An exploratory analysis of public perceptions of biofuels
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52712/issn.1850-0013-680Keywords:
biofuels, public perception, attitudes, focus groupsAbstract
The deployment of biofuels has generated a significant controversy in the energy, agricultural and environmental fields. Governments and promoters around the world have advocated for the development of biofuels based on their potential contribution to emissions reduction and energy security. But opposition to biofuels has grown in the last years. Environmental NGO’s and other stakeholders have called for a review of the environmental and social sustainability of energy crops. This controversy has characterized the public debate around biofuels. In this context, and given the need to improve public involvement in energy technologies, this article reports an investigation of Spanish citizens’perceptions about biofuels. The authors investigated the perceptions of informed citizens and the reasoning basis underlying those beliefs and attitudes. The study finds an initial positive association of biofuels with a clean and natural fuel that is mitigated by participants’concerns on the practical usage of biofuels and its social and environmental impact. The participants’reactions show the need to differentiate among the diverse groups of publics holding differing views and reactions to information on the benefits and costs of biofuels.
Downloads
References
APPA (2007): Biocarburantes y Desarrollo Sostenible, Mitos y Realidades, Informe, disponible en www.appa.es/descargas/Doc_BIOCARBUR ANTES_1309.pdf.
BANCO MUNDIAL (2007): World Development Report 2008, Agriculture for Development,Capítulo: Biofuels: The Promise and the Risks, Washington, The World Bank.
BINDER, A. B., CACCIATORE, M. A., SCHEUFELE, D. A., SHAW, B. R. y CORLEY, E. A. (2011): “Measuring risk/benefit perceptions of emerging technologies and their potential impact on communication of public opinion toward science”, Public Understanding of Science, pp. 1-18.
BOYATZIS, R. (1998): Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development, Thousand Oaks, Sage.
CACCIATORE, M. A., BRIGHAM SCHMUHL, N., BINDER, A. R., SCHEUFELE, D. A. y SHAW, B. R. (2010): “Assessing public opinion of alternative energies: The role of cognitive associations in support for biofuels”, comunicación presentada en el Annual meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis,Salt Lake City.
COMISIÓN EUROPEA (2010): “La Comisión fija un sistema de certificación de los biocarburantes sostenibles”, nota de prensa, junio.
CONTRERAS, T. (2008): “Aspectos sociales y ambientales del debate sobre los biocarburantes”, comunicación presentada en el Congreso Nacional de Medio Ambiente CONAMA9, Madrid.
COTULA, L., DYER, N. y VERMEULEN, S. (2008): Fuelling exclusión? The biofuels boom and poor people’s access to land,IIED and FAO, Londres.
EISER, J. R., MILES, S. y FREWER, L. J. (2002): Trust, perceived risk, and attitudes toward food technologies, Journal of Applied Social Psychology,32, pp. 2423-2433.
EXPERT GROUP ON SCIENCE AND POLICY (2007): Taking European Knowledge Society Seriously, Luxemburgo, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
FEREDAY, J. y MUIR-COCHRANE, E. (2006): “Demonstrating Rigor Using Thematic Analysis: A Hybrid Approach of Inductive and Deductive Coding and Theme Development, International Journal of Qualitative Methods5, 1.
GALDI, S., ARCURI, L. y GAWRONSKI, B. (2008): “Automatic Mental Associations Predict Future Choices of Undecided Decision-Makers”, Science 22, vol. 321, nº 5892, pp. 1100-1102.
GASKELL, G., ALLUM, N., BAUER, M., JACKSON, J., HOWARD, S. y LINDSEY, N. (2003): “Ambivalent GM nation? Public attitudes to biotechnology in the UK, 1991- 2002”, informe del Life Sciences in European Society Report, School of Economics and Political Science,Londres.
HOULE, D. (2010): “Biofuels in the European Union and the United States: A discursive Institutionalist Account of Policy Developments”, comunicación presentada en el Annual Meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association,Montreal, 1-3 de junio.
HORLICK-JONES, T., PRADES, A. y ESPLUGA, J. (2010): “Investigating the degree of ‘stigma’ associated with nuclear energy technologies: a cross-cultural examination of the case of fusion power”, Public Understanding of Science1, pp. 1-19.
HORLICK-JONES, T., WALLS, J. y KITZINGER, J. (2007): “Bricolage in action: learning about, making sense of, and discussing issues about genetically modified crops and food”, Health, Risk & Society9(1), pp. 83-103.
INFINITA RENOVABLES (2010): Informe Sectorial 2010, disponible en www.infinita.eu/ download.php?file=Informe%20Infinita_AC_52.pdf
KASPERSON, J. y KASPERSON, R. (2005): The Social Contours of Risk.,Volume 1, Publics, Risk Communication and the Social Amplification of Risk, Earthscan, Londres.
MACOUBRIE, J. (2006): “Nanotechnology: public concerns, reasoning and trust in government”, Public Understanding of Science15, pp. 221- 241.
MOL, A. P. J. (2007): “Boundless biofuels? Between environmental sustainability and vulnerability”, Sociologia Ruralis47 (4), pp. 297-315.
MORGAN, D. L. y KRUEGER, R. A. (1998): The Focus Group Kit, Londres, Sage.
OWENS, S. y DRIFFIL, L. (2008): “How to change attitudes and behaviors in the context of energy”, Energy Policy,vol. 36, p. 4412-4418.
PIN KOH, L. y GHAZOULA, J. (2008): “Biofuels, biodiversity, and people: Understanding the conflicts and finding opportunities”, Biological Conservation 141, 10, pp. 2450-2460.
PRADES LÓPEZ, A., HORLICK-JONES, T., OLTRA, C. y NAVAJAS, J. (2009): Lay Understanding and Reasoning about Fusion Energy: Results of an Empirical Study, Madrid, CIEMAT.
RENN, O. (1998): “Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges”, Journal of Risk Research1 (1), 49-71.
ROHRACHER, H. (2010): “Biofuels and their publics: the need for differentiated analysis and strategies”, Biofuels1 (1), pp. 3-5.
SAVVANIDOU, E., ZERVAS, E. y TSAGARAKIS, K.P. (2010): “Public acceptance of biofuels”, Energy Policy38, pp. 3482-3488.
SEARCHINGER, T., HEIMLICH, R., HOUGHTON, R. A., DONG, F., ELOBEID, A., FABIOSA, J., TOKGOZ, S., HAYES, D. y YU, T-H. (2008): “Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change”, Science319, pp. 1238-1240.
SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION OF BIOMASS PROJECT GROUP (2006): Criteria for sustainable biomass production, informe final, disponible en www.globalproblems- globalsolutions-files.org/unf_website/PDF/criteria_ sustainable_biomass_prod.pdf
TORRES y CARRERA (2010): Biocombustibles 2010, informe, disponible en www.torresycarrera.com/blog/puestobase/wpcontent/uploads/2011/03/Informe- Biocombustibles-2010.pdf.
UNEP (2009): Towards sustainable production and use of resources: Assessing biofuels, United Nations United Nations Environment Programme.
UPHAM, P. y SHACKLEY, S. (2007): “Local public opinion of a proposed 21.5 MW(e) biomass gasifier in Devon: Questionnaire survey results”, Biomass and Bioenergy31, Issue 6, pp. 433-441.
UPI (2011): Nota de prensa sobre la situación de la industria española del biodiesel y el proyectado sistema de cuotas de biodiesel, 25 de febrero, disponible en www.upi- oil.es/imagenes/SISTEMA_CUOTAS_-_NOTA_PRENSA_UPI_25-feb-2011.pdf.
VAN DE VELDE, L., VERBEKE, W., POPP, M. y VAN HUYLENBROECK, G. (2010): “Trust and perception related to information about biofuels in Belgium”, Public Understanding of Science 13, pp. 1-15.
WALLS, J., PIDGEON, N., WEYMAN, A. y HORLICK-JONES, T. (2004): “Critical trust: Understanding lay perceptions of health and safety risk regulation”, Health, Risk & Society,6, pp. 133-150.
WEGENER D. T. y Kelly J. R. (2008): “Social psychological dimensions of bioenergy development and public acceptance”, Bioenergy Research1(2), pp. 107-117.
WILDAVSKY, A. (1987): “Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation”, American Political Science Review81, pp. 3-21.
WÜSTENHAGEN, R., WOLSINK, M. y BÜRER, M. J. (2007): “Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept”, Energy Policy,vol. 35: 2683-2691.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 CC Attribution 4.0
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All CTS's issues and academic articles are under a CC-BY license.
Since 2007, CTS has provided open and free access to all its contents, including the complete archive of its quarterly edition and the different products presented in its electronic platform. This decision is based on the belief that offering free access to published materials helps to build a greater and better exchange of knowledge.
In turn, for the quarterly edition, CTS allows institutional and thematic repositories, as well as personal web pages, to self-archive articles in their post-print or editorial version, immediately after the publication of the final version of each issue and under the condition that a link to the original source will be incorporated into the self-archive.
