IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v109y2017icp10-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beliefs about impacts matter little for attitudes on shale gas development

Author

Listed:
  • Evensen, Darrick
  • Stedman, Rich

Abstract

Do facts lead to positive/negative views about energy development or vice versa? The answer matters crucially for policy and communication – if perceptions of what is true (beliefs) precede feelings (attitudes), additional information could shape views on an energy technology; yet, if attitudes precede beliefs, the usefulness of communication, either for influencing beliefs or simply making the public more informed, is far less clear. A long history of social-psychological research asserts that individuals’ beliefs predict their attitudes on environmental issues. Nevertheless, other theories intimate the reverse – attitudes shape beliefs, specifically on newly emergent, controversial topics. We investigated whether attitudes (i.e., support and opposition) about the contentious issue of shale gas development stem from or lead to beliefs about development. We collected data from random-sample surveys – of residents in the Marcellus Shale region and of a national US sample. Factor analyses and structural equation modelling lead us to question the dominant assumption that beliefs precede attitudes – the reverse, or a recursive relationship, appears more likely. Broad values and place attachment precede attitude formation more reliably than beliefs about impacts do – suggesting need for a larger focus in energy policy on core values and the ways in which development could foster or compromise these values.

Suggested Citation

  • Evensen, Darrick & Stedman, Rich, 2017. "Beliefs about impacts matter little for attitudes on shale gas development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 10-21.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:109:y:2017:i:c:p:10-21
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421517304081
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.053?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kinnaman, Thomas C., 2011. "The economic impact of shale gas extraction: A review of existing studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1243-1249, May.
    2. Clarke, Christopher E. & Bugden, Dylan & Hart, P. Sol & Stedman, Richard C. & Jacquet, Jeffrey B. & Evensen, Darrick T.N. & Boudet, Hilary S., 2016. "How geographic distance and political ideology interact to influence public perception of unconventional oil/natural gas development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 301-309.
    3. Jeffrey B. Jacquet & Richard C. Stedman, 2014. "The risk of social-psychological disruption as an impact of energy development and environmental change," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(9), pages 1285-1304, September.
    4. Clarke, Christopher E. & Hart, Philip S. & Schuldt, Jonathon P. & Evensen, Darrick T.N. & Boudet, Hilary S. & Jacquet, Jeffrey B. & Stedman, Richard C., 2015. "Public opinion on energy development: The interplay of issue framing, top-of-mind associations, and political ideology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 131-140.
    5. Andersson-Hudson, Jessica & Knight, William & Humphrey, Mathew & O’Hara, Sarah, 2016. "Exploring support for shale gas extraction in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 582-589.
    6. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    7. Merryn Thomas & Tristan Partridge & Barbara Herr Harthorn & Nick Pidgeon, 2017. "Deliberating the perceived risks, benefits, and societal implications of shale gas and oil extraction by hydraulic fracturing in the US and UK," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(5), pages 1-7, May.
    8. Kriesky, J. & Goldstein, B.D. & Zell, K. & Beach, S., 2013. "Differing opinions about natural gas drilling in two adjacent counties with different levels of drilling activity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 228-236.
    9. Dan M. Kahan & Hank Jenkins-Smith & Donald Braman, 2011. "Cultural cognition of scientific consensus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 147-174, February.
    10. Paul Slovic & Melissa L. Finucane & Ellen Peters & Donald G. MacGregor, 2004. "Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 311-322, April.
    11. Rayner, Steve, 2010. "Trust and the transformation of energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2617-2623, June.
    12. Sangaramoorthy, Thurka & Jamison, Amelia M. & Boyle, Meleah D. & Payne-Sturges, Devon C. & Sapkota, Amir & Milton, Donald K. & Wilson, Sacoby M., 2016. "Place-based perceptions of the impacts of fracking along the Marcellus Shale," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 27-37.
    13. Paredes, Dusan & Komarek, Timothy & Loveridge, Scott, 2015. "Income and employment effects of shale gas extraction windfalls: Evidence from the Marcellus region," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 112-120.
    14. Webler, Thomas & Tuler, Seth P., 2010. "Getting the engineering right is not always enough: Researching the human dimensions of the new energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2690-2691, June.
    15. Whitmarsh, Lorraine & Nash, Nick & Upham, Paul & Lloyd, Alyson & Verdon, James P. & Kendall, J.-Michael, 2015. "UK public perceptions of shale gas hydraulic fracturing: The role of audience, message and contextual factors on risk perceptions and policy support," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 419-430.
    16. Fry, Matthew & Briggle, Adam & Kincaid, Jordan, 2015. "Fracking and environmental (in)justice in a Texas city," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 97-107.
    17. Teresa A. Myers & Edward W. Maibach & Connie Roser-Renouf & Karen Akerlof & Anthony A. Leiserowitz, 2013. "The relationship between personal experience and belief in the reality of global warming," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(4), pages 343-347, April.
    18. Weber, Jeremy G., 2012. "The effects of a natural gas boom on employment and income in Colorado, Texas, and Wyoming," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1580-1588.
    19. Boiney, Lindsley G. & Kennedy, Jane & Nye, Pete, 1997. "Instrumental Bias in Motivated Reasoning: More When More Is Needed," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 1-24, October.
    20. Oberski, Daniel, 2014. "lavaan.survey: An R Package for Complex Survey Analysis of Structural Equation Models," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 57(i01).
    21. Felix N. Fernando & Dennis R. Cooley, 2016. "An Oil Boom’s Effect on Quality of Life (QoL): Lessons from Western North Dakota," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 11(4), pages 1083-1115, December.
    22. Tim Boersma & Corey Johnson, 2012. "The Shale Gas Revolution: U.S. and EU Policy and Research Agendas," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 29(4), pages 570-576, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Howell, Rachel A., 2018. "UK public beliefs about fracking and effects of knowledge on beliefs and support: A problem for shale gas policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 721-730.
    2. Liuyang Yao & Dangchen Sui & Xiaotong Liu & Hui Fan, 2020. "The Psychological Process of Residents’ Acceptance of Local Shale Gas Exploitation in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-20, September.
    3. Martínez-Espiñeira, Roberto & García-Valiñas, María Á. & Matesanz, David, 2019. "Public Attitudes towards Hydraulic Fracturing in Western Newfoundland," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    4. Susan T. Zimny & Margaret C. Reardon, 2021. "Environmental justice expansion in the context of fracking," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(2), pages 234-246, June.
    5. Andersson-Hudson, Jessica & Rose, Jonathan & Humphrey, Mathew & Knight, Wil & O'Hara, Sarah, 2019. "The structure of attitudes towards shale gas extraction in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 693-697.
    6. Sibo Chen, 2020. "Debating Extractivism: Stakeholder Communications in British Columbia’s Liquefied Natural Gas Controversy," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, December.
    7. Frances Drake, 2018. "Risk Society and Anti-Politics in the Fracking Debate," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-22, November.
    8. Liuyang Yao & Qian Zhang & Kin Keung Lai & Xianyu Cao, 2020. "Explaining Local Residents’ Attitudes toward Shale Gas Exploitation: The Mediating Roles of Risk and Benefit Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-13, October.
    9. Ambrosio-Albala, P. & Upham, P. & Bale, C.S.E. & Taylor, P.G., 2020. "Exploring acceptance of decentralised energy storage at household and neighbourhood scales: A UK survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Clarke, Christopher E. & Evensen, Darrick T.N., 2023. "Attention to news media coverage of unconventional oil/gas development impacts: Exploring psychological antecedents and effects on issue support," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    2. Hilary S. Boudet & Chad M. Zanocco & Peter D. Howe & Christopher E. Clarke, 2018. "The Effect of Geographic Proximity to Unconventional Oil and Gas Development on Public Support for Hydraulic Fracturing," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1871-1890, September.
    3. Howell, Rachel A., 2018. "UK public beliefs about fracking and effects of knowledge on beliefs and support: A problem for shale gas policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 721-730.
    4. Martínez-Espiñeira, Roberto & García-Valiñas, María Á. & Matesanz, David, 2019. "Public Attitudes towards Hydraulic Fracturing in Western Newfoundland," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    5. Liuyang Yao & Qian Zhang & Kin Keung Lai & Xianyu Cao, 2020. "Explaining Local Residents’ Attitudes toward Shale Gas Exploitation: The Mediating Roles of Risk and Benefit Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-13, October.
    6. Liuyang Yao & Dangchen Sui & Xiaotong Liu & Hui Fan, 2020. "The Psychological Process of Residents’ Acceptance of Local Shale Gas Exploitation in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-20, September.
    7. Maguire, Karen & Winters, John V., 2016. "Energy Boom and Gloom? Local Effects of Oil and Natural Gas Drilling on Subjective Well-Being," IZA Discussion Papers 9811, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Evans, Neil & Jones, Calvin & Munday, Max & Song, Meng, 2019. "Economic effects in the UK periphery from unconventional gas development: Evidence from Wales," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1037-1046.
    9. Kuan‐Ming Huang & Xiaoli Etienne, 2021. "Impact of Marcellus and Utica shale exploitation on Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia Regional Economies: A synthetic control analysis," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(6), pages 1449-1479, December.
    10. Evensen, Darrick & Demski, Christina & Becker, Sarah & Pidgeon, Nick, 2018. "The relationship between justice and acceptance of energy transition costs in the UK," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 451-459.
    11. Karen Maguire & John V. Winters, 2017. "Energy Boom and Gloom? Local Effects of Oil and Natural Gas Drilling on Subjective Well†Being," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 590-610, December.
    12. Howell, Emily L. & Li, Nan & Akin, Heather & Scheufele, Dietram A. & Xenos, Michael A. & Brossard, Dominique, 2017. "How do U.S. state residents form opinions about ‘fracking’ in social contexts? A multilevel analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 345-355.
    13. Malin, Stephanie A. & Mayer, Adam & Crooks, James L. & McKenzie, Lisa & Peel, Jennifer L. & Adgate, John L., 2019. "Putting on partisan glasses: Political identity, quality of life, and oil and gas production in Colorado," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 738-748.
    14. Yao, Liuyang & Sui, Bo, 2020. "Heterogeneous preferences for shale water management: Evidence from a choice experiment in Fuling shale gas field, southwest China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    15. Yu, Chin-Hsien & Huang, Shih-Kai & Qin, Ping & Chen, Xiaolan, 2018. "Local residents' risk perceptions in response to shale gas exploitation: Evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 123-134.
    16. Mayer, Adam, 2018. "The Fiscal Impacts of Energy: Perspectives from local governments in the Mountain West, USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 186-193.
    17. Susan Amiesa Fubara & Omowumi O. Iledare & Obindah Gershon & Jeremiah Ejemeyovwi, 2019. "Natural Resource Extraction and Economic Performance of the Niger Delta Region in Nigeria," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(4), pages 188-193.
    18. Cai, Zhengyu & Maguire, Karen & Winters, John V., 2019. "Who benefits from local oil and gas employment? Labor market composition in the oil and gas industry in Texas and the rest of the United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    19. Lee, Jim, 2015. "The regional economic impact of oil and gas extraction in Texas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 60-71.
    20. Kânoğlu-Özkan, Dilge Güldehen & Soytaş, Uğur, 2022. "The social acceptance of shale gas development: Evidence from Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PC).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:109:y:2017:i:c:p:10-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.