The politics of scientific consensus? Political divergence and partisanship in unconventional energy development in the United States

Abstract

Risk communication scholars have examined public perception of scientific consensus on a variety of politically controversial risk topics; social-psychological factors that shape such views (i.e., political ideology); and effects on issue attitudes. Few studies, however, have combined these antecedents and outcomes within a single framework -one that describes how politically polarized attitudes emerge via ideologically-divergent perceptions of scientific agreement. We address this shortcoming in the context of an emerging risk topic -unconventional oil and natural gas development (UOGD) in the United States -that is politically controversial and where scientific agreement on specific impacts along with value-laden assessments of benefit and risk are subjects of scholarly and public debate. Using a quota survey of United States adults (n = 700), we find that political conservatism heightened support indirectly via: (1) perceived scientific consensus that benefits outweigh the risks and, in turn, the belief that UOGD's health, economic, and environmental impacts in the United States have been positive and (2) lower perception of scientific consensus that risks outweigh benefits, which likewise heightened beliefs that aforementioned impacts have been positive. We discuss implications for risk communication research related to energy development.

Political Polarization: Challenges, Opportunities, and Hope for Consumer Welfare, Marketers, and Public Policy

“…Intuitively, political polarization will affect public policy by creating significant gaps in the policy goals of individuals at either end of the political spectrum. Without doubt, political polarization has hindered the advancement of issues such as climate change (Johnson and Schwadel 2019; Kahan et al 2012), transgender rights (Castle 2019), income inequality (Bechtel, Liesch, and Scheve 2018), energy policy (Clarke and Evensen 2019), race relations (Kosloff et al 2010), and media policy (Napoli and Dwyer 2018), among others. The increased policy gap can reflect the diverging political attitudes of the population but can also be compounded through more complex mechanisms.…”

Oil price shocks on shale oil supply and energy security: a case study of the United States

“…Many countries pay special attention to the development of alternative sources such as renewable energy (Kousksou et al , 2015; Aceleanu et al , 2017; Chel and Kaushik, 2018; Østergaard et al , 2020). Several other countries, such as the USA, have developed technologies for the extraction of unconventional energy sources because of the large number of unconventional energy resources (Kelsey et al , 2016; Zheng et al , 2017; Clarke and Evensen, 2019; Bernal et al , 2019). The increase in shale oil production since 2006 is mainly due to the significant increase in oil prices, which has made extraction cost-effective and increased the profitability of shale oil production, followed by technological advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing after 2010.…”

Compreensão da percepção pública da Ação Climática: desafio para as lideranças brasileiras

“…Uma vez que o objetivo desta tese é investigar a visão das lideranças na ação climática, partese do pressuposto da ocorrência das MCs, das suas causas antropogênicas e da gravidade de suas consequências para a vida no planeta. Esse pressuposto é fundamentado pelo alto consenso dos cientistas climáticos que sustentam que a TE é necessária para mitigação dos riscos climáticos (Clarke & Evensen, 2019;Gifford et al, 2018;Hamilton et al, 2015;Van der Linden, 2021).…”