The influence of values on evaluations of energy alternatives

Renewable Energy

Volumn 77, Issue , 2015, Pages 259-267

  Perlaviciute, G ^a   Steg, L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Attitudes; Evaluations; Nuclear energy; Renewable energy; Values

Indexed keywords

BIOSPHERICS; NUCLEAR ENERGY;

ATTITUDES; ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES; EVALUATIONS; RENEWABLE ENERGIES; VALUE-BASED; VALUES;

ENERGY POLICY;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; ENERGY EFFICIENCY; NUCLEAR POWER; PERCEPTION; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; VALUATION;

EID: 84919913953     PISSN: 09601481     EISSN: 18790682     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2014.12.020     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Forsberg C.W. Sustainability by combining nuclear, fossil, and renewable energy sources. Prog Nucl Energy 2008, 51:192-200.
2. Verbruggen A. Renewable and nuclear power: a common future?. Energy Policy 2008, 36:4036-4047.
3. Culley M.R., Carton A.D., Weaver S.R., Ogley-Oliver E., Street J.C. Sun, wind, rock and metal: attitudes toward renewable and non-renewable energy sources in the context of climate change and current energy debates. Curr Psychol 2011, 30:215-233.
4. Devine-Wright P. Across-national, comparative analysis of public understanding of, and attitudes toward nuclear, renewable and fossil-fuel energy sources. Proceedings of the 3rd conference of the UK network environmental psychology in the UK - crossing boundaries: the value of interdisciplinary research 2003, 160-173. T. Craig (Ed.).
5. Poortinga W., Pidgeon N., Lorenzoni I. Public perceptions of nuclear power, climate change and energy options in Britain: summary findings of a survey conducted during October and November 2005, technical report (understanding risk working paper 06-02) 2006, Centre for Environmental Risk, Norwich.
6. Bickerstaff K., Lorenzoni I., Pidgeon N.F., Poortinga W., Simmons P. Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste. Public Understanding Sci 2008, 17:145-169.
7. Corner A., Venables D., Spence A., Poortinga W., Demski C., Pidgeon N. Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: exploring British public attitudes. Energy Policy 2011, 39:4823-4833.
8. Pidgeon N.F., Lorenzoni I., Poortinga W. Climate change or nuclear power - no thanks! A quantitative study of public perceptions and risk framing in Britain. Global Environ Change 2008, 18:69-85.
9. Butler C., Parkhill K.A., Pidgeon N. Deliberating energy transitions in the UK - transforming the UK energy system: public values, attitudes and acceptability 2013, UKERC, London.
10. Parkhill K.A., Demski C., Butler C., Spence A., Pidgeon N. Transforming the UK energy system: public values, attitudes and acceptability - synthesis report 2013, UKERC, London.
11. Arkesteijn K., Oerlemans L. The early adoption of green power by Dutch households: an empirical exploration of factors influencing the early adoption of green electricity for domestic purposes. Energy Policy 2005, 33:183-196.
12. Wolsink M. Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renew Energy 2000, 21:49-64.
13. De Groot J.I.M., Steg L. Morality and nuclear energy: perceptions of risks and benefits, personal norms, and willingness to take action related to nuclear energy. Risk Anal 2010, 30:1363-1373.
14. De Groot J.I.M., Steg L., Poortinga W. Values, perceived risks and benefits, and acceptability of nuclear energy. Risk Anal 2012, 33:307-317.
15. Drottz-Sjöberg B.M., Sjöberg L. Risk perception and worries after the Chernobyl accident. JEnviron Psychol 1990, 10:135-149.
16. Venables D., Pidgeon N., Simmons P., Henwood K., Parkhill K. Living with nuclear power: a Q-method study of local community perceptions. Risk Anal 2009, 29:1089-1104.
17. Rokeach M. The nature of human values 1973, The Free Press, New York.
18. Schwartz S.H. Universals in the content and structure of values: theory and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in experimental social psychology 1992, vol. 25:1-65. Academic Press, Orlando, FL.
19. Maio G.R. Mental representations of social values. Advances in experimental social psychology 2010, vol. 42:1-43. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
20. Rohan M.J. Arose by any name? The values construct. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2000, 4:255-277.
21. Schultz P.W. The structure of environmental concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. JEnviron Psychol 2001, 21:327-339.
22. Steg L., De Groot J.I.M., Dreijerink L., Abrahamse W., Siero F. General antecedents of personal norms, policy acceptability, and intentions: the role of values, worldviews, and environmental concern. Soc Nat Resour 2011, 24:349-367.
23. De Groot J.I.M., Steg L. Value orientations to explain beliefs related to environmental significant behavior: how to measure egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric value orientations. Environ Behav 2008, 40:330-354.
24. Dietz T., Fitzgerald A., Shwom R. Environmental values. Annu Rev Environ Resour 2005, 30:335-372.
25. Nordlund A.M., Garvill J. Value structures behind proenvironmental behavior. Environ Behav 2002, 34:740-756.
26. Steg L., De Groot J.I.M. Environmental values. The Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology 2012, Oxford University Press, New York. S. Clayton (Ed.).
27. Stern P.C. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. JSoc Iss 2000, 56:407-424.
28. Stern P.C., Dietz T., Guagnano G.A. Abrief inventory of values. Educ Psychol Meas 1998, 58:984-1001.
29. Steg L., Perlaviciute G., Van der Werff E., Lurvink J. The significance of hedonic values for environmentally-relevant attitudes, preferences and actions. Environ Behav 2014, 46:163-192.
30. Stern P.C., Dietz T. The value basis of environmental concern. JSoc Iss 1994, 50:65-84.
31. Steg L., Bolderdijk J.W., Keizer K., Perlaviciute G. An integrated framework for encouraging proenvironmental behaviour. JEnviron Psychol 2014, 38:104-115.
32. Stern P.C., Kalof L., Dietz T., Guagnano G.A. Values, beliefs, and proenvironmental action: attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects. JAppl Soc Psychol 1995, 25:1611-1636.
33. Eyal T., Sagristano M.D., Trope Y., Liberman N., Chaiken S. When values matter: expressing values in behavioral intentions for the near vs. distant future. JExp Soc Psychol 2009, 45:35-43.
34. Ajzen I. Nature and operation of attitudes. Annu Rev Psychol 2001, 52:27-58.
35. Whitfield S.C., Rosa E.A., Dan A., Dietz T. The future of nuclear power: value orientations and risk perception. Risk Anal 2009, 29:425-437.
36. Bidwell D. The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes toward commercial wind energy. Energy Policy 2013, 58:189-199.
37. Teräväinen T., Lehtonen M., Martiskainen M. Climate change, energy security, and risk - debating nuclear new build in Finland, France and the UK. Energy Policy 2011, 39:3434-3442.
38. Alhakami A.S., Slovic P. Apsychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. Risk Anal 1994, 14:1085-1096.
39. Poortinga W., Pidgeon N.F. Trust in risk regulation: cause or consequence of the acceptability of GM food?. Risk Anal 2005, 25:199-209.
40. Wolsink M. The research agenda on social acceptance of distributed generation in smart grids: renewable as common pool resources. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012, 16:822-835.
41. Pelham B.W., Blanton H. Conducting research in psychology. Measuring the weight of smoke 2003, Thomson Wadsworth, Toronto, Canada.
42. Wolsink M. Wind power implementation: the nature of public attitudes: equity and fairness instead of "backyard motives". Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2007, 11:1188-1207.
43. Bolderdijk J.W., Gorsira M., Steg L., Keizer K.E. Values determine the (in)effectiveness of informational interventions in promoting pro-environmental behavior. PLoS One 2014, 8:e83911.
44. Abrahamse W., Steg L., Vlek C., Rothengatter T. The effect of tailored information, goal setting, and tailored feedback on household energy use, energy-related behaviors, and behavioral antecedents. JEnviron Psychol 2007, 27:265-276.
45. Bolderdijk J.W., Steg L., Geller E.S., Lehman P.K., Postmes T. Comparing the effectiveness of monetary versus moral motives in environmental campaigning. Nat Clim Change 2013, 3:413-416.
46. Thøgersen J. Inducing green behaviour. Nat Clim Change 2013, 3:100.
47. Evans L., Maio G.R., Corner A., Hodgetts C.J., Ahmed S., Hahn U. Self-interest and pro-environmental behaviour. Nat Clim Change 2013, 3:122-125.
48. Wildavsky A. Choosing preferences by constructing institutions: a cultural theory of preference formation. Am Polit Sci Rev 1987, 81:3-22.
49. Dunlap R.E., Van Liere K.D., Mertig A.G., Jones R.E. New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. JSoc Iss 2000, 56:425-442.
50. Perlaviciute G., Steg L. Contextual and psychological factors shaping evaluations and acceptability of energy alternatives: integrated review and research agenda. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014, 35:361-381.