References
- Aukes, E., Lulofs, K. R. D., & Bressers, J. T. A. (2018). Framing mechanisms: The interpretive policy entrepreneur’s toolbox. Critical Policy Studies, 12(4), 406–427. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2017.1314219
- Boscarino, J. E. (2016). Setting the record straight: Frame contestation as an advocacy tactic. Policy Studies Journal, 44(3), 280–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12121
- Buckton, C., Fergie, G., Leifeld, P., & Hilton, S. (2019). A discourse network analysis of UK newspaper coverage of the “sugar tax” debate before and after the announcement of the soft drinks industry levy. BMC Public Health, 19(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6799-9
- Callaghan, K., & Schnell, F. (2001). Assessing the democratic debate: How the news media frame elite policy discourse. Political Communication, 18(2), 183–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846001750322970
- Dear, M. (1992). Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome: The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place-protective action. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58(3), 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369208975808
- Dekker, R. (2017). Frame ambiguity in policy controversies: Critical frame analysis of migrant integration policies in Antwerp and Rotterdam. Critical Policy Studies, 11(2), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2016.1147365
- DeLeo, R. A. (2016). Time and the management of policy conflict: Issues, actors and institutions in the Boston biolaboratory controversy. Critical Policy Studies, 10(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2015.1014520
- Devine-Wright, P. (2009). Rethinking NIMBYism. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 19(6), 426–441. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.1004
- Dodge, J. (2017). Crowded advocacy: Framing dynamic in the fracking controversy in New York. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(3), 888–915. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-016-9800-6
- Dodge, J., & Lee, J. (2017). Framing dynamics and political gridlock: The curious case of hydraulic fracturing in New York. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 19(1), 14–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2015.1116378
- Durnova, A. (2018). A tale of ‘fat cats’ and ‘stupid activists’: Contested values, governance and reflexivity in the Brno railway station controversy. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 20(6), 720–733. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2013.829749
- Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
- Fast, S., & Mabee, W. (2015). Place-making and trust-building: The influence of policy on host community responses to wind farms. Energy Policy, 81, 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.02.008
- Feindt, P. H., & Kleinschmit, D. (2011). The BSE crisis in German newspapers: Reframing responsibility. Science as Culture, 20(2), 183–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2011.563569
- Firestone, J., Hoen, B., Rand, J., Elliott, D., Hübner, G., & Pohl, J. (2018). Reconsidering barriers to wind power projects: Community engagement, developer transparency and place. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 20(3), 370–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2017.1418656
- Fischer, M., Ingold, K., Sciarini, P., & Varone, F. (2016). Dealing with bad guys: Actor- and process-level determinants of the “devil shift” in policy making. Journal of Public Policy, 36(2), 309–334. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X15000021
- Hansen, J. L., Benson, E. D., & Hagen, D. A. (2006). Environmental hazards and residential property values: Evidence from a major pipeline event. Land Economics, 82(4), 529–541. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.82.4.529
- Hawkins, B., & Holden, C. (2013). Framing the alcohol policy debate: Industry actors and the regulation of the UK beverage alcohol market. Critical Policy Studies, 7(1), 53–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2013.766023
- Jenkins-Smith, H., Nohrstedt, D., Weible, C. M., & Ingold, K. (2017). The advocacy coalition framework: An overview of the research program. In C. M. Weible, & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (4th ed., pp. 135–171). Westview Press.
- Katz, J. (2018). The space between: Demonization of opponents and policy divergence. Review of Policy Research, 35(2), 280–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12279
- Leach, W. D., & Sabatier, P. A. (2005). To trust an adversary: Integrating rational and psychological models of collaborative policymaking. American Political Science Review, 99(4), 491–503. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305540505183X
- Leifeld, P. (2013). Reconceptualizing major policy change in the advocacy coalition framework: A discourse network analysis of German pension politics. Policy Studies Journal, 41(1), 169–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12007
- Leipold, S., Feindt, P. H., Winkel, G., & Keller, R. (2019). Discourse analysis of environmental policy revisited: Traditions, trends, perspectives. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 21(5), 445–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2019.1660462
- McBeth, M. K., Shanahan, E. A., & Jones, M. D. (2005). The science of storytelling: Measuring policy beliefs in greater yellowstone. Society & Natural Resources, 18(5), 413–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920590924765
- McConnell, A. (2010). Understanding policy success: Rethinking public policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
- Metze, T. (2017). Fracking the debate: Frame shifts and boundary work in Dutch decision making on shale gas. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 19(1), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2014.941462
- National Energy Technology Laboratory. (2015). Cost and performance baseline for fossil energy plants volume 1a: Bituminous coal (PC) and natural gas to electricity revision 3 (DOE/NETL-2015/1723). https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1480987-cost-performance-baseline-fossil-energy-plants-volume-bituminous-coal-pc-natural-gas-electricity-revision/.
- Parfomak, P. W. (2018). Interstate natural gas pipeline siting: FERC policy and issues for congress (CRS Report No. R45239). https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43138.pdf
- Pipeline Safety Trust. (2014). Local government guide to pipelines. http://pstrust.org/
- Pralle, S. B. (2003). Venue shopping, political strategy, and policy change: The internationalization of canadian forest advocacy. Journal of Public Policy, 23(3), 233–260. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X03003118
- Riker, W. H. (1993). Rhetorical interaction in the ratification campaigns. In W. H. Riker (Ed.), Agenda formation (pp. 88–126). University of Michigan Press.
- Sabatier, P. A., Hunter, S., & McLaughlin, S. (1987). The devil shift: Perceptions and misperceptions of opponents. Western Political Quarterly, 40(3), 449–476. https://doi.org/10.2307/448385
- Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semi-sovereign people: A realist’s view of democracy in America. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
- U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2019). Natural gas pipeline projects [Excel file]. https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/data.php#pipelines/.
- van Eeten, M. J. G. (1999). ‘Dialogues of the deaf’ on science in policy controversies. Science and Public Policy, 26(3), 185–192. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154399781782491
- Weible, C. M., & Heikkila, T. (2017). Policy conflict framework. Policy Sciences, 50(1), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-017-9280-6
- Yordy, J., You, J., Park, K., Weible, C. M., & Heikkila, T. (2019). Framing contests and policy conflicts over gas pipelines. Review of Policy Research, 36(6), 736–756. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12364