Public Participation in Area-based Urban Regeneration Programmes

This paper reports the findings of research into the representation of local interests in area-based urban regeneration programmes in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. The two case studies are contextualised by a review of the promotion of public participation in urban regeneration in both parts of Ireland and theorised as a site of interaction between state agencies and civil society. It is argued that the practice of public participation is a hegemonic project, which, within urban regeneration, is operationalised through partnership structures. The paper concludes that many factors from within and outside the case study programmes affected their consultation processes. Therefore the design and implementation of regeneration programmes should be undertaken in the context of an understanding of the relationship between the state and civil society in the empirical case.

Many ways to say 'no', different ways to say 'yes': Applying Q-Methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals

This paper explores the nature of public acceptance of wind farms by investigating the discourses of support and objection to a proposed offshore scheme. It reviews research into opposition to wind farms, noting previous criticisms that this has tended to provide descriptive rather than explanatory insights and as a result, has not effectively informed the policy debate. One explanation is that much of this research has been conceived within an unreflective positivist research frame, which is inadequate in dealing with the subjectivity and value-basis of public acceptance of wind farm development. The paper then takes a case study of an offshore wind farm proposal in Northern Ireland and applies Q-Methodology to identify the dominant discourse of support and objection. It is argued that this provides new insights into the nature of wind farm conflicts, points to a number or recommendations for policy functions of an example of how this methodology can act as a potential bridge between positivist and post-positivist approaches to policy analysis.

Perceived and reported access to the general practitioner: an international comparison of universal access and mixed private/public systems.

Timely and convenient access to primary healthcare is essential for the health of the population as delays can incur additional health and financial costs. Access to health care is under increasing scrutiny as part of the drive to contain escalating costs, while attempting to maintain equity in service provision. The objective was to compare primary care services in Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, and to report on perceived and reported access to GP services in universal access and mixed private/public systems. A questionnaire study was performed in Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). Patients of 20 practices in the ROI and NI were contacted (n = 22,796). Main outcome measures were overall satisfaction and the access to GP services. Individual responses and scale scores were derived using the General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (G-PAQ). The response rate was 52% (n = 11,870). Overall satisfaction with GP practices was higher in ROI than in NI (84.2% and 80.9% respectively). Access scores were higher in ROI than in NI (69.2% and 57.0% respectively) Less than 1 in 10 patients in ROI waited two or more working days to see a doctor of choice (8.1%) compared to almost half (45.0%) in NI. In NI overall satisfaction decreased as practice size increased; 82.8%, 80.4%, and 75.8%. In both systems, in large practices, accessibility is reduced when compared to smaller practices. The faster access to GP services in ROI may be due to the deterrent effect of the consultation charge freeing up services although, as it is the poorest and sickest who are deterred by the charge this improved accessibility may come at a significant cost in terms of equity. The underlying concern for policy makers centres around provision of equitable services.