Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDevine-Wright, P
dc.contributor.authorRyder, S
dc.contributor.authorDickie, J
dc.contributor.authorEvensen, D
dc.contributor.authorVarley, A
dc.contributor.authorWhitmarsh, L
dc.contributor.authorBartie, P
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-22T12:22:50Z
dc.date.issued2021-08-21
dc.description.abstractTo date, little research has investigated how public perceptions of policies to ban or restrict fossil-fuel extraction change over time; yet this topic is of crucial importance as countries worldwide seek to transition towards ‘net zero’ economies. This study addresses this gap by focusing on public responses to the 2019 moratorium on shale gas extraction in England, using an analytical framework comprising awareness, interpretations and opinions, and a mixed-method approach combining national survey, social media and local case interviews. Findings show high levels of awareness and support for the moratorium, yet differences between coalitions of interest based on ideology, scale and demographics. Social media analyses reveal a peak in public response across several days during a general election campaign in which different parties took divergent positions on shale gas. Public support for the moratorium – and induced seismicity as the primary reason for its introduction - was evidenced by the national survey, yet coincided with scepticism about its timing, extent and motivation, as indicated by social media activity and local case interviews. For some publics, the moratorium was a ploy to ensure electoral support, embedded in public distrust. This study indicates the merits of a mixed-method approach to understand the psychological and institutional context of public responses to policy change as it unfolds over time, and discusses the longer term implications of politicised attitudes for energy transitions.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipNatural Environment Research Council (NERC)en_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 81, article 102247en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.erss.2021.102247
dc.identifier.grantnumberNE/R017727/1en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/127203
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherElsevieren_GB
dc.rights.embargoreasonUnder embargo until 21 August 2022 in compliance with publisher policyen_GB
dc.rights© 2021. This version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/  en_GB
dc.subjectShale gasen_GB
dc.subjectFrackingen_GB
dc.subjectPublic responsesen_GB
dc.subjectAwarenessen_GB
dc.subjectInterpretationsen_GB
dc.subjectOpinionsen_GB
dc.subjectEnergy transitionsen_GB
dc.subjectSocial mediaen_GB
dc.subjectMixed methodsen_GB
dc.titleInduced seismicity or political ploy?: Using a novel mix of methods to identify multiple publics and track responses over time to shale gas policy changeen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2021-09-22T12:22:50Z
dc.identifier.issn2214-6296
dc.descriptionThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Elsevier via the DOI in this record en_GB
dc.identifier.journalEnergy Research and Social Scienceen_GB
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-08-05
exeter.funder::Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)en_GB
rioxxterms.versionAMen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2021-08-21
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2021-09-22T12:18:53Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2022-08-20T23:00:00Z
refterms.panelCen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2021. This version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/  
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2021. This version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/