The aim of this experimental scenario study is to examine the effects of giving voice to citizens in the decision-making process of a wind farm implementation on perceived procedural fairness,...Show moreThe aim of this experimental scenario study is to examine the effects of giving voice to citizens in the decision-making process of a wind farm implementation on perceived procedural fairness, trust in the project developer and project acceptance (versus no-voice versus pseudo voice). The effects of voice procedure were examined by means of an experimental study among UK citizens (N = 168). We offer our participants an experimental scenario where a project developer plans to build a wind farm near their house. Depending on the experimental condition, participants were told that they could voice their opinion and that this was considered in the decision-making process (voice), that they could voice their opinion but that this was not considered (pseudo-voice) or that they could not voice their opinion (no-voice). We hypothesised and found that giving voice to citizens increases perceived procedural fairness, which in turn increases trust in the project developer and project acceptance (versus no-voice and pseudo-voice). In addition, this research predicted higher perceived procedural fairness, trust in the project developer and project acceptance in people who were given pseudo-voice compared to no-voice. However, the results did not support this. Other factors found to be positively relating to citizens’ project acceptance were perceived community benefits and general attitudes towards wind farms. This research concludes that giving voice to citizens increases perceived procedural fairness, trust in the project developer and project acceptance, provided that this voice is actually considered by the project developer.Show less
