TY - JOUR
T1 - Values in the backyard
T2 - The relationship between people’s values and their evaluations of a real, nearby energy project
AU - Perlaviciute, Goda
AU - Görsch, Robert
AU - Timmerman, Marieke
AU - Steg, Linda
AU - Vrieling, Leonie
N1 - Funding Information:
We thank research assistants who helped collecting the data (in alphabetical order): Wouter Bloupot, Wouter Borsje, Svea Cornelius, Nina van der Have, Sven Kersemakers, Rianne Lambers, Katy van Netten, Lonneke Nijpels, Sven Otter, Annemijn Peters, Alex Thielen, Anne van Valkengoed, and Frederik Wermser. The first three study phases were funded by the Dutch oil and gas company NAM [Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij], agreement no. UI35509. The last two study phases were funded by the Green Deal project ?Public acceptability of energy concepts?, agreement number UI60071. The research team was fully responsible for designing and conducting the study, analysing the data, and reporting the results, and was free to publish the results in the way they wanted. Throughout the whole research process, the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Academic Practise (Association of Universities in the Netherlands, 2014) and the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (European Science Foundation, 2011) were strictly followed. Writing the manuscript was part of the project ?Responsible decision-making on gas: How individual and institutional factors influence public evaluations of gas? (file number 313-99-321), funded by the Dutch Research Council (NWO), programme Socially Responsible Innovation (MVI).
Funding Information:
We thank research assistants who helped collecting the data (in alphabetical order): Wouter Bloupot, Wouter Borsje, Svea Cornelius, Nina van der Have, Sven Kersemakers, Rianne Lambers, Katy van Netten, Lonneke Nijpels, Sven Otter, Annemijn Peters, Alex Thielen, Anne van Valkengoed, and Frederik Wermser. The first three study phases were funded by the Dutch oil and gas company NAM [Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij], agreement no. UI35509. The last two study phases were funded by the Green Deal project ‘Public acceptability of energy concepts’, agreement number UI60071. The research team was fully responsible for designing and conducting the study, analysing the data, and reporting the results, and was free to publish the results in the way they wanted. Throughout the whole research process, the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Academic Practise (Association of Universities in the Netherlands, 2014) and the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (European Science Foundation, 2011) were strictly followed. Writing the manuscript was part of the project ‘Responsible decision-making on gas: How individual and institutional factors influence public evaluations of gas’ (file number 313-99-321), funded by the Dutch Research Council (NWO), programme Socially Responsible Innovation (MVI).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd.
PY - 2021/10/1
Y1 - 2021/10/1
N2 - Research on abstract and/or hypothetical energy projects (e.g., nuclear, wind, solar energy) has shown that people favour energy projects that support their core values, and disfavour energy projects that threaten their core values. The question is to what extent people consider the implications for their values once energy projects become concrete, have real consequences, and come to their backyard. In a community affected by earthquakes induced by gas extraction, we studied the relationships between people’s values and their concerns about the earthquakes and acceptability of the gas extraction. The more strongly people endorsed biospheric values (i.e., caring about nature and the environment) and altruistic values (i.e., caring about others), the more negatively they evaluated gas extraction and the induced earthquakes. Stronger egoistic values (i.e., caring about personal resources) were associated with less negative evaluations of gas extraction and the earthquakes, possibly due to user and economic benefits associated with energy supply from natural gas. The findings were consistent across three local regions that vary in exposure to earthquakes and across five measurement points over six years, providing robust evidence that people consider the implications for their values when evaluating real, nearby energy projects. Furthermore, the results substantiate the critique of the NIMBY (Not-in-My-Backyard) explanation of local resistance to energy projects, which assumes that people are guided exclusively by immediate selfish concerns.
AB - Research on abstract and/or hypothetical energy projects (e.g., nuclear, wind, solar energy) has shown that people favour energy projects that support their core values, and disfavour energy projects that threaten their core values. The question is to what extent people consider the implications for their values once energy projects become concrete, have real consequences, and come to their backyard. In a community affected by earthquakes induced by gas extraction, we studied the relationships between people’s values and their concerns about the earthquakes and acceptability of the gas extraction. The more strongly people endorsed biospheric values (i.e., caring about nature and the environment) and altruistic values (i.e., caring about others), the more negatively they evaluated gas extraction and the induced earthquakes. Stronger egoistic values (i.e., caring about personal resources) were associated with less negative evaluations of gas extraction and the earthquakes, possibly due to user and economic benefits associated with energy supply from natural gas. The findings were consistent across three local regions that vary in exposure to earthquakes and across five measurement points over six years, providing robust evidence that people consider the implications for their values when evaluating real, nearby energy projects. Furthermore, the results substantiate the critique of the NIMBY (Not-in-My-Backyard) explanation of local resistance to energy projects, which assumes that people are guided exclusively by immediate selfish concerns.
KW - Nearby energy projects
KW - NIMBY
KW - Public acceptability
KW - Values
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85119869232&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1088/2515-7620/ac25d0
DO - 10.1088/2515-7620/ac25d0
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85119869232
SN - 2515-7620
VL - 3
JO - Environmental Research Communications
JF - Environmental Research Communications
IS - 10
M1 - 105004
ER -