Skip to main content
Taylor & Francis Group Logo
Advanced Search

Click here to search books using title name,author name and keywords.

  • Login
  • Hi, User  
    • Your Account
    • Logout
Advanced Search

Click here to search books using title name,author name and keywords.

Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.

Chapter

Frames of reference and the interpretation of values in the Dutch shale gas debate

Chapter

Frames of reference and the interpretation of values in the Dutch shale gas debate

DOI link for Frames of reference and the interpretation of values in the Dutch shale gas debate

Frames of reference and the interpretation of values in the Dutch shale gas debate book

Frames of reference and the interpretation of values in the Dutch shale gas debate

DOI link for Frames of reference and the interpretation of values in the Dutch shale gas debate

Frames of reference and the interpretation of values in the Dutch shale gas debate book

ByMarloes Dignum, Udo Pesch, Aad Correljé
BookResponsible Innovation in Large Technological Systems

Click here to navigate to parent product.

Edition 1st Edition
First Published 2020
Imprint Routledge
Pages 24
eBook ISBN 9781003019930

ABSTRACT

Energy initiatives often lead to public contestation, even when all actors support the same underlying values. The reason for contestation can be found in different interpretations of these values. This causes a serious problem in the operationalisation of responsible innovation as this presumes a singular understanding of the values that underlie a new technology. This chapter analyses this interpretive flexibility of values in the Dutch shale gas debate. It concludes that the interpretative flexibility of values pertains to the spatial orientation of the stakeholders originating from the place attachment of different actors. Arguments presented in favour of or against shale gas exploration are connected to the expected effects of this exploration on local/regional spatiality or on the (inter)national spatiality. Arguments that are put forward in either of these frames of reference hardly connect to the other frames of reference. Due to the differences in spatiality of the arguments, a common reference point is lacking, which leads to confusion and miscommunication. This paper concludes that responsible innovation should acknowledge public values in all frames of reference in a symmetrical way. It is also essential to identify a common spatiality on which the discussion can fruitfully take place.

T&F logoTaylor & Francis Group logo
  • Policies
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions
    • Cookie Policy
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions
    • Cookie Policy
  • Journals
    • Taylor & Francis Online
    • CogentOA
    • Taylor & Francis Online
    • CogentOA
  • Corporate
    • Taylor & Francis Group
    • Taylor & Francis Group
    • Taylor & Francis Group
    • Taylor & Francis Group
  • Help & Contact
    • Students/Researchers
    • Librarians/Institutions
    • Students/Researchers
    • Librarians/Institutions
  • Connect with us

Connect with us

Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067
5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2021 Informa UK Limited