Expectation of empowerment as a determinant of citizen participation in waste management planning 1,2

Transcription

1 Japanese Psychological Research 2009, Volume 51, No. 1, doi: /j x Blackwell Publishing Asia Expectation of empowerment as a determinant of citizen participation in waste management planning 1,2 HIROE MAEDA 3,4 * Tokai Gakuen University YUKIO HIROSE Nagoya University Abstract: The study investigated the determinants of citizen participation in the development of a waste management plan. It was hypothesized that people would decide whether or not to participate in the planning based on the expectation of empowerment to be gained by their participation, not on the general evaluation of citizen participation. Four hundred and twenty-four volunteers responded to a self-report mailed survey conducted in August 2001 in Nisshin City. Nisshin City was selected as a city where the municipal government was starting to develop a basic plan for waste reduction and recycling. Major findings from the survey were: (a) the direct social benefits (i.e., making a better plan by citizen participation) were the main determinant of the general evaluation of citizen participation; and (b) expectation of personal empowerment (i.e., sense of self-efficacy and solidarity) was the main determinant of behavioral intention to citizen participation. Key words: expectation of empowerment, citizen participation, volunteer, waste reduction, recycling. Citizen participation as a Social Dilemma The First Basic Environment Plan endorsed by the Cabinet of Japan in 1994 specified that one of their long-term objectives was to establish an environmentally sustainable society through citizen participation. Research on planning involving citizen participation has shown that many people express positive attitudes towards citizen participation, but only a few of them exercise their behavioral intention to participate in the planning (Maeda, Hirose, Sugiura, & Yagishita, 2008). A regional plan developed through citizen participation can be regarded as a social dilemma in supplying public goods (Olson, 1965). Although planning with citizen participation is viewed as an important process, there is a tendency to withhold participation because of 1 This research was funded by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (C(1) no ). 2 The authors would like to acknowledge Nisshin City environmental division s cooperation in provision of information about the basic waste management plan. 3 The authors also thank collaborators, Susumu Ohnuma, Junkichi Sugiura, Kaori Ando, for many helpful suggestions in the implementation of this study and writing this paper. Thanks are due to reviewers for their valuable comments too. The authors are most grateful to members of the recycle network for their comments on the earlier draft of the questionnaire, the representatives of many voluntary organizations for the distribution and return of the questionnaires, and so many volunteers for their responses to this survey. 4 This research was conducted when Maeda was a doctoral student in the Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Nagoya University. * Correspondence concerning this article should be sent to: Hiroe Maeda. ( mhiroe1205@hotmail.com) 2009 Japanese Psychological Association. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

2 Empowerment as a determinant of participation 25 associated personal expenses. If there is a lack of participation in regional planning, public goods become unusable. Concept of empowerment In community psychology, empowerment has been described as both a process and an outcome. As a process, empowerment has been defined as a process by which individuals gain mastery or control over their own lives and democratic participation in their community (Zimmerman & Rappaport, 1988). As an outcome, empowerment conveys both a psychological sense of personal control or influence and individual determination over one s own life (Rappaport, 1987). We focused on empowerment as an outcome, and the expectation of empowerment that was gained through citizen participation was assumed as follows. Empowerment as a selective incentive in the social dilemma. Based on previous studies, it is assumed that the selective incentives of participation are increased resources or enhanced abilities and skills. Olson (1965) suggested that motivating individuals to participate in producing public goods requires the availability of selective incentives. Examples of selective incentives in previous research on voluntary prosocial behaviors include Zimmerman and Rappaport (1988), who demonstrated that the level of participation in various community volunteer activities and psychological empowerment (i.e., political efficacy) are positively correlated. Kelly and Breinlinger (1996) reported that participation in labor union activities has been determined mainly by the reward paid exclusively to the participant and the costs in terms of work and time borne by the participant. Kelly and Breinlinger (1996) found that expectations about the results of participation were determinant of cooperation. Ando (2002) conducted interviews with members of environmental groups and found that volunteers gained skills, self-efficacy, and a sense of solidarity from their participation. In the context of the current study, self-efficacy meant the growth and development of one s abilities and way of thinking, and a sense of solidarity meant expanding networks and sharing similar interests with a group. Ando (2002) also found that volunteers acquired various skills relating to their movement (i.e., building consensus, making presentations). Hypothesized correlation between expectation of empowerment or evaluation of effects of citizen participation and behavioral intention to participate in citizen participation. As discussed earlier, citizen participation in the development of a basic waste management plan has social dilemma characteristics similar to social movements and volunteer activities. The appreciation of social benefits derived from citizen participation can be regarded as the primary factor impacting the positive perspectives of citizens regarding the planning process. It is also conceivable that behavioral intention to participate in planning is determined not only by the positive perspectives regarding planning, but also by the selective incentives provided to individual participants. An example of the social benefits evaluation is the expectation of a desirable social effect derived from citizen participation in the development of a basic plan. There are two different aspects of this social effect. One aspect is the direct effect on the basic plan (i.e., development of an easy-to-implement plan incorporating the citizens requests). The other aspect is the indirect ripple effect, where overall progress of citizen participation by the entire city is leveraged by the development of the basic plan, which promotes the community s commitment to environmental conservation. However, evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation can be regarded as an inhibiting factor in the general evaluation of citizen participation. If people assume that citizen participation would have substantial direct and ripple effects and evaluate the efficiency of citizen participation positively, their perspectives on the development of a basic plan with citizen participation become positive. It is hypothesized that perspectives on the development of a plan with citizen participation can be explained by the evaluation of the direct social benefits, ripple social

3 26 H. Maeda and Y. Hirose effects, and the evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation in developing a basic plan. In addition, the selective incentive that determines the behavioral intention to participate in the plan can be hypothesized as the personal empowerment expected from the participation and the evaluation of the planning by citizen participation. In this case, many people would not even know that local authorities make a basic plan of waste management or that a considerable amount of time is required for the planning. In this study, two forms of empowerment were expected from citizens participating in developing a plan. The first form of empowerment was a sense of self-efficacy, as evidenced by participants obtaining a variety of information from different perspectives as well as useful information. The second form of empowerment was a sense of solidarity from developing personal relationships with officials or community residents interested in waste reduction. Negative factors inhibiting participation were assumed to be personal costs such as time and effort expenses borne by individuals and the nuisance of dealing with people associated with participation. In other words, it is hypothesized that the behavioral intention of citizen participation in waste management is determined by the general evaluation, personal empowerment, and personal costs of citizen participation. Purpose of the study This study examined the determinants of behavioral intention to participate in the development of a basic waste management plan. Recently, the number of municipalities attempting to develop a basic environmental plan using citizen participation has been increasing; however, there is a lack of the concrete steps and actions associated with other municipal plans. Virtually no municipal governments have tried to establish a basic waste management plan using citizen participation. Under such circumstances, Nisshin City, the subject of this study, is a rare case for which a basic waste management plan was developed using citizen participation. In Nisshin City, a plan incorporating concrete measures was developed by the citizen committee members selected from the public, as well as many citizens who participated in a conference workshop. This study examines the following hypotheses (Figure 1): 1. The determinants of the general evaluation to develop a basic plan using citizen participation are the evaluations of social benefits and of the inefficiency of citizen participation. 2. The determinants of the behavioral intention to participate in the planning are the general evaluation of the planning with citizen participation, the expectations of Figure 1. Hypothesized model about determinants of general evaluation (G.E.) and behavioral intention (B.I.) to citizen participation.

4 Empowerment as a determinant of participation 27 empowerment as a selective incentive, and the personal costs. Methods Setting Nisshin City in Aichi, Japan, was targeted as the study area. After announcing the development of its basic waste management plan to be developed through citizen participation, Nisshin City organized a planning committee and requested the participation of citizens in various activities. Sample Because it was the first time that Nisshin City developed a plan through citizen participation and the concept was new to the general public, the number of participants was anticipated to be very low. Maeda, Hirose, Ando, Sugiura, and Yorifuji (2004) reported that people engaging in volunteer activities gained empowerment through their commitment, and their empowerment promoted their behavioral intention to participate in future town development. Therefore, local residents with experience in volunteer activities in the Nisshin City were targeted for the study. Measures Demographics. The sex, age, and state of participation in a community or a volunteer activity were asked of respondents. Behavioral intention to participate in the development of a basic plan. Respondents were asked about their behavioral intention to participate in the development of the basic waste management plan. To be specific, two questions were asked: One question asked about the respondents intention to participate in an inspection visit to an advanced community in tackling waste reduction, and the other question asked about their behavioral intention to participate in a workshop for discussing the contents of the plan. Each of the two items was reported on a five-point scale from most likely to most unlikely. General evaluation of the development of the basic plan by citizen participation. Two questions were asked: One question was about whether citizen participation was good for developing a basic plan, and the other question asked whether it is necessary for as many citizens as possible to participate in developing a basic plan. Each item was reported on a five-point scale from totally agree to totally disagree. Evaluation of social benefits from citizen participation in the basic plan. Questions were asked about the direct and ripple effects anticipated from citizen participation in the basic waste management plan. To measure the direct social benefits where positive effects were anticipated, two questions were asked: One question asked about whether citizen participation enables establishment of easyto-follow rules, and the other question asked about whether citizen participation enabled establishing rules encouraging citizens to promote recycling. To measure the ripple effects of citizen participation in planning to other stakeholders, two questions were asked: One question asked whether environmental education should be promoted in school, and the other asked whether more recyclable products should be available at supermarkets and other stores. To measure the evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation in the basic plan development, two questions were asked: One question asked about whether a plan would lose focus if citizens participated in it, and the other question asked whether it is better to entrust the planning to the administration. Each item was reported on a five-point scale from totally agree to totally disagree. Evaluation of empowerment expected from citizen participation in the planning. To measure the empowerment anticipated from participation, respondents expectations were measured using two questions: (a) whether citizen participation would provide them with useful information (sense of self-efficacy); or (b) whether citizen participation would offer

5 28 H. Maeda and Y. Hirose Table 1. Correlations among the latent constructs (N = 424) Direct social effects of citizen participation 0.54*** 0.29*** 0.41*** 0.11* 0.64*** 0.39*** 2. Ripple social effects of citizen participation *** *** 0.25*** 3. Inefficiency of citizen participation 0.33*** 0.20*** 0.39*** 0.21*** 4. Expectation of empowerment *** 0.57*** 5. Personal costs 0.10* 0.32*** 6. General evaluation of citizen participation 0.42*** 7. Behavioral intention of citizen participation * p <.05. *** p <.001. potential for relationships among participants (sense of solidarity). Two questions were also asked about the personal costs incurred as part of the participation, which is the time costs due to the participation, and anticipated burdens stemming from participation. Each item was reported on a five-point scale from totally agree to totally disagree. Procedure A total of 156 organizations were targeted for the study. Among them, 106 groups were registered as resource recycling/recovering organizations in Nisshin City during the fiscal year of Fifty groups were registered as civil action organization with the Nisshin Social Welfare Council during the same period. The total number of distributed surveys was 650. Recruitment To recruit participants, a telephone request was made to the representatives of the targeted organizations. Consent was provided by 143 organizations who disclosed their contact address through an intermediary of the city office. After receiving consent, the number of participants that could participate from the organizations was 650. Blank questionnaires and preaddressed stamped return envelopes were sent to the organization representatives. One designated representative was asked to distribute the questionnaires among their members and to collect completed questionnaires and send them back to investigators in a bulk mail package. Validity A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to verify the validity of the variables structure for the items of citizen participation effect evaluation, empowerment expectation, and personal costs. A structure of seven factors was identified: (1) evaluation of direct effect of citizen participation; (2) evaluation of indirect ripple effect of citizen participation; (3) expectation of empowerment; (4) evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation; (5) evaluation of personal costs; (6) general evaluation of the planning with citizen participation; and (7) behavioral intention to participate in the planning. The values of fit indicators were as follows; χ 2 (56) = , p <.01, GFI =.96, AGFI =.93, CFI =.96, RMSEA =.05. As GFI, AGFI, and CFI were all.9 or larger and as RMSEA was almost the same as the desirable value, which is.05 or smaller, the model met the standard. Table 1 showed the correlations between the latent variables, which indicates that all of the correlations were significant, except for those between the indirect ripple effect and the evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation, between the ripple social effect and the personal costs, and between the expectation of empowerment and the personal costs. Results Response rate Four hundred and seventy one questionnaires were received by the investigators. From the 471 questionnaires, 424 were complete and

6 Empowerment as a determinant of participation 29 analyzed, making the effective response rate 65.2%. Demographics The majority of the respondents were women (94.8%). The age distribution was as follows: those in the 30s and 40s comprised approximately 31.2% and 30.3%, respectively, followed by those in the 50s (19.4%). The most common community or volunteer activity experienced by respondents was involvement in school activity such as PTA (Parents and Teachers Association) and a neighborhood children s association, which accounted for approximately 80.8% of activities. The second most common community or volunteer activity was involvement in sports or hobbies (67.7%). The third most common community or volunteer activity was involvement in activities such as a women s association or a community association (63.0%). Participants in child welfare support activities and support for disabled people were 21.5% and 22.5%, respectively. Respondents who experienced recycling and environmental conservation activities and town development activity accounted for 37.6% and 20.2%, respectively. Evaluation of citizen participation effects, anticipation of empowerments, and personal costs Responses on a five-point scale from totally agree to totally disagree were scored from 5 to 1 point(s). Responses for behavioral intention on a five-point scale from most likely to most unlikely were also scored from 5 to 1 point(s). Table 2 shows mean values, standard deviations, and the correlations between the items. For the direct social benefits, the ripple social effects, and the expectation of empowerment derived from citizen participation in planning, the mean values of the answers were all 3, indicating that the overall response was positive. While the evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation was evaluated at the lower level, personal costs were judged as being costly. Responses to the question about the general evaluation of the planning by citizen participation were positive; however, the response to the behavioral intention to participate was neutral. Result of structural equation modeling Structural equation modeling was conducted as Model 1, using the latent variables shown in Figure 1. The results show that the valueof-fit indicators of Model 1 were as follows: χ 2 (61) = , p <.01, GFI =.96, AGFI =.92, CFI =.96, RMSEA =.06, and Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) = Model 1 explained 55% of the variance in general evaluation of citizen participation and 45% in the intention to participate. As the desirable value of RMSEA was specified as.05 or smaller, the value for the goodness of fit was not necessarily satisfactory. The path from general evaluation of citizen participation to behavioral intention to participate in the planning was not significant. The path from the general evaluation of citizen participation to behavioral intention to participate in the planning was eliminated. A new path was drawn to the general evaluation of planning with citizen participation from the expectation of empowerment, r =.50, p <.01, which showed higher correlations than the behavioral intention to participate, r =.42, p <.01, as shown by the correlations between latent variables in Table 1. After deleting the covariance between the latent variables that did not show significant correlations in Table 1, the structural equation modeling was conducted again as Model 2 (Figure 2). The fit indicator values were: χ 2 (65) = , p <.01, GFI =.95, AGFI =.93, CFI =.96, RMSEA =.05, AIC = Model 2 explained 55% of the variance in the general evaluation of citizen participation, and 46% in the intention to participate. As the RMSEA value was improved and the AIC value was also decreased, Model 2 was adopted for this study. For the general evaluation of citizen participation, four latent variables were significant explanatory variables: direct social effects, indirect ripple effects, evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation, and expectation of empowerment. Direct social effects were the most influential, and indirect ripple effects were

7 30 H. Maeda and Y. Hirose Table 2. Means, standard deviations, and correlations among the measured variables (N = 424) Item DSE1: Easy-to-follow rules 0.54*** 0.30*** 0.24*** 0.22*** 0.20*** 0.32*** 2. DSE2: Easy recycling rules 0.33*** 0.31*** 0.13** 0.12* 0.25*** 3. RSE1: Environmental education 0.52*** *** 4. RSE2: Recycled products would be available * 0.13** 5. IE1: Lose focus 0.64*** 0.25*** 6. IE2: Better to entrust to the administration 0.25*** 7. EE1: Obtain useful information 8. EE2: Relationships among participants 9. PC1: Burdens stemming from participation 10. PC2: Time costs 11. GE1: Citizen participation is necessary 12. GE2: Participation is good 13. BI1: A workshop 14. BI2: Inspection visit M SD Item DSE1: Easy-to-follow rules 0.24*** *** 0.41*** 0.27*** 0.24*** 2. DSE2: Easy recycling rules 0.21*** *** 0.34*** 0.23*** 0.17*** 3. RSE1: Environmental education 0.20*** *** 0.27*** 0.12* 0.15** 4. RSE2: Recycled products would be available 0.17*** *** 0.30*** 0.18*** 0.13** 5. IE1: Lose focus 0.18*** 0.20*** 0.10* 0.21*** 0.28*** 0.13** 0.21*** 6. IE2: Better to entrust to the administration 0.21*** ** 0.30*** ** 7. EE1: Obtain useful information 0.71*** *** 0.37*** 0.41*** 0.35*** 8. EE2: Relationships among participants *** 0.37*** 0.40*** 0.40*** 9. PC1: Burdens stemming from participation 0.47*** *** 0.20*** 10. PC2: Time costs *** 0.17*** 11. GE1: Citizen participation is necessary 0.60*** 0.33*** 0.28*** 12. GE2: Participation is good 0.22*** 0.28*** 13. BI1: A workshop 0.66*** 14. BI2: Inspection visit M SD Note. BI = behavioral intention; DSE = direct social effect of citizen participation; EE = expectation of empowerment; GE = general evaluation of the citizen participation; IE = inefficiency of citizen participation; PC = personal costs; RSE = ripple social effect of citizen participation. * p <.05. ** p <.01. *** p <.001. influential at almost the same level. Although the evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation and empowerment expectations had slightly lower absolute values of coefficients compared with coefficients of the effect evaluation, they were significant. For behavioral intention, two latent variables were significant explanatory variables: expectation of empowerment and personal costs. Expectation of empowerment was the most influential. A path from general evaluation of citizen participation to direct behavioral intention was not significant. Discussion In summary, the determinants of general evaluation of citizen participation and behavioral intention to participate were different, with the exception of the influence of empowerment expectations acting on both general evaluation and intention. General evaluation of citizen

8 Empowerment as a determinant of participation 31 participation was determined mainly by social effects and the evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation. It was also found that behavioral intention to participate in the planning is determined by personal empowerment expectation and costs. From these findings, it appears there is a discrepancy between evaluation of planning by citizen participation and behavioral Figure 2. Result of structural equation modeling about determinants of general evaluation and behavioral intention to citizen participation. χ 2 = 138.1, df = 65, N = 424, GFI =.96, AGFI =.93, CFI =.96, RMSEA =.05.

9 32 H. Maeda and Y. Hirose intention to participate. If people evaluate the expectation of empowerment from participation positively, and the participation costs negatively, behavioral intention to participate in planning will be strong. Relationships between evaluation of citizen participation/empowerment expectation and behavioral intention The significant explanatory variables for the general evaluation of the planning with citizen participation were direct social benefits, ripple social benefits, evaluation of the inefficiency of citizen participation, and the expectation of empowerment. Personal empowerment expectations also had a certain level of explanatory ability, although this was substantially influenced by the social benefits brought by citizen participation in the basic plan. The findings suggested that although social effects are important in building the general evaluation of citizen participation, personal reward is also considered in the process. For behavioral intention, the expectation of empowerment was a significant explanatory variable along with the personal costs evaluation. The general evaluation of planning by citizen participation was not a significant explanatory variable for behavioral intention. These findings indicated that decision making on whether or not to actually participate was the result of considering personal empowerment expected from the participation and the costs borne by the participant, rather than reviewing whether citizen participation and the resultant plan were desirable for the society or not. The factors considered when judging the social significance of citizen participation and the factors considered when judging the personal value of participation were different. Based on these findings, it was clarified that citizens use different frameworks for judging the appropriateness of planning with citizen participation and for deciding whether or not to actually participate in such a project of citizen participation Planning by citizen participation has been previously discussed as a social dilemma of public goods, where participation was not determined by the evaluation of the social benefits but by the personal benefits or empowerment as a selective incentive. In the past, studies have examined inconsistencies between the attitude and the behavior in the field of citizen participation (Cabinet Office Quality-of-Life Policy Bureau 2004; Maeda et al., 2008). So far, accelerating factors for the behavioral intention for citizen participation other than attitude have not been clearly identified. Nevertheless, this study was able to confirm that the empowerment expectation acts as a promoting factor. It was hypothesized that personal costs would act as an inhibitor for participation in the planning in the same way as participation in a volunteer group (Ando & Hirose, 1999). This study also confirmed that personal time costs and the burdens in human relations stemming from participation have a negative impact on the behavioral intention. Citizen participation in developing a basic waste management plan can be regarded as an environment-conscious behavior or a concrete action for environmental protection. Hirose (1994) examined proenvironment lifestyles from specific behavioral intention in a decisionmaking model of environment-conscious behavior. Hirose found that, despite the increased objective intention, environment-conscious behavior was influenced by feasibility evaluations, benefits/ costs evaluations, and social norm evaluations, until it is actually carried out. Consistent with the findings of Hirose (1994), citizen participation in the development of a basic waste management plan can be considered as an environmentconscious behavior. Consequently, empowerment expectation evaluation and personal costs evaluation are consistent with the benefits/ costs evaluation. Promoting citizen participation This study targeted respondents with experience in volunteer activities. Among the general population, it is essential to promote and encourage participation from among ordinary citizens with no experience in volunteer activities. To ensure general citizen participation, conventional methods such as efforts in building a positive evaluation of citizen participation through highlighting the social benefits expected from citizen partici-

10 Empowerment as a determinant of participation 33 pation would not be sufficient. Advocacy efforts must be made emphasizing that participation provides empowerment through a sense of selfefficacy and solidarity. To increase the expectations of self-efficacy, promoting the benefits of the new knowledge gained from participating and conveying messages that the possibilities exist to develop interpersonal relationships, would be helpful. To increase the sense of solidarity, the message must be conveyed that participation will provide opportunities to meet many people with different opinions and possibly form new friendships. To reduce personal costs, efforts are required to minimize time costs associated with participation and to offset the burdens associated with human relations during citizen participation. To reduce time costs, some feasible measures such as making the procedures for the development of a plan as efficient as possible to reduce the hours and days consumed, or locating the citizen panel conference site at a convenient place to shorten the transportation time would be ideal. When holding a citizen panel conference such as a consensus conference or planning cells to discuss the policy and regional plans in Japan, shorter schedules than the global standard have been successfully applied (Kobayashi, 2004; Shinoto, 2006). To reduce the burdens derived from human relations, an appropriate conference procedure must be devised to reduce psychological strain, enabling consensusbuilding among people with opposing opinions. Hirakawa (1997) has highlighted that community empowerment owes much of its success to the individuals commitment to the issues in their own community and to the control that they can have over those issues. Empowerment is a valuable concept as a psychological explanation of the citizen participation process. In this study, we examined the effect of empowerment on behavioral intention. For future research, a follow-up study focusing on the effects of the completion of development using the participation process is desirable. It is also important to measure how many people have actually been involved, how participation has affected the content of the plan, and how much empowerment the participants have actually gained through their participation compared with their expectations prior to the project. References Ando, K. (2002). Are participants in environmental movements self-sacrificing?: Motivation for participation. Japanese Journal of Qualitative Psychology, 1, (In Japanese with English abstract.) Ando, K., & Hirose, Y. (1999). Determinants of turnover and willingness to exert efforts in environmental volunteer groups. Japanese Journal of Social Psychology, 15, (In Japanese with English abstract.) Cabinet Office Quality-of-Life Policy Bureau (2004). Heisei 15 nendo kokumin seikatsu senkodo chosa [Survey on national life preference in the 15th year of the Heisei era] [Online]. Available: < senkoudo15_1.pdf>. Viewed April 28, (In Japanese, translated by the authors of this article.) Hirakawa, T. (1997). Komyunitei shinrigaku niokeru empawamento kenkyu no doko: Empawamento no jissemmen kara [Special issue. Research trends on empowerment in community psychology: Practices of empowerment]. Japanese Journal of Community Psychology, 1, (In Japanese, translated by the authors of this article.) Hirose, Y. (1994). Determinants of environmentconscious behavior. Japanese Journal of Social Psychology, 10, (In Japanese with English abstract.) Kelly, C., & Breinlinger, S. (1996). The social psychology of collective action: Identity, injustice, and gender. London: Taylor and Francis. Kobayashi, T. (2004). Dare ga kagakugijutsu nituite kangaeru noka? Konsensasu kaigi toiu jikken [Who should think about science and technology?: Consensus conference as a social experiment]. Nagoya: The University of Nagoya Press. (In Japanese, translated by the authors of this article.) Maeda, H., Hirose, Y., Ando, K., Sugiura, J., & Yorifuji, K. (2004). Environmental volunteer s recycling activities and empowerment: Competence, solidarity, and collective efficacy enhances volunteers intentions to participate in further activities. Journal of the Japan Society of Waste Management Experts, 15, (In Japanese with English abstract.) Maeda, H., Hirose, Y., Sugiura, J., & Yagishita, M. (2008). Representativeness of randomly

11 34 H. Maeda and Y. Hirose selected participant. Sociotechnica, 5, (In Japanese with English abstract.) Olson, M. (1965).The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/ Exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15, Shinoto, A. (2006). Puranunkusutsuere: Mitaka no jikken ni miru Nippon ban moderu no kanosei [Planungszelle: Possibility of Japanese model based on a pilot program in Mitaka]. Nikkei Glocal, 61, (In Japanese, translated by the authors of this article.) Zimmerman, M. A., & Rappaport, J. (1988). Citizen participation, perceived control, and psychological empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16, (Received July 24, 2006; accepted July 5, 2008)