How geographic distance and political ideology interact to influence public perception of unconventional oil/natural gas development

Clarke, Chris; Bugden, Dylan; Hart, P. Sol; Stedman, Richard C.; Jacquet, Jeffrey B.; Evensen, Darrick; Boudet, Hilary

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2016.07.032

Cited by 136 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A similar pattern has been shown for racial minorities [5]. Age, education, and gender have had mixed results, with different studies finding positive, negative, or non-significant relationships [40,43,74,85,86].…”

Section: Public Opinion Research On Energy Preferencessupporting

confidence: 66%

“…Previous public opinion research on energy topics has found broad support for renewable energy [2,8,39] and more divided views on fossil fuels such as natural gas [7,40] and nuclear energy [36]. Generally, opinion polls have found a declining trend in public support for the use of fossil fuels, especially coal [2,4,9].…”

Section: Public Opinion Research On Energy Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, in terms of "people" factors, political ideology, and party affiliation have consistently been shown to shape views about fossil fuels use in the U.S., with Republicans and conservatives being more supportive of using fossil fuels [7,40,54,55] and indicating preferences for lighter regulation of those sources [56,57] than Democrats and liberals. However, the two-party political system in the U.S. may account for some of this extreme polarization on energy and climate topics between political parties, and the effect of political ideology may be more nuanced in other countries with multiple political parties.…”

Section: Public Opinion Research On Energy Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Public Preferences in a Shifting Energy Future: Comparing Public Views of Eight Energy Sources in North America’s Pacific Northwest

Hazboun

Boudet

2020

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The U.S. and Canada continue to face major changes in energy production. Mounting awareness of the climate crisis has placed increasing importance on developing renewable energy sources, however, advances in fossil fuel extraction technology have opened vast domestic reserves of oil and natural gas. Public preferences for energy policy play a role in determining energy futures, but researchers rarely simultaneously compare public views across multiple renewable and non-renewable energies or across country boundaries. Here, we used a 2019 online survey sample (n = 1500) to compare predictors of support for eight fuel sources for electricity generation in British Columbia, Canada, and Washington and Oregon, USA. Results indicate the highest support overall for renewables (wind, solar, wave/tidal energy, geothermal) and the lowest for fossil fuels (coal and natural gas), nuclear, and hydropower. Mixed-effects regression modeling indicates that views on climate and the balance between environment and economy were consistent predictors of support across most energy types, while political ideology was less consistent. Perceived local importance of both extractive and renewable energy industries were significant predictors of support for some, but not all, energy sources, as were education and gender. Overall, our research suggests that while divisions persist in public energy preferences for both renewable and non-renewable sources, there is the broadest support for renewable energy technologies.

show abstract

Section: Public Opinion Research On Energy Preferencessupporting

confidence: 66%

Section: Public Opinion Research On Energy Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Public Opinion Research On Energy Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Public Preferences in a Shifting Energy Future: Comparing Public Views of Eight Energy Sources in North America’s Pacific Northwest

Hazboun

Boudet

2020

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The goal, however, was not a cross-state comparison within the US or a cross-region comparison in the UK; instead we sought to identify macro-level differences between the US and UK. The survey should be viewed as reflecting national views on this topic, not the views of communities exposed to development or with potential for development (see Clarke et al (2016) and for a discussion of differences in perception based on scale of analysis).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variation in beliefs about ‘fracking’ between the UK and US

Evensen

Stedman

O’Hara

et al. 2017

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In decision-making on the politically-contentious issue of unconventional gas development, the UK Government and European Commission are attempting to learn from the US experience. Although economic, environmental, and health impacts and regulatory contexts have been compared cross-nationally, public perceptions and their antecedents have not. We conducted similar online panel surveys of national samples of UK and US residents simultaneously in September 2014 to compare public perceptions and beliefs affecting such perceptions. The US sample was more likely to associate positive impacts with development (i.e. production of clean energy, cheap energy, and advancing national energy security). The UK sample was more likely to associate negative impacts (i.e. water contamination, higher carbon emissions, and earthquakes). Multivariate analyses reveal divergence cross-nationally in the relationship between beliefs about impacts and support/ opposition-especially for beliefs about energy security. People who associated shale gas development with increased energy security in the UK were over three times more likely to support development than people in the US with this same belief. We conclude with implications for policy and communication, discussing communication approaches that could be successful cross-nationally and policy foci to which the UK might need to afford more attention in its continually evolving regulatory environment.

show abstract

“…Pro/anti-UOGD movements and the policies they seek to promote speak to the role of public perception in shaping UOGD's longterm trajectory. Such perception reflects individual attitudes as well as broader social discourse among stakeholder groups, with psychological and social factors influencing both [9,[30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Clarke

Evensen

2019

Energy Research & Social Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

How geographic distance and political ideology interact to influence public perception of unconventional oil/natural gas development

Cited by 136 publications

References 41 publications

Public Preferences in a Shifting Energy Future: Comparing Public Views of Eight Energy Sources in North America’s Pacific Northwest

Public Preferences in a Shifting Energy Future: Comparing Public Views of Eight Energy Sources in North America’s Pacific Northwest

Variation in beliefs about ‘fracking’ between the UK and US

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About