The Role of Convictions and Trust for Public Protest Potential in the Case of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS)

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 919-932

  Wallquist, Lasse ^a   Visschers, Vivianne H M ^a   Dohle, Simone ^a   Siegrist, Michael ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

benefit perception; CCS; convictions; protest potential; risk perception; trust

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863851416     PISSN: 10807039     EISSN: 15497860     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10807039.2012.688719     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Behav Hum Decis Process, 50(2): 179-211.
2. Ashworth, P, Boughen, NMayhew, M. 2010. From research to action: Now we have to move on CCS communication. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control, 4(2): 426-33.
3. BFS. 2008. Statistik des jährlichen Bevölkerungsstandes (Espop) und der natürlichen Bevölkerungsbewegung (Bevnat) 2008. Provisorische Ergebnisse. [Statistics of the annual population and the natural population movement in 2008. Preliminary results.], Neuchâtel, Switzerland: Swiss Federal Statistical Office.
4. Clark, M. 2006. Taking action on global warming. Hum Ecol Risk Assess, 12(6): 1013-7.
5. de Best-Waldhober, M, Daamen, D and Faaij, A. 2009. Informed and uninformed public opinions on CO2 capture and storage technologies in the Netherlands. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control, 3(3): 322-32.
6. Desbarats, J, Upham, PRiesch, H. 2010. Review of the Public Participation Practices for CCS and non-CCS Projects in Europe, London, UK: Institute for European Environmental Policy.
7. Earle, T C. 2010. Trust in risk management: A model-based review of empirical research. Risk Anal, 30(4): 541-74.
8. Earle, T C and Siegrist, M. 2006. Morality information, performance information, and the distinction between trust and confidence. J Appl Soc Psychol, 36(2): 383-416.
9. Gutteling, J, Hanssen, Lvan der Veer, N. 2006. Trust in governance and the acceptance of genetically modified food in the Netherlands. Public Underst Sci, 15(1): 103-12.
10. Hu, L-t and Bentler, P M. 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling, 6(1): 1-55.
11. IEA. 2010. Energy Technology Perspectives, Paris, France: OECD/IEA.
12. Johnsson, F, Reiner, DItaoka, K. 2010. Stakeholder attitudes on Carbon Capture and Storage-An international comparison. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control, 4(2): 410-8.
13. Kriesi, H, Saris, W E and Wille, A. 1993. Mobilization potential for environmental protest. Eur Sociol Rev, 9(2): 155-72.
14. Malone, E L, Dooley, J J and Bradbury, J A. 2010. Moving from misinformation derived from public attitude surveys on carbon dioxide capture and storage towards realistic stakeholder involvement. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control, 4(2): 419-25.
15. Midden, C JH and Huijts, N MA. 2009. The role of trust in the affective evaluation of novel risks: The case of CO2 storage. Risk Anal, 29(5): 743-51.
16. Palmgren, C R, Morgan, G MBruine de Bruin, W. 2004. Initial public perceptions of deep geological and oceanic disposal of carbon dioxide. Environ Sci Technol, 38(24): 6441-50.
17. Poortinga, W and Pidgeon, N F. 2005. Trust in risk regulation: Cause or consequence of the acceptability of GM food?. Risk Anal, 25(1): 199-209.
18. Schnoor, J L. 2005. Global warming: A consequence of human activities rivaling earth's biogeochemical processes. Hum Ecol Risk Assess, 11(6): 1105-10.
19. Schumacher, E F. 1973. Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if People Mattered, London, UK: Blond & Briggs.
20. Siegrist, M. 1999. A causal model explaining the perception and acceptance of gene technology. J Appl Soc Psychol, 29(10): 2093-106.
21. Siegrist, M. 2000. The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Anal, 20(2): 195-204.
22. Siegrist, M and Cvetkovich, G. 2000. Perception of hazards: The role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Anal, 20(5): 713-9.
23. Siegrist, M, Cvetkovich, G and Roth, C. 2000. Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Anal, 20(3): 353-62.
24. Siegrist, M, Cousin, M-EKastenholz, H. 2007. Public acceptance of nanotechnology foods and food packaging: The influence of affect and trust. Appetite, 49(2): 459-66.
25. Sjöberg, L. 2000. Perceived risk and tampering with nature. J Risk Res, 3(4): 353-67.
26. Sjöberg, L. 2001. Limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust. Risk Anal, 21(1): 189-98.
27. Tanaka, Y. 2004. Major psychological factors affecting acceptance of gene-recombination technology. Risk Anal, 24(6): 1575-83.
28. Ter Mors, E, Weenig, M WHEllemers, N. 2010. Effective communication about complex environmental issues: Perceived quality of information about carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) depends on stakeholder collaboration. J Environ Psychol, 30(4): 347-57.
29. Terwel, B W, Harinck, FEllemers, N. 2009a. Competence-based and integrity-based trust as predictors of acceptance of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS). Risk Anal, 29(8): 1129-40.
30. Terwel, B W, Harinck, FEllemers, N. 2009b. How organizational motives and communications affect public trust in organizations: The case of carbon dioxide capture and storage. J Environ Psychol, 29(2): 290-9.
31. Tokushige, K, Akimoto, K and Tomoda, T. 2007. Public perceptions on the acceptance of geological storage of carbon dioxide and information influencing the acceptance. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control, 1(1): 101-12.
32. Verhagen, M JM. 2010. "Uitwerking van de afspraken voor de individuele CO2-opslagprojecten die momenteel in voorbereiding zijn. (in Dutch) [Elaboration of the agreements regarding the invididual CO2 storage porjects that are currently in preparation]". Available at http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en-publicaties/kamerstukken/2010/11/04/uitwerking-van-de-afspraken-voor-de-individuele-co2-opslagprojecten-die-momenteel-in-voorbereiding-zijn.html (accessed November 4, 2010)
33. Visschers, V HM, Keller, C and Siegrist, M. 2011. Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: Investigating an explanatory model. Energy Policy, 39(6): 3621-9.
34. Wallquist, L, Visschers, V HM and Siegrist, M. 2009. Lay concepts on CCS deployment in Switzerland based on qualitative interviews. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control, 3(5): 652-7.
35. Wallquist, L, Visschers, V HM and Siegrist, M. 2010. Impact of knowledge and misconceptions on benefit and risk perception of CCS. Environ Sci Technol, 44(17): 6557-62.
36. Wallquist, L, Visschers, V HMDohle, S. 2011. Adapting communication to the public's intuitive understanding of CCS. Greenhouse Gas. Sci Technol, 1(1): 83-91.