IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v13y2023i3p21582440231188922.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Message Framing and Attitudes Toward Green Gas Facilities in Rural Communities of The Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • Mathilde van Dijk
  • Annet-Jantien Smit
  • Jan-Peter Nap

Abstract

Green gas is an attractive option for a local energy transition to combat climate change, notably in rural communities. As local initiatives require local acceptance, the study used a questionnaire methodology to capture opinions and intentions toward green gas in a panel of rural respondents ( N  = 403) and evaluated the green gas message framing to help improve communication strategies. This survey experiment used four frames in a 2 × 2 setup: an energy value core frame of responsibility for nature versus autonomy and a focus frame emphasizing the collective ( i.e. , the community) versus the individual (i.e. , the household). Our findings highlight that the association with sustainability proves vital for a positive assessment of green gas, but its affordability is an issue. Moderated mediation analysis showed that subjective knowledge moderates between frames and intentions toward green gas: responsibility for nature contributes significantly, but only in the collective focus frame. These results are valuable in creating effective communication strategies about green gas adoption in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathilde van Dijk & Annet-Jantien Smit & Jan-Peter Nap, 2023. "Message Framing and Attitudes Toward Green Gas Facilities in Rural Communities of The Netherlands," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:21582440231188922
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440231188922
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440231188922
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440231188922?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Dijk, Mathilde & Van Herk, Hester & Prins, Remco, 2019. "Choosing your charity: The importance of value congruence in two-stage donation choices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 283-292.
    2. Amanda D Boyd & Jiawei Liu & Jay D Hmielowski, 2019. "Public support for energy portfolios in Canada: How information about cost and national energy portfolios affect perceptions of energy systems," Energy & Environment, , vol. 30(2), pages 322-340, March.
    3. Lynette A. M. H. Germes & Carina J. Wiekens & Lummina G. Horlings, 2021. "Success, Failure, and Impact of Local Energy Initiatives in The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Dobers, Geesche M., 2019. "Acceptance of biogas plants taking into account space and place," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    5. Hee Jin Kim & Jung Min Jang, 2018. "The Easier the Better: How Processing Fluency Influences Self-Efficacy and Behavioral Intention in Pro-Social Campaign Advertising," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-14, December.
    6. KeChrist Obileke & Nwabunwanne Nwokolo & Golden Makaka & Patrick Mukumba & Helen Onyeaka, 2021. "Anaerobic digestion: Technology for biogas production as a source of renewable energy—A review," Energy & Environment, , vol. 32(2), pages 191-225, March.
    7. Kortsch, Timo & Hildebrand, Jan & Schweizer-Ries, Petra, 2015. "Acceptance of biomass plants – Results of a longitudinal study in the bioenergy-region Altmark," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 690-697.
    8. Bolsen, Toby & Druckman, James N. & Cook, Fay Lomax, 2014. "Communication and Collective Actions: A Survey Experiment on Motivating Energy Conservation in the U.S," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 24-38, April.
    9. Upreti, Bishnu Raj, 2004. "Conflict over biomass energy development in the United Kingdom: some observations and lessons from England and Wales," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 785-800, April.
    10. Soland, Martin & Steimer, Nora & Walter, Götz, 2013. "Local acceptance of existing biogas plants in Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 802-810.
    11. Nadejda Komendantova & Sonata Neumueller, 2020. "Discourses about energy transition in Austrian climate and energy model regions: Turning awareness into action," Energy & Environment, , vol. 31(8), pages 1473-1497, December.
    12. Jeff Tollefson, 2022. "IPCC’s starkest message yet: extreme steps needed to avert climate disaster," Nature, Nature, vol. 604(7906), pages 413-414, April.
    13. Van de Velde, Liesbeth & Verbeke, Wim & Popp, Michael & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2010. "The importance of message framing for providing information about sustainability and environmental aspects of energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5541-5549, October.
    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. Mark Booker Nielsen, 2022. "Identifying Challenges and Drivers for Deployment of Centralized Biogas Plants in Denmark," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-28, June.
    2. Krekel, Christian & Rechlitz, Julia & Rode, Johannes & Zerrahn, Alexander, 2020. "Quantifying the Externalities of Renewable Energy Plants Using Wellbeing Data: The Case of Biogas," IZA Discussion Papers 13959, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Stanislav Martinát & Justyna Chodkowska-Miszczuk & Marián Kulla & Josef Navrátil & Petr Klusáček & Petr Dvořák & Ladislav Novotný & Tomáš Krejčí & Loránt Pregi & Jakub Trojan & Bohumil Frantál, 2022. "Best Practice Forever? Dynamics behind the Perception of Farm-Fed Anaerobic Digestion Plants in Rural Peripheries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, March.
    4. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Marco Modica & Andrea Rampa, 2021. "The Biogas dilemma: an analysis on the Social Approval of large new plants," SEEDS Working Papers 0221, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Apr 2021.
    5. Mark Booker Nielsen & Rikke Lybæk & Tyge Kjær, 2022. "Successfully Navigating the Project Lifecycle for Deployment of Centralized Biogas Projects—The Case of Solrød Biogas," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-21, August.
    6. Kolb, Sebastian & Plankenbühler, Thomas & Frank, Jonas & Dettelbacher, Johannes & Ludwig, Ralf & Karl, Jürgen & Dillig, Marius, 2021. "Scenarios for the integration of renewable gases into the German natural gas market – A simulation-based optimisation approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    7. Josef Navrátil & Stanislav Martinát & Tomáš Krejčí & Petr Klusáček & Richard J. Hewitt, 2021. "Conversion of Post-Socialist Agricultural Premises as a Chance for Renewable Energy Production. Photovoltaics or Biogas Plants?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, November.
    8. Muhammad Aslam Mohd Safari & Nurulkamal Masseran & Alias Jedi & Sohif Mat & Kamaruzzaman Sopian & Azman Bin Abdul Rahim & Azami Zaharim, 2020. "Rural Public Acceptance of Wind and Solar Energy: A Case Study from Mersing, Malaysia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-24, July.
    9. Zemo, Kahsay Haile & Panduro, Toke Emil & Termansen, Mette, 2019. "Impact of biogas plants on rural residential property values and implications for local acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1121-1131.
    10. Schumacher, K. & Krones, F. & McKenna, R. & Schultmann, F., 2019. "Public acceptance of renewable energies and energy autonomy: A comparative study in the French, German and Swiss Upper Rhine region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 315-332.
    11. Dobers, Geesche M., 2019. "Acceptance of biogas plants taking into account space and place," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    12. Rodríguez-Segura, Francisco Javier & Osorio-Aravena, Juan Carlos & Frolova, Marina & Terrados-Cepeda, Julio & Muñoz-Cerón, Emilio, 2023. "Social acceptance of renewable energy development in southern Spain: Exploring tendencies, locations, criteria and situations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    13. Minguez, Ana & Javier Sese, F., 2022. "Why do you want a relationship, anyway? Consent to receive marketing communications and donors’ willingness to engage with nonprofits," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 356-367.
    14. Dinica, Valentina, 2009. "Biomass power: Exploring the diffusion challenges in Spain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(6-7), pages 1551-1559, August.
    15. Robert Czubaszek & Agnieszka Wysocka-Czubaszek & Wendelin Wichtmann & Grzegorz Zając & Piotr Banaszuk, 2023. "Common Reed and Maize Silage Co-Digestion as a Pathway towards Sustainable Biogas Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-25, January.
    16. Faulques, Martin & Bonnet, Jean & Bourdin, Sébastien & Juge, Marine & Pigeon, Jonas & Richard, Charlotte, 2022. "Generational effect and territorial distributive justice, the two main drivers for willingness to pay for renewable energies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    17. Van Dael, Miet & Lizin, Sebastien & Swinnen, Gilbert & Van Passel, Steven, 2017. "Young people’s acceptance of bioenergy and the influence of attitude strength on information provision," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 417-430.
    18. Adams, Michelle & Wheeler, David & Woolston, Genna, 2011. "A participatory approach to sustainable energy strategy development in a carbon-intensive jurisdiction: The case of Nova Scotia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2550-2559, May.
    19. Rentizelas, Athanasios A. & Tatsiopoulos, Ilias P., 2010. "Locating a bioenergy facility using a hybrid optimization method," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 196-209, January.
    20. Upham, Paul & Shackley, Simon, 2006. "The case of a proposed 21.5 MWe biomass gasifier in Winkleigh, Devon: Implications for governance of renewable energy planning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(15), pages 2161-2172, October.

    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:sae:sagope:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:21582440231188922. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.