Effects of voice and similarity on procedural fairness and trust: A dual process model of public acceptance based on representatives’ participation

Nonami, Hiroshi; Hirose, Yukio; Ohnuma, Susumu; Midden, C.J.H.; Ohtomo, Shoji

doi:10.1111/ajsp.12097

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The effect of process control found in this study indicates the viability of the process-oriented account, where perceptions of procedural fairness can be enhanced by promoting process control, even when decision control cannot be increased. This result is consistent with recent the findings of Nonami, Hirose, Ohnuma, Midden, and Ohtomo (2015) 39 ) , who showed that enhancing process control by taking account of the opinions of residents plays an important role in fostering favorable perceptions of procedural fairness and public acceptance of policy. It was also found that trust in the sincerity of the government predicted perceived procedural fairness.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

<b>A Field Survey of Riverbank Settlers' Acceptance of Displacement Policy in Jakarta</b>

Zaida¹,

Hatori

2021

URPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Displacement policies are not always welcomed by residents, even though they are usually implemented to improve their living conditions. Focusing on procedural fairness and place attachment (project-and place-related factors, respectively), this study explores residents' concern underlying their opposition to a displacement policy. A field survey of 250 riverbank settlers in Jakarta, Indonesia was conducted. Residents' perceptions of procedural fairness significantly affected their degree of acceptance of displacement. Also, perceived procedural fairness predicted residents' participation in a class action lawsuit against the government's displacement proposal. This study showed that the degree of control that residents felt they had while the displacement policy was being designed, and their trust in the sincerity of the government, predicted the perceived procedural fairness.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

<b>A Field Survey of Riverbank Settlers' Acceptance of Displacement Policy in Jakarta</b>

Zaida¹,

Hatori

2021

URPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The NIMBY issue 318 in the acceptance of a repository of designated waste may be evoked by the different 319 perceptions of fairness between residents in the possible siting areas and the non-siting repository have yet to be chosen. In the domain of justice research, the validity of studies 359 with hypothetical scenarios has been confirmed (Nonami et al 2015;van den Bos 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Public acceptance model for siting a repository of radioactive contaminated waste

Ohtomo

Hirose

Ohnuma

2020

Journal of Risk Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Albrecht, and Bourke 1998). Especially, siting a NIMBY facility concentrates the risk 27 and cost on siting areas while diffusing the benefits outside of the siting areas. Thus, even 28 if they agree that a repository to dispose of harmful waste is necessary, they refuse to 29 build one in their hometown, that is, their backyard. In particular, NIMBY facilities often 30 induce a conflict between siting and non-siting areas. While residents in siting areas suffer 31 damage to their private interests, such as a devaluation of property, those in non-siting 32 areas are able to experience public interests, such as safety, without their private interests 33 being damaged. Consequently, residents in siting areas experience repulsion to inequity 34 and are likely to oppose the facility strongly. 35 Social psychology discusses the multidimensional aspect of the judgment of 36 fairness to accept technology or risky facilities. Besley (2010, 2012) suggested that 37 distributive, procedural, and interpersonal fairness play a role in perceptions of decision-38 making of public acceptance. First, distributive fairness is concerned with the fairness of 39 outcomes, such as risk-benefit evaluation. Research on justice has revealed that a 40 desirable, i.e., equitable, result plays an important role in the acceptance of a decision 41 (Deutsch 1975). Second, procedural fairness involves fairness in a decision-making 42 procedure, such as the opportunity of voice. Research on justice has shown that 43 procedural fairness is more important than distributive fairness (Lind and Tyler 1988; 44 Törnblom and Vermunt 1999). Third, interpersonal fairness occurs when people 45 recognize that risk communicators are trustworthy and respectful of people's views and/or 46 values. According to Bies (2005), interactional fairness represents a third component of 47 fairness along with distributive and procedural justice. Previous studies have 48 demonstrated internalized moral values as related to the judgment of fairness (Skitka 49 2002;Skitka and Mullen 2002). In issues related to energy technology, protected value, 50 which is not tradable against other values, has consistent effects on the acceptance of

show abstract

“…It is widely recognized that citizens should be accorded with opportunities to express their opinions and that diverse opinions should be reflected in the policy plan [30,33]. The opportunity to express opinions and the reflection of the opinions are lumped together as "reflection of voices", which is one of the most widely applied criteria in procedural fairness adjudications [34][35][36]. The inclusion of the voice entails the necessity of the involvement of citizens in the early stage of the planning; otherwise, it is difficult to reflect their opinions.…”

Section: Designing Hybrid Stepwise Participatory Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Procedural Fairness and Expected Outcome Evaluations in the Public Acceptance of Sustainability Policymaking: A Case Study of Multiple Stepwise Participatory Programs to Develop an Environmental Master Plan for Sapporo, Japan

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measures of sustainability-related participatory programs vary according to social and cultural contexts. Thus, this study proposed a stepwise participatory program in which stakeholders and randomly chosen citizens (citizen panels) were repeatedly and sequentially involved, and the citizen panels discharged discrete functions through all the planning stages. Procedural and outcome fairness was focal to the evaluation of the participatory program because these criteria are widely deemed essential for public acceptance. Evaluation by nonparticipants was imperative because of the limited number of participants, but sustainability plans affect and mandate the cooperation of the general public. Therefore, this study undertaken during the revision of the city of Sapporo’s environmental master plan compared evaluations of nonparticipants with those of participants from three stages of the stepwise participatory program applying backcasting scenario workshops. A two-wave mailout survey was administered to test two hypotheses: (a) workshop participants would evaluate the acceptance, process, outcome, and antecedent factors more positively than nonparticipants, and (b) procedural fairness and evaluation of expected outcomes would affect acceptance. The results supported these hypotheses. Procedural fairness was associated with acceptance most robustly and consistently. The study’s primary contribution to the extant literature entails accumulating empirical evidence on stepwise participatory programs.

show abstract

Effects of voice and similarity on procedural fairness and trust: A dual process model of public acceptance based on representatives’ participation

Cited by 8 publications

References 19 publications

<b>A Field Survey of Riverbank Settlers' Acceptance of Displacement Policy in Jakarta</b>

<b>A Field Survey of Riverbank Settlers' Acceptance of Displacement Policy in Jakarta</b>

Public acceptance model for siting a repository of radioactive contaminated waste

Procedural Fairness and Expected Outcome Evaluations in the Public Acceptance of Sustainability Policymaking: A Case Study of Multiple Stepwise Participatory Programs to Develop an Environmental Master Plan for Sapporo, Japan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About