The Impact of Procedural Justice on Opinions of Public Policy: Solid Waste Management as an Example¹

Abstract

This study assessed the applicability of Tyler and Lind's (1992) relational model of authority to the context of local government policies on solid waste management. Tests of the hypothesized relations proposed by Tyler and Lind, accomplished through structural equation modeling, revealed that our data supported the relations between the various constructs of the model. Perceptions of both process control and relational process were found to be positively related to procedural fairness judgments, while procedural fairness judgments were weakly related to evaluations of government entities. Contrary to our expectations, a similar structural equation model test of an extension of the Tyler and Lind model showed that the model constructs were unrelated to respondents' opinions of public policies. The results also indicated that respondents living in communities with different infrastructures and political climates differed slightly in their perceptions of procedural justice and related constructs, but did not differ in their endorsement of the various solid waste management policies.

A review on political factors influencing public support for urban environmental policy

“…Only a few numbers of study echoed to the suggestions. For example, Ebreo et al (1996) and Harring and Jagers (2013) investigated the impacts of procedural fairness and political trust, respectively, on policy support for urban environmental policies. Other focused on specific political factors, e.g., political affiliation (Dupont & Bateman, 2012), public participation (Daley, 2013;Halvorsen, 2003), and policy preferences (Daniels et al, 2013).…”

“…Current literature have yet fully discussed elements of fair procedures, for example, Kim et al (2013) and Ebreo et al (1996) only considered procedural fairness as a blanket of ideas, and grasped respondents' level of perception of fairness by asking question like "Do you think the process of government decision making that lead to an environmental tax is fair?" Evaluation on other aspects of procedural fairness such as whether citizens' voice is being heard or whether they are well represented during decision-making process is rarely discussed in past studies.…”

Social Justice: Outcome and Procedure

“…For example, advantage d citizens are more likely to accept policies that redistribute resources and opportunities to disadvantage d citizens if they think that the government agencies making the policies make their policies fairly . Citizens are generally more willing to accept policies that they disagree with when they feel that government policy-makin g processes are fair (Ebreo, Linn, & Vining, 1996;Tyler & Mitchell, 1994).…”

Who Would Claim to Be That, Who Was Not? Evaluations of an Ethnic Validation Procedure

“…Procedural justice refers to the social psychological consequences of the structure of decision‐making procedures on fairness judgments (Azzi & Jost, 1997; Beugre & Baron, 2001; Cohen & Greenberg, 1982; Daly, 1995; Ebreo, Linn, & Vining, 1996; Greenberg, 1986, 1987; Greenberg & Folger, 1983; Lind, Kanfer, & Earley, 1990; Lind & Tyler, 1988; Makkai & Braithwaite, 1996; Musante, Gilbert, & Thibaut, 1983; Tata, 2000a, 2000b; Thibaut, Walker, LaTour, & Houlden, 1974; Tyler, 1990, 1994; Tyler & Lind, 1992; Walker, LaTour, Lind, & Thibaut, 1974). Since the time of the early work, research has shown that procedural justice has strong effects on attitudes about institutions or authorities, as well as attitudes about the specific outcome in question (Lind & Tyler, 1988; Tyler, 1989; Tyler & Lind, 1992).…”