Methodology of the Survey Research method Identifying the common and specific problems of environmental journalism in the countries of the region is a natural precondition for the establishment and efficient operation of the REPC. This could be realised through various research instruments and approaches. The methodological argumentation of the survey is based on the following assumptions concerning the common and specific problems, as well as the needs of journalists in countries of the region: There are serious difficulties in accessing environmental information stemming from the legislation of the countries in the region, as well as in the relations between journalists and official institutions, and between journalists and NGOs. Problems exist within media organisations related to the low priority given to environmental issues on the media agenda. There is a lack of adequate information on environmental issues in the region. Professional interaction at the regional level is absent. Journalism qualifications and knowledge in specific environmental areas and how to present them to the general public are insufficient. The chosen survey instrument was direct polling through a questionnaire for environmental journalists of the region, i.e. gathering the subjective views and experience of the people towards whom REPC services are directed. This choice was based on the conviction that the data obtained will give an idea of the coverage of environmental issues by the media, with emphasis on the difficulties encountered by journalists in their everyday work. This would be the best way to identify the specific professional needs of environmental journalists in order to define REPC priorities and the services it will offer. The journalists from the region were asked to base their answers to the questions in the questionnaire on their personal experience. The data obtained on journalists’ actions and views would outline a picture of the media practices, problems and gaps. Some of the questions allowed respondents to formulate their needs in their own words (related to information, training and contacts). The summary of this information forms the initial database to which information from other sources will be eventually added. The questionnaire is included as Appendix 1 in this report. Below is an explanation of the purpose of the different questions with regard to the objectives of the survey. Questions 1, 2, 3 and 4 asked for general information about the respondents and about editorial practices in the media. Question 1 divided the respondents by the type of media. To make this possible, the so-called two-dimensional division (cross-tables) was used to establish those significant differences in media practices that could eventually prove important for REPC activities. Question 2 gave an idea of the experience of environmental journalists and of the number of journalists with insignificant or limited experience. Question 3 aimed to identify the presence of journalists writing exclusively about environmental issues and to give a rough idea of the importance attached to these types of problems within the media. Question 4 outlined the basic sources of environmental information and the deficit of certain types of information in the various countries of the region. Questions 5, 6 and 7 aimed to provide information about certain qualitative characteristics in the flow of environmental news as seen from the perspective of the respondents. Naturally, it was taken into consideration that the journalists’ answers would be based on their knowledge and personal views. Question 5 asked information about the frequency of coverage of environmental issues and allowed for a comparison between the countries of the region. Frequency was assessed according to the type of media. Question 6 outlined the forms preferred by journalists. Question 7 gave an idea of the priorities in writing an environmental story in the different countries of the region. Questions 8 and 9 showed the journalists’ assessment of their interaction with state institutions and NGOs. The processing of this information made it possible to compare journalists’ cooperation with state institutions versus cooperation with NGOs. It also allowed a comparison between the different countries. It aimed at drawing conclusions on problems in the legislative framework, access to environmental information in the different countries, and others. Questions 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 aimed to outline the shape of regional cooperation — real and desired — in the field of environmental journalism. Question 10 elicited information on the extent to which environmental journalists in the different countries are organised, as well as the popularity of their organisations. Questions 11 and 12 gauged the interest shown by the media in the countries of the region in environmental situations (problems, achievements) in neighbouring countries. Question 13 established the degree of existing cooperation at the regional level, as well as the desire for such cooperation. Question 14 attempted to establish the preferred forms of cooperation among environmental journalists from the region. Questions 15 and 16 allowed journalists to express in their own words their needs for training in environment issues and to provide any other information, related to the survey, that they deemed important and necessary. Finally, the questionnaire was seen as a contribution to the further practical work in establishing the REPC by registering the journalists who would be interested in contributing to, or functioning as REPC focal points/satellite offices in their countries. This aim was addressed in question No 17. This methodology relies on a quantitative method. The conclusions drown are based mostly on the numbers derived from the answers to the questionnaire. This method was predetermined by the short time frame and limited budget for the survey, which did not allow for more qualitative research. This shortcoming could be improved in future follow-up research projects by adding, for example, face-to-face interviews, content analyses, literature reviews and other research techniques not utilised in the current survey. The target group of the survey were all environmental journalists in the region. As no previous surveys of this kind have been undertaken, there is no data available on the precise number of environmental journalists. Getting such a precise number is not possible, because there is no strict definition for what it means to be classified as an environmental journalist. For the purpose of this survey an environmental journalist is defined as any journalist who deals with environmental issues as part of his/her work. The journalists who completed and returned the questionnaire formed the sample group, consisting of the most active representatives of the target group. For this reason the replies may carry a certain distortion when compared to the general picture. But the journalists who responded apparently recognised themselves as environmental journalists. This means that their competence in issues related to environmental reporting is presumably slightly higher than the average, which justifies the use of their answers.

Home The Authors Introduction Background Methodology Technical Implementation Survey Results Conclusion Appendix 1: Questionnaire Appendix 2: Results Tables