MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112595426 · doi:10.3390/ijerph17249161

Trends in Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Across Europe—A Literature Review

2020· review· en· W3112595426 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Acceptance of Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial acceptanceRenewable energyOpposition (politics)BusinessQualitative propertyEnvironmental economicsPolitical sciencePublic economicsPsychologySocial psychologyEconomicsEngineeringComputer sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social acceptance has proven to be a significant barrier in the implementation of renewable energy systems (hereinafter "RES"). While a general acceptance of RES is high, low local acceptance has hindered the development of renewable energy projects (hereinafter "REP"). This study assesses the determinants of local and general social acceptance of REP across Europe through a qualitative analysis from 25 case studies of the most significant social drivers and barriers that include all European countries. These case studies contain qualitative and quantitative analyses of the main factors for social acceptance of many representative groups including residents, stakeholders, and experts. Understanding the influences of social acceptance enables us to create strategies that will promote the development of REP by mitigating any public opposition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.360 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it