IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i21p7205-d670447.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholders’ Risk Perceptions of Decarbonised Energy System: Insights into Patterns of Behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Farid Karimi

    (Faculty of Bioeconomy, Novia University of Applied Sciences, Raseborgsvägen 9, 10600 Raseborg, Finland)

Abstract

According to EU goals and the Paris Agreement, an urgent need exists for reducing CO 2 emissions while still securing energy supply. Thus, the timely deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) is seemingly unavoidable, especially for the cement and steel industries. However, diverse perceptions of CCS among stakeholders such as experts, politicians, and laypeople exist that could hinder the deployment of the technology. Hence, it is worthwhile to recognise these diverse perceptions and their roots. In the studies on risk perceptions, the emphasis has been mostly on the public, as well as factors that influence the public, such as knowledge dissemination and trust. Although these are crucial elements, they are not enough to explain the complexity of risk perceptions. In contrast to the mainstream research, this paper hypothesises that both laypeople and experts are affected by common cultural denominators, therefore, might have similar patterns of risk perceptions. This research suggests a framework that explains the role of societal culture in risk governance, arguing that thrifty, uncertainty avoidant, hierarchical societies tend to have a higher risk perception of CCS. This study is based on a synthesis of the earlier research, an extensive literature review, and an analysis of interviews data.

Suggested Citation

  • Farid Karimi, 2021. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perceptions of Decarbonised Energy System: Insights into Patterns of Behaviour," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-14, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:21:p:7205-:d:670447
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/21/7205/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/21/7205/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rachel M. Krause & Sanya R. Carley & David C. Warren & John A. Rupp & John D. Graham, 2014. "“Not in (or Under) My Backyard”: Geographic Proximity and Public Acceptance of Carbon Capture and Storage Facilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(3), pages 529-540, March.
    2. Moon, Won-Ki & Kahlor, Lee Ann & Olson, Hilary Clement, 2020. "Understanding public support for carbon capture and storage policy: The roles of social capital, stakeholder perceptions, and perceived risk/benefit of technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    3. Snyder, Hannah, 2019. "Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 333-339.
    4. Lennart Sjöberg, 2000. "Factors in Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    5. Hilary S. Boudet, 2019. "Public perceptions of and responses to new energy technologies," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 4(6), pages 446-455, June.
    6. Unknown, 2014. "Media Coverage 2014," 2014: Ethics, Efficiency and Food Security: Feeding the 9 Billion, Well, 26-28 August 2014 225573, Crawford Fund.
    7. Niklas Höhne & Matthew J. Gidden & Michel Elzen & Frederic Hans & Claire Fyson & Andreas Geiges & M. Louise Jeffery & Sofia Gonzales-Zuñiga & Silke Mooldijk & William Hare & Joeri Rogelj, 2021. "Wave of net zero emission targets opens window to meeting the Paris Agreement," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 11(10), pages 820-822, October.
    8. Katherine Romanak & Mathias Fridahl & Tim Dixon, 2021. "Attitudes on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) as a Mitigation Technology within the UNFCCC," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Carola Braun & Christine Merk & Gert Pönitzsch & Katrin Rehdanz & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "Public perception of climate engineering and carbon capture and storage in Germany: survey evidence," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 471-484, April.
    10. Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian & McAlinden, Karl J., 2016. "The effect of trust on people's acceptance of CCS (carbon capture and storage) technologies: Evidence from a survey in the People's Republic of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 69-79.
    11. Bart W. Terwel & Fieke Harinck & Naomi Ellemers & Dancker D. L. Daamen, 2009. "Competence‐Based and Integrity‐Based Trust as Predictors of Acceptance of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1129-1140, August.
    12. Carola Braun, 2017. "Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2264-2275, December.
    13. Alexandra Zingg & Michael Siegrist, 2012. "Lay people's and experts' risk perception and acceptance of vaccination and culling strategies to fight animal epidemics," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 53-66, January.
    14. Huijts, Nicole M.A. & Midden, Cees J.H. & Meijnders, Anneloes L., 2007. "Social acceptance of carbon dioxide storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2780-2789, May.
    15. Carmel Anderson & Jacki Schirmer & Norman Abjorensen, 2012. "Exploring CCS community acceptance and public participation from a human and social capital perspective," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 687-706, August.
    16. David C. Warren & Sanya R. Carley & Rachel M. Krause & John A. Rupp & John D. Graham, 2014. "Predictors of attitudes toward carbon capture and storage using data on world views and CCS-specific attitudes," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(6), pages 821-834.
    17. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Linzenich, A. & Kaetelhoen, A. & Sternberg, A. & Bardow, A. & Ziefle, M., 2019. "Same or different? Insights on public perception and acceptance of carbon capture and storage or utilization in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 235-249.
    18. Lennart Sjöberg, 1998. "Worry and Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 85-93, February.
    19. Bart W. Terwel & Dancker D.L. Daamen, 2012. "Initial public reactions to carbon capture and storage (CCS): differentiating general and local views," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 288-300, May.
    20. Arroyo-Currás, Tabaré & Bauer, Nico & Kriegler, Elmar & Schwanitz, Valeria Jana & Luderer, Gunnar & Aboumahboub, Tino & Giannousakis, Anastasis & Hilaire, Jérôme, 2015. "Carbon leakage in a fragmented climate regime: The dynamic response of global energy markets," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 192-203.
    21. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Lauren A. Mayer & M. Granger Morgan, 2015. "Developing communications about CCS: three lessons learned," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 699-705, June.
    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. Emma ter Mors & Esther van Leeuwen & Christine Boomsma & Renate Meier, 2023. "Media Coverage of Carbon Capture and Storage: An Analysis of Established and Emerging Themes in Dutch National Newspapers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-13, February.
    2. Elżbieta Izabela Szczepankiewicz & Windham Eugene Loopesko & Farid Ullah, 2022. "A Model of Risk Information Disclosures in Non-Financial Corporate Reports of Socially Responsible Energy Companies in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-34, April.
    3. Chapman, Andrew & Shigetomi, Yosuke & Karmaker, Shamal Chandra & Saha, Bidyut & Brooks, Caleb, 2022. "Cultural and demographic energy system awareness and preference: Implications for future energy system design in the United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(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. Carola Braun & Christine Merk & Gert Pönitzsch & Katrin Rehdanz & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "Public perception of climate engineering and carbon capture and storage in Germany: survey evidence," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 471-484, April.
    2. Carola Braun, 2017. "Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2264-2275, December.
    3. Jingjing Xie & Yujiao Xian & Guowei Jia, 2023. "An investigation into the public acceptance in China of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 1-22, June.
    4. Liu, Bingsheng & Xu, Yinghua & Yang, Yang & Lu, Shijian, 2021. "How public cognition influences public acceptance of CCUS in China: Based on the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) model of attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    5. Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian & McAlinden, Karl J., 2016. "The effect of trust on people's acceptance of CCS (carbon capture and storage) technologies: Evidence from a survey in the People's Republic of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 69-79.
    6. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2023. "Socio-technical barriers to domestic hydrogen futures: Repurposing pipelines, policies, and public perceptions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 336(C).
    7. Pianta, Silvia & Rinscheid, Adrian & Weber, Elke U., 2021. "Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States: Perceptions, preferences, and lessons for policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    8. Buah, Eric & Linnanen, Lassi & Wu, Huapeng, 2020. "Emotional responses to energy projects: A new method for modeling and prediction beyond self-reported emotion measure," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    9. Katja Witte, 2021. "Social Acceptance of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) from Industrial Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-29, November.
    10. Kânoğlu-Özkan, Dilge Güldehen & Soytaş, Uğur, 2022. "The social acceptance of shale gas development: Evidence from Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PC).
    11. Moon, Won-Ki & Kahlor, Lee Ann & Olson, Hilary Clement, 2020. "Understanding public support for carbon capture and storage policy: The roles of social capital, stakeholder perceptions, and perceived risk/benefit of technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    12. Nuortimo, Kalle & Härkönen, Janne, 2018. "Opinion mining approach to study media-image of energy production. Implications to public acceptance and market deployment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 210-217.
    13. L׳Orange Seigo, Selma & Dohle, Simone & Siegrist, Michael, 2014. "Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 848-863.
    14. Lorraine Whitmarsh & Dimitrios Xenias & Christopher R. Jones, 2019. "Framing effects on public support for carbon capture and storage," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    15. Alina Ilinova & Natalia Romasheva & Alexey Cherepovitsyn, 2021. "CC(U)S Initiatives: Public Effects and “Combined Value” Performance," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    16. Gea Hoogendoorn & Bernadette Sütterlin & Michael Siegrist, 2021. "Tampering with Nature: A Systematic Review," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 141-156, January.
    17. Tryfonas Pieri & Alexandros Nikitas & Athanasios Angelis-Dimakis, 2023. "Public Acceptance and Willingness to Pay for Carbon Capture and Utilisation Products," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-15, March.
    18. Hurlbert, Margot & Osazuwa-Peters, Mac, 2023. "Carbon capture and storage in Saskatchewan: An analysis of communicative practices in a contested technology," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    19. Perlaviciute, Goda & Steg, Linda, 2014. "Contextual and psychological factors shaping evaluations and acceptability of energy alternatives: Integrated review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 361-381.
    20. Klaus, Geraldine & Ernst, Andreas & Oswald, Lisa, 2020. "Psychological factors influencing laypersons’ acceptance of climate engineering, climate change mitigation and business as usual scenarios," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).

    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:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:21:p:7205-:d:670447. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.