Lorraine Whitmarsh , Yu Shuang Gan , Patrick Devine-Wright , Darrick Evensen , Jen Dickie , Irena Connon , Adam Varley , Stacia Ryder , Phil Bartie
{"title":"在能源问题上,谁是 \"公众\"?关于公众对页岩气开采态度的揭示和诱导的混合方法研究","authors":"Lorraine Whitmarsh , Yu Shuang Gan , Patrick Devine-Wright , Darrick Evensen , Jen Dickie , Irena Connon , Adam Varley , Stacia Ryder , Phil Bartie","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2024.103840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Shale gas is a contentious energy source. Yet, ‘imagined’ notions of the public (for example, NIMBYs) rarely reflect the reality of public opinion. We use an inductive, empirical approach to define UK publics in relation to shale gas extraction, drawing on multiple data sources (social media, a national survey, and two local surveys) and composite measures. Cluster analyses and thematic coding reveal a diversity of responses ranging from active opposition, through ambivalence, to active support. The number of communities varies by data source and analytical method, but across all datasets we see more opposition than support. Across all datasets, political views were an important lens through which shale gas was understood. Our findings have implications for how developers and policy-makers engage with the public, and expose limitations of pre-defined notions of the public that may not reflect empirical realities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"119 ","pages":"Article 103840"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who is the ‘public’ when it comes to public opinion on energy? A mixed-methods study of revealed and elicited public attitudes to shale gas extraction\",\"authors\":\"Lorraine Whitmarsh , Yu Shuang Gan , Patrick Devine-Wright , Darrick Evensen , Jen Dickie , Irena Connon , Adam Varley , Stacia Ryder , Phil Bartie\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.erss.2024.103840\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Shale gas is a contentious energy source. Yet, ‘imagined’ notions of the public (for example, NIMBYs) rarely reflect the reality of public opinion. We use an inductive, empirical approach to define UK publics in relation to shale gas extraction, drawing on multiple data sources (social media, a national survey, and two local surveys) and composite measures. Cluster analyses and thematic coding reveal a diversity of responses ranging from active opposition, through ambivalence, to active support. The number of communities varies by data source and analytical method, but across all datasets we see more opposition than support. Across all datasets, political views were an important lens through which shale gas was understood. Our findings have implications for how developers and policy-makers engage with the public, and expose limitations of pre-defined notions of the public that may not reflect empirical realities.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"volume\":\"119 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103840\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629624004316\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629624004316","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Who is the ‘public’ when it comes to public opinion on energy? A mixed-methods study of revealed and elicited public attitudes to shale gas extraction
Shale gas is a contentious energy source. Yet, ‘imagined’ notions of the public (for example, NIMBYs) rarely reflect the reality of public opinion. We use an inductive, empirical approach to define UK publics in relation to shale gas extraction, drawing on multiple data sources (social media, a national survey, and two local surveys) and composite measures. Cluster analyses and thematic coding reveal a diversity of responses ranging from active opposition, through ambivalence, to active support. The number of communities varies by data source and analytical method, but across all datasets we see more opposition than support. Across all datasets, political views were an important lens through which shale gas was understood. Our findings have implications for how developers and policy-makers engage with the public, and expose limitations of pre-defined notions of the public that may not reflect empirical realities.
期刊介绍:
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers.
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.