Digital co-creation in urban mobility planning: what motivates people to participate?

References

• Baiocchi, G. 2017. Popular Democracy: The Paradox of Participation. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Barkan, S. E. 2004. “Explaining Public Support for the Environmental Movement: A Civic Voluntarism Model.” Social Science Quarterly 85 (4): 913–937. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2004.00251.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bomberg, E., and N. McEwen. 2012. “Mobilizing Community Energy.” Energy Policy 51:435–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.045.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brady, H. E., S. Verba, and K. L. Schlozmann. 1995. “Beyond SES: A Resource Model of Political Participation.” The American Political Science Review 89 (2): 271–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/2082425.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brant, R. 1990. “Assessing Proportionality in the Proportional Odds Model for Ordinal Logistic Regression.” Biometrics 46 (4): 1171. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532457.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burden, B. C. 2009. “The Dynamic Effects of Education on Voter Turnout.” Electoral Studies 28 (4): 540–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2009.05.027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casper, E. A. 2019. “Die Karten Auf Den Tisch Legen: Einflüsse Des Digitalen Partizipationssystems (DIPAS) Auf Das Planungsverständnis Von Bürgerinnen Und Bürgern – Ein Praxistest in Hamburg.” Accessed March 7, 2022. https://dipas.org/sites/default/files/2021-02/Casper_Masterarbeit_Die%20Karten%20auf%20den%20Tisch%20legen.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Choi, M., M. Glassman, and D. Cristol. 2017. “What It Means to Be a Citizen in the Internet Age: Development of a Reliable and Valid Digital Citizenship Scale.” Computers & Education 107 (2): 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.002.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, A., E. Vigoda, and A. Samorly. 2001. “Analysis of the Mediating Effect of Personal-Psychological Variables on the Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Political Participation: A Structural Equations Framework.” Political Psychology 22 (4): 727–757. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Condon, M. 2015. “Voice Lessons: Rethinking the Relationship Between Education and Political Participation.” Political Behavior 37 (4): 819–843. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-015-9301-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Marco, S., J. M. Robles, and M. Antino. 2014. “Digital Skills as a Conditioning Factor for Digital Political Participation.” Communications 39 (1): 43–65. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2014-0004.
   Google Scholar
• Dettweiler, M., and H.-J. Linke. 2019. “Forschung Bringt Neuen Schwung in Stadtentwicklungsprozesse.” RaumPlanung 200 (1–2019): 56–60.
   Google Scholar
• Devine-Wright, P., ed. 2010. Renewable Energy and the Public: From NIMBY to Participation. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Downs, A. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Brothers.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, D., F. Brändle, A. Mertes, L. E. Pleger, A. Rhyner, and B. Wulf. 2020. “Partizipation im digitalen Staat: Möglichkeiten und Bedeutung digitaler und analoger Partizipationsinstrumente im Vergleich.” Swiss Yearbook of Administrative Sciences 11 (1): 129–144. https://doi.org/10.5334/ssas.141.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, B., G. Gutsche, and H. Wetzel. 2020. “Who Wants to Get Involved? Determinants of Citizens’ Willingness to Participate in German Renewable Energy Cooperatives.” MAGKS Joint Discussion Paper Series in Economics 27-2020.
   Google Scholar
• Fraune, C., and M. Knodt. 2017. “Challenges of Citizen Participation in Infrastructure Policy-Making in Multi-Level Systems-The Case of Onshore Wind Energy Expansion in Germany.” European Policy Analysis 3 (2): 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1022.
   Google Scholar
• Fraune, C., M. Knodt, S. Gölz, and K. Langer, eds. 2019. Akzeptanz Und Politische Partizipation in Der Energietransformation: Gesellschaftliche Herausforderungen Jenseits Von Technik Und Ressourcenausstattung. Energietransformation. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
   Google Scholar
• Fraune, C., and K. Michele. 2019. “Politische Partizipation in Der Mehrebenengovernance Der Energiewende Als Institutionelles Beteiligungsparadox.” In Akzeptanz Und Politische Partizipation in Der Energietransformation: Gesellschaftliche Herausforderungen Jenseits Von Technik Und Ressourcenausstattung, edited by C. Fraune, M. Knodt, S. Gölz, and K. Langer, Energietransformation 159–182. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
   Google Scholar
• Geißel, B. 2008. “Wozu Demokratisierung der Demokratie? – Kriterien zur Bewertung partizipativer Arrangements.” In Erfolgsbedingungen lokaler Bürgerbeteiligung, edited by A. Vetter, 29–49. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
   Google Scholar
• Haslam, S. A. 2012. Psychology in Organizations: The Social Identity Approach. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Hirschner, R. 2017. “Beteiligungsparadoxon in Planungs- Und Entscheidungsverfahren.” Forum Wohnen und Stadtentwicklung 6:323–326. https://www.vhw.de/fileadmin/user_upload/08_publikationen/verbandszeitschrift/FWS/2017/6_2017/FWS_6_17_Beteiligungsparadoxon_in_Planungs_und_Entscheidungsverfahren_R._Hirschner.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Kalkbrenner, B. J., and J. Roosen. 2016. “Citizens’ Willingness to Participate in Local Renewable Energy Projects: The Role of Community and Trust in Germany.” Energy Research & Social Science 13:60–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kam, C. D., and C. L. Palmer. 2008. “Reconsidering the Effects of Education on Political Participation.” The Journal of Politics 70 (3): 612–631. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381608080651.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, Y., and H. Khang. 2014. “Revisiting Civic Voluntarism Predictors of College Students’ Political Participation in the Context of Social Media.” Computers in Human Behavior 36 (6092): 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.044.
   Google Scholar
• Klandermans, B. 1984. “Mobilization and Participation: Social-Psychological Expansisons of Resource Mobilization Theory.” American Sociological Review 49 (5): 583–600. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klandermans, B. 1997. The Social Psychology of Protest. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Landwehr, C., and T. Faas. 2016. “‘Who Wants Democratic Innovations, and Why?’ Gutenberg School of Management and Economics & Research Unit ‘Interdisciplinary Public Policy.’ Discussion Paper Series, (1705): 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Langer, K., T. Decker, J. Roosen, and K. Menrad. 2018. “Factors Influencing Citizens’ Acceptance and Non-Acceptance of Wind Energy in Germany.” Journal of Cleaner Production 175:133–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lilleker, D. G., and K. Koc-Michalska. 2017. “What Drives Political Participation? Motivations and Mobilization in a Digital Age.” Political Communication 34 (1): 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1225235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lortz, M., J. Kachel, and M. Knodt. 2021. PaEGIE Quartiersbefragung: Deskriptiver Datenreport. PaEGIE-Kurzberichte im Rahmen des Projekts “Partizipative Energietransformation: Innovative digitale Tools für die gesellschaftliche Dimension der Energiewende”. Darmstadt: TU Darmstadt und Fraunhofer IGD. Accessed October 17, 2023. https://download.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de/media/FB02/www.politikwissenschaft/Arbeitsbereich_Vergleich_Integration/bericht_paegie_datenreport.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Lortz, M., J. Stahl, L. Ritter, I. Iovine, B. Abb, E. Klien, H.-J. Linke, and M. Knodt. 2022. “Digitale Beteiligung in Der Städtischen Mobilitätsplanung.” Flächenmanagement und Bodenordnung 2 (2022): 75–86.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, P., A. Parsons, E. Nyanzu, and A. Rae. 2022. “Dog Fouling and Potholes: Understanding the Role of Coproducing ‘Citizen Sensors’ in Local Governance.” Local Government Studies 49 (5): 908–931. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2022.2116575.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer, A. K. 2011. “Does Education Increase Political Participation?” The Journal of Politics 73 (3): 633–645. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002238161100034X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonnell, J. 2020. “Municipality Size, Political Efficacy and Political Participation: A Systematic Review.” Local Government Studies 46 (3): 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2019.1600510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPherson, J. M., S. Welch, and C. Clark. 1977. “The Stability and Reliability of Political Efficacy: Using Path Analysis to Test Alternative Models.” American Political Science Review 71 (2): 509–521. https://doi.org/10.2307/1978345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nabatchi, T. 2010. “Addressing the Citizenship and Democratic Deficits: The Potential of Deliberative Democracy for Public Administration.” The American Review of Public Administration 40 (4): 376–399. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074009356467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niemi, R. G., S. C. Craig, and F. Mattei. 1991. “Measuring Internal Political Efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study.” The American Political Science Review 85 (4): 1407–1413. https://doi.org/10.2307/1963953.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nygård, M., and G. Jakobsson. 2013. “Political Participation of Older Adults in Scandinavia - The Civic Voluntarism Model Revisited? A Multi-Level Analysis of Three Types of Political Participation.” International Journal of Ageing & Later Life 8 (1): 65–96. https://doi.org/10.3384/ijal.1652-8670.12196.
   Google Scholar
• Olson, M. 1977. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Vol. 124. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oni, A. A., S. Oni, V. Mbarika, and C. K. Ayo. 2017. “Empirical Study of User Acceptance of Online Political Participation: Integrating Civic Voluntarism Model and Theory of Reasoned Action.” Government Information Quarterly 34 (2): 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.02.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Persson, M. 2015. “Education and Political Participation.” British Journal of Political Science 45 (3): 689–703. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123413000409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quick, K. S., and J. M. Bryson. 2022. “Public Participation.” In Handbook on Theories of Governance, edited by C. K. Ansell and J. Torfing, 158–168. Second ed. Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Quintelier, E. 2015. “Intergenerational Transmission of Political Participation Intention.” Acta Politics 50 (3): 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2014.19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosseel, Y. 2012. “Lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling.” Journal of Statistical Software 48 (2): 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders, L. M. 1997. “Against Deliberation.” Political Theory 25 (3): 347–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591797025003002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlozman, K. L., H. E. Brady, and S. Verba. 2018. Unequal and Unrepresented: Political Inequality and the People’s Voice in the New Gilded Age. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smets, K., and C. van Ham. 2013. “The Embarrassment of Riches? A Meta-Analysis of Individual-Level Research on Voter Turnout, Electoral Studies.“ http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2012.12.006.
   Google Scholar
• Spatz, L., M. Dettweiler, and H.-J. Linke. 2019. “Neue Blickwinkel – Visualisierung Im Partizipationsprozess.” Kursbuch Bürgerbeteiligung, edited by Jörg Sommer, 313–329. 3nd ed. Berlin: Berlin Institut für Partizipation.
   Google Scholar
• Steinbrecher, M., S. Huber, and H. Rattinger. 2007. Turnout in Germany: Citizen Participation in State, Federal, and European Elections Since 1979. Studien zur Wahl- Und Einstellungsforschung. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
   Google Scholar
• Stürmer, S., and C. Kampmeier. 2003. “Active Citizenship: The Role of Community Identification in Community Volunteerism and Local Participation.” Psychologica Belgica 43 (1–2): 103–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stürmer, S., and M. Lang. 2007. “Sozialpsychologische Prinzipien Der Mobilisierung Und Partizipation: Potenziale Der Gemeindepsychologie Für Die Raumplanung Im Stadtquartier.” RaumPlanung 130:73–77.
   Google Scholar
• Stürmer, S., and B. Simon. 2004. “Collective Action: Towards a Dual-Pathway Model.” European Review of Social Psychology 15 (1): 59–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280340000117.
   Google Scholar
• Toft, M. B., G. Schuitema, and J. Thøgersen. 2014. “The Importance of Framing for Consumer Acceptance of the Smart Grid: A Comparative Study of Denmark, Norway and Switzerland.” Energy Research & Social Science 3:113–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.07.010.
   Google Scholar
• van Stekelenburg, J., and B. Klandermans. 2013. “The Social Psychology of Protest.” Current Sociology 61 (5–6): 886–905. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113479314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Zomeren, M., T. Saguy, and F. M. H. Schellhaas. 2013. “Believing in “Making a Difference” to Collective Efforts: Participative Efficacy Beliefs as a Unique Predictor of Collective Action.” Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 16 (5): 618–634. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430212467476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verba, S., and N. Nie. 1972. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper & Row.
   Google Scholar
• Verba, S., K. L. Schlozman, and H. E. Brady. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zoellner, J., P. Schweizer-Ries, and C. Wemheuer. 2008. “Public Acceptance of Renewable Energies: Results from Case Studies in Germany.” Energy Policy 36 (11): 4136–4141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.06.026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar