Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy: Trends, Concepts, and Geographies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As global production of energy from renewable sources has grown over the last 25 years, so too has research on social acceptance of renewable energy. This article reports findings from a systematic review of peer‐reviewed articles related to this subject. There has been a rapid increase in the frequency of these studies and a shift in orientation away from market and socio‐political measures of securing policy support for renewables toward a sympathetic reporting of community opposition to wind turbines. Well‐developed conceptual and empirical critiques of the “Not‐in‐My‐Backyard” concept have emerged on the basis of Western European case studies, notably from the UK. Drawing from experiences across the globe with varied sizes and types of new energy infrastructure researchers have documented complex social responses that go beyond simplistic designations of opponent or supporter. Geographical concepts including place, landscape, distance decay, territory, and others have been gainfully employed in this interdisciplinary literature, and there is ample opportunity for greater contributions from the discipline to this area of growing popular and academic interest.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it