A research conducted by Scherer and Sam (2008) was motivated by lack of empirical research on the development of stadiums. It is also triggered by the involvement of the public in the decision-making process, especially in regard to use of government funding. Their research sought to evaluate the gaps in public consultation strategies and the application of government funding in the renovation and construction of Carisbrook Stadium. In order to perform this evaluation, the researchers reviewed the facilitating and restricting factors involving this stadium in respect to 5 public meetings held. The examination was performed to visit the establishment of neoliberal growth and the resistance of the public against the use of their funds during renovation and involvement of public-private association on consultation. The researchers went to the public meetings and recorded their formation.
Furthermore, they documented various people attending these meetings together with such data as their genders and age. They also held interviews with Carisbrook Working Party and MWH consultants. Furthermore, the structure of each meeting with its timing was collected from the MWH consultant. The researchers found that scholars applying precise pedagogical approaches can offer significant civic education to meet challenges aroused by the citizens on the public-private partnership. This training was attributed to the fact that the organization of the meetings was reliant on the meeting powers even when the stadium managers had a legislation to control it. The designs for consultation procedures were not considered since few people had used it. Finally, Dunedin public meeting showed low tolerance of rules and involved less meaningful arguments. In this respect, there was a need to directed meeting procedures and strict follow-up of the rules and regulations.
This article has been written and developed in a highly professional standard using sophisticated language and complex delivery of information. It does not only apply a multidimensional research technique involving intervention and use of secondary and primary data, but also presents a tactical explanation of procedures and their relevance in the research. In perspective, each development has been structured to fit the real use of the stadiums through reliable samples and randomization. Its strengths have been amplified further by the access of leaders in the management. These leaders were capable of providing the most recent information and counsel on other recommendation for their research. These meetings are not influenced by the research, which implies that data collected from the field misses manipulations. As a reliable scholarly article, however, the common styles of presenting titles are confusing. Essentially, empirical researches have a standard way of availing information to the readers. This strategy involves the presentation of such titles as abstract, introduction, background, literature, methodology, results, discussion and conclusion. These titles are not labeled in a standard and clear manner to facilitate readability.
This research is paramount to my topic of interest especially in understanding the functions of the stadium used for sporting. It provided ideas on the possible issues that may arise after the formation of the stadium. For instance, new constructions of the stadiums can consider permanent building to withstand terror of a violent population. In this regard, the wastage of public funding reduces and the saved amount is used to build other stadiums instead of renovating the ones built poorly. This form of supposition can also enlighten on the fans’ behaviors during the meetings, which can lead to further developments during the renovations of the earlier stadium. Therefore, this study aligns with the sporting development including the improvement of fans’ population and appearance of frequent sporting activities within such stadiums.
Reference
Scherer, J., & Sam, M. (2008). Public Consultation and Stadium Developments: Coercion and the Polarization of Debate. Sociology of Sport Journal, 25, 443-461.