Literature DB >> 25225393

Creating a national citizen engagement process for energy policy.

Nick Pidgeon1, Christina Demski2, Catherine Butler3, Karen Parkhill4, Alexa Spence5.   

Abstract

This paper examines some of the science communication challenges involved when designing and conducting public deliberation processes on issues of national importance. We take as our illustrative case study a recent research project investigating public values and attitudes toward future energy system change for the United Kingdom. National-level issues such as this are often particularly difficult to engage the public with because of their inherent complexity, derived from multiple interconnected elements and policy frames, extended scales of analysis, and different manifestations of uncertainty. With reference to the energy system project, we discuss ways of meeting a series of science communication challenges arising when engaging the public with national topics, including the need to articulate systems thinking and problem scale, to provide balanced information and policy framings in ways that open up spaces for reflection and deliberation, and the need for varied methods of facilitation and data synthesis that permit access to participants' broader values. Although resource intensive, national-level deliberation is possible and can produce useful insights both for participants and for science policy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  energy system transitions; national dialogue; public engagement

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25225393      PMCID: PMC4183173          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1317512111

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  8 in total

1.  Testing alternative decision approaches for identifying cleanup priorities at contaminated sites.

Authors:  Joseph Arvai; Robin Gregory
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2003-04-15       Impact factor: 9.028

2.  Informed public preferences for electricity portfolios with CCS and other low-carbon technologies.

Authors:  Lauren A Fleishman; Wändi Bruine De Bruin; M Granger Morgan
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.000

3.  Keep it complex.

Authors:  Andy Stirling
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2010-12-23       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Using surveys in public participation processes for risk decision making: the case of the 2003 British GM Nation? Public debate.

Authors:  Nick F Pidgeon; Wouter Poortinga; Gene Rowe; Tom-Horlick Jones; John Walls; Tim O'Riordan
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.000

5.  Bringing values and deliberation to science communication.

Authors:  Thomas Dietz
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Six propositions on public participation and their relevance for risk communication.

Authors:  R E Kasperson
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 4.000

7.  Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste.

Authors:  K Bickerstaff; I Lorenzoni; N F Pidgeon; W Poortinga; P Simmons
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2008-04

8.  Deliberating the risks of nanotechnologies for energy and health applications in the United States and United Kingdom.

Authors:  Nick Pidgeon; Barbara Herr Harthorn; Karl Bryant; Tee Rogers-Hayden
Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol       Date:  2008-12-07       Impact factor: 39.213

  8 in total
  8 in total

1.  Using decision pathway surveys to inform climate engineering policy choices.

Authors:  Robin Gregory; Terre Satterfield; Ariel Hasell
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-01-04       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  The Science of Science Communication II.

Authors:  Baruch Fischhoff; Dietram A Scheufele
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Perceptions of enhanced weathering as a biological negative emissions option.

Authors:  Nick F Pidgeon; Elspeth Spence
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.703

Review 4.  From Doxastic to Epistemic: A Typology and Critique of Qualitative Interview Styles.

Authors:  Astrid Berner-Rodoreda; Till Bärnighausen; Caitlin Kennedy; Svend Brinkmann; Malabika Sarker; Daniel Wikler; Nir Eyal; Shannon A McMahon
Journal:  Qual Inq       Date:  2018-11-28

5.  Dialectic narratives, hostile actors, and Earth's resources in Saskatchewan, Canada.

Authors:  Margot A Hurlbert; Jane Akpan
Journal:  Sustain Sci       Date:  2022-09-20       Impact factor: 7.196

Review 6.  A Research Agenda to Better Understand the Human Dimensions of Energy Transitions.

Authors:  Linda Steg; Goda Perlaviciute; Benjamin K Sovacool; Marino Bonaiuto; Andreas Diekmann; Massimo Filippini; Frank Hindriks; Cecilia Jacobbson Bergstad; Ellen Matthies; Simon Matti; Machiel Mulder; Andreas Nilsson; Sabina Pahl; Martha Roggenkamp; Geertje Schuitema; Paul C Stern; Massimo Tavoni; John Thøgersen; Edwin Woerdman
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-06-25

7.  Encouraging Science Communication through Deliberative Pedagogy: A Study of a Gene Editing Deliberation in a Nonmajors Biology Course.

Authors:  Sara A Mehltretter Drury; Anne Gibson Bost; Laura M Wysocki; Amanda L Ingram
Journal:  J Microbiol Biol Educ       Date:  2018-03-30

8.  Creating energy citizenship through material participation.

Authors:  Marianne Ryghaug; Tomas Moe Skjølsvold; Sara Heidenreich
Journal:  Soc Stud Sci       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 3.885

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.