The Role of Convictions and Trust for Public Protest Potential in the Case of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS)

Abstract

For the public to accept new technologies, trust and convictions play an important role. In the present research, we used structural equation modeling to examine an extensive causal model of the role of convictions and trust for the public's protest potential against carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) among a large sample of the general population (N = 769). Trust, convictions, perceived benefits, and risks were included in the model. Our model fitted the data well. Convictions regarding emission reduction, decentralization of energy production, and tampering with natural structures in the deep subsurface influenced the perception of benefits and risks. Trust, in contrast, was barely influential. Perceived benefits were more prominent for public protest potential than perceived risks. However, perceived benefits did not dominate perceived risks as much as earlier studies found for acceptance. We argue that trust can become fully effective as a determinant of perceived risks and benefits only when the public perceives the distinct positioning of the stakeholders involved. Until then, laypeople are likely to draw on their own convictions and intuitive mental concepts for making decisions about accepting a new technology or protesting it.

Explaining Local Residents’ Attitudes toward Shale Gas Exploitation: The Mediating Roles of Risk and Benefit Perceptions

“…Theoretically, local residents’ acceptance of SGE can be improved by their positive beliefs since SGE contributes to local development by increasing employment and income opportunities, improving public infrastructures, and fostering community pride [ 23 , 24 , 25 ]. Moreover, local residents’ acceptance of SGE can also be weaken by their negative beliefs as SGE poses a level of threat to health and environment, especially when the regulations are not sufficient to address these threatens [ 25 , 26 , 27 ]. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed.…”

Disturbed Earth: Conceptions of the Deep Underground in Shale Extraction Deliberations in the US and UK

“…Drawing together many of these ideas, the notion of 'tampering with nature' addresses humans' interference in the natural world combined with the arrogance or immorality that such acts may reflect (Sjöberg, 2000). A further CCS study in Switzerland found that tampering with the subsurface was a particularly influential value construct, suggesting a 'moral concept' of nature (and the subsurface in particular) ranging from 'naturally untouched' to 'un-naturally disturbed' (Wallquist et al, 2012). Such a framework aligns with the established finding that views on emergent technologies are influenced by perceived (un)naturalness (Slovic, 2000;Corner et al, 2013).…”

The takeover of science communication: how science lost its leading role in the public discourse on carbon capture and storage research in daily newspapers in Germany

“…Nevertheless, the transferability of results from international studies to the German context is limited. While in most countries CCS is also linked to energy as well as other industry sectors (such as the production of cement and steel; Barker et al, 2009;Wang et al, 2007;Xu and Cang, 2010), the German debate has focussed solely on coal (BMBF, 2007;Skrylnikow, 2010). From the beginning, CCS was seen as the saviour of the coal-mining industry and energy production through coal (Praetorius and Stechow, 2009).…”