IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v101y2017icp561-570.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Geothermal energy and the public: A case study on deliberative citizens’ engagement in central Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Pellizzone, Anna
  • Allansdottir, Agnes
  • De Franco, Roberto
  • Muttoni, Giovanni
  • Manzella, Adele

Abstract

This paper reports on a case study on the citizens’ engagement with developments towards the harnessing of geothermal energy in central Italy. The research has been conducted within the framework of a larger project on the feasibility of further geothermal developments in Italy, funded by the Italian government. The aims of the case study research were first to explore the role of public and stakeholder engagement in the processes of innovation in the geothermal energy sector. Second, to design, implement and consolidate a methodological framework for comparative analysis of case studies on citizens’ engagement, thus bringing a social scientific perspective into geothermal energy research. The results show general support for renewable energy but knowledge and understanding of the potential of geothermal is remarkably low. Lack of trust in politics and unsure public communication emerged as prominent themes where the common good and community developments are sharply contrasted with corporate and private interests. As geothermal energy is included and encouraged under the European Strategic Energy Plan and in the Paris agreement on halting climate change, the results can make significant input into future policy making, by providing concrete guidelines on citizens’ engagement in processes of culturally sustainable innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Pellizzone, Anna & Allansdottir, Agnes & De Franco, Roberto & Muttoni, Giovanni & Manzella, Adele, 2017. "Geothermal energy and the public: A case study on deliberative citizens’ engagement in central Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 561-570.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:101:y:2017:i:c:p:561-570
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.11.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421516306097
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.11.013?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. Pellizzone, Anna & Allansdottir, Agnes & De Franco, Roberto & Muttoni, Giovanni & Manzella, Adele, 2015. "Exploring public engagement with geothermal energy in southern Italy: A case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2014. "Diversity: Energy studies need social science," Nature, Nature, vol. 511(7511), pages 529-530, July.
    3. Breukers, Sylvia & Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Wind power implementation in changing institutional landscapes: An international comparison," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2737-2750, May.
    4. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    5. Gennaioli, Caterina & Tavoni, Massimo, 2016. "Clean or dirty energy: evidence of corruption in the renewable energy sector," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65173, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Romanach, Lygia & Carr-Cornish, Simone & Muriuki, Grace, 2015. "Societal acceptance of an emerging energy technology: How is geothermal energy portrayed in Australian media?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1143-1150.
    7. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    8. Paul Lehmann & Felix Creutzig & Melf-Hinrich Ehlers & Nele Friedrichsen & Clemens Heuson & Lion Hirth & Robert Pietzcker, 2012. "Carbon Lock-Out: Advancing Renewable Energy Policy in Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-32, February.
    9. Andy Stirling, 2014. "Transforming Power: social science and the politics of energy choices," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-03, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    10. Stilgoe, Jack & Owen, Richard & Macnaghten, Phil, 2013. "Developing a framework for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1568-1580.
    11. Dowd, Anne-Maree & Boughen, Naomi & Ashworth, Peta & Carr-Cornish, Simone, 2011. "Geothermal technology in Australia: Investigating social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6301-6307, October.
    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. Spampatti, Tobia & Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Brosch, Tobias, 2022. "Short and long-term dominance of negative information in shaping public energy perceptions: The case of shallow geothermal systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    2. Barbara Pavlakovič & Milica Rančić Demir & Nejc Pozvek & Maja Turnšek, 2021. "Role of Tourism in Promoting Geothermal Energy: Public Interest and Motivation for Geothermal Energy Tourism in Slovenia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Hou, Jianchao & Cao, Mengchao & Liu, Pingkuo, 2018. "Development and utilization of geothermal energy in China: Current practices and future strategies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 401-412.
    4. Tena Bilić & Sara Raos & Perica Ilak & Ivan Rajšl & Robert Pašičko, 2020. "Assessment of Geothermal Fields in the South Pannonian Basin System Using a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Tool," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-23, February.
    5. Soltani, M. & Moradi Kashkooli, Farshad & Souri, Mohammad & Rafiei, Behnam & Jabarifar, Mohammad & Gharali, Kobra & Nathwani, Jatin S., 2021. "Environmental, economic, and social impacts of geothermal energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    6. Baek, Haein & Chung, Ji-Bum & Yun, Gi Woong, 2021. "Differences in public perceptions of geothermal energy based on EGS technology in Korea after the Pohang earthquake: National vs. local," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    7. Bleicher, Alena & David, Martin & Rutjes, Henriette & Wallkamm, Magdalena, 2017. "Rohstoffgewinnung und Technologieentwicklung in Deutschland im Wandel: Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven," UFZ Reports 05/2017, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ).
    8. Bănică, Bianca & Patrício, Lia & Miguéis, Vera, 2024. "Citizen engagement with sustainable energy solutions - understanding the influence of perceived value on engagement behaviors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    9. Stefania Troiano & Veronica Novelli & Paola Geatti & Matteo Carzedda & Francesco Marangon & Luciano Ceccon, 2021. "Households? preferences for wood in home heating systems: Does sustainability matter?," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2021(2), pages 101-120.
    10. Renato Somma & Daniela Blessent & Jasmin Raymond & Madeline Constance & Lucy Cotton & Giuseppe De Natale & Alessandro Fedele & Maria Jose Jurado & Kirsten Marcia & Mafalda Miranda & Claudia Troise & T, 2021. "Review of Recent Drilling Projects in Unconventional Geothermal Resources at Campi Flegrei Caldera, Cornubian Batholith, and Williston Sedimentary Basin," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-23, June.
    11. Cordoves-Sánchez, Minerva & Vallejos-Romero, Arturo, 2019. "Social construction of risk in non-conventional renewable energy: Risk perception as a function of ecosystem services in La Araucanía, Chile," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 261-270.
    12. Cesare Saccani & Marco Pellegrini & Alessandro Guzzini, 2020. "Analysis of the Existing Barriers for the Market Development of Power to Hydrogen (P2H) in Italy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-29, September.
    13. Sun, Qingxuan & Wang, Yaxiong & Cheng, Ziyang & Wang, Jiangfeng & Zhao, Pan & Dai, Yiping, 2020. "Thermodynamic and economic optimization of a double-pressure organic Rankine cycle driven by low-temperature heat source," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(P3), pages 2822-2832.
    14. Dolter, Brett D. & Boucher, Martin, 2018. "Solar energy justice: A case-study analysis of Saskatchewan, Canada," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 221-232.
    15. Elisa Bustaffa & Olivia Curzio & Fabrizio Bianchi & Fabrizio Minichilli & Daniela Nuvolone & Davide Petri & Giorgia Stoppa & Fabio Voller & Liliana Cori, 2022. "Community Concern about the Health Effects of Pollutants: Risk Perception in an Italian Geothermal Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-17, October.
    16. Solano-Olivares, K. & Santoyo, E. & Santoyo-Castelazo, E., 2024. "Integrated sustainability assessment framework for geothermal energy technologies: A literature review and a new proposal of sustainability indicators for Mexico," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    17. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.
    18. Ibrahim Mosly & Anas A. Makki, 2018. "Current Status and Willingness to Adopt Renewable Energy Technologies in Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    19. Evgeniya Lupova-Henry & Nicola Francesco Dotti, 2019. "Governance of sustainable innovation: Moving beyond the hierarchy-market-network trichotomy? A systematic literature review using the ‘who-how-what’ framework," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/283521, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    20. Huijts, Nicole M.A. & Contzen, Nadja & Roeser, Sabine, 2022. "Unequal means more unfair means more negative emotions? Ethical concerns and emotions about an unequal distribution of negative outcomes of a local energy project," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 165(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. Pellizzone, Anna & Allansdottir, Agnes & De Franco, Roberto & Muttoni, Giovanni & Manzella, Adele, 2015. "Exploring public engagement with geothermal energy in southern Italy: A case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.
    3. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    4. Guanghui Hou & Tong Chen & Ke Ma & Zhiming Liao & Hongmei Xia & Tianzeng Yao, 2019. "Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-22, March.
    5. Songsore, Emmanuel & Buzzelli, Michael, 2014. "Social responses to wind energy development in Ontario: The influence of health risk perceptions and associated concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 285-296.
    6. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold, 2016. "Modeling the effect of responsible research and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 126-133.
    7. Reichelt, Nicole & Nettle, Ruth, 2023. "Practice insights for the responsible adoption of smart farming technologies using a participatory technology assessment approach: The case of virtual herding technology in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    8. Pepermans, Yves & Loots, Ilse, 2013. "Wind farm struggles in Flanders fields: A sociological perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 321-328.
    9. van Geenhuizen, Marina & Ye, Qing, 2014. "Responsible innovators: open networks on the way to sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 28-40.
    10. Aitken, Mhairi, 2010. "Wind power and community benefits: Challenges and opportunities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6066-6075, October.
    11. Glover, Dominic & Poole, Nigel, 2019. "Principles of innovation to build nutrition-sensitive food systems in South Asia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 63-73.
    12. Sophie Pellé & Bernard Reber, 2015. "Responsible Innovation in the Light of Moral Responsibility," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01418017, HAL.
    13. Cousse, Julia & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Hahnel, Ulf J.J., 2021. "Tell me how you feel about geothermal energy: Affect as a revealing factor of the role of seismic risk on public acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    14. Buhmann, Alexander & Fieseler, Christian, 2021. "Towards a deliberative framework for responsible innovation in artificial intelligence," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    15. Fisher, Erik, 2019. "Governing with ambivalence: The tentative origins of socio-technical integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1138-1149.
    16. von Wirth, Timo & Gislason, Linda & Seidl, Roman, 2018. "Distributed energy systems on a neighborhood scale: Reviewing drivers of and barriers to social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2618-2628.
    17. Miklós Lukovics & Beáta Udvari & Nikoletta Nádas & Erik Fisher, 2019. "Raising Awareness of Researchers-in-the-Making Toward Responsible Research and Innovation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(4), pages 1558-1577, December.
    18. Buzás, Norbert & Lukovics, Miklós, 2015. "A felelősségteljes innovációról [On responsible innovation]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(4), pages 438-456.
    19. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2021. "Researchers perception regarding socio-technical approaches implementation in their own research. Thermal energy storage researchers as example," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    20. Vesnic-Alujevic, Lucia & Nascimento, Susana & Pólvora, Alexandre, 2020. "Societal and ethical impacts of artificial intelligence: Critical notes on European policy frameworks," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).

    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:101:y:2017:i:c:p:561-570. 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.