DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14483/23448350.18586

Publicado:

2021-09-30

Número:

Vol. 42 Núm. 3 (2021): septiembre-diciembre

Sección:

Educación Científica

Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público

Renewable Energy Technologies (RET) from Public Engagement

Autores/as

  • Adriana-Patricia Gallego-Torres Universidad Distrital “Francisco José de Caldas”
  • Vladimir-Alfonso Ballesteros-Ballesteros Fundación Universitaria Los Libertadores

Palabras clave:

compromiso público, educación, energías renovables, tecnologías (es).

Palabras clave:

education, public engagement, renewable energies, technologies (en).

Descargas

Resumen (es)

Este trabajo presenta una revisión extensa acerca de la importancia de las posturas ciudadanas en la implementación de las tecnologías de energías renovables (TER). En las últimas décadas la educación ha intentado comprender desde el compromiso público la aceptación social de las tecnologías de energías renovables y la participación de las comunidades en los procesos de toma de decisiones relacionados con la transición hacia la implementación de energías limpias. En este sentido, el presente trabajo hace una reflexión teórica sobre el compromiso público, la aceptación e implementación de modelos de tecnologías en energías renovables y la participación ciudadana.

Resumen (en)

This work presents an extensive review about the importance of citizen positions in the implementation of renewable energy technologies (RET). In the last decades, education has tried to understand, from the perspective of public commitment, the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies and the participation of communities in decision-making processes related to the transition towards the implementation of clean energies. In this sense, this study makes a theoretical reflection on public commitment, the acceptance and implementation of renewable energy technology models, and citizen participation.

Referencias

Alsina, V., Martí, J. L. (2018). The birth of the crowd law movement: Tech-based citizen participation, legitimacy, and the quality of lawmaking. Analyse & Kritik, 40(2), 337-358. https://doi.org/10.1515/auk-2018-0019

Ballesteros-Ballesteros, V. A., Gallego-Torres, A. P. (2019). Model of education in renewable energies from the public engagement and the energetic attitude. Revista Facultad de Ingeniería, 28(52), 27-42. https://doi.org/10.19053/01211129.v28.n52.2019.9652

Batel, S. (2020). Research on the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies: Past, present and future. Energy Research & Social Science, 68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101544

Bauwens, T., Devine-Wright, P. (2018). Positive energies? An empirical study of community energy participation and attitudes to renewable energy. Energy Policy, 118, 612-625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.03.062

Berg, M., Lidskog, R. (2018). Deliberative democracy meets democratized science: A deliberative systems approach to global environmental governance. Environmental Politics, 27(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2017.1371919

Bertsch, V., Hall, M., Weinhardt, C., Fichtner, W. (2016). Public acceptance and preferences related to renewable energy and grid expansion policy: Empirical insights for Germany. Energy, 114, 465-477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.022

Bidwell, D. (2016a). The effects of information on public attitudes toward renewable energy. Environment and Behavior, 48(6), 743-768. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916514554696

Bidwell, D. (2016b). Thinking through participation in renewable energy decisions. Nature Energy, 1, e16051. https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2016.51

Brown, M. T., Ulgiati, S. (1999). Emerge evaluation of the biosphere and natural capital. AMBIO A Journal of the Human Environment, 28(6), 1-15

Burningham, K., Barnett, J., Walker, G. (2015). An array of deficits: Unpacking NIMBY discourses in wind energy developers’ conceptualizations of their local opponents. Society & Natural Resources, 28(3), 246-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2014.933923

Cardullo, P., Kitchin, R. (2018). Being a “citizen” in the smart city: up and down the scaffold of smart citizen participation in Dublin, Ireland. GeoJournal, 84, 1-13

Cass, N., Walker, G. (2009). Emotion and rationality: The characterization and evaluation of opposition to renewable energy projects. Emotion, Space and Society, 2(1), 62-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emospa.2009.05.006

Cass, N., Walker, G., Devine-Wright, P. (2010). Good neighbors, public relations, and bribes: the politics and perceptions of community benefit provision in renewable energy development in the UK. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 12(3), 255-275. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2010.509558

Devine-Wright, P., Howes, Y. (2010). Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: A wind energy case study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(3), 271-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.008

Dinica, V. (2018). Public engagement in governance for sustainability: A two-tier assessment approach and illustrations from New Zealand. Public Management Review, 20(1), 23-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1293142

Firestone, J., Kempton, W. (2007). Public opinion about large offshore wind power: Underlying factors. Energy Policy, 35(3), 1584-1598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.04.010

Franco Moreno, R. A., Reina Hernández, J. A., Riveros Toro, C. M. (2020). Concepciones sobre química verde en profesores de química en formación inicial. Noria: Investigación Educativa, 1(5), 94-108

Furlan, C., Mortarino, C. (2018). Forecasting the impact of renewable energies in competition with non-renewable sources. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 1879-1886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.284

Futrell, R. (2003). Framing processes, cognitive liberation, and NIMBY protest in the US chemical‐weapons disposal conflict. Sociological Inquiry, 73(3), 359-386. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-682X.00061

Gustafsson, S., Ivner, J., Palm, J. (2015). Management and stakeholder participation in local strategic energy planning: Examples from Sweden. Journal of Cleaner Production, 98, 205-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.014

Hsieh, T., Vaickus, M. H., Remick, D. G. (2018). Enhancing scientific foundations to ensure reproducibility: A new paradigm. The American Journal of Pathology, 188(1), 6-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpath.2017.08.028

James, J. (2019). Strength benefit of sawdust/wood ash amendment in cement stabilization of an expansive soil. Revista Facultad de Ingeniería, 28(50), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.19053/01211129.v28.n50.2019.8790

Kandpal, T. C., Broman, L. (2014) Renewable Energy Education: A Global Status Review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 34, 300-324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.02.039

Kreimer, P., Vessuri, H. (2018). Latin American science, technology, and society: A historical and reflexive approach. Tapuya: Latin American Science, Technology and Society, 1(1), 17-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/25729861.2017.1368622

Kropp, C. (2018). Controversies around energy landscapes in third modernity. Landscape Research, 43(4), 562-573. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2017.1287890

Larson, E., Krannich, R. (2016). “A great idea, just not near me!” Understanding public attitudes about renewable energy facilities. Society & Natural Resources, 29(12), 1436-1451. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2016.1150536

Li, G., Zheng, X. (2016). Thermal energy storage system integration forms for a sustainable future. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62, 736-757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.076

Lilliestam, J., Hanger, S. (2016). Shades of green: Centralization, decentralization, and controversy among European renewable electricity visions. Energy Research & Social Science, 17, 20-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.03.011

Lyall, C., Tait, J. (2017). New Modes of Governance: Developing an Integrated Policy Approach to Science, Technology, Risk, and the Environment. Routledge.

MacFarlane, J. M. (2018). Managing the future imaginary: Does ‘post-normal’ science need public relations? RT: A Journal on Research Policy and Evaluation, 6(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.13130/2282-5398/9139

Martin, V. Y. (2017). Citizen science as a means for increasing public engagement in science: Presumption or possibility? Science Communication, 39(2), 142-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547017696165

Mor, N., Reich, Z. (2018). From “Trust Me” to “Show Me” Journalism: Can DocumentCloud help to restore the deteriorating credibility of news? Journalism Practice, 12(9), 1091-1108. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2017.1376593

Neshkova, M. I., Guo, H. (2018). Policy target populations and public participation in agency decision making. International Public Management Journal, 21(2), 297-325. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2016.1160012

Ntanos, S., Kyriakopoulos, G., Chalikias, M., Arabatzis, G., Skordoulis, M. (2018). Public perceptions and willingness to pay for renewable energy: A case study from Greece. Sustainability, 10(3), e687. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030687

Ortega-Quevedo, V., Gil Puente, C. (2019). La naturaleza de la ciencia y la tecnología: una experiencia para desarrollar el pensamiento crítico. Científica, 35(2), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.14483/23448350.14095

Petrova, M. A. (2016). From NIMBY to acceptance: Toward a novel framework VESPA for organizing and interpreting community concerns. Renewable Energy, 86, 1280-1294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2015.09.047

Rees, W., Wackernagel, M. (1996). Urban ecological footprints: Why cities cannot be sustainable and why they are a key to sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 16(4-6), 223-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(96)00022-4

Rip, A. (2018). Science institutions and grand challenges of society: A scenario. In Futures of Science and Technology in Society (pp. 35-47). Springer

Robayo-Salazar, R. A., Mejía de Gutiérrez, R., Mulford-Carvajal, A. J. (2016). Production of building elements based on alkali-activated red clay brick waste. Revista Facultad de Ingeniería, 25(43), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.19053/01211129.v25.n43.2016.5294

Salamanca-Céspedes, J. E. (2019). La educación en energías renovables no convencionales en la formación de ingenieros electrónicos. Noria: Investigación Educativa, 2(4), 11-18.

Schot, J., Rip, A. (1997). The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 54(2-3), 251-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(96)00180-1

Speer, P. W., Han, H. (2018). Re-engaging social relationships and collective dimensions of organizing to revive democratic practice. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 6(2), 745-758. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v6i2.929

Toke, D., Breukers, S., Wolsink, M. (2008). Wind power deployment outcomes: How can we account for the differences? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12(4), 1129-1147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2006.10.021

Toynbee, P. (2007). Nimbys can't be allowed to put a block on wind farms. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/jan/05/comment.politics

Walker, G. (1995). Renewable energy and the public. Land Use Policy, 12(1), 49-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0264-8377(95)90074-C

Walker, G., Cass, N. (2007). Carbon reduction, “the public” and renewable energy: engaging with socio‐technical configurations. Area, 39(4), 458-469. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00772.x

Walker, G., Cass, N., Burningham, K., Barnett, J. (2010). Renewable energy and sociotechnical change: imagined subjectivities of ‘the public’ and their implications. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 42(4), 931-947. https://doi.org/10.1068/a41400

Walker, G., Devine-Wright, P., Barnett, J., Burningham, K., Cass, N., Devine-Wright, H., Speller, G., Barton, J. P., Evans, B., Heath, Y., Infield, D., Parks, J., Theobald, K. (2014). Symmetries, expectations, dynamics and contexts: A framework for understanding public engagement with renewable energy projects. In P. Devine-Wright (Ed.), Renewable Energy and the Public: From NIMBY to Participation (pp.33-46). Routledge.

Wilsdon, J., Willis, R. (2004). See-through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream (1st ed.). Demos (London). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3844.3681

Wilsdon, J., Wynne, B., Stilgoe, J. (2005). The Public Value of Science (or How to Ensure that Science Really Matters) (1st ed.). Demos (London). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.2281.7449

Wolsink, M. (2000). Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: Institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renewable Energy, 21(1), 49-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(99)00130-5

Wolsink, M. (2007a). Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2692-2704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.002

Wolsink, M. (2007b). Wind power implementation: The nature of public attitudes: equity and fairness instead of ‘backyard motives’. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11(6), 1188-1207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2005.10.005

Wüstenhagen, R., Wolsink, M., Bürer, M. J. (2007). Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2683-2691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.001

Cómo citar

APA

Gallego-Torres, A.-P., & Ballesteros-Ballesteros, V.-A. (2021). Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público. Revista Científica, 42(3), 368–377. https://doi.org/10.14483/23448350.18586

ACM

[1]
Gallego-Torres, A.-P. y Ballesteros-Ballesteros, V.-A. 2021. Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público. Revista Científica. 42, 3 (sep. 2021), 368–377. DOI:https://doi.org/10.14483/23448350.18586.

ACS

(1)
Gallego-Torres, A.-P.; Ballesteros-Ballesteros, V.-A. Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público. Rev. Cient. 2021, 42, 368-377.

ABNT

GALLEGO-TORRES, A.-P.; BALLESTEROS-BALLESTEROS, V.-A. Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público. Revista Científica, [S. l.], v. 42, n. 3, p. 368–377, 2021. DOI: 10.14483/23448350.18586. Disponível em: https://revistas.udistrital.edu.co/index.php/revcie/article/view/18586. Acesso em: 24 oct. 2021.

Chicago

Gallego-Torres, Adriana-Patricia, y Vladimir-Alfonso Ballesteros-Ballesteros. 2021. «Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público». Revista Científica 42 (3):368-77. https://doi.org/10.14483/23448350.18586.

Harvard

Gallego-Torres, A.-P. y Ballesteros-Ballesteros, V.-A. (2021) «Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público», Revista Científica, 42(3), pp. 368–377. doi: 10.14483/23448350.18586.

IEEE

[1]
A.-P. Gallego-Torres y V.-A. Ballesteros-Ballesteros, «Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público», Rev. Cient., vol. 42, n.º 3, pp. 368–377, sep. 2021.

MLA

Gallego-Torres, A.-P., y V.-A. Ballesteros-Ballesteros. «Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público». Revista Científica, vol. 42, n.º 3, septiembre de 2021, pp. 368-77, doi:10.14483/23448350.18586.

Turabian

Gallego-Torres, Adriana-Patricia, y Vladimir-Alfonso Ballesteros-Ballesteros. «Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público». Revista Científica 42, no. 3 (septiembre 30, 2021): 368–377. Accedido octubre 24, 2021. https://revistas.udistrital.edu.co/index.php/revcie/article/view/18586.

Vancouver

1.
Gallego-Torres A-P, Ballesteros-Ballesteros V-A. Tecnologías de energías renovables (TER) desde el compromiso público. Rev. Cient. [Internet]. 30 de septiembre de 2021 [citado 24 de octubre de 2021];42(3):368-77. Disponible en: https://revistas.udistrital.edu.co/index.php/revcie/article/view/18586

Descargar cita

Visitas

57

Dimensions


PlumX


Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Artículos más leídos del mismo autor/a