IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v155y2021ics0301421521001725.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do public review processes reflect public input? A study of hydraulic fracturing reviews in Australia and Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Colville, Shannon
  • Steen, John
  • Gosine, Raymond

Abstract

High volume hydraulic fracturing (HVHF) is a contentious issue worldwide. It is a crucial policy issue due to its significant impact on multiple stakeholders and, as a result, requires extensive public consultation and exposure. One process deployed in some liberal democracies to address this controversy is forming an independent expert review panel to receive public submissions and then prepare a report for policymakers. Our paper investigated how closely the review panel reports reflect and weigh the public submissions and to explore the subjects in which there is agreement or disagreement across the various reports. This study used the Leximancer automated text analysis software to compare key themes in the sub-national reports and public submissions. We find a consistent pattern across jurisdictions of public submissions reflecting health and environment while official reports focus on industry and economic development. There is a wide range of congruency between the jurisdictions on the capacity of the expert reports to reflect public opinion. Following from this divergence, we aim to contribute to more meaningful discussions regarding effective communication strategies between the government and the public to ensure review panel reports fairly represent public concerns.

Suggested Citation

  • Colville, Shannon & Steen, John & Gosine, Raymond, 2021. "Do public review processes reflect public input? A study of hydraulic fracturing reviews in Australia and Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:155:y:2021:i:c:s0301421521001725
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421521001725
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112303?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. Merryn Thomas & Nick Pidgeon & Darrick Evensen & Tristan Partridge & Ariel Hasell & Catherine Enders & Barbara Herr Harthorn & Michael Bradshaw, 2017. "Public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing for shale gas and oil in the United States and Canada," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), May.
    2. Nutt, Paul C., 2007. "Intelligence gathering for decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 604-622, October.
    3. Edwina Barvosa, 2015. "Mapping public ambivalence in public engagement with science: implications for democratizing the governance of fracking technologies in the USA," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(4), pages 497-507, December.
    4. Ken Crofts & Jayne Bisman, 2010. "Interrogating accountability," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(2), pages 180-207, June.
    5. Prno, Jason & Scott Slocombe, D., 2012. "Exploring the origins of ‘social license to operate’ in the mining sector: Perspectives from governance and sustainability theories," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 346-357.
    6. Middleton, Stuart & Liesch, Peter W. & Steen, John, 2011. "Organizing time: Internationalization narratives of executive managers," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 136-150, April.
    7. Walker, Gordon & Devine-Wright, Patrick & Hunter, Sue & High, Helen & Evans, Bob, 2010. "Trust and community: Exploring the meanings, contexts and dynamics of community renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2655-2663, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Anne-Maree Dowd & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2015. "Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Mahzouni, Arian, 2019. "The role of institutional entrepreneurship in emerging energy communities: The town of St. Peter in Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 297-308.
    3. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    4. Bauwens, Thomas, 2019. "Analyzing the determinants of the size of investments by community renewable energy members: Findings and policy implications from Flanders," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 841-852.
    5. Tiainen, Heidi, 2016. "Contemplating governance for social sustainability in mining in Greenland," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 282-289.
    6. Frans H. J. M. Coenen & Thomas Hoppe, 2022. "Renewable Energy Communities as a New Actor in Home Energy Savings," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 108-122.
    7. Peter Frumhoff & Richard Heede & Naomi Oreskes, 2015. "The climate responsibilities of industrial carbon producers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 132(2), pages 157-171, September.
    8. Wirth, Steffen, 2014. "Communities matter: Institutional preconditions for community renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 236-246.
    9. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    10. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Coffey, Stephanie, 2016. "Building a sustainable energy future, one community at a time," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 867-880.
    11. Hübner, Gundula & Leschinger, Valentin & Müller, Florian J.Y. & Pohl, Johannes, 2023. "Broadening the social acceptance of wind energy – An Integrated Acceptance Model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    12. Pons-Seres de Brauwer, C. & Cohen, J.J., 2020. "Analysing the potential of citizen-financed community renewable energy to drive Europe's low-carbon energy transition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    13. Okkonen, Lasse & Lehtonen, Olli, 2016. "Socio-economic impacts of community wind power projects in Northern Scotland," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 826-833.
    14. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    15. Van Alstine, James & Barkemeyer, Ralf, 2014. "Business and development: Changing discourses in the extractive industries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 4-16.
    16. Fouladvand, Javanshir & Aranguren Rojas, Maria & Hoppe, Thomas & Ghorbani, Amineh, 2022. "Simulating thermal energy community formation: Institutional enablers outplaying technological choice," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 306(PA).
    17. Salm, Sarah & Hille, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2016. "What are retail investors' risk-return preferences towards renewable energy projects? A choice experiment in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 310-320.
    18. Antioco, Michael & Coussement, Kristof & Fletcher-Chen, Chavi Chi-Yun & Prange, Christiane, 2023. "What's in a word? Adopting a linguistic-style analysis of western MNCs’ global press releases," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 58(2).
    19. Mumtaz Derya Tarhan, 2015. "Renewable Energy Cooperatives: A Review of Demonstrated Impacts and Limitations," Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises, vol. 4(1), pages 104-120, August.
    20. Goggins, Gary & Rau, Henrike & Moran, Paul & Fahy, Frances & Goggins, Jamie, 2022. "The role of culture in advancing sustainable energy policy and practice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(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:eee:enepol:v:155:y:2021:i:c:s0301421521001725. 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.