We conducted a social survey in Tajimi city, which planned to raise the refuse rate as threefold because of waste reduction and financial fairness. The city introduced the citizen participatory projects such as citizen advisory committee, public comment, neighborhood meeting, and citizen forum in order to obtain citizens\u27 consent for the rate raising. We hypothesized that the citizens evaluated their authority\u27s decision not only from the aspect of expected outcomes of rate increase, but also from the aspect of perceived fairness of the participatory method. We obtained 622 respondents from 1500 residents using a stratified sampling method. The main results are as follows. The expected outcomes of the rate increase of waste collection consisted of two factors as waste reduction efficiency and burden sharing. The perceived procedural fairness consisted of three factors as information disclosure, representation, and access to discourse and decision control. As hypothesized the citizens evaluated their authority\u27s decision of rate increase of waste collection by procedural fairness as well as expected outcomes. But trust in authority had no impact on its acceptance for rate raising. Instead, the trust had moderating effect between procedural fairness and public acceptance. Procedural fairness had more impact on the acceptance of the citizens having lower trust. These results suggested that when the citizens have less trust, they are more likely to pay attention to the decision procedure, yielding more strong effect of procedural fairness on their acceptance
