IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v189y2024ipas1364032123007256.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beliefs about technological and contextual features drive biofuels’ social acceptance

Author

Listed:
  • Bonaiuto, M.
  • Mosca, O.
  • Milani, A.
  • Ariccio, S.
  • Dessi, F.
  • Fornara, F.

Abstract

To make the transition towards renewable and sustainable energy possible, there is a need to make new relevant technologies, including biofuels more acceptable and accepted. To promote biofuels acceptance and thus adoption means to improve both their perceived technological features and the surrounding context supporting their adoption, as well as some social-psychological features of the target adopters. Achieving the ultimate goal of biofuels adoption thus requires a complex and holistic approach to foster this new energy technology's acceptability and acceptance considering several biofuels features. For this aim, the integrated Sustainable Energy Technology Adoption Model (i-SETA) was developed and tested with newly piloted tools to measure the relevant biofuels' beliefs profile. A Path Analysis tested the relationship between the investigated variables. Results revealed the importance of beliefs belonging to each one of the different considered domains (technological, contextual, and personal variables). Several of them had a direct impact on the cognitive and affective biofuels evaluation, and subsequently on biofuels acceptability and acceptance, for European Union both laypeople and expert stakeholders (total sample of 1017 participants). The main results thus revealed that very specific beliefs, across all the three beliefs classes, can be identified as either barriers or drivers with respect to the aim of boosting biofuels' acceptability and acceptance. Each one of these specific beliefs could thus be properly targeted in the audiences to cope with the barriers and capitalize on the drivers.

Suggested Citation

  • Bonaiuto, M. & Mosca, O. & Milani, A. & Ariccio, S. & Dessi, F. & Fornara, F., 2024. "Beliefs about technological and contextual features drive biofuels’ social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:189:y:2024:i:pa:s1364032123007256
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2023.113867
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032123007256
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113867?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. Xu, Ni & Wang, Kung-Jeng, 2021. "Adopting robot lawyer? The extending artificial intelligence robot lawyer technology acceptance model for legal industry by an exploratory study," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(5), pages 867-885, September.
    2. Taso, Yu-Chung & Ho, Chien-Wei & Chen, Ruey-Shii, 2020. "The impact of problem awareness and biospheric values on the intention to use a smart meter," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    3. 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.
    4. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    5. Čábelková, Inna & Strielkowski, Wadim & Streimikiene, Dalia & Cavallaro, Fausto & Streimikis, Justas, 2021. "The social acceptance of nuclear fusion for decision making towards carbon free circular economy: Evidence from Czech Republic," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    6. Hirotugu Akaike, 1987. "Factor analysis and AIC," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 317-332, September.
    7. Bart W. Terwel & Fieke Harinck & Naomi Ellemers & Dancker D. L. Daamen, 2009. "Competence‐Based and Integrity‐Based Trust as Predictors of Acceptance of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1129-1140, August.
    8. ChinHung Liu & YaHui Wu, 2021. "The Impact of Value-Belief-Norm Theory and Technology Acceptance Model on Use Intention of Green Design Packaging," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 15(7), pages 158-158, July.
    9. Anuar, Mohd Razealy & Abdullah, Ahmad Zuhairi, 2016. "Challenges in biodiesel industry with regards to feedstock, environmental, social and sustainability issues: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 208-223.
    10. Savvanidou, Electra & Zervas, Efthimios & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2010. "Public acceptance of biofuels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3482-3488, July.
    11. Nuccio Ludovico & Federica Dessi & Marino Bonaiuto, 2020. "Stakeholders Mapping for Sustainable Biofuels: An Innovative Procedure Based on Computational Text Analysis and Social Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    12. Schweizer-Ries, Petra, 2008. "Energy sustainable communities: Environmental psychological investigations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4126-4135, November.
    13. Hamed Taherdoost, 2018. "A review of technology acceptance and adoption models and theories," Post-Print hal-03741843, HAL.
    14. 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.
    15. Dessi, F. & Ariccio, S. & Albers, T. & Alves, S. & Ludovico, N. & Bonaiuto, M., 2022. "Sustainable technology acceptability: Mapping technological, contextual, and social-psychological determinants of EU stakeholders’ biofuel acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    16. Puricelli, S. & Cardellini, G. & Casadei, S. & Faedo, D. & van den Oever, A.E.M. & Grosso, M., 2021. "A review on biofuels for light-duty vehicles in Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    17. Yaghoubi, Jafar & Yazdanpanah, Masoud & Komendantova, Nadejda, 2019. "Iranian agriculture advisors' perception and intention toward biofuel: Green way toward energy security, rural development and climate change mitigation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 452-459.
    18. Milazzo, M.F. & Spina, F. & Vinci, A. & Espro, C. & Bart, J.C.J., 2013. "Brassica biodiesels: Past, present and future," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 350-389.
    19. Umit, Resul & Schaffer, Lena Maria, 2020. "Attitudes towards carbon taxes across Europe: The role of perceived uncertainty and self-interest," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    20. Alizadeh, Reza & Lund, Peter D. & Soltanisehat, Leili, 2020. "Outlook on biofuels in future studies: A systematic literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    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. Dessi, F. & Ariccio, S. & Albers, T. & Alves, S. & Ludovico, N. & Bonaiuto, M., 2022. "Sustainable technology acceptability: Mapping technological, contextual, and social-psychological determinants of EU stakeholders’ biofuel acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    3. Linzenich, Anika & Arning, Katrin & Bongartz, Dominik & Mitsos, Alexander & Ziefle, Martina, 2019. "What fuels the adoption of alternative fuels? Examining preferences of German car drivers for fuel innovations," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 249(C), pages 222-236.
    4. Offermann-van Heek, Julia & Arning, Katrin & Sternberg, André & Bardow, André & Ziefle, Martina, 2020. "Assessing public acceptance of the life cycle of CO2-based fuels: Does information make the difference?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Nketiah, Emmanuel & Song, Huaming & Obuobi, Bright & Adu-Gyamfi, Gibbson & Adjei, Mavis & Cudjoe, Dan, 2022. "Citizens' willingness to pay for local anaerobic digestion energy: The influence of altruistic value and knowledge," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    8. Čábelková, Inna & Strielkowski, Wadim & Streimikiene, Dalia & Cavallaro, Fausto & Streimikis, Justas, 2021. "The social acceptance of nuclear fusion for decision making towards carbon free circular economy: Evidence from Czech Republic," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    9. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    10. Adil, Ali M. & Ko, Yekang, 2016. "Socio-technical evolution of Decentralized Energy Systems: A critical review and implications for urban planning and policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1025-1037.
    11. Sherry-Brennan, Fionnguala & Devine-Wright, Hannah & Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2010. "Public understanding of hydrogen energy: A theoretical approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5311-5319, October.
    12. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2023. "Price promises, trust deficits and energy justice: Public perceptions of hydrogen homes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    13. Yuan, Xueliang & Zuo, Jian & Ma, Chunyuan, 2011. "Social acceptance of solar energy technologies in China--End users' perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1031-1036, March.
    14. Lindgren, Samantha, 2024. "Sociocultural determinants of electric cooking in rural Namibia: Recommendations for youth and educational approaches to implementation strategy and policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    15. Timo Kaphengst & Eike Karola Velten, 2014. "Energy Transition and Behavioural Change in Rural Areas – The Role of Energy Cooperatives. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 60," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47214.
    16. Schriever, Marlene & Halstrup, Dominik, 2018. "Exploring the adoption in transitioning markets: Empirical findings and implications on energy storage solutions-acceptance in the German manufacturing industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 460-468.
    17. 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.
    18. Bauwens, Thomas & Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2018. "Positive energies? An empirical study of community energy participation and attitudes to renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 612-625.
    19. Kânoğlu-Özkan, Dilge Güldehen & Soytaş, Uğur, 2022. "The social acceptance of shale gas development: Evidence from Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PC).
    20. Salak, B. & Lindberg, K. & Kienast, F. & Hunziker, M., 2021. "How landscape-technology fit affects public evaluations of renewable energy infrastructure scenarios. A hybrid choice model," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(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:rensus:v:189:y:2024:i:pa:s1364032123007256. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.