2008
DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2008.10773107
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Critical Factors for Successful Public Hearing in Infrastructure Development Projects: A Case Study of the on Nuch Waste Disposal Plant Project

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By involving the public effectively in the decision-making process, the chance of project success may increase due to (i) a reduction in project time and cost (Creighton, 2005); (ii) the development of more innovative plans and solutions through the incorporation of the collective wisdom of the community (CCSG, 2007); (iii) the accomplishment of the needs or concerns of a cross-section of society without sacrificing the project goals (Woltjer, 2009); (iv) an acceptance of the community, which can increase the legitimacy government decisions (Moore & Warren, 2006); (v) an opportunity to promote mutual learning (Manowong & Ogunlana, 2008); (vi) a desire to protect individual and minority rights (Plummer & Taylor, 2004); (vii) an achievement of sustainable project lifecycle management (Varol, Ercoskun, & Gurer, 2011); and (viii) the promotion of collaborative governance (Enserink & Koppenjan, 2007).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By involving the public effectively in the decision-making process, the chance of project success may increase due to (i) a reduction in project time and cost (Creighton, 2005); (ii) the development of more innovative plans and solutions through the incorporation of the collective wisdom of the community (CCSG, 2007); (iii) the accomplishment of the needs or concerns of a cross-section of society without sacrificing the project goals (Woltjer, 2009); (iv) an acceptance of the community, which can increase the legitimacy government decisions (Moore & Warren, 2006); (v) an opportunity to promote mutual learning (Manowong & Ogunlana, 2008); (vi) a desire to protect individual and minority rights (Plummer & Taylor, 2004); (vii) an achievement of sustainable project lifecycle management (Varol, Ercoskun, & Gurer, 2011); and (viii) the promotion of collaborative governance (Enserink & Koppenjan, 2007).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For PIC projects, the stakeholder groups are more apparent as schemes of this type usually have an impact on the public in general, particularly when social and environmental issues are at stake (Manowong & Ogunlana, 2008). Atkin and Skitmore (2008) believe that successful completion of PIC projects is dependent on meeting the expectations of stakeholders throughout the should be treated differently when conducting public consultation/engagement activities.…”
Section: Stakeholder Concernsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many researchers criticize those participations without substantial impact on decision-making as rhetoric (Conrad et al, 2011;Bawole, 2013). It is suggested factors of an authentic participation include constructive feedback on proposal and follow-up communication (King et al, 1998;Manowong & Ogunlana, 2008); meanwhile, participants may reciprocate negatively if they are consulted but ignored (Corgnet & Hernán-González, 2013).…”
Section: Overview Of Land Expropriation Public Hearingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, considering the frequent emphasis on the critical function of good preparation to a successful public hearing (Manowong & Ogunlana, 2008), we included the perceived preparation kindness into the model. A considerate preparation, such as a suitable time and location, will improve the relationship between the authority and farmers (Figure 3).…”
Section: Theory Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%