Fletcher 2003 👎👭👬👫

Question 1

What does this paper report on?

Answer 1

This paper reports on the findings of a survey of CPs designed to investigate these areas.

Question 2

What do the results suggest?

Answer 2

Results suggested that CPs show:

1. considerable variation in membership criteria
2. unclear decision-making procedures
3. uncertain representative structures.

Together, these expose CPs to misrepresentation and the risk of poor inclusivity

Question 3

Conclusions of Fletcher (2003)

Answer 3

CP = non-democratic, unaccountable and non-credible.

Question the ability of CPs to deliver meaningful integration amongst coastal stakeholders.

Question 4

What is fletcher (2003) ‘s comment on stakeholder representation in UK?

Answer 4

1. there is limited awareness of how representatives are appointed and it is acknowledged that representatives may not be fully representative of their constituency groups.
2. The role undertaken by Project Officers in the ‘quality control’ of representation, both in terms of those stakeholders represented, but also in some cases, on the ability of representatives to speak for their groups. Due to lack of formal guidance in most CPs this is dependent upon the project Officer’s individual skill and awareness of representation issues.
3. Relies heavily on ‘trust’ - internal communication, confident views are expressed properly
4. inFourth, it is apparent that public involvement in CPs in coastal management is ‘tangential’ to local peoples concerns. However, involvement in the CP process has a ‘direct influence’ on policy, which implies that non-participation (for whatever reason) means limited influence on policy. This, in turn, has implica- tions for the inclusivity of policy and its applicability.

Question 5

Cm heavily relied on …

Answer 5

Partnerships