Please boost your Plan to download papers
The Werribee Residents against Toxic Dump (WRATD). - Essay Example
Journalism & Communication
Pages 9 (2259 words)
Colonial Sugar Refining (CSR) argued that the facility would be well protected by a double clay liner to ensure that it did not pose danger to the environment. It was further argued that the development planning of the facility had met all the guidelines and regulations of EPA. …
Thus, CSR believed that the development was legal and met all the stipulated regulations.
However, the local residents were of the opinion that the project would be detrimental to the area’s economy. The region had also been previously compelled to accommodate unwanted developments such as Melbourne’s major sewerage treatment works. The residents formed Werribee Residents Against Toxic Dump (WRATD) in order to fight the proposal by CSR. The group was a grassroots organization with representation from various disparate parts of the community.
One of the key issues that hindered the implementation of development of the waste facility was due to ineffective involvement of the local community. There was inadequate publicity about the proposal and the local residents were not properly appraised concerning the project. The process was highly secretive. In a nutshell, there was minimal community involvement in regards the proposal by CSR. The reservations of the local community, whether real or perceived, need to be addressed in order for a project to be accepted. This paper analyzes the role of community engagement to the society and its social impacts. The paper also discusses the pertinent issue of ethics in relation to the society and the role that community engagement can play in order to tackle the ethical problems associated with communications from organizations. The case study of Werribee Residents Against Toxic Dump (WRATD) is critically analyzed in order to assess the proper methodology of public involvement in projects and the approaches that should be used in handling publicity for contentious projects. ...
Not exactly what