Please solve question 03. This is the 3rd time i am posting the question because i haven't got a clear explanation. Please also provide the details of who are the stakeholders of the case, and explain the meaning of the question before providing the solution. What does "assess the claims " mean. Please give a big full paragraph with all details for a clear understanding. Thank you very much

CASE STUDY 2 Setinggi Controversial Bypass The Works Ministry was considering two options for a new bypass highway connecting Setinggi, a border town in the state of Dramaland and the capital city of Unity, a developing country. Nadi Bina, a public-listed construction company, won the tender to lead the project. The proposed bypass highway could solve the traffic congestion in Setinggi as well as to improve the existing road network to the capital city. Commuters could save two hours of travel time between the two places. The project involved the upgrading of 10.72 km existing roads and the construction of a new four-lane dual carriageway spanning 12.58 km. Route 1 involved cutting a hilly terrain, which happened to be the home of endangered tree species that could only be found in this area. The hilly terrain resides in the Dramaland Heritage Park, an important part of the local environment with some potential influences on local ecosystems. Route 2 would cut through a privately-owned poultry farm and durian orchard. The owner, Ricky was a vocal opponent of the Route 2 plan. The government would have to invoke a compulsory acquisition of Ricky's land, which would increase the overall cost of construction by $2.5 million. The project would barely break-even after taking into account the overall costs and the net present value (NPV) of future cash flows over a 20-year period. Ricky was very adamant about his view because he wanted to protect the family land and business that had been in existence for three generations. It was a family business, which they depended for income and livelihood. The Ricky clan would lose a lucrative business venture because they also exported their durians to overseas markets. The farm and orchard employed local people and some had been working there for two generations. Ricky family members and some of the employees lived in the workers' quarters at the farm. They would definitely lose their jobs, source of income and homes. Ricky was contemplating legal action if the Works Ministry decided to go for Route 2. The planning division of the local municipal council had granted permission to the Ministry and Nadi Bina to commence planning works and rendered its support for the bypass project. The Council's President also supported the project and expressed his view that either route would attract income and new development to the local area. However, the local municipal council left the decision entirely to the Works Ministry and Nadi Bina, believing that they knew best about the most viable options and had wide experience in the construction project of this nature. In the end, the Works Ministry and Nadi Bina chose Route 1, which promptly angered a vocal environmental non-governmental organization (NGO). They organized a peaceful assembly at the project office in Setinggi to express their outrage over the lack of priority in protecting the sustainability of the environment. In addition, the leaders of the NGO were upset because the Ministry did not engage them and other stakeholders prior to making its decision to choose Route 1. They organized daily peaceful assembly at the project site and threatened to take action to disrupt the construction of the bypass. Questions: 2 Identify the stakeholders in the case. 3 Assess the claims of each stakeholder identified in Question 2