IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/growch/v57y2026i1ne70106.html

Co‐Creating an Urban Circularity Questionnaire: A Workshop Approach With Experts

Author

Listed:
  • Rengin Aslanoğlu
  • Loredana Ivan
  • Cihan Kayaçetin
  • Qiuxian Li
  • Joost van Hoof
  • Jeroen Dikken

Abstract

As cities strive for sustainable development, the concept of urban circularity is gaining increasing recognition as a framework for systemic transformation. Yet, tools used to assess circularity, such as questionnaires, are often limited to traditional measurement functions. This paper argues that adopting new methods for developing questionnaires can serve as both a mechanism for creating a circularity measurement tool and for initiating conversations with stakeholders. It details a co‐creation process involving international stakeholders (architects, urban planners, local government representatives, and social scientists) in the development of a circularity questionnaire and argues that these should be context‐driven, methodologically sound, and, more importantly, socially accountable tools that include all stakeholders. This paper emphasizes ensuring effective measurements of urban circularity through the participation of all perspectives, improving the development process and the quality of surveys, and increasing stakeholder participation and dialog to effect change and increase insights into circularity practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Rengin Aslanoğlu & Loredana Ivan & Cihan Kayaçetin & Qiuxian Li & Joost van Hoof & Jeroen Dikken, 2026. "Co‐Creating an Urban Circularity Questionnaire: A Workshop Approach With Experts," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:growch:v:57:y:2026:i:1:n:e70106
    DOI: 10.1111/grow.70106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/grow.70106
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/grow.70106?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bryn Rosenfeld & Kosuke Imai & Jacob N. Shapiro, 2016. "An Empirical Validation Study of Popular Survey Methodologies for Sensitive Questions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(3), pages 783-802, July.
    2. Nuri Cihan Kayaçetin & Chiara Piccardo & Alexis Versele, 2022. "Social Impact Assessment of Circular Construction: Case of Living Lab Ghent," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sylvain Chassang & Christian Zehnder, 2024. "Secure Survey Design in Organizations: Theory and Experiments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 371-405, November.
    2. Bertelli, Olivia & Calvo, Thomas & Lavallée, Emmanuelle & Mercier, Marion & Mesplé-Somps, Sandrine, 2025. "Attitudes and behaviors in a fragile state. A list experiment in Mali," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Jorge M. Agüero & Veronica Frisancho, 2022. "Measuring Violence against Women with Experimental Methods," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(4), pages 1565-1590.
    4. Kang Liu, 2025. "Contested circular economy and mixed social implications from practice: A scoping review," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(2), pages 2154-2170, April.
    5. Sarkar, Olivia & Dutta, Arijita, 2025. "Who prefers to buy improved period products in India? Evidence from list experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    6. Jiayuan Li & Wim Van den Noortgate, 2022. "A Meta-analysis of the Relative Effectiveness of the Item Count Technique Compared to Direct Questioning," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(2), pages 760-799, May.
    7. Brownback, Andy & Burke, Nathaniel & Gagnon-Bartsch, Tristan, 2024. "Inference from biased polls," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 449-486.
    8. Peterson-Wilhelm, Bailey & Schwab, Benjamin & Hemachandra, Dilini & Headey, Derek, 2025. "Social Desirability Bias in Program Evaluation: The Case of a Childhood Nutrition Program in Sri Lanka," 2025 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2025, Denver, CO 360988, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Pier Francesco Perri & Eleni Manoli & Tasos C. Christofides, 2023. "Assessing the effectiveness of indirect questioning techniques by detecting liars," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 64(5), pages 1483-1506, October.
    10. Reitmann, Ann-Kristin & Mahé, Clotilde & Goedhuys, Micheline & Nillesen, Eleonora, 2026. "Measuring social norms: direct and indirect methods and the role of financial incentives in reducing misreporting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    11. Zakharov, Alexei & Chapkovski, Philipp, 2025. "The effect of war on redistribution preferences," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    12. Chapkovski, Philipp & Schaub, Max, 2022. "Solid support or secret dissent? A list experiment on preference falsification during the Russian war against Ukraine," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 1-6.
    13. Nillesen, Eleonora & Grimm, Michael & Goedhuys, Micheline & Reitmann, Ann-Kristin & Meysonnat, Aline, 2019. "On the Malleability of Implicit Attitudes Towards Women Empowerment: Evidence from Tunisia," IZA Discussion Papers 12471, IZA Network @ LISER.
    14. Lai, Yufeng & Boaitey, Albert & Minegishi, Kota, 2022. "Behind the veil: Social desirability bias and animal welfare ballot initiatives," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    15. Sarah Brierley, 2020. "Unprincipled Principals: Co‐opted Bureaucrats and Corruption in Ghana," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(2), pages 209-222, April.
    16. Andrew Bell, 2022. "Combatant socialization and norms of restraint: Examining officer training at the US Military Academy and Army ROTC," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(2), pages 180-196, March.
    17. Bertelli, Olivia & Calvo, Thomas & Lavallée, Emmanuelle & Mercier, Marion & Mesplé-Somps, Sandrine, 2025. "What one thinks, what one says and what one does: Male justifications and practices of gender-based violence in Mali," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    18. Matthew Cancian, 2022. "The Impact of Modern-System Training on Battlefield Participation by Kurdish Soldiers," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(7-8), pages 1449-1480, August.
    19. Edmund Malesky & Markus Taussig, 2019. "How Do Firms Feel About Participation by Their Peers in the Regulatory Design Process? An Online Survey Experiment Testing the Substantive Change and Spillover Mechanisms," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 129-150, June.
    20. Gutiérrez Fernández, Emilio & Rubli, Adrian, 2023. "Challenges for Measuring the LGBT+ Population and Homophobia in Mexico," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 12707, Inter-American Development Bank.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:growch:v:57:y:2026:i:1:n:e70106. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0017-4815 .

    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.