IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/engenv/v23y2012i2-3p375-387.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framing Co2 Storage Risk: A Cultural Theory Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Evar

    (School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Drummond Street, Edinburgh, EH8 9XP, UK Contact)

Abstract

This research note discusses risk perceptions of CO 2 storage from a cultural theory perspective. Data for consideration is drawn from several publications by key stakeholders in the CO 2 storage risk debate, as well as studies of (lay) public perceptions of risk. Two strands of further research are proposed based on the data, and a claim is made that publications from one stakeholder, the EU Commission, strongly indicate a risk framing that conforms to the hierarchical typology within cultural theory. Suggestions are made for more detailed fieldwork to confirm this finding and to investigate the research questions further.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Evar, 2012. "Framing Co2 Storage Risk: A Cultural Theory Perspective," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(2-3), pages 375-387, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:engenv:v:23:y:2012:i:2-3:p:375-387
    DOI: 10.1260/0958-305X.23.2-3.375
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1260/0958-305X.23.2-3.375
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1260/0958-305X.23.2-3.375?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. Lauren A. Fleishman & Wändi Bruine De Bruin & M. Granger Morgan, 2010. "Informed Public Preferences for Electricity Portfolios with CCS and Other Low‐Carbon Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(9), pages 1399-1410, September.
    2. René von Schomberg, 2006. "The Precautionary Principle and its Normative Challenges," Chapters, in: Elizabeth Fisher & Judith Jones & René von Schomberg (ed.), Implementing the Precautionary Principle, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    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. Xexakis, Georgios & Hansmann, Ralph & Volken, Sandra P. & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2020. "Models on the wrong track: Model-based electricity supply scenarios in Switzerland are not aligned with the perspectives of energy experts and the public," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    2. Titz, Alexandra & Döll, Petra, 2009. "Actor modelling and its contribution to the development of integrative strategies for management of pharmaceuticals in drinking water," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 672-681, February.
    3. 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.
    4. Adrian Tantau & Simona Irina Goia (Agoston) & Violeta Mihaela Dincă & Carmen Păunescu & Stere Stamule & Tănase Stamule & Anca Bogdan, 2024. "Exploring the Generation Z Attitude towards Energy Efficiency Improvement and Decarbonization through Heat Pumps: An Empirical Study in Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, February.
    5. Escribano, Gonzalo & González-Enríquez, Carmen & Lázaro-Touza, Lara & Paredes-Gázquez, Juandiego, 2023. "An energy union without interconnections? Public acceptance of cross-border interconnectors in four European countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    6. Nick Boase & Mathew White & William Gaze & Clare Redshaw, 2017. "Evaluating the Mental Models Approach to Developing a Risk Communication: A Scoping Review of the Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(11), pages 2132-2149, November.
    7. Zhang, Dongcheng & Jiang, Hanchen & Qiang, Maoshan, 2023. "Public attitudes toward hydropower in China: The role of information provision and partisan identification," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    8. Liu, Bingsheng & Xu, Yinghua & Yang, Yang & Lu, Shijian, 2021. "How public cognition influences public acceptance of CCUS in China: Based on the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) model of attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    9. Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, 2019. "Bad news is bad news: Information effects and citizens’ socio-political acceptance of new technologies of electricity transmission," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 531-545.
    10. Michael Siegrist & Philipp Hübner & Christina Hartmann, 2018. "Risk Prioritization in the Food Domain Using Deliberative and Survey Methods: Differences between Experts and Laypeople," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(3), pages 504-524, March.
    11. Abdulla, A. & Vaishnav, P. & Sergi, B. & Victor, D.G., 2019. "Limits to deployment of nuclear power for decarbonization: Insights from public opinion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1339-1346.
    12. Thomas, Gareth & Demski, Christina & Pidgeon, Nick, 2019. "Deliberating the social acceptability of energy storage in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    13. Lacey, Justine & Malakar, Yuwan & McCrea, Rod & Moffat, Kieren, 2019. "Public perceptions of established and emerging mining technologies in Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 125-135.
    14. Nuortimo, Kalle & Härkönen, Janne, 2018. "Opinion mining approach to study media-image of energy production. Implications to public acceptance and market deployment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 210-217.
    15. Sharpton, Tara & Lawrence, Thomas & Hall, Margeret, 2020. "Drivers and barriers to public acceptance of future energy sources and grid expansion in the United States," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    16. Alexane Dubois & Simona Holzer & Georgios Xexakis & Julia Cousse & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2019. "Informed Citizen Panels on the Swiss Electricity Mix 2035: Longer-Term Evolution of Citizen Preferences and Affect in Two Cities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-21, November.
    17. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Lauren A. Mayer & M. Granger Morgan, 2015. "Developing communications about CCS: three lessons learned," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 699-705, June.

    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:engenv:v:23:y:2012:i:2-3:p:375-387. 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.