Urbanization increases pluvial flood risk by expanding impermeable surfaces, which is a trend likely to intensify with climate change. Permeable pavement (PePav) made from industrial byproducts, in accordance with circular economy principles, may improve soil permeability. Public acceptance remains a critical barrier to its implementation. Existing measures of willingness to accept (WtA) new technologies are inconsistent, limiting interdisciplinary collaboration. Therefore, a concise WtA scale was adapted from the Bogardus Social Distance Scale to assess acceptance of PePav at varying levels of proximity in residential contexts, from public flood-prone roads to private yards. The scale was evaluated across three studies: Study 1 (N = 195) and Study 2 (N = 187) utilized mixed student samples, while Study 3 (N = 625) involved a non-student sample. The 5-item solution, identified through factor analysis in Study 1, consistently demonstrated a unidimensional and cumulative structure and satisfactory reliability, even after the proposed PePav ingredient modification in subsequent studies. The scale correlated with recycling experience and professional background, indicating convergent validity, but not with flooding or informal construction experience, across all samples. Study 3 provided evidence of external validity by incorporating empirically well-established Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) constructs and showing that WtA predicted PePav use beyond TPB variables and demographics. The scale also showed measurement invariance across sample type (student vs. general population) and different levels of construction experience. The constructed WtA scale is suitable for efficiently assessing professional and public acceptance of circular building materials and may have broad cross-disciplinary relevance. This enables timely, targeted interventions and informed policy decisions to advance sustainable technologies in the built environment, with substantial implications for education, professional policy, and sustainable engineering. Nevertheless, further validation is required.
Svetozarevic et al. (Wed,) studied this question.