a purposive sample. Grounded theory was used to analyse the empirical data, while the quantification of qualitatively processed data was performed using the Statistica software suite (ver. 11.00). Respondents were divided in their opinions. The majority believes that the contractor should pay for the study, thus solving the issue of financing, but still allowing for potential manipulation. The accepted solution is that the concerned authorities should be the ones commissioning the study via public tender, while the contractor would cover the cost. The public and civil sectors mostly have a negative view of the existing system, while respondents from the economic sector disagree. They claim that a faulty or unprofessional study presents a risk for the contractor and that other institutions should determine whether the procedure was done professionally.

Izvorni jezik
Engleski

Znanstvena područja
Informacijske i komunikacijske znanosti

POVEZANOST RADA