Exportar Publicação
A publicação pode ser exportada nos seguintes formatos: referência da APA (American Psychological Association), referência do IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers), BibTeX e RIS.
Batel, S. (2018). A critical discussion of research on the social acceptance of renewable energy generation and associated infrastructures and an agenda for the future. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning. 20 (3), 356-369
S. A. Batel, "A critical discussion of research on the social acceptance of renewable energy generation and associated infrastructures and an agenda for the future", in Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 356-369, 2018
@article{batel2018_1730766054874, author = "Batel, S.", title = "A critical discussion of research on the social acceptance of renewable energy generation and associated infrastructures and an agenda for the future", journal = "Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning", year = "2018", volume = "20", number = "3", doi = "10.1080/1523908X.2017.1417120", pages = "356-369", url = "http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1523908X.2017.1417120" }
TY - JOUR TI - A critical discussion of research on the social acceptance of renewable energy generation and associated infrastructures and an agenda for the future T2 - Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning VL - 20 IS - 3 AU - Batel, S. PY - 2018 SP - 356-369 SN - 1523-908X DO - 10.1080/1523908X.2017.1417120 UR - http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1523908X.2017.1417120 AB - Social sciences’ research on the social acceptance of renewable energy generation and associated technologies (RET), such as high voltage power lines, has been growing in the last decades. In fact, while RET are considered one of the main mitigation measures of climate change, opposition to their construction, and namely from the local communities living nearby, is often found. Important conceptual proposals have been made for a better understanding of opposition, however, this literature still presents some limitations. Here, I will discuss two of them: first, the main focus on the local and, with it, the lack of a relational and critical approach, which recognizes opposition and other types of responses to RET as public participation in RET-related issues; second, the focus on the individual and the consequent lack of examining people’s material practices and engagements. ER -