In short, we agree with Zaller (2001) that opinions can vary according to the level of exposure to information, or the degree of political competence of individuals that citizens do not always have stable attitudes on all issues and that opinions are partly formed by the discourses carried out in public arenas. The second theory concerns the nature of public opinion. This event, which at the same time focuses the attention of the public and policy-makers on a problem, opens a window of opportunity and can lead to a major and relatively rapid reconfiguration of the public policies concerned ( policy learning ). It is a sudden - and relatively rare - event, harmful or revealing possible harm, limited to a geographical area and of which the political decision-makers and the public become simultaneously aware (Gamson 1992). Two types of theory appear relevant here to understand recent developments in European public opinion regarding energy issues.īased on the intuitive notion of a disaster transforming the public agenda and the priorities for public action, John Kingdon (1984 2013) proposes the notion of focusing event. There is also some evidence to question the role of public opinion in shaping public policy and the nature of political decisions ( Belot 2019). Of course, the debate is great regarding how complex it is to limit public opinion to the results of surveys and on the quality of that opinion ( Converse 2006). Indeed, the challenges of energy and environmental transitions are such, especially when they affect infrastructures or changes in practices, that they cannot be resolved without the inclusion of the citizens. The democratic framework of the States considered here requires that public opinions be taken into account. These four poles define, as it were, the boundaries of the possible energy mixes within which the Member States position their national energy policies. These elements form a new energy landscape that identifies four possible levers of action, within the dual frame of decarbonising economies and improving Europe's energy independence: renewables, nuclear, gas and efficiency/sobriety. Finally, nuclear energy seems to appear to have become a credible alternative again, thanks to the discussion on European level green taxonomy and the political window of opportunity which places the imperative of energy security squarely at the centre of the energy debate. Secondly, it is clear that the end of fossil fuels will not be immediate: in the European Parliament, the coalitions opposing gas are gradually weakening, and the deployment of LNG terminals and the development of hydrogen offer possibilities for an extension of the use of these energies in terms of public policy. This means, on the one hand, that renewable energies (RE) are clearly presented as one of the solutions to be developed on the other, that the issue of energy demand is once again gradually becoming a priority, with objectives for efficiency and the reduction of consumption. Firstly, the Green Deal has become a robust instrument to the extent that it is now part of the May 2022 REPowerEU plan. The importance of the European level has therefore been established when it comes to energy issues. This is undeniable in the field of energy: if certain mechanisms such as the general cap on gas prices have not been adopted, some measures, which were hard to imagine at European level until recently, have now been ratified, such as joint gas purchases, shared objectives for reducing energy demand, the obligation to store energy, etc. The health crisis triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic, and perhaps above all the war in Ukraine, together with increasingly outspoken Chinese and/or American interventionism, have largely contributed to " breaking European energy taboos" towards more collective and coordinated approaches.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |