Analysis of Differences between Public and Experts’ Views Regarding Sustainable Development of Developing Cities: A Case Study in the Iraqi Capital Baghdad
Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 33087
Analysis of Differences between Public and Experts’ Views Regarding Sustainable Development of Developing Cities: A Case Study in the Iraqi Capital Baghdad

Authors: Marwah Mohsin, Thomas Beach, Alan Kwan, Mahdi Ismail

Abstract:

This paper describes the differences in views on sustainable development between the general public and experts in a developing country, Iraq. This paper will answer the question: How do the views of the public differ from the generally accepted view of experts in the context of sustainable urban development in Iraq? In order to answer this question, the views of both the public and the experts will be analysed. These results are taken from a public survey and a Delphi questionnaire. These will be analysed using statistical methods in order to identify the significant differences. This will enable investigation of the different perceptions between the public perceptions and the experts’ views towards urban sustainable development factors. This is important due to the fact that different viewpoints between policy-makers and the public will impact on the acceptance by the public of any future sustainable development work that is undertaken. The brief findings of the statistical analysis show that the views of both the public and the experts are considered different in most of the variables except six variables show no differences. Those variables are ‘The importance of establishing sustainable cities in Iraq’, ‘Mitigate traffic congestion’, ‘Waste recycling and separating’, ‘Use wastewater recycling’, ‘Parks and green spaces’, and ‘Promote investment’.

Keywords: Urban sustainable development, experts’ views, public views, statistical analysis.

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 542

References:


[1] Ameen, R.F.M. and Mourshed, M. 2017. Urban environmental challenges in developing countries—A stakeholder perspective. Habitat International 64(April), pp. 1–10.
[2] Grant, R. 2015. Sustainable African Urban Futures: Stocktaking and Critical Reflection on Proposed Urban Projects. American Behavioral Scientist 59(3), pp. 294–310.
[3] Lange, J. et al. 2012. Potentials and limits of urban rainwater harvesting in the Middle East. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 16(3), pp. 715–724.
[4] Omer, A.M. 2008. Energy, environment and sustainable development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 12(9), pp. 2265–2300.
[5] UN-Habitat 2014. National Report of the Republic of Iraq for Habitat III 2016. (July 2014). Available at: http://www.hlrn.org/img/documents/Iraq_National_Report.pdf.
[6] Al-Salihi, A.M. et al. 2010. Estimation of Global solar radiation on Horizontal Surface from Routine Meteorological Measurements For Different Cities in Iraq. Journal of College of Education, Al-Mustansiriyah University (in press)(April 2010), pp. 1–11.
[7] Aldossary, N.A. et al. 2014a. Domestic energy consumption patterns in a hot and arid climate: Amultiple-case study analysis. Renewable Energy 62, pp. 369–378.
[8] Ameen, R.F.M. and Mourshed, M. 2017b. Urban environmental challenges in developing countries: A stakeholder perspective. Habitat International 64(April), pp. 1–10.
[9] Assefa, G. and Frostell, B. 2007. Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: A case study of energy technologies. Technology in Society 29(1), pp. 63–78.
[10] Giannarou, L. and Zervas, E. 2014. Using Delphi technique to build consensus in practice. International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management 9(2), pp. 65–82.
[11] Grant, R. 2015. Sustainable African Urban Futures: Stocktaking and Critical Reflection on Proposed Urban Projects. American Behavioral Scientist 59(3), pp. 294–310.
[12] Habibi, A. et al. 2014. Delphi Technique Theoretical Framework in Qualitative Research. The International Journal of Engineering and Science 3(4), pp. 2319–1813.