The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: A qualitative study of public perceptions towards energy technologies and portfolios in Germany

Scheer, Dirk; Konrad, Wilfried; Wassermann, Sandra

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2016.09.061

Cited by 47 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The participants also performed satisfactorily in actively mastering the Riskmeter (M=3.7±1.5, 73% correct on average) and understanding the information on electricity portfolios (M=5.2±1.4, 74% correct on average). Eighty-five percent of participants reported that they followed a specific strategy when creating their preferred Riskmeter portfolio rather than randomly coming up with the portfolio 50 . The participants were also satisfied with their preferred portfolio (M=23.3±3.4, the maximum score of 28).…”

Section: Informational Materials Were Effective In Knowledge Creationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Deliberative workshops 14,17 , deliberative opinion polls 48 , consensus conference 49 , and focus groups 15,50 are additional tools that enable learning through group discussions. Although some earlier studies have combined several such tools 14,17,20 , more empirical evaluative evidence could be gathered on the usability and short-and longer-term effectiveness of these tools 47,51,52 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perspectives of Informed Citizen Panel on Low-Carbon Electricity Portfolios in Switzerland and Longer-Term Evaluation of Informational Materials

Volken

Xexakis

Trutnevyte

2018

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Low-carbon transition is gaining momentum, but relatively little is known about the public preferences for low- and zero-carbon electricity portfolios given their environmental, health, and economic impacts. Decision science literature argues that conventional opinion surveys are limited for making strategic decisions because the elicited opinions may be distorted by misconceptions and awareness gaps that prevail in the public. We created an informed citizen panel ( N = 46) in Switzerland using technology factsheets, interactive web-tool Riskmeter, and group discussions. We measured the evolution of the panel's knowledge and preferences from initial (uninformed) to informed and longer-term views 4 weeks after. In terms of energy transition, our elicited technology and portfolio preferences show strong support for the low-carbon electricity sector transition, especially relying on hydropower, solar power, electricity savings and efficiency, and other renewable sources. Since these informed preferences are structurally different from the futures considered by many energy experts, we argue that these preferences should also inform the Swiss Energy Strategy 2050s implementation. In terms of methodologies in decision science, our factsheets, Riskmeter, and group discussions all proved effective in forming the preferences and improving knowledge. But we also intriguingly found that in a longer run the participants tended to revert back to their initial opinions. The latter finding opens up multiple new research questions on the longer-term effectiveness of informational tools and stability of informed preferences.

show abstract

Section: Informational Materials Were Effective In Knowledge Creationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspectives of Informed Citizen Panel on Low-Carbon Electricity Portfolios in Switzerland and Longer-Term Evaluation of Informational Materials

Volken

Xexakis

Trutnevyte

2018

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Without an inclusive project development process, members of local communities may exercise their available or perceived property rights to resist project development. (iii) Skewed stakeholder input : Specific stakeholders may hijack focus groups or forums where the project planner seeks to give and receive feedback. (iv) Presupposition : Project planners present risk analysis conclusions without accounting for public input in the process of conducting the risk analysis, despite entrenched doubts among the public on the veracity of the analysis’ initial assumptions. (v) Extended time horizons : There is no guarantee that the project planner will continue to collaborate with the local populace after the project is completed to continually update problematic systems or areas with recurring externalities. (vi) Lack of consideration of local fears : The project planner does not include local fears or negative opinions in risk assessment efforts, or fails to resolve these issues in a meaningful way. Furthermore, members of the public often worry about specific details that are not important to the regulator, yet are perceived as critical for members of local communities. (vii) Risk communication sans referendum (without reference) : A risk communication message is created without a reference to how stakeholders currently frame the problem, despite best practice guidance to the contrary . For important values and beliefs, individuals are not convinced by others but are self‐convinced through a process of incorporating new information into their own existing values and beliefs .…”

Section: Method: Two‐step Community‐driven Hypothesis‐testing Intervementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Risk communication is one tool used by governments and businesses to regain public trust. By carefully crafting a message regarding the relative risks, benefits, and uncertainties facing a particular development project, spokesmen for a government or business interest seek to assuage the public's fears and to highlight the benefits that such development may provide . In theory, this is accomplished by presenting a curated set of facts to representatives of the public in order to convince them of the merits of a particular project, with the ultimate goal that those community leaders and other stakeholders will align community opinions with those of project planners and thereby resolve the coordination failure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community‐Driven Hypothesis Testing: A Solution for the Tragedy of the Anticommons

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shared ownership of property and resources is a longstanding challenge throughout history that has been amplifying with the increasing development of industrial and postindustrial societies. Where governments, project planners, and commercial developers seek to develop new infrastructure, industrial projects, and various other land-and resource-intensive tasks, veto power shared by various local stakeholders can complicate or halt progress. Risk communication has been used as an attempt to address stakeholder concerns in these contexts, but has demonstrated shortcomings. These coordination failures between project planners and stakeholders can be described as a specific kind of social dilemma that we describe as the "tragedy of the anticommons." To overcome such dilemmas, we demonstrate how a two-step process can directly address public mistrust of project planners and public perceptions of limited decision-making authority. This approach is examined via two separate empirical field experiments in Portugal and Tunisia, where public resistance and anticommons problems threatened to derail emerging industrial projects. In both applications, an intervention is undertaken to address initial public resistance to such projects, where specific public stakeholders and project sponsors collectively engaged in a hypothesis-testing process to identify and assess human and environmental health risks associated with proposed industrial facilities. These field experiments indicate that a rigorous attempt to address public mistrust and perceptions of power imbalances and change the pay-off structure of the given dilemma may help overcome such anticommons problems in specific cases, and may potentially generate enthusiasm and support for such projects by local publics moving forward.

show abstract

“…Sun, Ouyang, and Meng proposed that positive attitudes are impacted by factors such as property price, gender, and living area [32]. This suggests that the concept of supporting the incineration should be guided in the residents who are in the pseudo-rational state via strategies such as the supplement of energy, work, or free public entertainment from the facility [33].…”

Section: Decision Strategy For the Changing Of Public Risk Attributementioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of the Individual Attitude in the Risk Decision of Waste Incinerator Construction: Cellular Automaton Model

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In current work, the phenomenon of NIMBY (not in my back yard) for a municipal solid waste incinerator was recognized through an investigation for the evolution of individual risk attitude to group risk attitude (ItGRA). The cellular automaton model was employed to evaluate the risk attitude status with different frequencies of social interaction between residents. In the simulation case, the risk attitude of residents in the pseudo-rational state and non-pseudo-rational state was evaluated, which indicates the sheep-flock effect on the exaggeration of public NIMBY attitude. To the incinerator, the individual risk attitude evolved to supportive group risk attitude at a social interaction frequency 100 times higher than that in family or local neighborhoods, when the initial number of residents in opposition and support was equal. This was supported by the result of the model in the evaluation of resident risk attitude around the incinerator in Shanghai. On the contrary, for those in a non-pseudo-rational state, the ultimate group risk attitude depends on the probability that the residents have a supportive or opposing risk attitude as the concept of individuals was difficult to change. Accordingly, the decision strategy of incinerator construction should consider the influence of the sheep-flock effect, which can increase the attitude of residents in support and lead to the evolution of a group risk attitude to support attitude. Therefore, this study provides insight into the evolution of public attitude to NIMBY attitude and a promising evaluation method to quantify and guide the individual and group risk attitudes.

show abstract

The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: A qualitative study of public perceptions towards energy technologies and portfolios in Germany

Cited by 47 publications

References 66 publications

Perspectives of Informed Citizen Panel on Low-Carbon Electricity Portfolios in Switzerland and Longer-Term Evaluation of Informational Materials

Perspectives of Informed Citizen Panel on Low-Carbon Electricity Portfolios in Switzerland and Longer-Term Evaluation of Informational Materials

Community‐Driven Hypothesis Testing: A Solution for the Tragedy of the Anticommons

Evolution of the Individual Attitude in the Risk Decision of Waste Incinerator Construction: Cellular Automaton Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About