IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aes/amfeco/v40y2015i17p872.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Application of Qualitative Risk Analysis as a Tool Adopted by Public Organizations for Evaluating “Green Projects”

Author

Listed:
  • Maurizio Lanfranchi

    (University of Messina)

  • Carlo Giannetto

    (University of Messina)

  • Angelina De Pascale

    (University of Messina)

  • Remus Ion Hornoiu

    (Bucharest University of Economic Studies)

Abstract

This paper intends to explore the application of Qualitative Risk Analysis in evaluating the risk level associated with several public projects based on urban and peri-urban agriculture as a model of sustainable development of a territory. Therefore, urban agriculture is seen as an experimental model through which we can analyze the interaction between local institutions and citizens, as well as being a marketing tool to promote sustainability aspects linked to the territory. To this end, after a bibliographic review on the Qualitative Risk Analysis and the involvement of stakeholders in decisions relating to the public sector, a valuation of certain projects on the theme of urban and peri-urban agriculture, advanced by the local public Administration will be shown. The analysis proceeds with the classification of projects according to defined risk categories and their graphical representation through probability-impact matrix. The matrix shows that the data scores and the ranking vary significantly for each of the different projects involved. In this respect, the main purpose of this paper is to reveal how the success of a marketing policy based on the concept of sustainable marketing for promoting the territory depends, in many cases, not only on the characteristics of the territory analyzed, but also on the level of “riskiness” associated with the projects. Consequently, the empirical results of the paper can be a guide for public organizations, dealing with a plurality of projects but with limited resources, to assess and to prioritize projects using the level of “riskiness” as a criterion. Furthermore, economic resources could be directed to manage projects after taking into account the relevant risk ranking.

Suggested Citation

  • Maurizio Lanfranchi & Carlo Giannetto & Angelina De Pascale & Remus Ion Hornoiu, 2015. "An Application of Qualitative Risk Analysis as a Tool Adopted by Public Organizations for Evaluating “Green Projects”," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 17(40), pages 872-872, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:40:y:2015:i:17:p:872
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.amfiteatrueconomic.ro/temp/Article_2436.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Armenia Androniceanu & Irina-Virginia Drăgulănescu, 2012. "Sustainability of the Organizational Changes in the Context of Global Economic Crisis," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(32), pages 365-379, June.
    2. Grimble, Robin & Wellard, Kate, 1997. "Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 173-193, October.
    3. Dorel Mihai Paraschiv & Estera Laura Nemoianu & Claudia Adriana Langă & Tünde Szabó, 2012. "Eco-innovation, Responsible Leadership and Organizational Change for Corporate Sustainability," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(32), pages 404-419, June.
    4. Filippo Sgroi & Matteo Candela & Anna Maria Di Trapani & Mario Foderà & Riccardo Squatrito & Riccardo Testa & Salvatore Tudisca, 2015. "Economic and Financial Comparison between Organic and Conventional Farming in Sicilian Lemon Orchards," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Zander, Kerstin K. & Signorello, Giovanni & De Salvo, Maria & Gandini, Gustavo & Drucker, Adam G., 2013. "Assessing the total economic value of threatened livestock breeds in Italy: Implications for conservation policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 219-229.
    6. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lanfranchi, Maurizio & Giannetto, Carlo & De Pascale, Angelina, 2016. "Economic analysis and energy valorization of by-products of the olive oil process: “Valdemone DOP” extra virgin olive oil," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1227-1236.
    2. Radek Doskocil, 2022. "The Multicriteria Assessment of the Green Growth in the Context of the European Union’s Green Deal," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 24(61), pages 739-739, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mascarenhas, André & Ramos, Tomás B. & Haase, Dagmar & Santos, Rui, 2016. "Participatory selection of ecosystem services for spatial planning: Insights from the Lisbon Metropolitan Area, Portugal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 87-99.
    2. Marques, Marlene & Juerges, Nataly & Borges, José G., 2020. "Appraisal framework for actor interest and power analysis in forest management - Insights from Northern Portugal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    3. Alex Osei-Kojo & Nathan Andrews, 2016. "Questioning the Status Quo: Can Stakeholder Participation Improve Implementation of Small-Scale Mining Laws in Ghana?," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Jordi Gallego-Ayala & Dinis Juízo, 2014. "Integrating Stakeholders’ Preferences into Water Resources Management Planning in the Incomati River Basin," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(2), pages 527-540, January.
    5. Bert George, 2017. "Does strategic planning ‘work’ in public organizations? Insights from Flemish municipalities," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 527-530, November.
    6. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    7. Martin Luštický & Martin Musil, 2016. "Stakeholder-Based Evaluation of Tourism Policy Priorities: The Case of the South Bohemian Region," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(3), pages 3-23.
    8. Jolanta MAJ, 2015. "Diversity Management’S Stakeholders And Stakeholders Management," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 780-793, November.
    9. Gillespie, Stuart & van den Bold, Mara, 2015. "Stories of change in nutrition: A tool pool:," IFPRI discussion papers 1494, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    10. Franco-Trigo, L. & Fernandez-Llimos, F. & Martínez-Martínez, F. & Benrimoj, S.I. & Sabater-Hernández, D., 2020. "Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(10), pages 1083-1099.
    11. Kerstin K Zander & Gillian B Ainsworth & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Stephen T Garnett, 2014. "Threatened Bird Valuation in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    12. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    13. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    14. Beatrice Dingha & Leah Sandler & Arnab Bhowmik & Clement Akotsen-Mensah & Louis Jackai & Kevin Gibson & Ronald Turco, 2019. "Industrial Hemp Knowledge and Interest among North Carolina Organic Farmers in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
    15. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    16. Anne Hardy & Leonie J. Pearson, 2016. "Determining Sustainable Tourism in Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    17. Christophe Favoreu & David Carassus & Christophe Maurel, 2015. "Strategic management in the public sector: a rational, political or collaborative approach? [Le management stratégique en milieu public : approche rationnelle, politique ou collaborative ?]," Post-Print hal-02152509, HAL.
    18. Matthew Oliver Ralp Dimal & Victor Jetten, 2020. "Analyzing preference heterogeneity for soil amenity improvements using discrete choice experiment," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 1323-1351, February.
    19. Sandra Ricart & Antonio M. Rico-Amorós, 2022. "Can agriculture and conservation be compatible in a coastal wetland? Balancing stakeholders’ narratives and interactions in the management of El Hondo Natural Park, Spain," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 589-604, June.
    20. Katharina Löhr & Christian Hochmuth & Frieder Graef & Jane Wambura & Stefan Sieber, 2017. "Conflict management programs in trans-disciplinary research projects: the case of a food security project in Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(6), pages 1189-1201, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Risks Analysis; Sustainable local development; Sustainable marketing; Urban and peri-urban agriculture.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O22 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Project Analysis
    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • P32 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist Institutions and Their Transitions - - - Collectives; Communes; Agricultural Institutions
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:40:y:2015:i:17:p:872. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Valentin Dumitru (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.