IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v38y2010i9p5013-5027.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From riches to rags: Biofuels, media discourses, and resistance to sustainable energy technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Sengers, F.
  • Raven, R.P.J.M.
  • Van Venrooij, A.

Abstract

This study aims to open the black box of resistance to sustainable energy technologies by analyzing (shifts in) media discourse. To this end, media coverage on biofuels in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2008 is analyzed by means of combining novel quantitative approaches with practitioner interviews. The quantitative analyses reveal the dynamics in the content of media discourse, but also its underlying structure in the form of two axes, each representing opposite socio-cognitive frames: 'techno-economic vs. social-ecological' and 'regional vs. global'. In-depth interviews with key practitioners in the Dutch biofuels field support these finding and provide additional insights with regard to (a) perceived shifts in media coverage; (b) cognitive pluralism; (c) the politics involved; and (d) resistance in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Sengers, F. & Raven, R.P.J.M. & Van Venrooij, A., 2010. "From riches to rags: Biofuels, media discourses, and resistance to sustainable energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5013-5027, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:9:p:5013-5027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(10)00304-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. van Alphen, Klaas & van Voorst tot Voorst, Quirine & Hekkert, Marko P. & Smits, Ruud E.H.M., 2007. "Societal acceptance of carbon capture and storage technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4368-4380, August.
    2. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    3. Ulmanen, Johanna H. & Verbong, Geert P.J. & Raven, Rob P.J.M., 2009. "Biofuel developments in Sweden and the Netherlands: Protection and socio-technical change in a long-term perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(6-7), pages 1406-1417, August.
    4. Qu, Mei & Tahvanainen, Liisa & Ahponen, Pirkkoliisa & Pelkonen, Paavo, 2009. "Bio-energy in China: Content analysis of news articles on Chinese professional internet platforms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2300-2309, June.
    5. Raven, R.P.J.M. & Mourik, R.M. & Feenstra, C.F.J. & Heiskanen, E., 2009. "Modulating societal acceptance in new energy projects: Towards a toolkit methodology for project managers," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 564-574.
    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. Scheer, Dirk & Konrad, Wilfried & Wassermann, Sandra, 2017. "The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: A qualitative study of public perceptions towards energy technologies and portfolios in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 89-100.
    2. Hitzeroth, Marion & Megerle, Andreas, 2013. "Renewable Energy Projects: Acceptance Risks and Their Management," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 576-584.
    3. Simone Carr-Cornish & Peta Ashworth & John Gardner & Stephen Fraser, 2011. "Exploring the orientations which characterise the likely public acceptance of low emission energy technologies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 107(3), pages 549-565, August.
    4. Choi, Jihye & Kim, Justine Jihyun & Lee, Jongsu, 2024. "Public willingness to pay for mitigating local conflicts over the construction of renewable energy facilities: A contingent valuation study in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    5. Kim, Ju-Hee & Kim, Hee-Hoon & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2022. "Social acceptance toward constructing a combined heat and power plant near people's dwellings in South Korea," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 244(PB).
    6. Bertsch, Valentin & Hyland, Marie & Mahony, Michael, 2017. "What drives people's opinions of electricity infrastructure? Empirical evidence from Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 472-497.
    7. John Colton & Kenneth Corscadden & Stewart Fast & Monica Gattinger & Joel Gehman & Martha Hall Findlay & Dylan Morgan & Judith Sayers & Jennifer Winter & Adonis Yatchew, 2016. "Energy Projects, Social Licence, Public Acceptance and Regulatory Systems in Canada: A White Paper," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 9(20), May.
    8. Kubota, Hiromi & Hondo, Hiroki & Hienuki, Shunichi & Kaieda, Hideshi, 2013. "Determining barriers to developing geothermal power generation in Japan: Societal acceptance by stakeholders involved in hot springs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1079-1087.
    9. Busse, Maria & Siebert, Rosemarie, 2018. "Acceptance studies in the field of land use—A critical and systematic review to advance the conceptualization of acceptance and acceptability," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 235-245.
    10. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Farla, Jacco C.M., 2014. "Identifying and explaining public preferences for the attributes of energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 71-82.
    11. Christian Oltra & Paul Upham & Hauke Riesch & Àlex Boso & Suzanne Brunsting & Elisabeth Dütschke & Aleksandra Lis, 2012. "Public Responses to Co2 Storage Sites: Lessons from Five European Cases," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(2-3), pages 227-248, May.
    12. Aaen, Sara Bjørn & Kerndrup, Søren & Lyhne, Ivar, 2016. "Beyond public acceptance of energy infrastructure: How citizens make sense and form reactions by enacting networks of entities in infrastructure development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 576-586.
    13. van Heek, Julia & Arning, Katrin & Ziefle, Martina, 2017. "Reduce, reuse, recycle: Acceptance of CO2-utilization for plastic products," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 53-66.
    14. Hyland, Marie & Bertsch, Valentin, 2018. "The Role of Community Involvement Mechanisms in Reducing Resistance to Energy Infrastructure Development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 447-474.
    15. Qu, Mei & Ahponen, Pirkkoliisa & Tahvanainen, Liisa & Gritten, David & Mola-Yudego, Blas & Pelkonen, Paavo, 2011. "Chinese university students’ knowledge and attitudes regarding forest bio-energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3649-3657.
    16. McComas, Katherine A. & Lu, Hang & Keranen, Katie M. & Furtney, Maria A. & Song, Hwansuck, 2016. "Public perceptions and acceptance of induced earthquakes related to energy development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 27-32.
    17. Antoine Boche & Clément Foucher & Luiz Fernando Lavado Villa, 2022. "Understanding Microgrid Sustainability: A Systemic and Comprehensive Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.
    18. 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.
    19. Suškevičs, M. & Eiter, S. & Martinat, S. & Stober, D. & Vollmer, E. & de Boer, C.L. & Buchecker, M., 2019. "Regional variation in public acceptance of wind energy development in Europe: What are the roles of planning procedures and participation?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 311-323.
    20. Ali Arababadi & Stephan Leyer & Joachim Hansen & Reza Arababadi & Gloria Pignatta, 2021. "Characterizing the Theory of Energy Transition in Luxembourg, Part Two—On Energy Enthusiasts’ Viewpoints," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-18, November.

    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:38:y:2010:i:9:p:5013-5027. 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.