The more public influence, the better? The effects of full versus shared influence on public acceptability of energy projects in the Netherlands and China

Liu, Lu; Bouman, Thijs; Perlaviciute, Goda; Steg, Linda

doi:10.1016/j.erss.2021.102286

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to our expectations, egoistic value orientation was positively correlated to cognitive, affective, and behavioral attitudes. We suspect that EFC system changes in the wake of the energy transition imply individual benefits and therefore are not congruent with egoistic value orientation (Liu et al 2021). Furthermore, individuals may not primarily perceive individual disadvantages (e.g., time and money) in system change in an unfamiliar sector, which is supported by the low observed emotion and affectedness levels.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Energy system changes in the agricultural sector: testing a value-congruent communication approach to foster positive attitudes

Olvermann,

Kauffeld

2024

Environ. Res. Commun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple sectors, including agriculture, are subject to decarbonization and wide-ranging system changes. With a growing distance between agriculture and the public, communicating changes and fostering public acceptance as crucial factors for the success of these changes has become challenging. Therefore, understanding public attitudes towards emerging system changes in unfamiliar sectors helps identify appropriate communication strategies and provides information about possible responses from different stakeholders. To address the scarcity of studies on system changes in agriculture and their acceptability, a multidimensional evaluation of attitudes was undertaken using a factorial survey to test the utility of value-congruent information for enhancing positive attitudes. Electrical field cultivation (EFC) served as a case example for one potential energy system change in agriculture. The data were collected via an open scientific survey panel in Germany (N = 300) using a written vignette in the form of a newspaper article; different benefit foci and hypotheses were tested using path analysis. Although the different benefit foci did not reveal significant differences, problem awareness and knowledge were found to predict positive attitudes toward EFC. For once, results highlight the need to foster overall problem awareness for fossil fuels to garner public support for various pathways. Additionally, results underscore the perceived lack of personal affectedness by transition pathways as a barrier to responding to communication strategies, specifically in unfamiliar sectors such as agriculture. The study outlines the need for stakeholders to design communication strategies under consideration of fostering personal affectedness and overall problem understanding.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Energy system changes in the agricultural sector: testing a value-congruent communication approach to foster positive attitudes

Olvermann,

Kauffeld

2024

Environ. Res. Commun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Abstract-project acceptability. Based on previous research [37][38][39][40], participants reported on a seven-points scale how acceptable (1 very unacceptable-7 very acceptable) and necessary (1 not at all necessary-7 very necessary) they consider generating energy in the province of South-Holland by means of solar parks (a field with many solar panels) and onshore wind turbines. The two items for each energy project were averaged to compose acceptability scales for solar and wind energy, respectively.…”

Section: Plos Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previously, willingness to participate has been measured at three levels of decision-making power: being informed, having a say, and deciding [16]. We built on and extended this measure by adding the willingness to co-decide, as particularly this level of decision-making power was found to be most likely to increase public acceptability of energy projects [40]. Noteworthy, in the real-life setting where the current study was embedded, the Province of South-Holland was not initiating any events to engage the public in decision-making on the energy transition across the seven energy regions (i.e., abstract level).…”

Section: Plos Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

Time to talk about values, time to say no: What drives public participation in decision-making on abstract versus concrete energy projects?

Perlaviciute,

Squintani

2023

PLOS Clim

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One way to develop more socially acceptable energy projects is by engaging people with different values (i.e., guiding principles in people’s lives) from early on in decision-making. However, people with different values may want to participate at different times of decision-making. When energy projects are still abstract (e.g., national renewable energy targets), people with strong biospheric values (i.e., caring about the environment) and altruistic values (i.e., caring about others) may want to participate. Whereas when projects become concrete (e.g., a local wind park), people with strong egoistic values (i.e., caring about personal resources) and hedonic values (i.e., caring about comfort and pleasure) may want to participate. In two field studies in the same region, we found that biospheric and altruistic values were indeed most strongly associated with people’s willingness to participate in abstract decision-making. At a local project level, the more people were against the project, the more they wanted to participate, irrespective of their values. We conclude that simply inviting people to participate in decision-making does not yet guarantee that different public values will be represented, and we draw recommendations for better incorporating values in energy decision-making.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, different from what is implied by the traditional participation ladder (Arnstein, 1969), more decision-making power might not (always) be what people want. For example, once people could decide together with responsible parties about a wind energy project, adding more power by letting people take the decisions themselves did not lead to higher acceptability of the decision-making process nor the wind energy project (Liu et al, 2021). One reason for this could be that people think ordinary citizens are not competent enough to decide on climate policies-a decision-making panel consisting only of citizens was indeed evaluated as having less expertise and less able to take high-quality decisions than a decision-making panel consisting of both citizens and experts (Liu et al, 2021).…”

Section: Whether and When To Participate?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, once people could decide together with responsible parties about a wind energy project, adding more power by letting people take the decisions themselves did not lead to higher acceptability of the decision‐making process nor the wind energy project (Liu et al, 2021). One reason for this could be that people think ordinary citizens are not competent enough to decide on climate policies—a decision‐making panel consisting only of citizens was indeed evaluated as having less expertise and less able to take high‐quality decisions than a decision‐making panel consisting of both citizens and experts (Liu et al, 2021). The findings substantiate wider critique of the assumption underlying the Arnstein's ladder that the more power the better (e.g., Hurlbert & Gupta, 2015).…”

Section: Public Preferences For Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contested climate policies and the four Ds of public participation: From normative standards to what people want

Perlaviciute

2021

WIREs Climate Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stimulating public participation in decision making is heralded as a way to get climate policies accepted by the public. Yet, little is known about whether and when public participation can increase policy acceptability. This is true in particular of practices organized by responsible parties to engage the public in decision making. Based on a vast body of interdisciplinary literature, four types of normative standards for effective public participation can be distilled, which I call the four Ds: dialogue, decision-making power, diversity, and deliberation. However, normative standards may not be enough for reaching socially acceptable climate policies, if people do not want to participate, or want to participate too late in decision making, and are not open to different perspectives. The result can be fake participation, exclusion, and polarization-all which may reduce, rather than increase, public acceptability of climate policies. Understanding public preferences for participation is therefore critical for the implementation of the four Ds and for reaching socially acceptable climate policies. This Perspective article is relevant for scientists, policy makers, NGO's, businesses, interest groups, and other parties wanting to understand how to engage the public in climate decision making.

show abstract

The more public influence, the better? The effects of full versus shared influence on public acceptability of energy projects in the Netherlands and China

Cited by 13 publications

References 48 publications

Energy system changes in the agricultural sector: testing a value-congruent communication approach to foster positive attitudes

Energy system changes in the agricultural sector: testing a value-congruent communication approach to foster positive attitudes

Time to talk about values, time to say no: What drives public participation in decision-making on abstract versus concrete energy projects?

Contested climate policies and the four Ds of public participation: From normative standards to what people want

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About