Mediating consultation: insights from private sector consultants involved in air quality consultations
Environmental consultants act as intermediaries between clients (public and private sector) and stakeholders (both statutory and non-statutory), presenting information and arguments on behalf of clients to stakeholders and gathering stakeholders' views. This research explores environmental consultants’ perceptions of the processes of consultation about air quality issues with a view to analysing their role in the process and the tensions they face. The study used a mixed-methods approach: a survey of 150 environmental consultants, two focus groups and three in-depth semi-structured interviews. The results show that consultants are conservative in their choice of consultation methods, choosing approaches that minimise the risk to clients’ desired outcomes. Resource and time constraints further limit the scope of many consultations. Consultants typically make little effort to evaluate the consultation process, relying on outcome measures (such as a successful planning application) and process measures (numbers attending meetings) rather than considering the outcome in relation to participants. However, environmental consultants were aware of issues such as raising the expectations of participants and the need to be transparent about the extent to which participants can influence decisions. Given the widespread use ofenvironmental consultants to manage the consultation process, the research raises questions about the purpose of consultation (is it to improve outcomes, to comply with regulations or to build consensus?).
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 55 (2012)
Issue (Month): 1 (April)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJEP20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:55:y:2012:i:1:p:113-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.