Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (301) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (65)
- Jugend-Check (61)
- Public lecture (56)
- Part of a Book (47)
- Report (13)
- Book (9)
- Review (8)
- Interview (7)
- Working Paper (7)
- Part of Periodical (6)
Language
- German (223)
- English (57)
- French (8)
- Other Language (8)
- Spanish (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (301)
Keywords
- Arbeit (38)
- Bildung (38)
- Familie (30)
- Digitales (26)
- Freizeit (17)
- Umwelt (15)
- Politik (14)
- Gesellschaft (13)
- Gesundheit (13)
- Jugend-Check (9)
Institute
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, insbesondere Europarecht und Völkerrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Weiß) (18)
- Lehrstuhl für Politikwissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Stephan Grohs) (16)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, insbesondere deutsches und europäisches Verwaltungsrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Ulrich Stelkens) (13)
- Lehrstuhl für Sozialrecht und Verwaltungswissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Constanze Janda) (12)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, Staatslehre und Rechtsvergleichung (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Karl-Peter Sommermann) (11)
- Lehrstuhl für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsmanagement (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michael Hölscher) (6)
- Lehrstuhl für Verwaltungswissenschaft, Staatsrecht, Verwaltungsrecht und Europarecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Mario Martini) (6)
- Lehrstuhl für vergleichende Verwaltungswissenschaft und Policy-Analyse (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michael Bauer) (6)
- Lehrstuhl für Volkswirtschaftslehre, insbesondere Wirtschafts- und Verkehrspolitik (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Andreas Knorr) (5)
- Lehrstuhl für Wirtschaftliche Staatswissenschaften, insbesondere Allgemeine Volkswirtschaftslehre und Finanzwissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Gisela Färber) (2)
- Lehrstuhl für Personal, Führung und Entscheidung im öffentlichen Sektor (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michèle Morner) (1)
- Lehrstuhl für öffentliches Recht, insbesondere allgemeines und besonderes Verwaltungsrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Jan Ziekow) (1)
Purpose – Governments and energy operators are often confronted with opposition to the construction of new high-voltage transmission lines. Besides other factors, a potential determinant of public opposition and acceptance that has gained increasing attention is the fairness of the planning and approval procedure as perceived by the citizens. The purpose of this study is to develop and validate a scale for measuring perceived procedural fairness (PPF).
Design/methodology/approach – The authors developed the ten-item “perceived procedural fairness scale (PPFS)” and assessed its quality by means of item response theory. By using a Rasch rating scale model, the authors tested whether the instrument met the requirements of this kind of measurement model. For conducting their research, the authors used data from two telephone surveys in Germany that were collected in areas that are affected by grid expansion.
Findings – The findings suggest that the scale can be considered a reliable and internal valid instrument for measuring citizens’ PPF.
Originality/value – At the moment, there is no psychometrically rigorously evaluated scale available for measuring PPF in the context of power grid expansion. Therefore, the study contributes to filling this gap and provides a valuable tool for researchers and practitioners concerned with further investigating citizens’ PPF and its relationships with other relevant constructs in the field.
Keywords - Policy, Procedural fairness, Procedural justice, Energy infrastructure, Power grid expansion, Item response theory, Rasch modelling