IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i9p7307-d1134667.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Citizen Participation for Sustainability and Resilience: A Generational Cohort Perspective on Community Brand Identity Perceptions and Development Priorities in a Rural Community

Author

Listed:
  • Ivan Paunovic

    (CENTIM—Centre for Entrepreneurship, Innovation and SMEs, Bonn-Rhine-Sieg University of Applied Sciences (Campus Rheinbach), 53359 Rheinbach, Germany)

  • Cathleen Müller

    (CENTIM—Centre for Entrepreneurship, Innovation and SMEs, Bonn-Rhine-Sieg University of Applied Sciences (Campus Rheinbach), 53359 Rheinbach, Germany)

  • Klaus Deimel

    (CENTIM—Centre for Entrepreneurship, Innovation and SMEs, Bonn-Rhine-Sieg University of Applied Sciences (Campus Rheinbach), 53359 Rheinbach, Germany)

Abstract

Citizen participation is deemed to be crucial for sustainability and resilience planning. However, generational equity has been missing from recent academic discussions regarding sustainability and resilience. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to reintroduce the topic of the existence or absence of an intergenerational consensus on the example of a rural community and its perceived brand image attributes and development priorities. The research is based on primary data collected through an online survey, with a sample size of N = 808 respondents in Neunkirchen-Seelscheid, Germany. The data were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test for the presence and/or absence of consensus among the five generations regarding brand image attributes and development priorities. The findings point to divergence between what the median values indicate as the most relevant brand image attributes and development priorities among the citizens and the areas where the Kruskal–Wallis test shows that an intergenerational consensus either does or does not exist. The results imply the need for new concepts and applied approaches to citizen participation for sustainability and resilience, where intergenerational dialogue and equity-building take center stage. In addition to the importance of the theory of citizen participation for sustainability and resilience, our results provide ample evidence for how sustainability and resilience planning documents could potentially benefit from deploying the concept of intergenerational equity. The present research provides sustainability and political science with new conceptual and methodological approaches for taking intergenerational equity into account in regional planning processes in rural and other areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivan Paunovic & Cathleen Müller & Klaus Deimel, 2023. "Citizen Participation for Sustainability and Resilience: A Generational Cohort Perspective on Community Brand Identity Perceptions and Development Priorities in a Rural Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7307-:d:1134667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7307/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7307/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Otto Spijkers, 2018. "Intergenerational Equity and the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, October.
    2. Nicole Darnall & G. Jason Jolley, 2004. "Involving the Public: When Are Surveys and Stakeholder Interviews Effective?1," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 21(4), pages 581-593, July.
    3. Scott Daewon Kim & Petra Moser, 2021. "Women in Science. Lessons from the Baby Boom," NBER Working Papers 29436, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Ernie Stark & Paul Poppler, 2018. "Considering heterogeneity within assumed homogenous generational cohorts," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 41(1), pages 74-95, January.
    5. Anja Plumeyer & Pascal Kottemann & Daniel Böger & Reinhold Decker, 2019. "Measuring brand image: a systematic review, practical guidance, and future research directions," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 227-265, April.
    6. Sergiu BALAN & Lucia Ovidia VREJA, 2018. "Generation Z: Challenges For Management And Leadership," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 12(1), pages 879-888, November.
    7. Neil Ward & David L. Brown, 2009. "Placing the Rural in Regional Development," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(10), pages 1237-1244, December.
    8. Tracy L. Washington & Debra Flanders Cushing & Janelle Mackenzie & Laurie Buys & Stewart Trost, 2019. "Fostering Social Sustainability through Intergenerational Engagement in Australian Neighborhood Parks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-16, August.
    9. Handy, Christopher & Shester, Katharine, 2020. "The Effect of Birth Order on Educational Attainment among the Baby Boom Generation," MPRA Paper 102426, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Alireza Nouri & Shafi Khadem & Anna Mutule & Christina Papadimitriou & Rad Stanev & Mattia Cabiati & Andrew Keane & Paula Carroll, 2022. "Identification of Gaps and Barriers in Regulations, Standards, and Network Codes to Energy Citizen Participation in the Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-29, January.
    11. Ernie Stark & Paul Poppler, 2018. "Considering heterogeneity within assumed homogenous generational cohorts," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 41(1), pages 74-95, January.
    12. Ivan Paunović & Verka Jovanović, 2017. "Implementation of Sustainable Tourism in the German Alps: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-15, February.
    13. Josephine Marion Zimba & Brian Simbeye & Stanley Chilunga Chirwa, 2021. "Towards Intergenerational Equity: Analysis of Youth Engagement Strategies in Climate Action Planning in Mzuzu, Malawi," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(4), pages 309-320.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ana Brochado & Paula Rodrigues & Ana Sousa & Ana Pinto Borges & Mónica Veloso & Mónica Gómez-Suárez, 2023. "Resilience and Sustainable Urban Tourism: Understanding Local Communities’ Perceptions after a Crisis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Lewis Williams, 2024. "Indigenous Intergenerational Resilience and Lifelong Learning: Critical Leverage Points for Deep Sustainability Transformation in Turbulent Times," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-20, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Rosario Padial-Ruz & Mª Esther Puga-González & Álvaro Céspedes-Jiménez & David Cabello-Manrique, 2021. "Determining Factors in the Use of Urban Parks That Influence the Practice of Physical Activity in Children: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-23, March.
    3. Amitrajeet A. Batabyal & Hamid Beladi, 2019. "Preference matching, income, and population distribution in urban and adjacent rural regions," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 98(5), pages 2201-2208, October.
    4. George Kyriakarakos & Athanasios T. Balafoutis & Dionysis Bochtis, 2020. "Proposing a Paradigm Shift in Rural Electrification Investments in Sub-Saharan Africa through Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-19, April.
    5. repec:ags:ijag24:344656 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Xiaofei Liu & Zhenbo Wang & Xuegang Cui, 2021. "Scenario Simulation of the Impact of China’s Free-Trade Zone Construction on Regional Sustainable Development: A Case Study of the Pearl River Delta Urban Agglomeration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    7. Sara Sousa, 2021. "Environmental Taxation in Portugal: A Contribution to Sustainability," Eurasian Studies in Business and Economics, in: Mehmet Huseyin Bilgin & Hakan Danis & Ender Demir & Sofia Vale (ed.), Eurasian Economic Perspectives, pages 369-382, Springer.
    8. Setiawan Priatmoko & Moaaz Kabil & Yitno Purwoko & Lóránt Dénes Dávid, 2021. "Rethinking Sustainable Community-Based Tourism: A Villager’s Point of View and Case Study in Pampang Village, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Jose Ribamar Siqueira Junior & Enrique Horst & German Molina & Laura H. Gunn & Felipe Reinoso-Carvalho & Burcu Sezen & Nathalie Peña-García, 2023. "Branding in the eye of the storm: the impact of brand ethical behavior on brand commitment during the COVID-19 crisis in a South American country," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 95-115, March.
    10. Go, Frank M. & Trunfio, Mariapina & Lucia, Maria Della, 2013. "Social capital and governance for sustainable rural development," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 115(2), pages 1-7, June.
    11. Heloise Michelle Nunes Medeiros & Quêzia Leandro de Moura Guerreiro & Thiago Almeida Vieira & Sandra Maria Sousa da Silva & Ana Isabel da Silva Aço Renda & José Max Barbosa Oliveira-Junior, 2021. "Alternative Tourism and Environmental Impacts: Perception of Residents of an Extractive Reserve in the Brazilian Amazonia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-29, February.
    12. Keying Ding & Mian Yang & Shixian Luo, 2021. "Mountain Landscape Preferences of Millennials Based on Social Media Data: A Case Study on Western Sichuan," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    13. Neumeier Stefan & Pollermann Kim, 2014. "Rural Tourism As Promoter Of Rural Development – Prospects And Limitations: Case Study Findings From A Pilot Projectpromoting Village Tourism," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 6(4), pages 270-296, December.
    14. Zhang Jingchao & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2021. "Are societies becoming proself? A topographical difference under fast urbanization in China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(9), pages 12976-12993, September.
    15. Stefania Środa-Murawska & Elżbieta Grzelak-Kostulska & Jadwiga Biegańska & Leszek S. Dąbrowski, 2021. "Culture and Sustainable Tourism: Does the Pair Pay in Medium-Sized Cities?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-26, August.
    16. Valentina Caiola & Elina Moreira Kares & Margherita Pillan & Davide Spallazzo & Aarni Tuomi, 2023. "Remote Cultural Events: Investigating the Usefulness of Live Streaming for Creating Cultural and Social Engagement in Communities of Older Adults," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-20, July.
    17. Baltrunaite, Audinga & Casarico, Alessandra & Rizzica, Lucia, 2022. "Women in economics: the role of gendered references at entry in the profession," CEPR Discussion Papers 17474, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Chin-Cheng Yang & Chih-Chien Shen & Yu-Sheng Lin & Huai-Wei Lo & Jia-Zhi Wu, 2021. "Sustainable Sports Tourism Performance Assessment Using Grey-Based Hybrid Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-24, April.
    19. Don J. Webber & Stephanié Rossouw, 2010. "Sub-national vulnerability measures:A spatial perspective," Working Papers 1004, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    20. Bernhard Swoboda & Carolina Sinning, 2021. "Endorsement of Global Product Brands by Global Corporate Brands – A Consumer Perspective Across Nations," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 61(4), pages 563-598, August.
    21. Freshwater, David, 2021. "The main forces affecting rural regions in 2020," Village and Agriculture (Wieś i Rolnictwo), Polish Academy of Sciences (IRWiR PAN), Institute of Rural and Agricultural Development, vol. 189(4), February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7307-:d:1134667. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.