Ellis, R A (1980) An analysis of the impact of public participation activities in water and transportation projects. PhD thesis, Ohio State University, USA.
Abstract
Described is a heuristic analysis of variables potentially influential in public participation processes involving projects in water resources, wastewater management, and highway construction. Methodology involved a comprehensive review of the public participation literature to inductively identify variables noted as being present, or normatively recommended for presence in public participation processes. These variables were then organized into sets of logically-associating variables such that a resultant conceptual framework of a systems model for public participation was created. This conceptual framework was then converted into an analysis work sheet containing the 161 variables gathered during the inductive examination of the literature. One hundred five case studies, divided among public participation in projects in the categories of water resources, wastewater, and highways were then analyzed for the presence or absence of the 161 variables. The resulting analyses were then transposed to a computer analysis medium for analysis of frequency and correlational information. Variables were then screened using the data produced by the computer analysis such that selected variables were characterized by (1) assured frequency of documentation within the sample; (2) correlations of significance beyond p (LESSTHEQ) .05; and (3) sufficient frequency of correlation between independent and dependent variables to satisfy screening criteria. The variables selected by the three-level screening process were then examined for their independent/dependent relationships, i.e., how variables relating to the context and the process of the participatory effort were associated with particular outcome variables. Conclusions drawn from the examination of these relationships included: (1) The maintenance of two-way flow of communication between agency and participants was strongly positively correlated with desirable out-comes and strongly negatively correlated with undesirable outcomes; (2) participatory characteristics which interfere with two-way flow of communication are strongly negatively associated with desirable outcomes, and strongly positively associated with undesirable outcomes; and (3) certain contextual factors surrounding public participation in the sample projects planning are associated with undesirable outcomes for the participatory effort.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | water resource; highway; communication; documentation; public participation; heuristic; case study |
| Index terms: | water resource, screening, case study, heuristic, highway construction, presence, transportation project, documentation, conceptual framework, agency, public participation, dependent variable, methodology |
| Subjects: | participation process, environmental science, data collection methods, risk assessment, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, environmental engineering, statistical analysis, management, theoretical framing, research methods, civil engineering, professional development |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Sustainability, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Human Resources |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here