MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407766791 · doi:10.1016/j.egycc.2025.100179

Trust in scientists, researchers, and environmental organizations associated with policy support for energy transition

2025· article· en· W4407766791 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy and Climate Change · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Acceptance of Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTransition (genetics)Energy transitionEnergy (signal processing)Environmental policyPolitical sciencePublic relationsBusinessKnowledge managementEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• The public supports policies that will directly benefit them. • The public trusts scientists, researchers, and non-profit organizations most. • Policymakers and decision makers could be more successful in gaining policy support by leveraging the public's trust in other actors. Energy transition, shifting away from fossil fuel use, is fundamental to addressing climate change. To explore public support for energy transition policies, we surveyed a representative sample of residents in Canada's largest province, Ontario, ( N = 1620), and conducted regression analyses to examine how support varies with trust in the actors communicating these policies. Ontarians prefer ‘carrot’ policies—those offering direct benefits to households—over ‘stick’ policies. The most supported policies include the development of renewable natural gas, interest-free energy efficiency loan programs, and funding for low-income energy efficiency programs, while the least supported policies are a carbon tax, continued oil sands development, and the electrification of heating. Ontarians have low to moderate levels of trust in governments at all levels, utilities, media, oil and gas companies, and to some extent in renewable energy companies. However they demonstrate consistently high trust in scientists, researchers, and non-profit organizations. Public support for policies in Ontario is influenced by trust in stakeholders and policymakers, with the relationship varying across different policies. We find Ontarians’ trust in scientists, researchers, and non-profit organizations is positively associated with supporting ‘emerging’ energy transition policies, such as the development of renewable natural gas and hydrogen. Our findings suggest that policymakers seeking to advance energy transition policies can strengthen both effectiveness and public acceptance by engaging with trusted actors, such as scientists and non-profits, and leveraging their credibility. Furthermore, adopting inclusive and participatory planning processes that reflect public values and address equity concerns is crucial to fostering long-term trust and policy stability amidst the challenges of the energy transition.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.274 · 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