Addressing social representations in socio-technical transitions with the case of shale gas

(1)

ContentslistsavailableatScienceDirect

Environmental

Innovation

and

Societal

Transitions

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e :w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / e i s t

Addressing

social

representations

in

socio-technical

transitions

with

the

case

of

shale

gas

Paul

Upham

a,∗

,

Aleksandra

Lis

b,1

,

Hauke

Riesch

c,2

,

Piotr

Stankiewicz

d,3

a_Centre_for_Integrated_Energy_Research_and_{Sustainability}_Research_Institute,_University_of_Leeds,_Energy

Building,UniversityofLeeds,LeedsLS29JT,UK

b_Department_of_Ethnology_and_Cultural_{Anthropology,}_Adam_Mickiewicz_University,_{ul. ´}_Sw._Marcin_78,

61-809Pozna´n,Poland

c_Department_of_Sociology_and_{Communications,}_Brunel_University,_Kingston_Lane,_Uxbridge,_Middlesex

UB83PH,UK

d_Nicolaus_Copernicus_University,_Institute_of_Sociology,_ul._Fosa_Staromiejska_1a,_87-100_Toru´_n,_Poland

a

r

t

i

c

l

e

i

n

f

o

Articlehistory:

Received16September2014

Receivedinrevisedform2January2015 Accepted30January2015 Availableonlinexxx Keywords: Fracking Publicopinion Shalegas Socialrepresentations Socio-technicaltransitions

a

b

s

t

r

a

c

t

Whilesociologistsofscienceandtechnologyhavelongunderstood technologicaldiffusionandadoptionasprocessesofsocial embed-ding,thepsycho-socialprocessesinvolvedhavereceivedrelatively littleattentioninthesocio-technicaltransitionsliterature.Herewe considerthevalueofMoscovici’ssocialrepresentationstheoryin termsofitspotentialcontributiontoatheoryofsocio-technical change,themulti-levelperspective(MLP).Usingfracking-derived shalegasasatechnologycasestudyandnewspaper representa-tionsofthetechnologyinPoland,GermanyandtheUKasdata, weaddressandillustrateconnectionsbetweentheprocessesof anchoringandobjectiﬁcationthatarecentraltosocial represen-tationstheoryandthesocio-technicaldynamicsobserved.Inso

∗ Correspondingauthor.Tel.:+441133432796.

E-mailaddresses:p.upham@leeds.ac.uk(P.Upham),aleksandra.ola@gmail.com(A.Lis),hauke.riesch@brunel.ac.uk (H.Riesch),piotrek@umk.pl(P.Stankiewicz).

1 _Tel.:₊₄₈_504859397. 2 _Tel.:₊₄₄₇₈₅₁₉₄_3613. 3 _Tel.:₊₄₈_566113644.

(2)

doing,wesetoutanapproachforfurtherworkonagencyinthe MLPandsocio-technicalchangeprocessesgenerally,informedby asocialpsychologicalapproachthatalignswithstructuralist con-cepts.

1. Introduction

Itissomewhatsurprisingthattheorisationofsocio-technicalsystemchangehastodatesaid rela-tivelylittleabouttheroleofpublicopinioninsystemchangefromapsychologicalperspective.Nelson andWinter’s(1982)technologicalregimeconceptoriginallyreferred tosharedcognitiveroutines amongengineersandtechnologists,whichsociologistsoftechnologybroadenedtoincludeawider rangeofactors(Bijker,1995,inGeelsandSchot,2007).Yettheoriesofperception,behavioural, atti-tudinalorpracticechangerelatingtoabroaderrangeofsystemactorsappearlargelyabsentinthe socio-technicaltransitionsliterature,includingthatonthemulti-levelperspective(MLP)(Whitmarsh, 2012).Thepublicdosometimesmakeanappearanceasconsumersandbyproxyascivilsociety(e.g. Geels,2013),butdetailon(andparticularlyintegrationof)psychologicalprocessesislargelymissing. Thesameappliestotheroleofbroadcastandothernewsmedia,whicharguablyplayaroleinboth shapingandreﬂectingpublicdiscourse,asbothcauseandeffect(Habermas,1984).Itisnotthat socio-technicaltransitionstheoristsareunawareoftheroleofthepublicascitizensorconsumers,butthey doseemtohavepaidthisrolerelativelylittleattention.

SeekingtoremedythisandtakingtheMLPasanexemplarmodelofsocio-technicalchange(Geels andSchot,2007),herewedevelopacognitiveperspectiveontheinteractionbetweenniche,regime andlandscape levels,drawing specificallyonsocial representationstheory (Moscovici, 1988).In particular,wecommentonhowtheprocessesofanchoringandobjectification,centraltosocial rep-resentationstheory,interactwiththeprocessespositedintheMLP.Accordingly,weviewactorsas agentswhobothproduceandareaffectedbysocialrepresentations.ThroughlinkagewiththeMLP, welocateandillustratesocialrepresentationsasproducedinactors’communicationsand interac-tions,whichbecomepartofthewiderbackgroundrealitythattheMLPdescribesasthelandscapeofa givensocio-technicalchange,butwhichalsooperateatregimeandnichelevels.Inshort,wesuggest thatsocialrepresentationstheoryallowsustoseethethreelevelsofMLPasinteractingwitheach otherthroughthecognitivepracticesoftheactorsinvolved.Ourfocusisthusmoreideationalthan material,butitisnotondiscourseperse,butratherontheuseofcommunicationinconjunctionwith thespecificsocialpsychologicalprocessespositedinsocialrepresentationstheory.

Empirically,weexaminetheseinteractionsthroughacomparativecasestudyofmedia representa-tionsofshalegasintheUK,GermanyandPoland,forwhichthereislittlesimilarliteraturetodate,with theexceptionofe.g.JaspalandNerlich(2013).Forthispurpose,representationsofshalegasare par-ticularlyapt:beingcontroversial,shalegasexploitationhasbeendiverselythematisedinthenational mediaofEuropeannationsbyavarietyofactorsfromseveralperspectives,enablingaspreadof rep-resentationstobeobserved.Intermsofresearchdesign,thepapercombinesempiricalillustration withtheorydevelopment.Ouraimistoproposeatheoreticalperspectiveforfurtherresearchrather thantomakewidelyapplicable,empiricallyconclusivestatements.Theperspectivethatwedevelop isintendedtobeofrelevanceforbothemergingandestablishedsocio-technicalsystemsandalsofor differentculturalcontexts–henceweuseempiricsfromseveralcountries,illustrativeofdifferent politicalbackgrounds,albeitasingleclassofcommunicationssource(newspapers).Webeginwithan overviewoftheshalegassectorinthecasestudycountriesoftheUK,PolandandGermany,selected fortheircontrastingexperiencesofshalegasexploitationinEurope.Wethenprovideoverviewsof thetwotheoriesthatwewishtobringtogether;astatementofmethodsanddatafollows;ﬁnallywe discussconnectionsbetweenthetheoriesanddirectionsforfurtherwork.

InEurope,particularlyEasternEurope,exploratorydrillingforshalegashasbeenundertakenby oilandgasmajors suchasTotalandChevron,aswellassmalleroperators(Williamsand Amiel,

(3)

2014),thoughtheextentofthecommerciallyviableresourceremainstobeseen.Inmanyrespects, frackingforshale gasisa regime-levelactivityof thenatural gasextractionindustry,supplying acorefossilfuelproductandinvolvingthemajorpetroleumservicecompaniessuchas Hallibur-ton,Schlumbergerand BakerHughes (Westenhaus,2012).HenceMontgomeryand Smith(2010) describetheextensivedevelopmentanduseoffrackingintheUSparticularly(butnotonly),as hav-ingadecadalhistory,on-goingthroughthesecondhalfofthe20thcenturyanduptothepresent day.

Bycontrast,frackingintheUKtodatehasinvolvedmostlylesser-knowncompanies(Griffiths, 2013)and in terms of the exploration and extractionit is only more recently that one of the oil and gas majors (Total) hasbecome involved (BBC News, 2014). On the distribution side in the UK, one of the large distribution firms, Centrica, has part-funded the exploratory activi-ties of the firm Cuadrilla (Carrington, 2014), itself formed in 2005. In general,fracking activity in the UK up to the time of writing has involved very few of the major international energy firms.

InPoland,thepossibilityofshalegasexploitationhasattractedbothglobalcompanieslikeTotal, ChevronandExxonMobilandPolishstate-ownedcompaniessuchasPGNiG,LotosorPKNOrlen.4

Since2007,overonehundredexplorationlicenceshavebeenissuedtooverthirtycompaniescovering almost30%ofPoland’sterritory.Alargenumberoflicencesareinhandsofarelativelynewplayer ontheoilandgasmarket,SanLeonEnergyPlc(17licences),foundedin1995withheadquartersin Ireland.SanLeonEnergyPlcis50%ownedbytheQuantumFundoftheAmericanphilanthropistGeorge SorosandthecompanyToscaFund,havingacquireditsﬁrstoilexplorationassetsinMoroccoonlyin 2007.Mostofthelicences,though,belongtothePolishstate-ownedcompanies.Foreigncompanies, includingtheglobalgiants,ownbetweenoneandﬁvelicenceseach.

InGermany,atthetimeofwriting,thegovernmenthasstatedinacoalitiontreatythat uncon-ventionalgasexplorationwillnotbeundertakenatleastforthedurationoftheGrandCoalition government.Thisfollowedawidespreadfurorewhen,inFebruary2013,ChancellorAngelaMerkel announceddraftregulationsthatwouldpermituseoflargescalefrackingtechniques.Thedraft leg-islationwasmotivatedbyconcernsoverhighenergycostsandcamefromtheFederalDepartmentof Economics,thenledbythepro-businessFreeDemocrats.Followinganinﬂuential2012reportbythe FederalEnvironmentAgency(Umweltbundesamt,2012),thecoalitionstatementisenvironmentally precautious,statingthatfrackingispotentiallyveryhighrisk;thattheuseofenvironmentallytoxic substancesaspartoffrackingisrejected;thatarequestforapprovalcanonlybeconsideredwhenthere issufﬁcientdataforthepurposeandthatanyadversechangeinwaterqualitycanbecategorically avoided(Deutschlandszukunftgestalten,2013).

Intermsofpublicopinion,studiesofpublicattitudestoenergysourcesandtechnologies consis-tentlyshowthattheEuropeanpublicfavoursrenewablesources(seeWhitmarshetal.,2011fora UK-orientedreviewinclusiveofEurobarometerresults).IntheUK,attitudestoshalegasshow consid-erableambivalenceanduncertainty–asofJune2014,ofthe74%oftheBritishpublicwhohaveheard ofit,halfneitheropposenorsupportit,withsupportandoppositioneachaccountingforaround one-quarter(DECC,2014).InPoland,thereisageneralpublicsupportforshalegasexploitationinPoland, rangingfrom59%inareassurroundingexplorationactivitiesto78%atthecountrylevel(CBOS,2013). InPomerania,oneofthetworegionswheremostofthelicencesarelocated,76%inhabitantshave expressedsupportforshalegasexploration(JackmanandSterczy ´nska,2013,p.383).Intheother mostoccupiedregion,Lubelskie,supportisevenhigher andreached88%(PolishShale,2014).In termsofGermanandPolishactivism,Lis(2014)reportsthattheGermananti-frackingmovementis strongerthanthePolishequivalent,particularlyinNorthRhineland-WestphaliaandLowerSaxony, i.e.inthemostprospectiveshalegasregions.Inadditiontolocalgroupsandenvironmental organi-sations,BundesverbandBürgerinitiativenUmweltschutze.V.(FederalAssociationofEnvironmental ActionGroups)opposeshydraulicfracturing.Lis(2014)observesthattheGermanmovementis bet-terorganisedanditspropositionsmorefar-reaching.Polishoppositioncentresaremostlylocaland seldomrequestabanonfrackingacrossthewholeofPoland.

(4)

Box1:Selectedsocio-technicaltransitionprocesses

Pathdependence

Pathdependencereferstothewayinwhichcriticaljuncturesatanearlystageinthedevelopmentof asocio-technicalsystempersistthroughself-reinforcingmeans.Self-reinforcingmeansthatonce achoice–forexampletouseaparticulartechnology–hasbeenmade,itislikelytoberepeated eveniftherearebetteralternatives(Arthur,1989;Pierson,2004).Arthur(1989)definedfourmajor causesforself-reinforcing:(1)largeset-uporfixedcosts,(2)learningeffects,(3)coordination effects,and(4)adaptiveandself-fulfillingexpectations.

Pathcreation

Fromasocio-technicaltransitionsperspective,systemtransformationbasedonpathcreationof moresustainabletrajectoriesrequirestheactiveroleofentrepreneurs,mindfullydeviatingfrom oldpractices,reﬂectingandmobilisingofdiversesetsofobjectsandpeopletocreatenewpaths (GarudandKarnøe,2001).

Expectations

Beforetheirfuturefeasibilitybecomesclear,technoscientiﬁcpathwaysseeksupportongrounds thatliebeyondevidenceoftechnicalprogress.Suchgroundshavebeentheorisedas technologi-calexpectations,i.e.‘real-timerepresentationsoffuturetechnologicalsituationsandcapabilities’ (Borupetal.,2006).Ratherthansimplypredictingfuturerealities,expectationsmobilise techno-logicalandeconomicactivities,thusdirectinginvestmenttowardssomepathwaysratherthan others.

Alignment

TheMulti-LevelPerspectiveconceivesoftransitionsasoutcomesofalignmentsbetween devel-opments atmultiple levelsof thetechnologysystem(Geelsand Schot, 2007). Radicallynew technologieshaveahardtimetobreakthrough,becausefactorssuchasregulations, infrastruc-ture,userpracticesandsupportivenetworksareallalignedtotheexistingtechnology(Smith, 2007).

De-alignment

De-alignmentprocessesinvolvedeviationsfromalignment,duetopressureswithintheregime, orfromthenicheorlandscapelevels.Stressesandpressuresmayarisefromnewtechnologies orchangingexpectationsorregulations,etc.Regardlessofwheretheprocessesoriginate,they involvestressesandpressuresthatdriveandaccentuatechangeinpartsofthesystem.

2. Theoreticalperspectives

2.1. Themulti-levelperspectiveofsocio-technicalchange

Themulti-levelperspectivearguesthattransitionscomeaboutthroughdifferenttypesof interac-tionbetweenprocessesatthethreelevels,via:niche-protectedinnovationsgraduallybecomingmore powerful;landscape-levelchangethatpressuresthesocio-technicalregime;and/ordestabilisationof theregimeenablingniche-innovationstogaintheirownmomentum(GeelsandSchot,2007).Atthe micro-level,technologicalnichesareconceivedofasthelocationatwhichpath-breakinginnovations emerge.Intermsoftheoriginalevolutionarymetaphor,theyareakintogeneticmutations,involving noveltyanddiversitythatmayormaynotdevelopfurtherandthatthenichesacttoprotect(ifonly temporarily)(Kempetal.,1998),oftenthroughtheactionsofsmallnetworksofdedicatedactors(Geels andSchot,2007).Hencenichesareprotectedspacesthatpoliciesmaypassivelyoractivelyprotect, nur-ture,empower(SmithandRaven,2012)orhinder.Atthemacro-level,thesocio-technicallandscape isconceivedofasanexogenousenvironmentthatisbeyondthedirectinﬂuenceofnicheandregime actorsandwhichincludesmacro-economicandpoliticaltrends,plusdeepculturalpatterns(Geels andSchot,2007).Intermsofchangeprocesses,summarily,systemsofproductionmaytake alter-nativepathways,includingtransformation,reconﬁguration,technologicalsubstitution,de-alignment andrealignmentastheregimeisdestabilisedandpreviouslynicheinnovationsareassimilatedinto anadaptedregime(GeelsandSchot,2007).

InBox1wedeﬁnetheprocessesthatareparticularlysupportedbytheempiricsthepresentcase, returningtotheseinSection5.Severaloftheseprocessesaretakenfromthetransitiontypologyof

(5)

GeelsandSchot(2007)–whichwetreatasgeneralcategoriesofMLPprocesses–andaresupplemented bymoregeneralprocesses.Thelatterfollowfromfrackedshalegashavingstrongelementsofpath dependenceinthatitcontinuesfossilfuelusage;andalsothewayinwhichhighexpectationsof frackedshalegasunderpinsrecentinvestmentinEurope.

2.2. Socialrepresentationstheory

OneofthemajorsocialpsychologicaltheoriesofperceptionandsocialinfluenceisMoscovici’s (1988)SocialRepresentationsTheory,whichidentifiestwokeyprocessesinvolvedin understand-ingandevaluatingchangesinthesocialandphysicalenvironment:theseareanchoring(categorising accordingtopre-existingcognitiveframeworks,thusrenderingtheunfamiliarfamiliar);and objec-tification(translatingtheabstractintotheconcreteandtangible,usuallyinvolvingamentalimage), suchthatnewandpotentiallycomplicatedandabstractconceptsacquiretangibleand‘real’qualities. Moscovici(2000)arguedthatsocialrepresentationshavetwofunctions.First,theyconventionalise newconceptsandgivethemarecognisableandcommonform,thusenhancingcommunicationand coordinationwithinagroup:“Theseconventionsenableustoknowwhatstandsforwhat”(Moscovici, 2000,p.22).Second,representationsprescribewaysofthinkingabouttopics:“theyareforcedupon us,transmitted,andaretheproductofawholesequenceofelaborationsandofchangeswhichoccur inthecourseoftimeandaretheachievementofsuccessivegenerations”(Moscovici,2000,p.24). Moscovicialsoemphasisesthatsocialrepresentationsarenotstatic,unliketheDurkheimianconceptof representationsthatservedashisinspiration.Instead,socialrepresentationsareconstantlychanging asthecommunitiesthroughwhichtheytravelthemselveschangeandtakeupother,newconcepts, whichinturnarebeinganchoredtoolderrepresentations;theseinturnalsobecomeshapedbywhat comesafter.Inshort,socialrepresentationsaredynamicandcumulativeprocesses,simultaneously ideationalandcognitive.

BauerandGaskell(1999),whomwedrawonbelow,visualisethedynamicofsocialrepresentation asthetriangularrelationshipbetween:(a)thesubjects,orcarriersoftherepresentation;(b)theobject thatisbeingrepresentedand(c)the“pragmaticcontext”ofthegroupthatholdstherepresentation. Socialrepresentationtheoryconcernstheinteractionbetweenthethreepointsofthetriangle,with eachpointhavinganinﬂuenceontheothertwo.BauerandGaskellthusintroduceanexplicittime-axis intheirvisualisation,withthetrianglemovingintimeandthusconstantlychanging,resultingintheir “Toblerone”modelofsocialrepresentation.

IntermsofcritiqueofMoscovici’stheory,MckinlayandPottter(1987)arguethatsocial represen-tationsarelikelyfurtherreducibletoindividual,cognitiveprocesses;howeverwewouldstillassert thatthereremainsastrongsocialdimensiontoknowledgeandlearning,evenifthelattertakesplace ultimatelywithinindividuals(cf.Wenger’s(1998)conceptoflearningastakinginplacein–andbeing aproductof–socialcontexts).

2.3. Connectingtheories

BoththeMLPandsocialrepresentationstheoryfocusondifferenttypesandobjectsofchange, involvingdifferentchangeprocesses.Yetthetwoapproachescanbereadilyconnected.WhenBauer andGaskell(1999,2008)refertoatriangularrelationshipbetweensubject,objectanddomain(or ‘project’),thisdomaincanaswelltaketheformofasocio-technicalsystemasanyotherphenomenon. Thematteroftheoreticalconnectionthenbecomesoneofinvestigatinghowsocialrepresentations andrelatedprocessesaffecttheprocessesoftheMLP:notably,alternativepathwaysoftransformation, reconﬁguration,technologicalsubstitution,de-alignmentandrealignment,inresponsetointeractions betweentheniche,regime,landscape,entrepreneursornewentrants,incumbentsandpolicyatall levels.

InFig.1webringtogetherthebasicconceptsgraphically,drawingonGeelsandSchot(2007) andBauerandGaskell(1999).Inourempiricalillustrationweshowsomeoftheseconnectionsand eachconnectionmayinprinciplebefollowedindetail,overdifferentperiodsoftimeandwithvarying emphases.Observationofthedevelopmentofthefullrangeoftheseconnectionsrequiresanhistorical perspective.Ourempiricshereinvolveacontentioustechnologyatanearlyandcontestedstageof

(6)

Fig.1. Processesofevolvingsocialrepresentationandsocio-technicalchange(afterBauerandGaskell,1999).Inthe simpliﬁca-tionposedbyBauerandGaskell(1999),therearetwosubjects(individualperceivers)whocarryasocialrepresentation,S1and S2.Oistheobjectoftheirrepresentationandtheyarerelatedinaprojectordomainrepresentedbyatriangle.Thisrelationship hasapast(t−1),apresent(t)andafuture.Againmaintainingthesimpliﬁcation,wetakethedomaininquestiontobethestate oftheregimeforaparticularsocio-technicalsystem,itselfsubjecttonicheandlandscapepressures,positingthatthechanging stateofthatregimeisinpartafunctionofchangingandcompetingsocialrepresentations.Nicherepresentationsarethosethat aremarginalrelativetodominant,regime-levelrepresentations.Landscaperepresentationsarelong-lasting,relativelystable representations.

socialacceptanceinthecountriesconsidered,enablingustoobservehowsocialrepresentationscan differsubstantially,havedifferentstrengthsandindeedthatsocialembeddingofnewtechnologymay nottakeplaceatall.

InFig.1,followingBauerandGaskell(1999),thereismorethanonesubject(S1andS2)who per-ceivesobject(O):wearedealingwithsocialrepresentations,notthecognitionofasingleindividual. Therearealsomultiplepointsintime(t−1,tandonwardsintothefuture),asrepresentationschange. Fig.1juxtaposesthebasicconceptsofnicheandlandscapepressures,withregimestateschangingin responsetopressures.Inthisconception,socialrepresentationsinterplayinmutualrelationshipwith thepositionsofpoliticalactors,institutions,corporationsandotheractors.Similarlysocial represen-tationsareinvolvedinabroadrangeofprocesses,includingthoseofsocio-technicallock-inandpath dependence(Arthur,1989);conversely,processesofpathcreation(Garudetal.,2010);processesof alignmentanddealignment(Geels,2002);andpsycho-socialprocessesofexpectation,shapingand imagination(vanLente,2000),tonameonlyafewofthemainprocessesthathavebeenprominentin theliteratureofSTSandsocio-technicalchange.Associatedwiththoseprocessesaretheconstruction anddeconstructionofsocio-technicalnetworksthatconnectmaterialandnon-materialresources.

In termsofconceptualconnectionsbetweensocialrepresentationstheoryand theMLP,there areprecedentsintheconsiderationofthecognitive,normativeandregulativerulesandinstitutions involvedinco-ordinatinghumanactivities(Geels,2004;GeelsandSchot,2007).Forexample,Geels andSchot(2007,p.405),drawingonBijker(1995),discussclosurearoundaparticular interpreta-tionofanewtechnology,which“involvesthebuild-upofasharedcognitiveframe”,asanimportant aspectofsocial-technicaltransitionprocesses.5_Social_{representations}_are_thoroughly_embedded_in

thecollaborativeandcompetitiveaspectsofsociallife.WhatisdistinctiveaboutMoscovici’stheory, though,andwhatsocialrepresentationstheoryoffersbeyondideasofsharedcognitiveframes,closure andsoon,aretheparticularprocessesofanchoringandobjectiﬁcation:itistheseprocessesposited asunderpinningsharedperceptionthatwesuggestcontributetoorhindersocio-technicalchange processes.Socio-technicaloutcomesaretheresultoftheinterplayofalloftheaboveandmore;social

(7)

representationsareonlyoneelementinthis,buttheyareanimportantelementthatisbothinﬂuencer andinﬂuenced:inpart,bothexplanansandexplanandum.

Moreover,asGeelsandSchot(2007)emphasise,somesocialrepresentationsaremore inﬂuen-tialthanothers,afunctionoftheirsocial,politicalandmaterialpositions.SimilartoCallon’s(1991) inscriptions,wesuggestthatthemostwidelysharedrepresentationscometoformpartofthe dom-inantregimeatthecognitivelevel.Thoserepresentationsthatarelittlesharedremainasniche-level representations,whilethosethatareculturalandconnecttothemostwidelysharedvaluesform partoftheslower-changinglandscape.Whilethereisdiscussionofcompetitionbetweenideasand discoursesintheexistingsocio-technicaltransitionsliterature,thecognitivedetailoftheprocesses bywhichideascometomovefromnichetoregimehavebeenlessaddressed.Moscovici’sargument (e.g.2008;originally1971andbasedonanempiricalanalysisofhowthelanguageofpsychoanalysis movedfromnichemedicalpracticetocommonparlance)isthatfornewideastosucceed,theyneed tobecomeappropriatedandintegrated(anchored)intoexistingframes.Whilethisparallels think-ingindiscursiveentrepreneurship(e.g.Phillipsetal.,2004),theanalyticprocessespositedareﬁrmly cognitive.

3. Method

OuraimhereistoillustratesomeoftheconnectionsbetweenMLPand socialrepresentations processes,ratherthantobeexhaustiveintermsoftheMLPprocessescovered:thereisplentyofscope forfurtherworkinthisregard.Similarly,wesupportthetheorisationwithempiricssampledinaway thatreﬂectstherelativeincidenceofthemes,ratherthaninawaythatensuresalloftheirvarietyis represented.Henceweusedsystematicratherthanstratiﬁedsampling,selectingeveryntharticle(e.g. every5tharticleintheUKsample).Thislargelyprovidesapictureofregime-levelrepresentations, withnicherepresentationspresentbutonanumericallysmallerscale.

Forthecasestudies,themethodinvolvedcollatingrepresentationsoffrackingandshalegasin recentnewspaperarticlesineachofPoland,GermanyandtheUK.Thechoiceandnumberof newspa-persexaminedineachcountryreﬂectsacombinationoftheavailabilityofelectronically-searchable sourcesandtheaimtorepresentarangeofreportingstyles(ratherthanpoliticalrepresentativeness perse).Henceweselectedineachcountrynewspapertitlesthatspannedboththe‘serious’pressand titlesthatarelighterinnewscontent.Thisselectioncriterionisintendedtoprovideawiderangeof typesofrepresentation,ratherthanonlydifferentpositions.

FortheUK,thenumberofarticleswasdeﬁnedbythelimitsoftheNexisLexissearchengineand coveredintotalthemostrecent500articlesinTheSun,a populartabloidthatmixesnewswith entertainmentandhumour,andtheNexisbroadsheetgroupofsevennewspapers,providingdetailed currentaffairsandbusinessnewscoverage.TheUKnewspapersare:CityA.M,Independent.co.uk, IndependentonSunday,telegraph.co.uk,TheDailyTelegraph(London),TheGuardian(London),The Independent(London),TheObserver,TheSundayTelegraph(London),TheSundayTimes(London), thetimes.co.uk,TheTimes(London).Asthistypeofdatabasesearchdoesnotalwaysproduceconsistent oraccurateoutput(seeDeacon,2007,inBeckeretal.,2012),thesearchwasrepeatedtoprovidethe fullrangeofnewspapers.

ForPoland,differentsearchstrategieswereused,againreflectingdataavailability.Samplingwas againcarriedoutonasystematicbasis(everynth)article,intendedtoreflecttherelativeincidenceof opinionratherthanitsvariety.Fortwoselectedbroadsheets,asearchwasagaincarriedoutthrough NexisLexisdatabasesearchengine.Forcomparison,asearchwascarriedoutinopen-accessInternet archivesoftheprofessionalnewspaperfortheenergysectorWirtualnyNowyPrzemysłaswellas forthetabloidFAKT.ForGermany,thenewspapersinspectedwerethetabloidBildandabroadsheet groupoffournationalpapers(Tagesspiegel,FrankfurterRundschau,SüddeutscheZeitungandDie Welt).Asthenumberofarticlespertimeunitdifferedinthethreecountries,andalsothedateof thefirstreferencefoundvaried,thetimeperiodsforwhichwehavedataalsovaryasfollows:UK 09/11–06/13;Germany01/11–06/13;Poland06/10–06/13.Whilestrictcomparabilityisdifficultto obtainduetointernationaldifferencesinfactorssuchastheprevalenceofbroadsheets,essentially thedatarepresentabroadspreadofnewsdiscourseonfrackingandshalegasinthethreecountriesin theperiod2011–13.Intotal303newspaperitemsweremanuallycodedfromatotalof1334available

(8)

itemsintheabovenewspapersinthatperiod,i.e.asampleof23%nearlyonequarterofthetotal availableinthe15newspapersexamined.

Athemewasdefinedasthemain,orakey,messageofthearticle.Themeswerederivedbottom-up fromthedata,bymanuallyinspectingtheselectedarticlesandincrementallyidentifyingcommon themesacrossarticles.Onlyexplicit,notimplicitthemeswerecodedandwesoughttoreflectonly themesclearlyprominentinthearticle.Themecodingwasundertakentwice,firstonanindividual countrybasisandthenagainwherethemeswerefoundtoberecurrentwithinasinglecountrybut hadnotbeeninitiallysearchedforintheothercountries.

4. Resultsanddiscussion

Here we ﬁrst provide an overview of the themes evident in newspaper representations of shalegas exploitation in the three countries. We then draw on these to illustrateconnections betweensocial representationstheoryand theMLPsocio-technical transitions framework.Fig.2 providesquantitativedetail,showingtheoverallthematic frequency(inpercentageterms, inter-nallyreferencedwithineachnewspaperornewspaperset)forselectedbroadsheets(‘qualitypress’) acrossthe three countries. Fig. 3 shows theoverall thematic frequency (in thesame terms) in the tabloid (lighter) newspapers of the three countries. Separating the two types of newspa-perswasintendedtoprovideamorecomparable basisthanwoulda mixandassumed different patternsof representations in the quality and lighter press. In fact while visual comparison of Figs.2and3 allowsobservationof somesuchdifferences,overallthematicincidenceamong the newspapersand newspaper classes was not statisticallysigniﬁcant and we refer to this further below.

4.1. UnitedKingdom

During 2012,TheSunappearsunsureabouttheadvantagesanddisadvantagesoffrackingand whereitspositionlies.HenceatanearlystageintheUKdebate,thenewspaperreportsinaneutral waytheIrishvisitofNigeriancampaigner:“InmyhomecountryofNigeriawehaveseenoilcompanies destroyingourland_._._.Yourcountryisbeautiful–youmustnotletitbedestroyed.”(TheSun(England), August18,2012).Bytheendof2012,however,TheSunhasshiftedtoastronguseofhumourand punning,combinedwithanemphasisofthepotentialbeneﬁtsofshalegasnotonlyatthenational scale,butalsointermsofreducedhouseholdbills.Thereismoreofanemphasisonterritoriality, withshadesofpatriotism(thesearestrongandlong-standingthemesinthestyleofthisparticular newspaper).

Frackingwasgiventhego-aheadbytheUKGovernmentinmid-December2012,butthe like-lihoodofthiswasanticipatedandstrengthenedthroughofficially-commissionedreportssuchthat ofPublicHealthEngland,whichassessedthelikelyhealth impactsaslowin October2012(PHE, 2013).During the monthsprior tothis, thepotentialeconomic value ofthe resourcein theUK andtheactualeconomicvalueof theresourceintheUS appeartocoincidewitha shiftinboth columnistandnewsarticlesinboththebroadsheetsandTheSuntoa moreconcertedfavouring oftheexploitationofshalegas.ThisshiftovertimeisillustratedbyTheSun’sincreasingreference tothehouseholdbenefitsoffrackingand thenewspaper’suseofhumour(appendedFig.A3a–c). Thepredominantthemesinthismorerecentperiodareanappreciationandpositiveapprovalof theperceivedbenefitsofthefossilfuelresources,withthebroadsheetsreportingthemany com-mercialdealsinvolved.Indeed Totalhassincegoneahead withinvestmentinUK fracking(BBC, 2014).

InbothUKnewspapertypes(broadsheetandtabloid),thereisastrongthemeoffracking-derived shalegasasrevolutionaryandthisisportrayedthroughavarietyofmetaphors:astectonicplates shifting(TheSunday Times(London),February 24,2013) (seeBox 2);as theOpec ‘stranglehold’ beingbrokenbytheshale‘revolution’(thetimes.co.uk,January17,2013);asa‘wake-upcallthatwill changetheworld’(Independent.co.uk,December14,2012)andaconfoundingofthethesisofpeak oil:“BobDudley,thechiefexecutive,said:‘Conventionalwisdomhasbeenturnedonitshead.Fears ofoilrunningoutappearincreasinglygroundless.”’(Independent.co.uk,January17,2013).IntheUK

(9)

Fig. 2. Thematic frequency (%) in the broadsheets of the three countries (key, explicit themes only).

(10)

Fig. 3. Thematic frequency (%) in the tabloids of the three countries (key, explicit themes only).

(11)

Box2:Examplesofanchoringandobjectification:UKarticleheaders Examplefrom‘TheSun’,UKtabloid

Notforshale;THISPRETTYVILLAGECOULDBESITTINGONVASTRESERVESOFFUELYET

GETTINGTOTHEMMEANSUSINGCONTROVERSIALFRACKINGTECHNIQUE.BUTANGRY

LOCALSSAYTHEY’RE_._._.TheSun(England),May15,2013Wednesday, NEWS;Pg.22,847 words,OLIVERHARVEY;STEWARTWHITTINGHAMIntheUSithasbeencreditedwith kick-startingtheireconomybyprovidingcheapenergyandjobsandcouldmakethecountry self-sufﬁcientinenergyby2030.YettheusuallysedatevillagersofBalcombeinWestSussexhave amessagefortheoilmen:Frackoff_._._.

Herefrackingisanchoredtotheimageryofterritorialdefence.PunningisendemicinTheSunand hastheeffectofreducingthemystiqueoffracking,renderingitmorefamiliarthroughassociation withinformaldiscourse.Heretherearepunson‘sale’(‘notforshale’)andtheabusiveFword(‘frack off’),arecurrentfrackingpuninTheSun.Althoughtheeditorialstanceofthepaperappearsto shifttoapositivestanceonfrackingduringtheperiodexamined,theimageryinthisexampleis ofasituationinwhichoutsidersseektobuyofflocalresidents,whocrudelyrejecttheofferin response.Ingeneral,humourhasalonghistoryinsignallingandsupportingpoliticalresistance (Lockyer,2006).

ExamplefromTheSundayTimes,UKbroadsheet

UncleSamwon’tsharehisshalegasgoodies;IRWINSTELZERAMERICANACCOUNT,

TheSundayTimes(London),February24,2013Sunday,BUSINESS;Pg.4,859words,IRWIN STELZER.Thetectonicplatesareshiftingisanover-usedexpression,deployedbyfashionistas whenskirtlengthschangebyafewinches,andbypoliticianswhensomeunknownsoarsto his15minutesoffame.Whenitcomestotheenergyindustry,however,theexpressionisapt. Herefrackingisanchoredtoimageryincludingaparodyofselﬁshness(perhapsofachild), fol-lowedbyaseismicimage,bothevocativemetaphorsusedtoconveyasenseofwhatfrackinghas giventotheUSAandtheassociatedinternational,geopoliticalimplications.

ExamplefromTheSundayTimes,UKbroadsheet

ExxoneyesUKshale.TheSundayTimes(London),December16,2012Sunday,BUSINESS;

BUSINESS;FRONTPAGE;Pg.1,72words.THEworld’slargestoilcompanyisconsideringa betonBritain’snascentshalegasrevolution,writesDannyFortson.ExxonMobilhasentered talkstobuyastakeintheBowlanddrillingoperationinnorthwestEnglandownedbyIGas, theLondon-listeddeveloper.Theinterestofthe$400bn(

£

245bn)Americangiantemergedjust daysaftertheBritishbanonfrackingwaslifted.Shell,TotalandStatoilaremullingbids. Againthisexampleusesagreed-relatedorcovetousmetaphortoportraytheoilmajor, accompa-niedbyconnotationsofspeculation.Thefrackingdevelopmentitselfisnew-born,emergentand revolutionary.Revolutionisaverycommonthemeinnewspaperarticlesonfrackingduringthe periodexamined.

broadsheetstheglobalimplicationsareseenaspotentiallyprofound,extendingwellbeyondenergy security:“Thegeopoliticalimplicationsarehuge:whatifthedollarsharplystrengthens,and Wash-ingtongrowslessinclinedtomeddleintheMiddleEast?”(TheIndependentonSunday,February10, 2013).

FollowingUKGovernmentapprovaloftheresumptionoffracking,anotablethemeinthe broad-sheetsisgovernmentsupportforfrackingbeingsymptomaticofaweakeningofthegovernment’s positiononclimatechangetargets,alsowiththeassociated,internaldifferenceswithinGovernment thatareendemictoWhitehall:“Climateministerkeepshisdistancefrom‘dashforgas’(thetimes.co.uk, December6,2012);and“ThepledgereinforcedGeorgeOsborne’saimofmakinga‘dashforgas’the mainthrustofBritain’sfutureenergypolicy,raisingmoreconcernsthattheCoalitionwasmoving awayfromitspromiseofbeingthe‘greenestgovernmentever”’(Independent.co.uk,October9,2012). AppendixoffersadditionalthematicandtimingdetailontheUKcasebywayofillustration.

(12)

4.2. Germany

Withtheexceptionofonlytheearliestarticlesonfracking,whichstartedtoappearin2011,the Germanpressalmostinvariablydescribedfrackingas“controversial”(“umstritten”),evenwithinthe morepositiveorneutralarticles.Evenarticlesoutliningtheviewsofproponentsoffrackingincluded anacknowledgedthatthisisacontestedtechnology.Overall,thecoverageoffrackinghasnotbeen positiveandthisisthecaseforthetabloidaswellasthe‘quality’press.

Withthetechnologyhavingbeenestablishedasacontentiouspublicissue,frackingfeaturedinthe Germannewsextensivelyduringthelatterpartoftheperiodsurveyed.Asthecountrywasatthattime headingforafederalelection(heldinSeptember2013),politiciansofallthemainpartiesaimedto clarifytheirpositionsonthisandotherissues.AdditionallyseveralregionalLandtagelectionswereto beheldduringtheperiod.MindfulofthegenerallynegativeattitudeoftheGermanpublic,statements rarelyofferedunqualiﬁedsupportforfracking(especiallysointheregions);insteadthepositions rangedfromcompleterejectiontoverystringentdemandsofassurancesonsafetybeforefracking shouldbeallowed(e.g.“FollowingtheBavarianenvironmentministerMarcelHuber(CSU),theSPD hasalsocalledforafundamentalprohibitionofgasextractionusingfracking,aslongasdangersto theenvironmentcannotberuledout”Bild,1.3.2013).

AlsonotableintheGermanpressarereferencestotherelative“cleanliness” ofnaturalgasin termsofCO2 emissions(“areputationforbeingenvironmentallyfriendly”FrankfurterRundschau,

30.5.2012),whichhasallowedfrackingtobeframedasatransitiontechnologyinthemorepositive articles.Similarlyfrackinghasbeenpresentedintermsofthebenefitsforthenationaleconomyand, lessso,forindividualenergycompaniesandlocaleconomies.Energysecuritywasfeaturedmostlyin discussionsoffrackingintheUSandconsequentlyaboutthebenefitstoUSenergysecurityandthe resultinggeopoliticalchanges,ratherthanwithreferencetoGermany.Indeedthegeopoliticalchanges thatfrackingmightdriveweregivensubstantialattention.Thiswassometimesframedpositivelyand ofteninassociationwithculturally-specificopinion(oneBildcommentpiecearguedthat,as Saudi-Arabia’sinfluencewanesduetotheWestsupplyingitsownfuels,itwillbelesslikelytofundreligious fundamentalistschoolsallovertheworld(Bild,18.2.2013)).Moreneutrallyobservedgeopolitical consequencesoffrackingintheUScentredaroundaprojectedreductioninthemilitarypresenceof theUSintheMiddleEastandelsewhere.

Whilegeopoliticswasthusamajorthemeofdiscussion,controversyoverfrackinginGermanyhas centredmainlyonlocalenvironmentalissues.Theseweresometimesnotfurtherdeﬁned,butvery frequentlytheissuethatstoodoutwasthecontaminationofgroundwatersupply.Withinthis partic-ulardebate,therewasaninterestingdifferenceintheterminologyusedtorefertothewatersupply. Particularlysointhetabloid,thetermusedintheearlierarticles,beforethepublicdebatereachedthe peakofthelastfewmonthsoftheanalyticperiod,tendedtobe“groundwater”(“Grundwasser”:10 referencesinthebroadsheets,11inBild).Thisgraduallyshiftedto“drinkingwater”(“Trinkwasser”: 14referencesinthebroadsheets,25inBild)asthedebatebecamemoreheatedandasnewspaper articles–andthepoliticiansreportedon–shiftedtoamorenegativestance.Ingeneral,“drinking water”hashealthriskconnotationsthatarelessobviousintheterm“groundwater”.Thisconcern overdrinkingwatercontaminationﬁnallyresultedinasomewhatidiosyncraticGermanfuroreover thetraditionalGermanbeerpuritylaws,aftertheGermanBrewersFederation(Deutscher Brauer-Bund)enteredthedebate,withfearsthattheymaynolongerbeabletoguaranteeuncontaminated beer,andthusendangerapartofGerman“culturalheritage”(Bild,23.5.2013).

4.3. Poland

ThePolishcasestudyshowshowshalegasrepresentationswerechangingovertimefrom primar-ilyeconomicandrelatedtoenergysecuritytobeingassociatedwithspeciﬁcissuesoftaxationand environmentalregulations.Onecanalsoseehowthroughmediarepresentationsshalegasbecomes cognitivelyembeddedintothefossilfuelregimeofenergyproductioninPoland.

Between2010and2012,twomainthemesinGazetaWyborcza(GW)weredominant:thatshalegas isgeopoliticallygamechanging(21times)andthatitwillenhancePoland’senergysecurity(6times). Onecouldreadthat:“shalegasisagreatchanceforPoland.ThankstoshalegasexploitationPolandmay

(13)

gainindependenceinenergypolicy”(GW,May24,2013).Shalegaswasacontroversialtopic(11times) raisingpatrioticfeelingsfromtimetotime(9times).Forexample,inSeptember2011information leakedtothepressthatRussiancapitalstandsbehindcompanieswithlicencestoexploreshalegasin PolandandthatRussiamaybetryingtoobstructexplorationprocessesinPoland(GW,September23, 2011).ThegovernmentissuedastatementthatPolishregulationswillnotletRussiancompaniesblock shalegasexploration(GW,September23,2011).ThesequitegeneralexpressionsoffearofRussia’s interferencehavebecomemoresubstantiatedwheninmid-2012ExxonMobilannouncedmovingits explorationactivitiesawayfromPoland.ThishasimmediatelybeenconnectedtoRussia’sinterestin spoilingPoland’splanstoexploitshalegasinthefuture:“MaybeitisnotconvenientforExxonto investinPolandbecausethisisnotwhatGazpromwithitsstrangleholdonourgassupplieswants” (GW,December28,2010).

From2010throughout2013,GWpresentedshalegasashavinggreateconomicimportancefor Poland(18times)anda commercialvalueforcompanies(4times). Thesearchforshalegaswas comparedtothe‘goldrush’anditsimpactontheAmericaneconomywasemphasised(GW,January 27,2010).The‘goldrush’metaphoralsoreferredtothelevelof interestofforeigncompaniesin Poland’sshalegasreserves:“inourcountry‘allthegreatonesofthisworld’–forexample,Exxon Mobil,Chevron,ConocoPhillips,MarathonOilCorp.arelookingforshalegas”(GW,January27,2010). Companies’interestinPolishshalegasreservesbroughtabouthopesforenergysecurity:“theywill earnmoneyandwewillgainenergysecurity”(GW,January27,2010).

InDziennikGazetaPrawna(DGP),shalegasisalsogenerallyframedasauniquechanceforPoland toachieveindependencefromRussiangassupplieswithlowerenergypricesthatwillboostPolish economy.ItfeelsthatPoland‘hitthejackpot’.Between2010and2011,shalegaswasoftenpresented asgeopoliticallygamechangingwithfrequentreferencesmadetotheenvironmentalcontroversies offracking.InMarch2012,areportonPolishshalegasreserves,carriedoutbythePolishGeological Institute,estimatedthequantityofexploitableshalegasatabout10timeslowerlevelthantheearlier optimisticestimationsmadebytheUSEnergyInformationAgency(340–760billionm3_compared_to

5300billionm3_)._After_2012,_new_frames_came_forward:_supply_limits,_uncertain_effects_on_fuel_costs

andconcernsaboutenvironmentaldamage.AccordingtothetabloidFAKT,thatwas:“theendofthe dream”(FAKT,December4,2012).

InWNP,geopoliticallygamechangingroleofshalegashasfrequentlybeenmentioned(10times) withregardtoPoland’srelationstoRussia,totheEU,aswellastoGermany.InOctober2013the WNPwrote“Firstofall,shalegasisdangerousformanycompanies.Bybettingonrenewableenergy sources,Germanyhas,withagreatstyle,developedproductionandresearchinthissector.Forthem shalegasisaseriouscompetitor”(WNP,October10,2013).

Inthesecondhalfof2011thegovernmentstartedtoprepareaspeciallawtoregulatetaxation fromshalegasexploration(GW,October7,2011).Mostofthearticlesontaxation(fouroutofseven) appearedfromOctobertillDecember2011.InNovember2011GWwrotethatthePolishcompanies werenotworriedaboutnewtaxationasitis“asongofthefuture”(GW,November23,2011).

InGWreferencestoenvironmentaldamageweremadeeighttimes.Ithasoftenbeenworriedthat environmentalconcernsmayholdbackexploitationactivities(fivetimesinGW,seventimesinDGP, seventimesinWNP).InDGP,environmentalconcernsappearmostlyinarticlesthatreportopponents’ activities(sixtimes).Thisperhapsreflectstheratherbusinessorientedthanenvironmentaloriented characterofthebroadsheet.Onlyfourtimes,DGPmakesapointthatshalegasextractionrequiresa highlevelofenvironmentalprotection.InJuly2013,theWNPwrote“OnThursday,theenvironmental committeeoftheEuropeanParliamentadoptedregulationsunfavourableforshalegasexploitation. Itwantsshalegasexplorationactivitiestobecoveredwithafullenvironmentalimpactassessment whichmaymakeshalegasexploitationlessprofitable”(WNP,July11,2013).

InFAKTenvironmentalprotestorsarepresentedas“hordesofeco-terroristscamerunningtousto convincepeoplethatgasexplorationisatragedywhichdestroystheenvironment”(FAKT,February 27,2012).Faktpresentsshalegasmainlyasacontroversy(18times),butatthesametime man-ageableintermsofpotentialadverseeffects(12times)andthussafe(10times).Remarkably,inthe secondhalfof2012,Faktpublishedaseriesof10educationalarticlesinformofquestionsandanswers (allegedlyreaders’questions),explainingvariousaspectsofshalegasexploration,fracking,itsimpact onenvironment,risksandbeneﬁts.Thearticlespresentshalegasundertheheadings,like‘werefute

(14)

themyths’,‘theold,goodfracking’,‘thelawisprotectingus’and‘wearenotafraidofshalegas’.The wholeseriesofarticlescreatesthestrongimpressionofbeingsponsoredbygascompanies,evenmore sobecausethenameofonegascompanyisrepeatedinmostofthearticles.FAKTalsoexpresseshope forcheapergasforhouseholds(FAKT,September13,2012andFAKT,September19,2012).

5. Discussion

Consideredalongsidesocio-technicaltransitionsconcepts,socialrepresentationstheoryimplies thatbuildingmorecomprehensiveaccountsoftechnologicalchangerequireslookingbeyondthe materialityofcompetingtechnologicaloptionsandcorporateenvironments.Formanyactors, repre-sentationsareintendedtobeperformative,inthiscontexthelpingtobringtolifeimaginedfuturesof prosperityandenergyindependence,orhelpingtoavoiddamagedlandscapesandaproblematically warmerworld.Itisinthesitesandsituationsofsocio-technicalcontroversythatweperhapsbestsee thesocialdimensionsoftechnologicalchange:Doise(1993,inLaszlo,1997)emphasisethatsocial rep-resentationsdistinguishaswellasbindsocialgroups.Thisappliesbothwithinandbetweencountries andmayberelativelyconstantorchangeovertime.Weseeevidenceofallofthisinthemedia repre-sentations:inthechangeintoneovertimeinTheSun,GazetaWyborczaandDziennikGazetaPrawna, intheconsistentscepticismoftheGermannewspapers,andinthecompeting,alternativediscourses andmetaphorsfoundsimultaneouslywithineachofthecountries.

While therearesomeimportantcommonalitiesacrossthecountries,notablyissues ofenergy securityandgeopolitics,therearealsoclearnationaldifferencesinmediadiscourse(andpossibly alsoreportingstandards,giventheapparentsponsorshipofarticlesinFAKT).AsLaszlo(1997)argues, anchoringasaconceptwouldholdlimitedanalyticvalueifitwasnotculturallyorsocially context-specific.Hencealternativeanchors–alternativewaysofmakingnewphenomenafamiliar–arealmost inevitableandthemselvesformpartofthecompetitiveenvironmentinwhichdifferent,partly substi-tutabletechnologiesaredevelopedandpromoted.Someoftheseanchorscrosswellbetweencountries andculturesandothersdonot,remainingculturallyspecificoratleastholdingmoreresonanceinone countrythaninanother(e.g.theGermantrinkwasseranchor).Moreover,theanchoringofshalegasin themediadiscoursesbringsthedifferentlevelsoftheMLPtogether,butthisisalwaysinthecontext oflocal,situatedpractices(inourcaseatnationallevels),whichthenleadtodifferentobjectifications ofrisks,bothcontributingtoandreflectingdifferentpolicyresults.

InPoland,forexample,shalegasiscognitivelyalignedwithavaluedfossilfuelregimethrough mediarepresentationsofeconomicprosperityandenergyindependencefromRussia.Related eco-nomicandgeopoliticalvisionsconstitutethemaincognitiveframeforinterpretingactivitiesrelated toshalegasexploration.ShalegasinPolandisconceivedofwithinthisframeandhencewhenthe ‘globalgiants’cometofrackforshalegasinPoland,thisisalignedwithnationalhopesforenergy security,prosperityandindependencefromapowerfulneighbour.WhenExxonMobilannouncesits withdrawal,thisisalignedwiththefearofRussianinﬂuenceonPolishenergysupplies.Interestingly, shalegaswasnever–inthePolisharticlesexamined–presentedasposingathreattothePolish coalsector.Rather,technologicalsubstitutionismade‘thinkable’atthegeopoliticallevel.Ratherthe discussionwasofRussiangasbeingsubstitutedwithPolishfrackedgas,ratherthanintermsofcoal substitution.Inpsychologicalterms,Polishsocialrepresentationsofshalegasdonotcreateacognitive spaceforadissonancebetweenshalegasandcoalsectors.Shalegasandcoalareanchoredtogether andviewedasaligned,coexistinginafuturefossilfuelregime.Arelativescarcityofenvironmental themesinPolishmediadiscourseonshalegasunderscorestheconclusionthattheﬁndingofshalegas doesnotheraldanymajortechnologicalshift,butratherapath-dependentdevelopmentinthePolish energysector.

Anchoring involves not only cognitive but also moral dimensions: the assimilation of new phenomenainvolvesconnectionstosharedvaluesaswellassharedperceptions,worldviews,opinions andconcepts.Objectiﬁcationtakesthisastagefurtherthroughfamiliarisation.Anotableexamplein TheSun(UK)isacommentator’sdomesticatedimage:

“Togetatthisvastreservoirofnaturalresources,youhavetouseasystemcalledfracking.It’s perfectlysimple.Yousquirtwaterintotherocksfarbelowthesurface.Theysplit.Andthegas

(15)

thatcomesoutispipedtoyourmum’shometokeephertoestoastythiswinter.”(Clarkson,The Sun,15.12.12).

WhileTheSun eventuallytreatsshalegasasjustanotherformofheatingfuel,albeitonethat theUK potentially owns,so theUK broadsheetgroup and PolishDGPtreat shale gasas corpo-ratenewsofcommercialandeconomicsignificance.MostoftheUKbroadsheetarticlesareinfact entriesintheBusinesssectionsofthenewspapers,involvingfinancialandcommercialthemes.By contrastthemostprevalentthemesofarticlesinDieWeltareonesofcontroversyand environmen-talconcern,objectifiedintermsofgrundwasserand latterlytrinkwasser.OppositioninGermany intheperiodconsideredwassubstantial,widespread,hardenedover time andmostlyrelated to concernaboutpotential,localenvironmentalimpacts. Nonetheless,theinternational,geopolitical implicationsoffrackingandshalegaswerediscussedrepeatedlyandfrequently,notonlyGermany, butin eachof thethreecountries. Indeedstatisticalanalysis(factorialANOVAusingsquare root normalisedpercentageincidenceofsub-themesonapernewspaperbasis)showsnosignificant dif-ferenceintheoverallvariance ofthemesbetweenthenewspapers(p=0.729,df=5,Fcrit2.279), but doesshowsignificant differencein theincidence of theterms per se(p=1.18e−7,df=28, F crit 1.557).The ANOVAtestsfor sources ofvariance and thepattern ofcommonality acrossthe newspapers, but above chance (p=0.05) variance among the themes is repeated when (a) the threecountrybroadsheetsarecomparedwitheachotherand(b)whenthethreecountrytabloids are compared with each other, reinforcing the impression of sharedrepresentations across the countries.

ReturningtoFig.1, itshouldbe emphasisedthat asrepresentationsvary andcompete,what maybe,forexample,aformofpathcreationforoneactorcanbeaformofpathdependencyfor another.ThesecontrastsarefurtherillustratedinTable1,whichprovidessomeexamplesofarticle headlinesandcontent(someofwhicharealsoreferredtoabove),organisedaccordingtoselected socio-technicalprocesses.Itshouldbenotedthatwhiletheseprocesseshavediscretemeaningsin theabstract,inthematerialworldagivenphenomenonoftenexhibitsthecharacteristicsofmore thanoneprocess.Asmentionedabove,theprocessesinTable1aretakenfromthetransition typol-ogyofGeelsandSchot(2007),whichwetreatasgeneralcategoriesofMLPprocesses,supplemented bymoregeneralprocessesthatareevidentinrepresentationsoffrackedshalegasinthecountries considered.

Box2providesexamplesof(a)anchoringastheprocessofconnectingtopre-existingconceptual categoriesand(b)objectificationasconnectionwithvisualortangibleimagery.Metaphorisoften stronginthelatter.Whererepresentationsareofactivitiesorobjectsthatalreadyhaveatangible, physicaldimension,ratherthanbeingprimarilyconceptual,thecolouring,associativeaspectofthe associationisoftenconveyedthroughparticularchoiceofverbsandnouns,withobjectificationbeing associativeratherthandirect.Objectificationmayalsobemoreorlessstrong.Itispossiblethatfracking isbecomingobjectifiedasthe‘frackingrig’inthepublicmind,butatthisstage,thisisspeculation.By contrast,cloninghasbeensuggestedasfirmlyobjectifiedinthepublicmindduringthe1990sthrough imagesof‘DollytheSheep’(BauerandGaskell,1999).

Table1splitsanumberofexamplesofdifferentprocessesinto‘pro’and‘anti’campsto empha-sisethatthecognitivedimensionsofprocessesofsystemchangecanbecompetitiveorcollaborative, contestedorshared.Oftenaspeciﬁcnewspaperarticlewillcontainseveralco-existingbut differ-entrepresentations,whileatothertimes,particularlyiftheitemisaletterorcommentary,theview expressedisone-dimensional.Newsmediaarticlesprovideaninsightintothestruggleofideas,which inturnunderpinthepoliticalstruggleforsupportiveorhinderingregulationoffrackingforshalegas andthedeliberationofactorsastheyseektorespondandpositionthemselves.Asmentioned,the pro-cessesareideationalbutalsopsychological:whilesocialrepresentationstheorycanbedistinguished fromdiscursivetheoriesbyitsemphasisonpsychologicalprocesses,thereisacommonalityinthe datathatbothapproachesuse.Theideationalandmaterialaspectsofthesituationarerepresented indifferentwaysbydifferentpeopleandauthors,butnonethelessinawaythatintegratestheseinto pre-existing,socialisedcognitiveschemata.

(16)

Table1

Socialrepresentationsoffrackedshalegas(FSG)ascognitivedimensionsofsocio-technicalchangeprocesses(examplesfrom Poland,GermanyandtheUK).

Socio-technical processes

Proshalegasrepresentations Anti-shalegasrepresentations Pathcreation FSGasanewenergysourcethatisgeopolitically

revolutionary

E.g.TheUSmaysoonbeself-sufﬁcientinfuel,with profoundeconomic,politicalandenvironmental consequences(thetimes.co.uk,July25,2012and Bild,April19,2012).

E.g.Asaresultofthesechanges,mostprobably, newcoalitionswillbemadeonthegeopolitical scenewhichwillreplacetheoldstateofpower relations(DziennikGazetaPrawna,November15, 2012).

FSGasanunwantedvariantinfossilfuel extraction

E.g.Therisksposedbyfracking chemicalsexceedthebeneﬁts (FrankfurterRundschau,May21, 2013).

E.g.Havingrespectforenvironmental goalsandfortheneedtoreduce greenhousegases,especiallyCO2,we

decidedtostillbetoncoal(...)– addedPrimeMinisterTusk(WNP, September10,2013).

Pathdependence FSGmaintainsexistingwaysoflife

E.g.Acheapandplentifulsupplyofgasmeans societycankeepongoing.Peoplecanstilldrive carsandhavepatioheatersandtakeforeign holidays(TheSun,December15,2012). E.g.Lowercostsofenergywillincrease competitivenessoftheindustriesandmayattract newinvestments,especiallyinthesituationwhen thepreviousinvestors’attractor–thelowerlabour costs–isslowlydisappearing(WNP,September2, 2013).

FSGentrenchesfossilfuels E.g.Theshale-gasboomcould undermineinvestmentsinrenewable energies(DieWelt,April212011).

Expectationsand visions

FSGwillsupportnationalandcommercialprosperity E.g....withthecontroversialextractionmethodof fracking,theenergypriceswillbelowered considerably(Tagesspiegel,May31,2013). E.g.Shalegascanbeachancefor

re-industrializationinPoland(WNP,September2, 2013).Abundanceofdomesticgasisalsoachance formodernchemicalindustries,petrochemical industriesandfortheproductionofequipmentfor shalegasextraction(GazetaWyborcza,May27, 2011).

InvestorconcernsaboutFSG E.g.Oilandgasexplorerscomeunder pressuretoclampdownon controversialextractionprocess (Independent.co.uk,June15,2012). E.g.Inordertosucceedweneedlegal regulationfavourablefortheriskygas extractioninvestment.Andwedonot havesuch–notesarepresentativeof thegasindustry(DziennikGazeta Prawna,May22,2013). Alignment

(regime-level)

FSGﬁtswiththeexistingsocio-technicalsystem (positive)

Wearelookingatpowershortagesintwoorthree years,andtheﬁrstnewnuclearplantisatleasta decadeoff.Frackingisagodsend(thetimes.co.uk, February24,2013).

Naturalgaswillbecometheoilofthe21stcentury (Tagesspiegel,February13,2012).

E.g.Oilandcoaldominateglobalenergy consumption.Naturalgashasalargeshareofthe marketaswell.Andthefuturebelongstogas (DziennikGazetaPrawna,November15,2012).

FSGﬁtswiththeexistingsocio-technical system(negative/mixed)

Itisalsodebatablewhetheritwillbe worthitforthegasindustry,because everybitofregulationwilldrivethe costshigher(FrankfurterRundschau, February2,2013).

De-alignment (landscape-level)

FSG-inducedgeopoliticalchangeviewedpositively E.g.theprospectofaself-sufﬁcientBritainis causingalarmingas-richRussia,wherePresident VladPutinassumedhehadWesternEuropeathis mercy(TheSun,September21,2012).

E.g.Shouldsomethinghorriblehappeninthe middleeast,thenIcaneasilyimaginethataUS presidentwouldsay:‘Idon’tcare.Wehaveenough energy’(Tagesspiegel,February22,2013). E.g.SuchdevelopmentsmaycausethatRussia,the mainplayerontheglobalconventionalgasmarket, willstartlosingaround1%ofPKBeachyear (DziennikGazetaPrawna,April29,2013).

FSG-relatedgeopoliticsasposing dilemmas

E.g.GermanswouldimportRussiangas withoutworryingabout

environmentalimpactsinRussia...I wouldcallthishypocrisy,Oettinger [ECCommissionerforEnergy]said (DasBild,May29,2013).

(17)

6. Conclusions

Socialrepresentationshavemanyfunctions,includingthecapacitytopropose,defendandjustify particularperspectives:asHowarth(2006)expressesit,socialrepresentation‘isnotaquietthing’. Herewehavebroughttogethersocialrepresentationstheoryandthemulti-levelperspectiveof socio-technicalchange,directing attentiontosocio-technicalstructuresandchangeprocessesinwhich socialrepresentationsarelikelytoplayaroleandprovidingillustrationsofanchoringand objectiﬁca-tionforPoland,GermanyandtheUK,Europeancountrieswitharecentbutdifferentrecenthistories offrackingdebateandpractice.Inconnectingtheoriesandallocatingrepresentationstoparticular processespositedintheMLPandtosocio-technicalchangeprocessesgenerally,wehaveshownhow newsmediarepresentationsofa‘new’technologyindicatethedynamicsinvolved,whileatthesame timeperformativelysupporttheconstructionofsociallyshared,butalsocompeting,understandings. Eachtechnologycasewillinvolveparticularrepresentationsinvolvedinparticularinteractionsof niches,regimesandparticularaspectsofthelandscape.Frackingforshalegasisinsomewaysunusual inthatfrackingisasmuchapracticeasacloselycoupledsetoftechnologies.Moreovershalegasas acommercialresourceisnot‘new’:theﬁrstcommercialnaturalgaswellintheUSwasreportedly dugin1821inFredonia,ChautauquaCounty(NYSDEC,2007).Naturalgas,itssupplyanddistribution infrastructureandthecompaniesandinstitutionsinvolvedinitsdeliveryarealllongestablished:in manyways,shalegasistheproductofanincumbentsector.Nonetheless,thetechnologyofhydraulic fracturingandthescaleofexploitationofthisresourcearenewgloballyandparticularlynewtoEurope anditspublics.

Nonetheless,thetheoreticallinkageproposedisintendedtoofferapsychologicallyinformedand focussedaccountofagencyandofdifferentialsocialembedding,thefirstofwhichhasbeen high-lightedasunder-emphasisedintheMLPasoriginallyconceived.Whileactorshavealwaysbeenpart oftheMLPandtheprocessesbywhichagencyisexpressedareincreasinglyspecified(Geels,2014),the psychologicaldimensionsofagencyintheMLPhavebeenlargelymissing(Whitmarsh,2012)and pro-cessesofagencyingeneralunder-played(Meadowcroft,2009).ByconnectingMoscovici’sprocesses ofanchoringandobjectificationtosocio-technicalchangeprocesses,weaimtohaveopenedawayof thinkingaboutthistopicthatcanbefurtherexploredwithmoredetailedcasestudies.Trackingthe co-evolutionofthesocialrepresentationsofatechnologyanditssocietalembeddinginanhistoricalcase wouldbeparticularlyinteresting.Moreover,ratherthansimplyreferencingtheMLPandassociated dynamicsasacontextualframework,weshowthatthereareclosetheoreticalconnectionstobemade betweensocialrepresentationstheoryandthestructuraldynamicsofsocio-technicalperspectives.By focusingonatheoryofsocialrepresentationsratherthanonprocessesofindividualpsychology,we hopetohavelimitedtheproblemsofconceptualincommensurabilitythatattemptstointegrate differ-entperspectivesoftenencounter(Kuhn,1962;Feyerabend,1962inOberheimandHoyningen-Huene, 2013).Thereismoretosayonthistopic,butforthetimebeingweleavethediscussionhereandoffer aperspectiveforfurtheruse.

Acknowledgements

Thankstoanonymousrefereesforadditionalsuggestionsonconnectionsbetweensocio-technical transitionprocessesandsocialrepresentationstheory.

Appendix. Additionaldetailonthematicincidence

(18)

Fig. A1. UK Broadsheet fracking and shale gas themes.

(19)

(20)

The Sun: would reduce household bills

The Sun: use of humour or punning

Date of arcle

The Sun: fracking as controversial

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig.A3.(a–c)InitialconcerninTheSun(UK)shiftstohumorousrepresentationandapprovalofshalegasexploitation,withan emphasisonthepotentialforreductioninhouseholdbills.

(21)

References

Arthur,B.,1989.Competingtechnologies,increasingreturns,andlock-inbyhistoricalevents.Econ.J.99(394),116–131. Bauer,M.,Gaskell,G.,1999.Towardsaparadigmforresearchonsocialrepresentations.J.TheorySocialBehav.29(2),163–186. Bauer,M.,Gaskell,G.,2008.Socialrepresentationstheory:aprogressiveresearchprogrammeforsocialpsychology.J.Theory

SocialBehav.38(4),335–353.

BBC, 2014. French oilgiant Totalto invest inUK shalegas. In:BBC Newsonline, January14th 2014. BBC, London, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25695813(accessed21.01.14).

Becker,S.,Bryman,A.,Ferguson,H.(Eds.),2012.UnderstandingResearchforSocialPolicyandSocialWork:Themes,Methods andApproaches.ThePolicyPress,Bristol.

Bijker,W.E.,1995.OfBicycles,BakelitesandBulbs:TowardsaTheoryofSociotechnicalChange.TheMITPress,Cambridge, MA/London,England.

Borup,M.,Brown,N.,Konrad,K.,VanLente,H.,2006.Thesociologyofexpectationsinscienceandtechnology.Technol.Anal. Strateg.Manag.18(3–4),285–298.

CBOS,publicopinionresearchconductedinMay20132013.Społecznystosunekdogazułupkowego(SocialAttitudetowards ShaleGas).FundacjaCentrumBadaniaOpiniiSpołecznej,Warszawa,http://www.cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2013/K 07613.PDF (accessed01.10.13).

Callon,M.,1991.Techno-economicnetworksandirreversibility.In:Law,J.(Ed.),ASociologyofMonsters:EssaysonPower, TechnologyandDomination.Routledge,London/NewYork,pp.132–161.

Carrington,D.,2014.EmailsrevealUKhelpedshalegasindustrymanagefrackingopposition.In:TheGuardianonline17.01.14. TheGuardian,London,http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jan/17/emails-uk-shale-gas-fracking-opposition DECC, 2014. DECC Public Attitudes Tracker – Wave 10. Department of Energy and Climate Change, London,

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/ﬁle/342426/Wave10ﬁndingsofDECC Public Attitudes TrackerFINAL.pdf(accessed15.12.14).

Deutschlandszukunftgestalten,2013.Koalitionsvertrag,zwischenCDU,CSU,SPD,http://www.bundestag.de/dokumente/ textarchiv/2013/48077057kw48koalitionsvertrag/koalitionsvertrag.pdf(accessed14.01.14).

Doise,W.,1993.Debatingsocialrepresentations.In:Breakwell,G.M.,Canter,D.(Eds.),EmpiricalApproachestoSocial Repre-sentations.SciencePublications,Oxford.

Feyerabend,P.,1962.Explanation,reductionandempiricism.In:Feigl,H.,Maxwell,G.(Eds.),ScientiﬁcExplanation,Spaceand Time.MinnesotaStudiesinthePhilosophyofScience,vol.III.UniversityofMinneapolisPress,Minneapolis,pp.28–97. Garud,R.,Karnøe,P.,2001.Pathcreationasaprocessofmindfuldeviation.DependenceandCreation.LawrenceErlbaum

Associates,London.

Garud,R.,Kumaraswamy,A.,Karnøe,P.,2010.Pathdependenceorpathcreation?J.Manag.Stud.47,760–774.

Geels,F.W.,2004.Fromsectoralsystemsofinnovationtosocio-technicalsystems:insightsaboutdynamicsandchangefrom sociologyandinstitutionaltheory.Res.Policy33,897–920.

Geels,F.W.,2002.Technologicaltransitionsasevolutionaryreconﬁgurationprocesses:amulti-levelperspectiveanda case-study.Res.Policy31(8–9),1257–1274.

Geels,F.W.,2013.Theimpactoftheﬁnancial–economiccrisisonsustainabilitytransitions:ﬁnancialinvestment,governance andpublicdiscourse.Environ.Innov.Soc.Transit.6(0),67–95.

Geels,F.W.,2014.Regimeresistanceagainstlow-carbontransitions:introducingpoliticsandpowerintothemulti-level per-spective.TheoryCult.Soc.,http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276414531627.

Geels,F.W.,Schot,J.,2007.Typologyofsociotechnicaltransitionpathways.Res.Policy36(3),399–417.

Grifﬁths,2013.,2013.Shalegasrush:thefrackingcompanieshopingtostrikeitrich.In:TheGuardianonline12.03.13. The Guardian, London, http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/mar/12/shale-gas-rush-fracking-companies (accessed21.01.14).

Habermas,J.,1984.TheTheoryofCommunicativeAction,vol.1.Beacon,Boston,MA.

Howarth,C.A.,2006.Socialrepresentationisnotaquietthing:exploringthecriticalpotentialofsocialrepresentationstheory. Br.J.Soc.Psychol.45(1),65–86.

Jackman,M.,Sterczy ´nska,S.,2013.Gazzłupkówwoczachmieszka ´nców,samorz ˛adów,koncesjonariuszyiinstytucji wojew-ództwapomorskiego(Shalegasintheperceptionoftheinhabitants,localauthorities,licenseholdersandinstitutionsfrom thePomorskieRegion).Przegl ˛adGeol.61(1),381–385.

Jaspal, R.,Nerlich, B.,2013. Fracking in the UKpress:threat dynamics in anunfolding debate. PublicUnderst. Sci., http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963662513498835(onlineAugust13,2013).

Kemp,R.,Schot,J.,Hoogma,R.,1998.Regimeshiftstosustainabilitythroughprocessesofnicheformation:theapproachof strategicnichemanagement.Technol.Anal.Strateg.Manag.10,175–195.

Kuhn,T.,1962.TheStructureofScientiﬁcRevolutions.UniversityofChicagoPress,Chicago.

Laszlo,J.,1997.Narrativeorganisationofsocialrepresentations.PapersonSocialRepresentations6,155–172.

Lis,A.,2014.PublicControversiesoverShaleGasinEurope–Germany.NewsserviceofPolishGeologicalSurvey,Warsaw, http://infolupki.pgi.gov.pl/en/society/public-controversies-over-shale-gas-europe-germany(accessed17.12.14). Lockyer,S.,2006.Atwo-prongedattack?JournalismStud.7(5),765–781,http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14616700600890422. Mckinlay,A.,Pottter,J.,1987.Socialrepresentations:aconceptualcritique.J.TheorySocialBehav.17,471–487.

Meadowcroft,J.,2009.Whataboutthepolitics?Sustainabledevelopment,transitionmanagement,andlongtermenergy transitions.PolicySci.42,323–340.

Montgomery,C.T.,Smith, M.B.,2010. Hydraulicfracturing.Historyofanenduringtechnology.J.Petrol.Technol.Arch., http://www.ourenergypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Hydraulic.pdf(accessed30.12.14).

Moscovici,S.,1988.Notestowardsadescriptionofsocialrepresentations.Eur.J.SocialPsychol.18,211–250. Moscovici,S.,2000.SocialRepresentations.Polity,Cambridge.

Nelson,R.R.,Winter,S.G.,1982.AnEvolutionaryTheoryofEconomicChange.BellknapPress,Cambridge,Massachusets. NYSDEC,2007.NewYork’sOilandNaturalGasHistory–ALongStorybutnottheFinalChapter.NewYorkStateDepartmentof

(22)

Oberheim,E.,Hoyningen-Huene,P.,2013.Theincommensurabilityofscientiﬁctheories.In:Zalta,E.N.(Ed.),TheStanford EncyclopediaofPhilosophy.,Spring2013edition,http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/incommensurability/ Pierson,P.,2004.PoliticsinTime:History,Institutions,andSocialAnalysis.PrincetonUniversityPress.

PHE,2013. Reviewof thePotential Public HealthImpacts ofExposures to Chemical andRadioactive Pollutants asa ResultoftheShaleGasExtraction.PublicHealthEngland,London,http://www.hpa.org.uk/Publications/Environment/ PHECRCEReportSeries/1310Reviewofthepotentialhealthimpactsshalegas/(accessed23.01.14).

Phillips,N.,Lawrence,T.,Hardy,C.,2004.Discourseandinstitutions.Acad.Manage.Rev.29(4),635–652.

Polish Shale (Ed.), 2014. Mieszka ´ncy Lubelszczyzny popieraj ˛a wydobywanie gazu łupkowego (Inhabitants of Lubel-skie support shale gas exploration). LupkiPolskie.pl, www.lupkipolskie.pl/aktualnosci/newsy-z-polski/03-2013/ mieszkancy-lubelszczyzny-popieraja-wydobywanie-gazu-lupkowego#(accessed26.03.13).

Smith,A.,2007.Translatingsustainabilitiesbetweengreennichesandsocio-technicalregimes.Technol.Anal.Strateg.Manag. 19(4),427–450.

Smith,A.,Raven,R.,2012.Whatisprotectivespace?Reconsideringnichesintransitionstosustainability.Res.Policy41, 1025–1036.

Umweltbundesamt,2012.UmweltauswirkungenvonFrackingbeiderAufsuchungundGewinnungvonErdgasaus unkonven-tionellenLagerstätten,http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/ﬁles/medien/461/publikationen/4346.pdf vanLente,H.,2000.Frompromisestorequirement.In:Brown,N.,Rappert,B.,Webster,A.(Eds.),ContestedFutures:ASociology

ofProspectiveTechnoscience.Ashgate,Aldershot.

Wenger,E.,1998.CommunitiesofPractice:Learning,Meaning,andIdentity.CambridgeUniversityPress.

Westenhaus,B.,2012.NewFrackingTechnologytoBringHugeSuppliesofOilandGastotheMarket.www.oilprice.com,16 January2012,http://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas/New-Fracking-Technology-To-Bring-Huge-Supplies-Of-Oil-And-Gas -To-The-Market.html(accessed22.01.14).

Whitmarsh,L.,Upham,P., Poortinga,W., Darnton,A.,McLachlan, C.,Devine-Wright,P., Sherry-Brennan,F.,2011. Pub-licAttitudestoLow-CarbonEnergy–ResearchSynthesis.RCUK,http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/RCUK-prod/assets/documents/ energy/EnergySynthesisFINAL20110124.pdf

Whitmarsh,L.,2012.HowusefulistheMulti-LevelPerspectivefortransportandsustainabilityresearch?J.Transp.Geogr.24 (0),483–487.

Williams,S.,Amiel,G.,2014.FrenchCompanyisFirstOilMajortoShowInterestinBritain’sUnconventionalGasReserves, Retrievedfromhttp://optionc.retzad.com/praesent-et-urna-turpis-sadips/,15.02.2015.