2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.10.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A critical stakeholder analysis of the Trans-ASEAN Gas Pipeline (TAGP) Network

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These experts, who held middle or upper level management positions at their institutions, repeatedly mentioned the Fort Canning tunnel, Chek Jawa Wetlands, and foreign workers dormitory as "typical" and "indicative of the sorts of conflicts planners in Singapore face." We then conducted a remainder of 43 interviews with various stakeholders involved in each case study, relying on a "critical stakeholder approach" which ensured we included members of the public and private sector in addition to the communities themselves (Aligica, 2006;Billgren and Holmen, 2008;Sovacool, 2010). We chose research interviews as our main method of data collection due to the subjective nature of land use conflicts; issues such as social heritage, esthetics, and biodiversity are difficult to value quantitatively.…”
Section: Case Selection and Research Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These experts, who held middle or upper level management positions at their institutions, repeatedly mentioned the Fort Canning tunnel, Chek Jawa Wetlands, and foreign workers dormitory as "typical" and "indicative of the sorts of conflicts planners in Singapore face." We then conducted a remainder of 43 interviews with various stakeholders involved in each case study, relying on a "critical stakeholder approach" which ensured we included members of the public and private sector in addition to the communities themselves (Aligica, 2006;Billgren and Holmen, 2008;Sovacool, 2010). We chose research interviews as our main method of data collection due to the subjective nature of land use conflicts; issues such as social heritage, esthetics, and biodiversity are difficult to value quantitatively.…”
Section: Case Selection and Research Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For a further analysis, different approaches can be taken. Sovacool proposes an interest-centred critical stakeholder analysis ( [65]; cf. [59]).…”
Section: Interests Of Stakeholdersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…information management (Rowley 2011), and to several fields of environmental governance: waste management (Heidrich et al 2009); marine planning (Buanes et al 2004;Mikalsen & Jentoft 2001;Pomeroy & Douvere 2008); forest governance (Salam & Noguchi 2006); protected area management (Mushove & Vogel 2005;Rastogi et al 2010); or, environmental impact assessment (EIA) (Sovacool 2010). Despite its wide usage, the meaning of the term is contested.…”
Section: Stakeholders and Stakeholder Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have investigated the relations between the goals of a project, and stakeholder interests: e.g. 'winners' and 'losers' in nature conservation management (Mushove & Vogel 2005), or costs and benefits of a development project for stakeholders (Sovacool 2010). Thus, a common approach to identify (and classify) stakeholders is to detect and compare their interests in the issue, and power to influence decisions (see an application by Rastogi et al (2010)).…”
Section: Stakeholders and Stakeholder Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%