The German coal debate on Twitter: Reactions to a corporate policy process.
Saved in:
| Title: | The German coal debate on Twitter: Reactions to a corporate policy process. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Müller-Hansen, Finn1,2 (AUTHOR) mueller-hansen@mcc-berlin.net, Lee, Yuan Ting1,3 (AUTHOR), Callaghan, Max1,4 (AUTHOR), Jankin, Slava3 (AUTHOR), Minx, Jan C.1,4 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Energy Policy. Oct2022, Vol. 169, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Coal, *Climate change mitigation, Corporate governance, Public opinion, Social media |
| Company/Entity: | X Corp. |
| Abstract: | Phasing out coal is a prerequisite to achieving the Paris climate mitigation targets. In 2018, the German government established a multi-stakeholder commission with the mandate to negotiate a plan for the national coal phase-out, fueling a continued public debate over the future of coal. This study analyzes the German coal debate on Twitter before, during, and after the session of the so-called Coal Commission, over a period of three years. In particular, we investigate whether and how the work of the commission translated into shared perceptions and sentiments in the public debate on Twitter. We find that the sentiment of the German coal debate on Twitter becomes increasingly negative over time. In addition, the sentiment becomes more polarized over time due to an increase in the use of more negative and positive language. The analysis of retweet networks shows no increase in interactions between communities over time. These findings suggest that the Coal Commission did not further consensus in the coal debate on Twitter. While the debate on social media only represents a section of the national debate, it provides insights for policy-makers to evaluate the interaction of multi-stakeholder commissions and public debates. • We analyze the debate about the coal phase out in Germany on Twitter (2017–2020). • We find that public attention, negative sentiment and polarization increased. • In 2019, the Coal Commission agreed on a plan to manage the coal phase out. • This compromise did not translate to more consensus in the public debate on Twitter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Energy Policy is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | GreenFILE |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: 8gh DbLabel: GreenFILE An: 158863157 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: The German coal debate on Twitter: Reactions to a corporate policy process. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Müller-Hansen%2C+Finn%22">Müller-Hansen, Finn</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> mueller-hansen@mcc-berlin.net</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lee%2C+Yuan+Ting%22">Lee, Yuan Ting</searchLink><relatesTo>1,3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Callaghan%2C+Max%22">Callaghan, Max</searchLink><relatesTo>1,4</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jankin%2C+Slava%22">Jankin, Slava</searchLink><relatesTo>3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Minx%2C+Jan+C%2E%22">Minx, Jan C.</searchLink><relatesTo>1,4</relatesTo> (AUTHOR) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Energy+Policy%22">Energy Policy</searchLink>. Oct2022, Vol. 169, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p. – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Coal%22">Coal</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Climate+change+mitigation%22">Climate change mitigation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Corporate+governance%22">Corporate governance</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Public+opinion%22">Public opinion</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+media%22">Social media</searchLink> – Name: SubjectCompany Label: Company/Entity Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22X+Corp%2E%22">X Corp.</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Phasing out coal is a prerequisite to achieving the Paris climate mitigation targets. In 2018, the German government established a multi-stakeholder commission with the mandate to negotiate a plan for the national coal phase-out, fueling a continued public debate over the future of coal. This study analyzes the German coal debate on Twitter before, during, and after the session of the so-called Coal Commission, over a period of three years. In particular, we investigate whether and how the work of the commission translated into shared perceptions and sentiments in the public debate on Twitter. We find that the sentiment of the German coal debate on Twitter becomes increasingly negative over time. In addition, the sentiment becomes more polarized over time due to an increase in the use of more negative and positive language. The analysis of retweet networks shows no increase in interactions between communities over time. These findings suggest that the Coal Commission did not further consensus in the coal debate on Twitter. While the debate on social media only represents a section of the national debate, it provides insights for policy-makers to evaluate the interaction of multi-stakeholder commissions and public debates. • We analyze the debate about the coal phase out in Germany on Twitter (2017–2020). • We find that public attention, negative sentiment and polarization increased. • In 2019, the Coal Commission agreed on a plan to manage the coal phase out. • This compromise did not translate to more consensus in the public debate on Twitter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Energy Policy is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=8gh&AN=158863157 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113178 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 1 StartPage: N.PAG Subjects: – SubjectFull: Coal Type: general – SubjectFull: Climate change mitigation Type: general – SubjectFull: Corporate governance Type: general – SubjectFull: Public opinion Type: general – SubjectFull: Social media Type: general – SubjectFull: X Corp. Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: The German coal debate on Twitter: Reactions to a corporate policy process. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Müller-Hansen, Finn – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Lee, Yuan Ting – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Callaghan, Max – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Jankin, Slava – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Minx, Jan C. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 10 Text: Oct2022 Type: published Y: 2022 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 03014215 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 169 Titles: – TitleFull: Energy Policy Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
