東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Energy and Risk: Discourse, Framing,...

Gardner Taylor, Temis.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Energy and Risk: Discourse, Framing, and Content.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Energy and Risk: Discourse, Framing, and Content./
Author:	Gardner Taylor, Temis.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2018,
Description:	848 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-05, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International80-05A.
Subject:	Environmental Law. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10979451
ISBN:	9780438666917

Energy and Risk: Discourse, Framing, and Content.
Gardner Taylor, Temis.

Energy and Risk: Discourse, Framing, and Content. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2018 - 848 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-05, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Utah State University, 2018.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

This research examined how people communicate and create knowledge about energy-related risks. Analysis of the discourse, frames, and content surrounding unconventional energy policy and development in the Western United States was conducted using three case studies. The results contribute to an understanding of energy-related risk perceptions in social and historical contexts. Discourses contained in newspapers and public comments to the Bureau of Land Management presented arguments on the basis of risks to the environment; climate; human health and safety; jobs and economic prosperity; property rights; and local governments. Governments were seen as risks when they were perceived to allow misuse of public resources or threatened to override democratic processes. The quantity of water, energy, and land resources that would be consumed in the production of unconventional fuels were perceived to be social and environmental risks. Findings indicate that national identity and expectations of democracy were commonly-held values. Other entities, such as energy, the oil and gas industry, and property rights, were constructed in ways that created polarization and conflict among discourses. Different underlying assumptions about the role of government and what should be protected created social tensions and competing accounts of risks. Overall findings lend support to theories of risk and indicate possible communication and trust-building strategies for scientists and policy-makers.

ISBN: 9780438666917Subjects--Topical Terms:

676816
Environmental Law.

Energy and Risk: Discourse, Framing, and Content.
LDR:02540nmm a2200325 4500 001 2264484
005 20200504070427.5
008 220629s2018 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780438666917
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10979451
035 $a (MiAaPQ)usu:12934
035 $a AAI10979451
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Gardner Taylor, Temis. $3 3541608
245 1 0 $a Energy and Risk: Discourse, Framing, and Content.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2018
300 $a 848 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-05, Section: A.
500 $a Publisher info.: Dissertation/Thesis.
500 $a Advisor: Tainter, Joseph.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Utah State University, 2018.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a This research examined how people communicate and create knowledge about energy-related risks. Analysis of the discourse, frames, and content surrounding unconventional energy policy and development in the Western United States was conducted using three case studies. The results contribute to an understanding of energy-related risk perceptions in social and historical contexts. Discourses contained in newspapers and public comments to the Bureau of Land Management presented arguments on the basis of risks to the environment; climate; human health and safety; jobs and economic prosperity; property rights; and local governments. Governments were seen as risks when they were perceived to allow misuse of public resources or threatened to override democratic processes. The quantity of water, energy, and land resources that would be consumed in the production of unconventional fuels were perceived to be social and environmental risks. Findings indicate that national identity and expectations of democracy were commonly-held values. Other entities, such as energy, the oil and gas industry, and property rights, were constructed in ways that created polarization and conflict among discourses. Different underlying assumptions about the role of government and what should be protected created social tensions and competing accounts of risks. Overall findings lend support to theories of risk and indicate possible communication and trust-building strategies for scientists and policy-makers.
590 $a School code: 0241.
650 4 $a Environmental Law. $3 676816
650 4 $a Natural Resource Management. $3 676989
690 $a 0439
690 $a 0528
710 2 $a Utah State University. $b Environment and Society. $3 1036082
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 80-05A.
790 $a 0241
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2018
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10979451