Hybrid forums, knowledge deficits and the multiple uncertainties of resource extraction: Negotiating the local governance of shale gas in Poland

Energy Research and Social Science

Volumn 28, Issue , 2017, Pages 29-36

  Lis, Aleksandra ^a   Stasik, Agata Kinga ^b  

^a ADAM MICKIEWICZ UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

^b KOZMINSKI UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

Author keywords

Hybrid forums; Knowledge deficit; Resource extraction; Shale gas; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

EID: 85017548577     PISSN: 22146296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2017.04.003     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. [1] Jaspal, R., Nerlich, B., Fracking in the UK press: threat dynamics in an unfolding debate. Public Underst. Sci. 23:3 (2014), 348–363.
2. [2] Wagner, A., Shale gas: energy innovation in a (non-)knowledge society: a press discourse analysis. Sci. Public Policy 42:2 (2014), 273–286.
3. [3] Cotton, M., Rattle, I., Van Alstine, J., Shale gas policy in the United Kingdom: an argumentative discourse analysis. Energy Policy 73 (2014), 427–438.
4. [4] Ocelik, P., Osicka, J., The framing of unconventional natural gas resources in the foreign energy policy discourse of the Russian Federation. Energy Policy 72 (2014), 97–109.
5. [5] Mazur, A., How did the fracking controversy emerge in the period 2010–2012?. Public Underst. Sci., 2014, 1–16.
6. [6] Boudet, H., Clarke, C., Bugden, D., et al. ‘Fracking’ controversy and communication: using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing. Energy Policy 65 (2014), 57–67.
7. [7] Clarke, C., Hart, P.S., Schuldt, J.P., et al. Public opinion on energy development: the interplay of issue framing, top-of-mind associations, and political ideology. Energy Policy 81 (2015), 131–140.
8. [8] Evensen, D., Jacquet, J.B., Clarke, C.E., Stedman, R.C., What's the ‘fracking’ problem? One word can't say it all. Extr. Ind. Soc. 1 (2014), 130–136.
9. [9] Williams, L., Macnaghten, P., Davis, R., et al. Framing ‘fracking’: exploring public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing in the United Kingdom. Public Underst. Sci., 2015, 1–7.
10. [10] Brasier, K.J., Davis, L., Glenna, L., et al. Communities experiencing shale gas development. Hefley, W.E., Wang, Y., (eds.) Economics of Unconventional Shale Gas Development, 2015, Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, 148–178.
11. [11] Thomas, M., Pidgeon, N., Evensen, D., et al. Public Perception of Shale Gas Operations in the Usa and Canada – A Review of Evidence. 2016.
12. [12] Vasi, I.B., Walker, E.T., Johnson, J.S., et al. ‘No Fracking Way!’ documentary film, discursive opportunity, and local opposition against hydraulic fracturing in the United States, 2010 to 2013. Am. Sociol. Rev. 80:5 (2015), 934–959.
13. [13] Hopke, J.E., Hashtagging politics: transnational anti-fracking movement Twitter practices. Soc. Media Soc. 1:2 (2015), 1–12.
14. [14] Hopke, J.E., Simis, M., Discourse over a contested technology on Twitter: a case study of hydraulic fracturing. Public Underst. Sci. 26:1 (2015), 105–120, 10.1177/0963662515607725 Article first published online: October 4, 2015; Issue published: January 1, 2017.
15. [15] Brasier, K., Filteau, M.R., McLaughlin, D.K., et al. Residents’ perceptions of community and environmental impacts from development of natural gas in the Marcellus Shale: a comparison of Pennsylvania and New York cases. J. Rural Soc. Sci. 26:1 (2011), 32–61.
16. [16] Malin, S., There's no real choice but to sign: neoliberalization and normalization of hydraulic fracturing on Pennsylvania farmland. J. Environ. Stud. Sci. 4 (2014), 17–27.
17. [17] Perry, S.L., Development, land use, and collective trauma: the Marcellus Shale gas boom in rural Pennsylvania. J. Cult. Agric. 34:1 (2012), 81–92.
18. [18] Szolucha, A., The Human Dimension of Shale Gas Development in Lancashire, UK. Towards a Social Impact Assessment. 2016.
19. [19] Mathews, A., Barnes, J., Prognosis: visions of environmental futures. Barnes, J., (eds.) J. R. Anthropol. Inst., 2016, 9–26 Special Issue: Environmental Futures.
20. [20] Barnes, J., Uncertainty in the signal: modelling Egypt's water futures. Barnes, J., (eds.) J. R. Anthropol. Inst., 2016, 46–66 Special Issue: Environmental Futures.
21. [21] Kneas, D., Subsoil abundance and surface absence: a junior mining company and its performance of prognosis in Northwestern Ecuador. Barnes, J., (eds.) J. R. Anthropol. Inst., 2016, 46–66 Special Issue: Environmental Futures.
22. [22] Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., Barthe, Y., Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy. 2009, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England.
23. [23] Brown, M.B., Science in Democracy. Expertise, Institutions, and Representation. 2009, The MIT Press.
24. [24] Dickson, D., The Case for a Deficit Model of Science Communication. 2005, SciDev. Net. Retrieved November 13, 2014, from http://medsci.free.fr/docsderef/Dickson2005_Deficit model of sciencecommunication.pdf.
25. [25] Irwin, A., Politics of talk: coming to terms with the new scientific governance. Soc. Stud. Sci. 36:2 (2006), 299–320.
26. [26] Beck, U., Risk society: towards a new modernity. Ritter, M., (eds.) Nation, Theory, Culture & Society Series, 1992, Sage.
27. [27] Stehr, N., Knowledge Politics. Governing the Consequences of Science and Technology. 2005, Paradigm Publishers, Boulder, London.
28. [28] Van Asselt, M.B.A., Renn, O., Risk governance. J. Risk Res. 14:4 (2011), 431–449.
29. [29] Fiorino, D.J., Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technol. Hum. Values 15:2 (1990), 226–243.
30. [30] Irwin, A., Jensen, T., Jones, K., The good, the bad and the perfect: criticizing engagement practice. Soc. Stud. Sci. 43:1 (2013), 118–135.
31. [31] Latour, B., Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy. 2004, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
32. [32] Państwowy Instytut Geologiczny (PIG), Ocena zasobów wydobywalnych gazu ziemnego i ropy naftowej w formacjach łupkowych dolnego paleozoiku w Polsce (basen bałtycko-podlasko-lubelski). 2012, Państwowy Instytut Geologiczny - Państwowy Instytut Badawczy Warszawa.
33. [33] Rutkowski, M., Gaz pojawia się i znika, czyli krótka historia szacowania zasobów węglowodorów niekonwencjonalnych w Polsce. Przegląd Geologiczny 61:6 (2013), 331–333.
34. [34] Olkuski, J., Złoża gazu niekonwencjonalnego w Polsce – prognozy i postępy w poszukiwaniach. Szpak, K., Musiałek, P., (eds.) Polska Energetyka 2012, 2013, Centrum Analiz Energetycznych, Kraków, 21–24.
35. [35] Szczepański, M., W. Brytania. Czas prawdy dla gazu łupkowego. 2015 20 January, Available at: http://wyborcza.pl/1,91446,17281787,W__Brytania__Czas_prawdy_dla_gazu_lupkowego.html. (Accessed 11 May 2016).
36. [36] Lis, A., Stankiewicz, P., Framing shale gas for policy making in Poland. J. Environ. Policy Plan., 19(1), 2017, 10.1080/1523908X.2016.1143355.
37. [37] Jaspal, R., Nerlich, B., Lemańcyzk, S., Fracking in the Polish press: geopolitics and national identity. Energy Policy 74 (2014), 253–261.
38. [38] Upham, P., Lis, A., Riesch, H., et al. Addressing social representations in socio-technical transitions with the case of shale gas. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 16:September 2015 (2015), 120–141, 10.1016/j.eist.2015.01.004.
39. [39] Goldthau, A., Sovacool, B.K., Energy technology, politics, and interpretative frames: shale gas fracking in Eastern Europe. Glob. Environ. Polit. 16:4 (2016), 50–69.
40. [40] Stasik, A., Stankiewicz, P., Raport: Poszukiwanie i wydobycie gazu łupkowego w Polsce – wiedza, opinie, oceny. 2014 [online]. http://infolupki.pgi.gov.pl/sites/default/files/czytelnia_pliki/1/sondaz_pig_raport_gaz_lupkowy.pdf. (18 November 2014).
41. [41] Materka, E., End of transition? Expropriation, resource nationalism, fuzzy research, and corruption of Environmental Institutions in the making of the shale gas revolution in Northern Poland. Debatte J. Contemp. Cent. East. Eur. 19:3 (2011), 599–631, 10.1080/0965156x.2012.681919.
42. [42] Miland, R., Decyzję środowiskową będzie wydawał Regionalny Dyrektor Ochrony Środowiska. 2014 24 October, Available at: http://www.teraz-srodowisko.pl/aktualnosci/Od-nowego-roku-decyzje-srodowiskowa-bedzie-wydawal-Regionalny-Dyrektor-Ochrony-Srodowiska-57.html. (Accessed 12 May 2016).
43. [43] Stankiewicz, P., Stasik, A., Suchomska, J., Od informowania do współdecydowania i z powrotem. Prototypowanie technologicznej demokracji. Studia Socjologiczne 3:218 (2015), 65–101.
44. [44] Patton, M.Q., Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd ed., 2002, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
45. [45] Stankiewicz, P., (eds.) Razem o Łupkach. Koncepcja komunikacji społecznej w zakresie gazu łupkowego w województwie pomorskim, 2012, Fundacja Rozwiązań Ekoenergetycznych – Free, Gdańsk.
46. [46] Felt, U., Fochler, M., Machineries for making publics: inscribing and de-scribing publics in public engagement. Minerva 48 (2010), 219–238.
47. [47] Ashworth, P., Wade, S., Reiner, D., Liang, X., Developments in public communications on CCS. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 40 (2015), 449–458.
48. [48] Desbarats, J., Upham, P., Riesch, H., et al. Review of the public participation practices for CCS and non-CCS projects in Europe. Deliverable 1.2: NEARCO2 – New Participation and Communication Strategies for Neighbors of Co2 Capture and Storage Options, 2010.
49. [49] Renn, O., Klinke, A., Van Asselt, M., Coping with complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity in risk governance: a synthesis. Ambio 40:2 (2011), 231–246.
50. [50] Pidgeon, N.F., Climate change risk perception and communication: addressing a critical moment?. Risk Anal. 32:6 (2012), 951–956, 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01856.x.
51. [51] Stasik, A., Technology impact assessment in the age of uncertainty: epistemological challenge as a political challenge. Polityka Społeczna 1:10 (2014), 9–13.