Fostering citizen deliberations on the social acceptability of renewable fuels policy: The case ofadvanced lignocellulosic biofuels in Canada

Biomass and Bioenergy

Volumn 74, Issue , 2015, Pages 103-112

  Longstaff, Holly ^a   Secko, David M ^a   Capurro, Gabriela ^a   Hanney, Patricia ^a   McIntyre, Terry ^a  

^a Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering   (Canada)

Author keywords

Biofuels; Deliberative democracy; Policy; Public engagement; Social acceptance

Indexed keywords

PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIAL ASPECTS; SURVEYS;

BIOFUEL PRODUCTION; CITIZEN ENGAGEMENTS; DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY; GOVERNMENT DECISIONS; PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT; RENEWABLE ENERGY POLICY; SOCIAL ACCEPTABILITY; SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE;

BIOFUELS;

BIOFUEL; CITIZENSHIP; DEMOCRACY; ENERGY POLICY; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; RENEWABLE RESOURCE;

CANADA; MONTREAL; QUEBEC [CANADA];

EID: 84921850469     PISSN: 09619534     EISSN: 1873-2909     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.01.003     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Wüstenhagena R., Wolsinkb M., Bürera M. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 2007, 35(5):2683-2691.
2. Cohen J.J., Reichl J., Schmidthaler M. Re-focussing research effort on the public acceptance of energy infrastructure: a critical review. Energy 2014, 76(1):4-9.
3. Wynne B. Public uptake of science: a case for institutional reflexivity. Public Underst Sci 1993, 2(4):321-337.
4. Einsiedel E.F., O'Doherty K. Public engagement and emerging technologies 2012, UBC Press, British Colombia.
5. Secko D., Burgess M., O'Doherty K. Perspectives on engaging the public in the ethics of emerging biotechnologies: from salmon to biobanks to neuroethics. J Account Res 2008, 15(3):283-302.
6. Lee J.W. Introduction: an overview of advanced biofuels and bioproducts. Advanced biofuels and bioproducts 2013, Springer, New York.
7. Rathmann R., Szklo A., Schaeffer R. Land use competition for production of food and liquid biofuels: an analysis of the arguments in the current debate. Renew Energy 2010, 35(1):14-22.
8. Mabee E.E., Saddler J.N. Bioethanol from lignocellulosics: status and perspectives in Canada. Bioresour Technol 2010, 4806-4813.
9. Mohr A., Raman S. Lessons from first generation biofuels and implications for the sustainability appraisal of second generation biofuels. Energy Policy 2013, 63:114-122.
10. Natural Resources Canada What is Canada's renewable fuels strategy? 2010, http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/transportation/alternative-fuels/programs/ecoenergy-biofuels/334.
11. Government of Canada Canadian environmental protection act bill C-33, an act to amend the canadian environmental protection act 1999 2008, http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/LegislativeSummaries/39/2/c33-e.pdf.
12. Financial post. Auld D. Biofuel blunder 2013, http://opinion.financialpost.com/2013/09/03/biofuel-blunder/.
13. Rohracher H. Biofuels and their publics: the need fordifferentiated analyses and strategies. Biofuels 2010, 1(1):3-5.
14. Ribeiro B.E. Beyond commonplace biofuels: social aspects of ethanol. Energy Policy 2013, 57:355-362.
15. Phalan B. The social and environmental impacts of biofuels in Asia: an overview. Appl Energy 2009, 86:S21-S29.
16. Zapata C., Nieuwenhuis P. Driving on liquid sunshine-the Brazilian biofuel experience: a policy driven analysis. Bus Strategy Environ 2009, 18(8):528-541.
17. Wright W., Reid T. Green dreams or pipe dreams? media framing of the US biofuels movement. Biomass Bioenergy 2011, 35(4):1390-1399.
18. Savvanidou E., Zervas E., Tsagarakis K.P. Public acceptance of biofuels. Energy Policy 2010, 38(7):3482-3488.
19. Fishkin J.S., Luskin R.C., Jowell R. Deliberative polling and public consultation. Parliam Aff 2000, 53(4):657-666.
20. Chambers S. Deliberative democratic theory. Annu Rev Political Sci 2003, 6:307-326.
21. Gastil J. Political communication and deliberation 2008, Sage, California.
22. Burgess M. From 'trust us' to participatory governance: deliberative publics and science policy. Public Underst Sci 2014, 23(1):48-52.
23. O'Doherty K., Burgess M., Secko D. Sequencing the salmon genome: a deliberative public engagement. Genomics Soc Policy 2010, 6:15-32.
24. MacLean S., Burgess M. In the public interest: assessing expert and stakeholder influence in public deliberation about biobanks. Public Underst Sci 2010, 19:486-496.
25. Goodin R.E., Dryzek J.S. Deliberative impacts: the macro-political uptake of mini-publics. Polit Soc 2006, 34:219-244.
26. Longstaff H., Burgess M.M. Recruiting for representation in public deliberation on the ethics of biobanks. Public Underst Sci 2010, 19(2):212-224.
27. Dunlap R.E., Van Liere K.D., Mertig A.G., Jones R.E. Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. J Soc Issues 2000, 56(3):425-442.
28. Longstaff H., Secko D.M. Assessing the quality of a deliberative democracy mini-public event about advanced biofuel production and development in Canada. Public Underst Sci 2014, [in press]. doi:10.1177/0963662514545014.
29. Rubin E. Genomics of cellulosic biofuels. Nature 2008, 454:841-845.
30. Hanney P., Secko D.M., McIntyre T. Sustainable biofuel policy: assessing Canada's biofuel policies against bioethical principles. Int J Sustain Policy Pract 2013, 8(3):75-88.
31. Blacksher E., Diebel A., Forest P., Dorr Goold S., Abelson J. What is public deliberation?. Hastings Cent Rep 2012, 42:14-17.
32. Fiorese G., Catenacci M., Verdolini E., Bosetti V. Advanced biofuels: future perspectives from an expert elicitation survey. Energy Policy 2013, 56:293-311.
33. Renewable Energy World Will the draft european biomass policy repeat biofuel mistakes? 2013, http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/08/draft-european-biomass-policy-repeats-biofuel-policy-mistakes-green-groups-say.
34. International Institute for Sustainable Development IISD. 2011-2012 annual report 2012, http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/annrep_2011_2012_en.pdf.
35. Chin H.C., Choong W.W., Wan Alwi S.R., Mohammed A.H. Issues of social acceptance on biofuel development. J Clean Prod 2014, 71:30-39.
36. Stilgoe J., Lock S., Wilsdon J. Why should we promote public engagement with science?. Public Underst Sci 2014, 23(1):4-15.
37. Ackom E.K., Mabee W.E., Saddler J.N. Industrial sustainability of competing wood energy options in Canada. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2010, 162:2259-2272.
38. Gronowska M., Joshi S., MacLean H. A review of U.S and Canadian biomass supply studies. Bioresources 2009, 4(1).
39. Gregg J., Smith S. Global and regional potential for bioenergy from agriculture and forestry residue biomass. Mitig Adapt Strategy Glob Change 2010, 15:241-262.
40. Sengers F., Raven R., Van Venrooij A. From riches to rags: biofuels, media discourses, and resistance to sustainable energy technologies. Energy Policy 2010, 38:5013-5027.
41. Nuffield Council on Bioethics Biofuels: ethical issues 2011, http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/biofuels.
42. Pilgrim S., Harvey M. Battles over biofuels in Europe: NGOs and the politics of markets. Sociol Res Online 2010, 15(3):4.
43. Gaskell G., Allansdottir A., Allum N., Castro P., Esmer Y., Fischler C., et al. The 2010 eurobarometer on the life sciences. Nat Biotechnol 2011, 29(2):113-114.
44. Upham P., Tomei J., Dendler L. Governance and legitimacy aspects of the UK biofuel carbon and sustainability reporting system. Energy Policy 2011, 39(5):2669-2678.
45. Upham P. Heat and light: understanding bioenergy siting controversy. Renewable energy and the public: from nimby to participation 2013, 289.
46. Bell D., Gray T., Haggett C. The social gap in wind farm sitting decisions: explanations and policy responses. Environ Polit 2005, 14(4):460-477.
47. Parkhill KA, Demski C, Butler C, Spence A, Pidgeon N. Transforming the UK energy system: value, attitudes and acceptability - synthesis report (UKERC: London). http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/2243/1/SYNTHESIS_FINAL.pdf.
48. Sundqvist G. Heating up or cooling down? analysing and performing broadened participation in technoscientific conflicts. Environ Plan A 2014, 46(9):2065-2079.