Public Acceptance of Structural Strategy

  • Satoshi FujiiEmail author


The previous chapter demonstrated that whether it is a problem of urban life, transportation, or the environment, when we examine the introduction of a structural strategy to solve social dilemmas in real society; inevitably we would find the creation of another social dilemma but at a higher level.


Structural Strategy Social Dilemma Procedural Fairness Public Acceptance Private Benefit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Baron, J. (1995). Blind justice: Fairness to groups and the do-no-harm principle. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baron, J., & Jurney, J. (1993). Norms against voting for coerced reform. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 347–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cook, K. S. (Ed.). (2001). Trust in society. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  4. Fransson, N., & Gärling, T. (1999). Environmental concern: Conceptual definitions, measurement methods, and research findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 369–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fujii, S. (2001). TDM and social dilemmas: the role of public spirits in solving transport problems. Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, No. 667/IV-50, 41–58. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  6. Fujii, S. (2003). Analysis on psychological factors of accepting a TDM policy (unpublished data). (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  7. Fujii, S., & Takemura, K. (2001). Risk attitude and attention: A psychometric analysis of framing effect by contingent focus model. Kodo Keiryogaku (The Japanese Journal of Behaviormetrics), 28(1), 9–17. (in Japanese with English abstract).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fujii, S., Gärling, T., & Kitamura, R. (2001). Changes in drivers’ perceptions and use of public transport during a freeway closure: Effects of temporary structural change on cooperation in a real-life social dilemma. Environment and Behavior, 33(6), 796–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fujii, S., Suda, H., Adachi, T., & Kitamura, R. (2002a). An analysis of decision making processes under CVM: A cognitive-psychological test of NOAA’s guidelines. Infrastructure Planning Review, 19(1), 91–98. (in Japanese with English abstract).Google Scholar
  10. Fujii, S., Suda, H., Nishida, S., & Kitamura, R. (2002b). CVM for procedural justice and consensus building. Infrastructure Planning Review, 19(1), 99–104. (in Japanese with English abstract).Google Scholar
  11. Fujii, S., Takemura, K., & Kikkawa, T. (2002c). Decision making process and consensus building: A strategy to restraining an egoistic motivation in social dilemmas, Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, No. 709/IV-56, 13–26. (in Japanese with English abstract).Google Scholar
  12. Fujii, S., Gärling, T., Jakobsson, C., & Jou, R., C. (2003). A cross-country study of fairness and infringement on freedom as determinants of public acceptance of road pricing, submitted to Transportation.Google Scholar
  13. Fujii, S., Kitamura, R., & Suda, H. (2004). Contingent valuation method can increase procedural justice. Journal of Economic Psychology, 25(6), 877–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hirose, Y., Karasawa, K., Sugiura, J., Ohnuma, S., Ando, K., Nishi, K., et al. (2001). Citizen’s evaluation and behavior on a container and package collecting system: Awareness survey of citizens in Nagoya City, Living Environment Research Group. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  15. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kobayashi, K. (2000). Contentions and issues regarding a theory of interregional fairness. Transport Policy Studies’ Review, 3(3), 13–24. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  17. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory, New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research (pp. 27–55). New York, NY: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1982). Die Schweigespirale: Öffentliche Meinung-unsere soziale Haut. Franskfult: Varlag Ullstein GmbH.Google Scholar
  20. Rasinski, K., & Tyler, T. R. (1987). Fairness and vote choice in the 1986 Presidential election. American Politics Quarterly, 16, 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Saeki, Y. (1980). Logics of decision making. University of Tokyo Press. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  22. Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (2001). Value hierarchies across cultures: Taking a similarities perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(3), 269–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith, H. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1996). Justice and power: When will justice concerns encourage the advantaged to support policies which redistribute economic resources and the disadvantaged to willingly obey the law? European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 171–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sugiura, J., Nonami, H., & Hirose, Y. (1999). The effects of informational exposure and behavioral commitment on residents’ evaluations of the new waste collection system: An environmental and social psychological approach. Journal of the Japan Society of Waste Management Experts, 10(2), 87–96. (in Japanese with English abstract).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Takemura, K. (1994). Theoretical explanation of the framing effect: Situation-dependent focusing model of decision making under risks. Japanese Psychological Review, 37(3), 270–291. (in Japanese with English Abstract).Google Scholar
  26. Tanaka, K. (1997). Psychology of social fairness. Nakanishiya Shuppan. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  27. Tocqueville, A. D. (1838). Democracy in America (translated by Johng, Spencer). New York: George Dearborn & Co.Google Scholar
  28. Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K., & McGraw, K. (1985). The influence of perceived injustice on support for political authorities. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 700–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tyler, T. R., Beckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  30. Wilke, H. A. M. (1991). Greed, efficiency and fairness in resource management situations. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 165–187). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  31. Yamagishi, T. (1986). The structural goal/expectation theory of cooperation in social dilemmas. In E. Lawler & B. Morkovsky (Eds.), Advances in Group Processes (Vol. 3, pp. 52–87). JAL: Greenwich, CT.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Urban ManagementKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations