IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v113y2018icp123-134.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Local residents' risk perceptions in response to shale gas exploitation: Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Yu, Chin-Hsien
  • Huang, Shih-Kai
  • Qin, Ping
  • Chen, Xiaolan

Abstract

In 2014, China became the world's third country to accomplish shale gas commercial development, following the United States and Canada. China still however lacks a comprehensive analysis of its public's concerns about potential environmental risks of shale gas exploration, particularly those of local residents near extraction sites. This paper specifically aims to explore risks perceived as associated with shale gas development in the Changning-Weiyuan area of Sichuan Basin, by conducting a face-to-face household survey with 730 participants interviewed. Some 86% of respondents reported their belief that shale gas exploitation causes more than three types of negative impacts, the most commonly perceived being noise, underground water contamination and geological disruption. Associated variables that were statistically significant predictors of risk perception include demographic characteristics (age, gender, education), environmental awareness level, landslide experience, awareness of past shale gas accidents, information sources, general knowledge about shale gas, and perspectives on whether negative impacts can be observed and controlled, along with trust in the central government and the petroleum company. Our findings implications are discussed, with the goal of informing both central and local authorities’ policy development in protecting local residents from risks of shale gas exploitation and better communicating risks to residents.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:113:y:2018:i:c:p:123-134
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421517306274
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.004?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. Krupnick, Alan & Wang, Zhongmin & Wang, Yushuang, 2014. "Environmental risks of shale gas development in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 117-125.
    4. Tian, Lei & Wang, Zhongmin & J. Krupnick, Alan & Liu, Xiaoli, 2014. "Stimulating Shale Gas Development in China: A Comparison with the US Experience," RFF Working Paper Series dp-14-18, Resources for the Future.
    5. 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.
    6. Tian, Lei & Wang, Zhongmin & Krupnick, Alan & Liu, Xiaoli, 2014. "Stimulating shale gas development in China: A comparison with the US experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 109-116.
    7. Neil Gunningham, 2014. "A shale gas revolution for China?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 302-320, March.
    8. Lorraine Whitmarsh, 2008. "Are flood victims more concerned about climate change than other people? The role of direct experience in risk perception and behavioural response," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 351-374, April.
    9. Little, Roderick J A, 1988. "Missing-Data Adjustments in Large Surveys," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 6(3), pages 287-296, July.
    10. Jacquet, Jeffrey B., 2012. "Landowner attitudes toward natural gas and wind farm development in northern Pennsylvania," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 677-688.
    11. Yuan, Jiehui & Luo, Dongkun & Xia, Liangyu & Feng, Lianyong, 2015. "Policy recommendations to promote shale gas development in China based on a technical and economic evaluation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 194-206.
    12. Boudet, Hilary & Clarke, Christopher & Bugden, Dylan & Maibach, Edward & Roser-Renouf, Connie & Leiserowitz, Anthony, 2014. "“Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 57-67.
    13. Hu, Desheng & Xu, Shengqing, 2013. "Opportunity, challenges and policy choices for China on the development of shale gas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 21-26.
    14. Zhang, Yue-Jun & Peng, Hua-Rong, 2017. "Exploring the direct rebound effect of residential electricity consumption: An empirical study in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 132-141.
    15. Lynn J Frewer & Chaya Howard & Richard Shepherd, 1998. "Understanding public attitudes to technology," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(3), pages 221-235, July.
    16. 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.
    17. Little, Roderick J A, 1988. "Missing-Data Adjustments in Large Surveys: Reply," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 6(3), pages 300-301, July.
    18. Lan-Cui Liu & Gang Wu & Yue-Jun Zhang, 2015. "Investigating the residential energy consumption behaviors in Beijing: a survey study," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 75(1), pages 243-263, January.
    19. Finkel, M.L. & Law, A., 2011. "The rush to drill for natural gas: A public health cautionary tale," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 101(5), pages 784-785.
    20. Asa Boholm, 1998. "Comparative studies of risk perception: a review of twenty years of research," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 135-163, April.
    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. Cai, Zhengyu & Yu, Chin-Hsien & Zhu, Chunhui, 2021. "Government-led urbanization and natural gas demand in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    2. Macêdo Coelho, Yuri Cavaleiro de & de Medeiros, Priscila Sanjuan & Santos, Janaira Almeida & Araújo Lucas, Flávia Cristina, 2022. "Perception of environmental impacts of aggregate mining: A case study from the municipality of Ourém, Pará, Brazil," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    3. Tiezhong Liu & Huyuan Zhang & Hubo Zhang, 2020. "The Influence of Social Capital on Protective Action Perceptions Towards Hazardous Chemicals," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-12, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Zhong Wang & Yuyan Luo & Pengchong Li & Xiaoqian Cai, 2018. "Problem Orientated Analysis on China’s Shale Gas Policy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, October.
    6. Yongyou Nie & Jinbu Zhao & Yiyi Zhang & Jizhi Zhou, 2020. "Risk Evaluation of “Not-In-My-Back-Yard” Conflict Potential in Facilities Group: A Case Study of Chemical Park in Xuwei New District, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, March.
    7. Xu, Bin & Lin, Boqiang, 2022. "Exploring the spatial distribution of distributed energy in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    8. 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).
    9. 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.

    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. 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).
    2. Yang, Yan & Wang, Limao & Fang, Yebing & Mou, Chufu, 2017. "Integrated value of shale gas development: A comparative analysis in the United States and China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1465-1478.
    3. 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.
    4. Auping, Willem L. & Pruyt, Erik & de Jong, Sijbren & Kwakkel, Jan H., 2016. "The geopolitical impact of the shale revolution: Exploring consequences on energy prices and rentier states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 390-399.
    5. 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.
    6. Li, Yanbin & Li, Yun & Wang, Bingqian & Chen, Zhuoer & Nie, Dan, 2016. "The status quo review and suggested policies for shale gas development in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 420-428.
    7. Guanglin Pi & Xiucheng Dong & Cong Dong & Jie Guo & Zhengwei Ma, 2015. "The Status, Obstacles and Policy Recommendations of Shale Gas Development in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-20, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Martínez-Espiñeira, Roberto & García-Valiñas, María Á. & Matesanz, David, 2019. "Public Attitudes towards Hydraulic Fracturing in Western Newfoundland," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    10. Adam Mayer, 2018. "Community economic identity and colliding treadmills in oil and gas governance," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Yuan, Jiehui & Luo, Dongkun & Xia, Liangyu & Feng, Lianyong, 2015. "Policy recommendations to promote shale gas development in China based on a technical and economic evaluation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 194-206.
    13. James A. Pollard & David C. Rose, 2019. "Lightning Rods, Earthquakes, and Regional Identities: Towards a Multi‐Scale Framework of Assessing Fracking Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 473-487, February.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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).
    17. Arnold, Gwen & Farrer, Benjamin & Holahan, Robert, 2018. "How do landowners learn about high-volume hydraulic fracturing? A survey of Eastern Ohio landowners in active or proposed drilling units," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 455-464.
    18. Mayer, Adam, 2017. "Political identity and paradox in oil and gas policy: A study of regulatory exaggeration in Colorado, US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 452-459.
    19. Wang, Jianliang & Liu, Mingming & McLellan, Benjamin C. & Tang, Xu & Feng, Lianyong, 2017. "Environmental impacts of shale gas development in China: A hybrid life cycle analysis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 38-45.
    20. Xunpeng, Shi & Variam, Hari Malamakkavu Padinjare & Tao, Jacqueline, 2017. "Global impact of uncertainties in China’s gas market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 382-394.

    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:113:y:2018:i:c:p:123-134. 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.