| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
190614
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Residential stove burning using treated or untreated wood, or manufactured woody ‘pellets’ (a form of biomass), has grown in popularity globally as an environmentally sustainable alternative to residential coal or gas heating. The exponential growth of the global production of wood pellets illustrates the reach of this industry. Between 2004 and 2015 the global production of wood pellets surged from 1.7 million tonnes to 13 million tonnes, 60% of which is used in the residential home market (IEA Bioenergy, 2019). In 2013, the European Environment Agency estimated that between 1990 and 2011, the use of biomass for home heating grew by 56% among European Union member states (EEA, 2013, p.90). This growth has been driven by the global demand for sustainable energy sources, and biomass has been promoted by some governments since the mid-2000s to this end, for example with tax incentives and public information campaigns (Badouard et al., 2021).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
193664
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Recent shifts in political support to populist parties worldwide have been linked to the changing preferences of “left behind communities.” Based on apparently growing “left behind” support for populists, some commentators have argued for policy changes including tightened immigration rules coupled with increasing investment in economically deprived areas, particularly in health care. However, left behind communities’ policy preferences are unclear from existing research due to a series of methodological challenges associated with researching polarization and stigmatization. We complement existing research with an innovative photo elicitation methodology covering five field sites in the United Kingdom during 2019, focusing on left behind communities’ policy preferences concerning Brexit. Photo elicitation overcomes methodological challenges associated with emotional attachment and stigmatization. Drawing on 418 interviews with 489 participants, we find that interviewees rejected elite framings suggesting a logical link between Brexit and health care investment, instead articulating policy preferences for health care investment drawing on personal experiences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|