Global controversies in local settings: anti-fracking activism in the era of Web 2.0

References

• Barteau, M., and S. Kota. 2014. Shale Gas: A Game-changer for U.S. Manufacturing. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan.
   Google Scholar
• Baxter, J., R. Morzaria, and R. Hirsch. 2013. “A Case-control Study of Support/Opposition to Wind Turbines: Perceptions of Health Risk, Economic Benefits, and Community Conflict.” Energy Policy 61: 931–943. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.050.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betsch, C., and K. Sachse. 2012. “Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde How the Internet Influences Vaccination Decisions.” Vaccine 30: 3723–3726.10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.03.078
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betsch, C., and S. Wicker. 2012. “E-Health Use, Vaccination Knowledge and Perception of Own Risk: Drivers of Vaccination Uptake in Medical Students.” Vaccine 30: 1143–1148.10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.12.021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blatter, J. K. 2008. “Case Study.” In The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, edited by L. M. Given, 68–71. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Boholm, Å., and R. Löfstedt, eds. 2004. Facility Siting. Risk, Power and Identity in Land Use Planning. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Buttny, R. 2015. “Contesting Hydrofracking during an Inter-Governmental Hearing: Accounting by Reworking or Challenging the Question.” Discourse&Communication 9 (4): 423–440. doi:10.1177/1750481315576842.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callon, M., P. Lascoumes, and Y. Barthe. 2009. Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Castells, M. 2012. Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Control Risks Group. 2012. The Global Anti-Fracking Movement. What It Wants, How It Operates and What’s Next. London: Control Risk.
   Google Scholar
• Corvellec, H. 2001. “Talks on Tracks: Debating Urban Infrastructure Projects.” Studies in Cultures, Organisations and Societies 7: 25–53.10.1080/10245280108523551
   Google Scholar
• Dear, M. 1992. “Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome.” Journal of the American Planning Association 58 (3): 288–300. doi:10.1080/01944369208975808.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Earl, J., and K. Kimport. 2011. Digitally Enabled Social Change: Activism in the Internet Age. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262015103.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Edelstein, M. R. 2004. “Sustainable Innovation and the Siting Dilemma: Thoughts on the Stigmatization of Projects and Proponents, Good and Bad.” Journal of Risk Research 7 (2): 233–250. doi:10.1080/1366987042000158730.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elam, M., and G. Sundqvist. 2009. “The Swedish KBS Project: A Last Word in Nuclear Fuel Safety Prepares to Conquer the World?” Journal of Risk Research 12 (7–8): 969–988.10.1080/13669870903126077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, C. 2004. “Risk, Transparency and Cover up: Media Narratives and Cultural Resonance.” Journal of Risk Research 7 (2): 199–211. doi:10.1080/1366987042000171294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flick, U. 2002. An Introduction to Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Flick, U. 2004. “Triangulation in Qualitative Research.” In A Companion to Qualitative Research, edited by U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, and I. Steinke, 178–183. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. 2006. “Five Misunderstandings about Case-study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (2): 219–245.10.1177/1077800405284363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuches, Ch., K. Boersma, A. Albrechtslund, and M. Sandoval, eds. 2012. Internet and Surveillance: The Challenges of Web 2.0 and Social Media. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, Ch. 2014. Social Media: A Critical Introduction. London: Sage.10.4135/9781446270066
   Google Scholar
• Hopke, J. E. 2015. “Hashtagging Politics: Transnational Anti-Fracking Movement Twitter Practices.” Social Media + Society 1 (2): 1–12. doi:10.1177/2056305115605521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopke, J. E., and M. Simis. 2015. “Discourse Over a Contested Technology on Twitter: A Case Study of Hydraulic Fracturing.” Public Understanding of Science: 1–16. doi:10.1177/0963662515607725.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, D., and S. Xu. 2013. “Opportunity, Challenges and Policy Choices for China on the Development of Shale Gas.” Energy Policy 60: 21–26.10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IEA (International Energy Agency). 2012. Golden Rules for a Golden Age of Gas. World Energy Outlook. Special Report on Unconventional Gas. Paris: International Energy Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Jacoby, H. D., F. M. O’Sullivan, and S. Paltsev. 2012. “The Influence of Shale Gas on US Energy and Environmental Policy.” Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy 1: 37–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. 1986. Risk Management and Political Culture. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. 2005. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400837311
   Google Scholar
• Jaspal, R., B. Nerlich, and Sz. Lemańcyzk. 2014. “Fracking in the Polish Press: Geopolitics and National Identity.” Energy Policy 74 (November): 253–261. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2014.09.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jemielniak, D. 2014. Common Knowledge? An Ethnography of Wikipedia. Stanford: Stanford University Press.10.11126/stanford/9780804789448.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, C., and T. Boersma. 2013. “Energy (in)Security in Poland the Case of Shale Gas.” Energy Policy 53: 389–399. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.068.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, Naomi. 2014. This Changes Everything. Capitalism vs. the Climate. New York: Simon&Schuster Paperbacks.
   Google Scholar
• Landzelius, K. 2006. “The Meta-native and the Militant Activist: Virtually Saving the Rainforest.” In Native on the Net: Indigenous and Diasporic Peoples in the Virtual Age, edied by K. Landzelius, 112–131. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1998. “From the World of Science to the World of Research?” Science 280 (5361): 208–209.10.1126/science.280.5361.208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lidskog, R. 2005. “Siting Conflicts – Democratic Perspectives and Political Implications.” Journal of Risk Research 8 (3): 187–206. doi:10.1080/1366987042000175489.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lis, A., and P. Stankiewicz. 2016. “Framing Shale Gas for Policy Making in Poland.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning: 53–71. doi:10.1080/1523908X.2016.1143355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo, B., and L. Parham. 2010. “The Impact of Web 2.0 on the Doctor-Patient Relationship.” Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (1): 17–26.10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00462.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazur, A. 2014. “How Did the Fracking Controversy Emerge in the Period 2010–2012?” Public Understanding of Science 25 (2): 207–222. doi:10.1177/0963662514545311.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNutt, K. 2014. “Public Engagement in the Web 2.0 Era.” Canadian Public Administration 57 (1): 49–70.10.1111/capa.2014.57.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meraz, S., and Z. Papacharissi. 2013. “Networked Gatekeeping and Networked Framing on #Egypt.” The International Journal of Press/Politics 18 (2): 138–166.10.1177/1940161212474472
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merkens, H. 2004. “Selection Procedures, Sampling, Case Construction.” In A Companion to Qualitative Research, edited by U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, and I. Steinke, 165–172. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Moe, H. 2010. “Everyone a Pamphleteer? Reconsidering Comparisons of Mediated Public Participation in the Print Age and the Digital Era.” Media, Culture & Society 32 (4): 691–700.10.1177/0163443710367715
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molinatti, G., and L. Simonneau. 2015. “A Socioenvironmental Shale Gas Controversy: Scientists’ Public Communications, Social Responsibility and Collective versus Individual Positions.” Science Communication 37 (2): 190–216. doi:10.1177/1075547014560827.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, Tim. 2005, October 30. What is Web 2.0. O’Reilly Network. Accessed July 31, 2010. http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
   Google Scholar
• Owens, S. 2004. “Siting, Sustainable Development and Social Priorities.” Journal of Risk Research 7 (2): 101–114.10.1080/1366987042000158686
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petray, T. L. 2011. “Protest 2.0: Online Interactions and Aboriginal Activists.” Media, Culture and Society 33 (6): 923–940.10.1177/0163443711411009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PWC (PricewaterhouseCoopers) 2013. Shale Energy: A Potential Game-changer. Implications for the US Transportation & Logistics Industry. New York: PricewaterhouseCoopers.
   Google Scholar
• Rahm, D. 2011. “Regulating Hydraulic Fracturing in Shale Gas Plays: The Case of Texas.” Energy Policy 39: 2974–2981.10.1016/j.enpol.2011.03.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravetz, J. 2004. “The Post-Normal Science of Precaution.” Futures 36 (3): 347–357. doi:10.1016/S0016-3287(03)00160-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed, S. 2015. “Chevron to Abandon Shale Natural Gas Venture in Poland.” The New York times, January 30. Accessed May 5, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/31/business/international/chevron-to-abandon-shale-venture-in-poland-a-setback-to-fracking-europe.html
   Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, L., and B.-M. Drottz-Sjöberg. 2001. “Fairness, Risk and Risk Tolerance in the Siting of Nuclear Waste Repository.” Journal of Risk Research 4 (1): 75–101.10.1080/136698701456040
   Google Scholar
• Stasik, A., and P. Stankiewicz. 2014. Raport: poszukiwanie i wydobycie gazu łupkowego w polsce – wiedza, opinie, oceny. [Report: Exploration and Exploitation of Shale Gas in Poland – Knowledge and Opinions.] Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Geologiczny. Accessed August 13, 2014. http://infolupki.pgi.gov.pl/sites/default/files/czytelnia_pliki/1/sondaz_pig_raport_gaz_lupkowy.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sykora, M. 2011. “Web 2.0 Common Uses and Potential Applications an Interdisciplinary Study of Social Media with Case Studies of Applications and Some Methodology Improvements.” The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Science 5 (10): 411–450.10.18848/1833-1882/CGP
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, Ch., and A. Sheth. 2011. “Web Wisdom: An Essay on How Web 2.0 and Semantic Web can Foster a Global Knowledge Society.” Computers in Human Behavior 27 (4): 1285–1293.10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2011. World Shale Gas Resources: An Initial Assessment of 14 Regions Outside the United States. Washington: U.S. Department of Energy.
   Google Scholar
• Van Asselt, M. B. A., and E. Vos. 2008. “Wrestling with Uncertain Risks: EU Regulation of GMOs and the Uncertainty Paradox.” Journal of Risk Research 11 (1–2): 281–300. doi:10.1080/13669870801990806.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Horst, D. 2007. “NIMBY or Not? Exploring the Relevance of Location and the Politics of Voiced Opinions in Renewable Energy Siting Controversies.” Energy Policy 35 (5): 2705–2714. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasi, I. B., E. T. Walker, J. S. Johnson, and H. Fen. 2015. “‘No Fracking Way!’ Documentary Film, Discursive Opportunity, and Local Opposition against Hydraulic Fracturing in the United States, 2010 to 2013.” American Sociological Review 80 (5): 934–959. doi:10.1177/0003122415598534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, A. 2014. “Shale Gas: Energy Innovation in a (Non-)Knowledge Society: A Press Discourse Analysis.” Science and Public Policy 42 (2): 273–286. doi: 10.1093/scipol/scu050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, L., P. Macnaghten, R. Davis, and S. Curtis. 2015. “Framing ‘Fracking’: Exploring Public Perceptions of Hydraulic Fracturing in the United Kingdom.” Public Understanding of Science 26 (1): 89–104. doi:10.1177/0963662515595159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolsink, M. 2007. “Wind Power Implementation: The Nature of Public Attitudes: Equity and Fairness instead of ‘Backyard Motives’.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 11 (6): 1188–1207. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2005.10.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. 1998. “May the Sheep Safely Graze? A Reflexive View of the Expert-Lay Knowledge Divide.” In Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, edited by S. Lash, B. Szerszynski, and B. Wynne, 44–83. London: Sage.10.4135/9781446221983
   Google Scholar