Citizen viewpoints on energy policy Policy Sciences 12 (1980) 147-174 1 4 7 Elsevier Scientific P u b l i s h i n g C o m p a n y , A m s t e r d a m - Printed in the N e t h e r i a n d s Citizen Viewpoints on Energy Policy* R O N A L D D . B R U N N E R and W E S T O N E. V I V I A N Institute o f Public Poti~3' Studies. The University o f Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan A B S T R A C T T h i s e x p l o r a t i o n of citizen v i e w p o i n t s o n e n e r g y policy u s e s a c l u s t e r i n g t e c h n i q u e to analyze 101 Q - s o r t s o b t a i n e d f r o m a diverse n a t i o n a l s a m p l e in April 1979. T h e results i n d i c a t e a n a p p r o x i m a t e c o n s e n s u s . T h e p r e d o m i n a n t t h e m e s in t h e core v i e w p o i n t a n d t h r e e p e r i p h e r a l v a r i a t i o n s are resistance to e n e r g y price increases a n d c o n c e r n for public health, safety, a n d t h e e n v i r o n m e n t , p a r t i c u l a r l y in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h n u c l e a r p o w e r plants. T h e r e is also w i d e s p r e a d d i s t r u s t o f t h e oil a n d gas i n d u s t r y , local utilities, t h e P r e s i d e n t , g o v e r n m e n t generally, a n d e n e r g y experts, coupled with disbelief, d i s t r u s t , disaffection, a n d u n d e r t o n e s o f m o r a l o u t r a g e . T h e e x i s t e n c e o f this a p p r o x i m a t e c o n s e n s u s is less s u r p r i s i n g t h a n the a b s e n c e o f s h a r e d v i e w p o i n t s t h a t a r e i n d e p e n d e n t or o p p o s e d to it. I n d i v i d u a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f t h e m a i n t h e m e s are e x p l o r e d t h r o u g h u n s t r u c t u r e d , follow-up interviews with t h e best r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e core viewpoint. T h e e v o l u t i o n o f s h a r e d v i e w p o i n t s h a s been s h a p e d by specific e v e n t s s u c h as T h r e e Mile I s l a n d a n d by r e c u r r i n g events, particularly c h r o n i c energy price increases a n d i n t e r m i t t e n t s h o r t a g e s , a n d t h e o n g o i n g n a t i o n a l d e b a t e o n e n e r g y policy. I n o u r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e social t e n s i o n a n d p e r s o n a l insecurities a c c u m u l a t e d as a result o f t h e energy s i t u a t i o n are potentially destabilizing. However, the potential for rapid c h a n g e in citizen v i e w p o i n t s h a s so f a r been blocked by p e r c e p t u a l a n d political rigidities t h a t u n d e r l i e a n a p p r o x i m a t e s t a l e m a t e in W a s h i n g t o n . T h e c o n c l u d i n g s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s s o m e s u g g e s t i o n s for d e a l i n g with t h e p e r c e p t u a l , political, a n d moral a s p e c t s o f t h e s i t u a t i o n . I. Introduction O u r inability to realize s a t i s f a c t o r y p r o g r e s s t o w a r d a s u s t a i n a b l e energy f u t u r e has been a t t r i b u t e d to the energy policy process and, often indirectly, to o u r institutions o f g o v e r n m e n t , law a n d politics. F r o m one perspective, the political s y s t e m enables special interests a n d a r e c a l c i t r a n t public to f r u s t r a t e the a d o p t i o n o f r a t i o n a l a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e policies d e v e l o p e d by e x p e r t s in the federal g o v e r n m e n t . F r o m * W e w o u l d like to t h a n k G e r a l d A. C o l e for his c o n t r i b u t i o n s to t h e initial p h a s e s o f this s t u d y , a n d T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f M i c h i g a n for f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t . A n earlier v e r s i o n o f t h i s p a p e r was p r e s e n t e d at t h e 2 5 t h A n n u a l M e e t i n g o f t h e A m e r i c a n N u c l e a r Society, J u n e 5, 1979, in A t l a n t a . 0 0 3 2 - 2 6 8 7 / 8 0 / 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 / $ 0 2 . 2 5 �9 1980 Elsevier Scientific P u b l i s h i n g C o m p a n y 148 a n o t h e r , the political s y s t e m enables the public a n d the federal g o v e r n m e n t to inhibit the d e v e l o p m e n t o f efficient m a r k e t solutions. A closer l o o k at citizen viewpoints on energy policy, a n d their role in the policy process, sheds s o m e light on these diagnoses. A citizen's v i e w p o i n t on a public issue such as energy policy is a n evolving p a t t e r n a m o n g an indefinite n u m b e r o f attitudes a n d opinions. Direct or m e d i a t e d e x p e r i e n c e m a y induce shifts in the direction or intensity o f a few o f these p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s relative to others, a n d t h e r e b y create stresses t o w a r d a d j u s t m e n t elsewhere in the pattern. E a c h c h a n g e in the overall p a t t e r n redefines the m e a n i n g s o f the p a r t i c u l a r attitudes and opinions included within it. W h i c h p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s c h a n g e significantly in t e r m s o f intensity, direction, or m e a n i n g d e p e n d s u p o n m a n y factors? At one e x t r e m e are the primitive needs o f the p e r s o n a l i t y left o v e r f r o m earliest childhood. A t the o t h e r are events o n a global scale, such as changes in the p r o d u c t i o n a n d price o f M i d d l e E a s t e r n crude oil. W h a t results f r o m the i n t e r p l a y o f such factors is a citizen's v i e w p o i n t t h a t is u l t i m a t e l y unique, but which is similar in some degree to the viewpoints o f others. T h e f u n c t i o n o f p r o m o t i o n a l politics is to intensify, c o o r d i n a t e , a n d redefine certain predispositions on a selective basis, in o r d e r to mobilize support. T h e extent to which p r o m o t i o n a l efforts succeed or fail, given c o m p e t i n g efforts a n d u n p l a n n e d events, is a m a t t e r o f o v e r r i d i n g i m p o r t a n c e f o r public policy, as the diagnoses s k e t c h e d a b o v e suggest: W i d e s p r e a d public o p p o s i t i o n m a y r e n d e r the efforts o f policy planners politically infeasible or (if a d o p t e d ) ineffective. O u r p u r p o s e here is to e x p l o r e citizen v i e w p o i n t s a n d their i n t e r a c t i o n with elite perspectives in the energy policy process; a n d to suggest the need to r e t h i n k energy policy p l a n n i n g as a m e a n s o f c o p i n g with subjective differences. F o r this study, in April 1979 we asked 101 citizens nationwide to express their v i e w p o i n t s on e n e r g y policy. T h r o u g h a p r o c e d u r e k n o w n as Q - t e c h n i q u e [1 ], each s o r t e d a s a m p l e o f 48 s t a t e m e n t s culled f r o m public discourse on the issue a n d selected a c c o r d i n g to a t h e o r e t i c a l f r a m e w o r k [2]. I n c o n t r a s t t o the m o r e f a m i l i a r s a m p l e surveys, this t e c h n i q u e is relatively specialized to the identification o f s h a r e d viewpoints, and to qualitative questions o f intensity, direction, and m e a n i n g in each o f them. W e used cluster analysis [3], a f o r m o f n u m e r i c a l t a x o n o m y , to analyze the data. In a d d i t i o n , we c o n d u c t e d follow-up, u n s t r u c t u r e d interviews with the best represen- tatives o f these viewpoints in J u n e 1979. T h e results reveal only one basic, s h a r e d viewpoint on energy policy a m o n g these r e s p o n d e n t s , a l t h o u g h certain v a r i a t i o n s are distinguishable. As in a n y a p p r o x i m a t e consensus, individual i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f the m a i n p r o p o s i t i o n s differ in s o m e ways. T h e p r e d o m i n a n t t h e m e s are resistance to energy price increases a n d c o n c e r n f o r public health, safety, a n d the e n v i r o n m e n t , particularly in c o n n e c t i o n with nuclear p o w e r plants. T h e r e is also widespread distrust o f the oil a n d gas industry, local utilities, the President, a n d energy experts, c o u p l e d with disbelief, disorientation, disaffection, a n d u n d e r t o n e s o f m o r a l outrage. T h e existence o f this a p p r o x i m a t e consensus is less surprising t h a n the absence o f shared viewpoints t h a t are independent or o p p o s e d to it. 149 T h e e v o l u t i o n of shared viewpoints on energy policy has been shaped by specific events such as the incident at T h r e e Mile Island and by recurring events, particularly chronic energy price increases and i n t e r m i t t e n t shortages, and the ongoing national energy policy debate. In o u r interpretation, the social tension and personal insecurities a c c u m u l a t e d as a result of the energy situation are potentially destabilizing. However, the potential for rapid change in citizen viewpoints has so far been blocked by perceptual and political rigidities that underlie an a p p r o x i m a t e stalemate in Washington. T h e concluding section presents some suggestions for dealing with the perceptual, political, and moral aspects of the situation. II. M e t h o d s F o r those readers unfamiliar with the methods used here, a digression is in order. O t h e r readers are encouraged to proceed to the next section. Q-techniques, as we have noted, are a p p r o p r i a t e for discovering the n u m b e r and c o n t e n t of shared viewpoints. A shared viewpoint is a p a t t e r n o f m an y attitudes and opinions organized into a c o h e r e n t whole by like-minded individuals. T h r o u g h the University S u r v e y Research C e n t e r we c o n t a c t e d a diverse (but not r a n d o m ) set o f 101 respondents. Each r e s p o n d e n t was asked to model his or her viewpoint on energy by sorting48 statements, each typed on a separate card, acco rd i n g to relative intensity and direction ( a g r e e m e n t or disagreement). M o r e specifically, each r e s p o n d e n t did a preliminary sorting of the statements by agreement, disagreement, or relative indifference. T h e few statements agreed with most intensely were t h en placed at the +5 e x t r e m e of a c o n t i n u u m ; the few statements disagreed with most intensely were placed at the -5 extreme; and sorting c o n t i n u e d in this manner, alternating f r o m one side to the other, until all of the remaining statements were located with respect to each other. T h e result is a Q-sort, in which intensity and d i r e c t i o n are given directly by the respondent. Meanings i m p u t e d to any particular st at em en t by a r e s p o n d e n t can be inferred f r o m the overall pattern. F r o m the Q-sort p r o v i d e d by each r e s p o n d e n t we f o r m e d the m at ri x o f distances between each pair of respondents i a n d j . Distance was defined as di, j = 1 - ri,j, where ri, j is the p r o d u c t - m o m e n t c o r r e l a t i o n between their Q-sorts with each statement weighted equally. T h e average linkage m e t h o d was used to f o r m clusters o f r e s p o n d e n t s who share in some degree the same viewpoint. In this p ro ced u re, each res pondent is initially construed as a single-member cluster. T h e n the two clusters (or res pondents) s e p a r a t e d by the smallest distance are j o i n e d to f o r m a t w o - m e m b e r cluster. In the next and all succeeding operations, the two clusters separated by the smallest average distances between all pairs of their m em b ers are joined. In the final operation, all respondents are joined in one cluster. T h e n o n - r a n d o m sampling p r o c e d u r e entailed s o c i o d e m o g r a p h i c quotas assigned to each of seventeen interviewers. It does not permit estimates o f the proportion of the 150 national population that holds a particular opinion or viewpoint. Together with the clustering techniques, however, it is sufficiently sensitive to signal the existence of any shared viewpoint in the population represented by several or more o f the respondents. Diversity rather than randomness is the most appropriate sampling objective for this purpose. III. An Approximate Consensus The organization of viewpoints is summarized in Fig. I. Each point along the horizontal axis at the bottom of the figure represents one o f the 101 respondents. Thus i0 20 30 Step 40 50 60 70 80 90 i00 Cluster ~ ~ Dist X 28 42 .54 X.I 8 39 .55 X.2 7 40 .55 X.3 16 22 .65 All Rs i01 i i.ii I Q I I G l t v v v v ~ v f , v i i0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 i00 Respondents Fig. 1. Organization of viewpoints. 151 the width o f a cluster reflects the n u m b e r of r e s p o n d e n t s included within it. T h e vertical axis is scaled in steps, which indicate the point in the clustering p r o c e d u r e at which the v a r i o u s clusters f o r m e d . T h e steps are n u m b e r e d f r o m 100 to 1, b o t t o m to top, in reverse o f the sequence o f o p e r a t i o n s . T h r o u g h this c o n v e n t i o n , the step n u m b e r s indicate the n u m b e r o f clusters r e m a i n i n g at each point in the sequence. F r o m the start o f the p r o c e d u r e to the conclusion, the clusters b e c o m e increasingly h e t e r o g e n e o u s with respect to the v i e w p o i n t s o f the r e s p o n d e n t s included within them. T h e table in Fig. 1 gives the a v e r a g e distances between all pairs o f m e m b e r s of the two clusters j o i n e d to f o r m X, X . l , X.2, X.3, a n d the final cluster, a l o n g with the step at which the c o m p o n e n t clusters j o i n e d a n d cluster size. F i g u r e 1 indicates t h a t there exists only one basic, s h a r e d v i e w p o i n t a m o n g these r e s p o n d e n t s with respect to the 48 s t a t e m e n t s . T h e r e s p o n d e n t s in cluster X are the core r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of this viewpoint. T h e r e s p o n d e n t s in the o t h e r distinguishable clusters - X. 1, X.2, a n d X.3 - s h a r e related b u t p e r i p h e r a l viewpoints. T h e v i e w p o i n t s o f the o t h e r r e s p o n d e n t s are idiosyncratic. T h e key point is t h a t no s h a r e d viewpoint i n d e p e n d e n t o f the core v i e w p o i n t or o p p o s e d to it emerged f r o m the data. N o o t h e r cluster rivals the core cluster X in t e r m s o f the h o m o g e n e i t y a n d the n u m b e r o f r e s p o n d e n t viewpoints included within it. It is c o m p r i s e d o f 28 respondents, o v e r a q u a r t e r o f the total. At the s a m e level o f h o m o g e n e i t y , only one o f the 41 o t h e r clusters r e m a i n i n g at this step (a subset o f X.2) includes as m a n y as six r e s p o n d e n t viewpoints. T h e others include f o u r or less. M o r e o v e r , the r e m a i n i n g distinguishable clusters c o m p r i s i n g at least 5% o f the r e s p o n d e n t s merge with X o n the basis o f relatively small a v e r a g e distances. Consider, for e x a m p l e , the worst case. A t step 22 where the X.3 cluster (n ---- 16) merges with the a u g m e n t e d core cluster (n = 52), the distance m e a s u r e indicates t h a t the a v e r a g e c o r r e l a t i o n a m o n g the 16 X 52 = 832 pairs o f r e s p o n d e n t v i e w p o i n t s b e t w e e n the t w o clusters is 0.35. T h e v i e w p o i n t s included in X.3 are, o n average, m o r e similar to the v i e w p o i n t s in the a u g m e n t e d core cluster t h a n to the relatively idiosyncratic viewpoints in the 21 other clusters c o m p r i s e d o f 33 r e s p o n d e n t s r e m a i n i n g at this step. T h e latter j o i n the a u g m e n t e d core cluster at large distances. T h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t there exists only one s h a r e d viewpoint, o r g a n i z e d into core and p e r i p h e r a l v a r i a t i o n s , is s u p p o r t e d by the p a t t e r n o f c o r r e l a t i o n s a m o n g cluster profiles. A cluster profile is the a v e r a g e score ( o r rank) o f each of the 48 s t a t e m e n t s assigned by m e m b e r s o f the cluster. It c a n be i n t e r p r e t e d as the Q - s o r t t h a t would have been p r o v i d e d by a n " i d e a l " or " p e r f e c t " r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the s h a r e d viewpoint. T h e a v e r a g i n g p r o c e d u r e used to f o r m cluster profiles suppresses the dispersion o f s t a t e m e n t scores ( o r ranks) a m o n g cluster m e m b e r s . I f the s h a r e d viewpoints were i n d e p e n d e n t , the c o r r e l a t i o n between their cluster profiles w o u l d be a p p r o x i m a t e l y zero. I f the s h a r e d viewpoints were o p p o s e d or polarized, the c o r r e l a t i o n between their cluster profiles w o u l d be negative. As s h o w n in T a b l e 1 the c o r r e l a t i o n s between the profiles are consistently high a n d positive. X is not only the m o s t h o m o g e n e o u s cluster o f r e s p o n d e n t s , as we h a v e seen; its profile is also highly c o r r e l a t e d with the a v e r a g e 152 ] ' A B L E l Correlations A m o n g Cluster Profiles Clusters X X.1 X.2 X.3 All Rs X 1.00 X.l 0.76 1.00 X.2 0.72 0.52 1.00 X.3 0.72 0.72 0.46 1.00 All Rs 0.96 0.83 0.71 0.84 1.00 viewpoint in the peripheral clusters and with the average viewpoint in the sample as a whole. Before turning to the content o f core and peripheral viewpoints, it is worthwhile to examine alternative explanations. The structure o f the data may not be the best explanation for the emergence of only one shared viewpoint in several variations. One alternative explanation is that the organization o f viewpoints summarized in Fig. 1 is an artifact of the average linkage method. The best test of this possibility is to apply the complete linkage (or farthest neighbor) m e t h o d to the same data. Under this method: When two clusters join, their similarity is that existing between the farthest pair of members, one in each cluster. The method will generally lead to tight, hyperspherical, discrete clusters that join only with difficulty and at relative low overall similarity values [4]. With these d a t a the complete linkage m e t h o d does p r o d u c e relatively discrete clusters that join late in the procedure at the lower-numbered steps. However, the classifica- tion o f respondents p r o d u c e d by this m e t h o d is similar to the classification p r o d u c e d by the average linkage m e t h o d for these data. A n d the cluster profiles reveal that the statements having rather high positive and negative mean scores are the same statements that a n c h o r the cluster profiles p r o d u c e d by the average linkage method. I n other words, profiles of the clusters generated by the two methods are quite similar. A n o t h e r alternative e x p l a n a t i o n is that the o r g a n i z a t i o n o f viewpoints summarized in Fig. 1 is an artifact o f the particular opinions included in the sample o f 48 statements. More specifically, the possibility exists that the sample of statements is biased in the direction o f highly consensual statements. There are inherent difficulties in testing this alternative because the universe of possible statements is essentially u n b o u n d e d , and because there is no n o n a r b i t r a r y s t a n d a r d to distinguish a biased f r o m an unbiased sample. However, we applied the average linkage m e t h o d to the data set that excluded the six statements having the highest mean scores (positive or negative direction) in the cluster o f all respondents. The classification o f respondents and the organization o f viewpoints is quite similar to that summarized in Fig. 1. I n short, deleting the most consensual statements f r o m the sample of 48 statements makes little difference. 153 A third a l t e r n a t i v e e x p l a n a t i o n is t h a t the o r g a n i z a t i o n o f v i e w p o i n t s is a n artifact o f the set o f 101 r e s p o n d e n t s interviewed f o r this study. I n the absence o f o t h e r collections o f r e s p o n d e n t s interviewed in the s a m e way at the s a m e time, little can be said conclusively. I n t e r v i e w e r s were instructed to select r e s p o n d e n t s a c c o r d i n g to diversity o f s o c i o d e m o g r a p h i c characteristics in o r d e r to m i n i m i z e the possibility t h a t a n y significant v i e w p o i n t existing in the p o p u l a t i o n would go undetected. T h e p r o c e d u r e s used here are sufficiently sensitive to detect the existence o f a n i n d e p e n d e n t or o p p o s e d v i e w p o i n t if only several r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the v i e w p o i n t are included [5]. T h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f v i e w p o i n t s t h a t emerges f r o m these d a t a represents an a p p r o x i m a t e c o n s e n s u s on the intensity a n d d i r e c t i o n of a n u m b e r o f e n e r g y - r e l a t e d attitudes a n d opinions, but not necessarily o n their meanings. I n this instance, as in legislatures, m a r k e t s , and o t h e r political a n d social settings, a g r e e m e n t a m o n g a n u m b e r o f p e o p l e o n a set o f p r o p o s i t i o n s m a s k s a v a r i e t y o f differences a m o n g individual i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f the p r o p o s i t i o n s a n d the reasons f o r a c c e p t i n g them. U n d e r these circumstances, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n reflects one's o b s e r v a t i o n a l s t a n d p o i n t , a n d no single i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , including the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the analyst, is exhaustive. IV. The Shared Viewpoints: Core and Periphery Recall t h a t a cluster profile is f o r m e d by a v e r a g i n g the scores ( o r ranks) assigned to e a c h s t a t e m e n t by m e m b e r s o f the cluster. As a result o f this o p e r a t i o n , the s t a t e m e n t s t h a t are m a t t e r s o f i m p o r t a n c e and consensus t u r n out to h a v e the m o s t e x t r e m e scores, t e n d i n g t o w a r d + 5 a n d 5. T h e 13 s t a t e m e n t s h a v i n g the m o s t e x t r e m e m e a n scores ( g r e a t e r t h a n 12.51) in the core v i e w p o i n t profile are r e p r o d u c e d in T a b l e 2. T h e o t h e r 35 s t a t e m e n t s , with m e a n s t e n d i n g t o w a r d zero, are either relatively insignificant o r relatively c o n t r o v e r s i a l a m o n g m e m b e r s o f the core cluster. As we have a l r e a d y suggested, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f this s h a r e d v i e w p o i n t ( o r a n y other) is by no m e a n s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d . O n the one hand, a n u m b e r o f plausible t h e m e s m a y be w o v e n a m o n g the v a r i o u s c o m b i n a t i o n s o f t w o or m o r e s t a t e m e n t s . O n the other, each s t a t e m e n t m a y h a v e a n u m b e r o f c o n n o t a t i o n s d e p e n d i n g u p o n the c o n t e x t o f o t h e r s t a t e m e n t s with which it is associated. T h e process is inherently open-ended. H e r e we begin the process by starting with the manifest c o n t e n t o f the viewpoint profile, a n d in p a r t i c u l a r with the s t a t e m e n t s h a v i n g the highest degree o f significance a n d consensus. C o r e Viewpoint R e s p o n d e n t s in the core cluster object m o s t strongly t o the l o c a t i o n o f new nuclear p o w e r plants in the areas where they live (16.__a, -4.1). H o w e v e r , there is very little consensus on the b r o a d e r issues o f w h e t h e r the n a t i o n needs m o r e nuclear p o w e r or w h e t h e r f e d e r a l subsidies f o r n u c l e a r p o w e r are a p p r o p r i a t e (see s t a t e m e n t s 2 4 a n d 12 1 5 4 T A B L E 2 Cluster X Profile: T h e M o s t Significant and C o n s e n s u a l S t a t e m e n t s * M o s t disagree M o s t agree 16. 1 h a v e no objections to the location o f a new n u c l e a r power p l a n t in the a r e a where I live. (-4. I~ -0.9, -4.7, • 30..~ We s h o u l d accept a d d i t i o n a l risks to public h e a l t h a n d safety in order to deal with t h e energy crisis. (-4.0_..~,-3.5,-3.9, 1.6) 26. C o n s u m e r prices o f gasoline, n a t u r a l gas, fuel oil a n d electricity are t o o low. (-3.8.,..~, 1 . 9 , 0 . 0 , - 2 . 9 ) 47. T h e oil a n d gas c o m p a n i e s deserve t h e t r u s t of people like me. (-3.4..__ z, 2 . 3 , - 1 . 6 , 1.4) 1. O v e r t h e n e x t t w e n t y years, solar e n e r g y j u s t c a n ' t m a k e m u c h difference in m e e t i n g t h e n a t i o n ' s energy needs. ( -3.2.._. d, 0.0, - 1.0, -3.5) 4 3 . 1 w o n ' t cut back on m y energy u s e until o t h e r s m a k e t h e s a m e sacrifice. ( 2.7_.__ z -0.1, -2.6, -2.6) 34.,.. a A n increase in gas a n d electric bills m e a n s m o r e h a r d s h i p for t h e p o o r a n d t h o s e o n fixed incomes. ( + 3 . 7 , + 4 . 1 , +2,6, +2.3) 33. N o t even t h e e x p e r t s k n o w how to safely dispose o f radioactive wastes f r o m nuclear power plants. (+3.4.__. z +3.1, + 3 . 7 , +1.3) 6.. a E n e r g y research a n d d e v e l o p m e n t s h o u l d e m p h a s i z e renewable energy sources like solar energy. (+3.3__= +3.1, +3.9, +3.9) 8. W e s h o u l d do w h a t e v e r we c a n to m a k e o u r j'obs a n d i n c o m e s less d e p e n d e n t on foreign oil. (+3.3..._., +3.1, +3.0, -t-3.4) 46. Oil a n d n a t u r a l gas h a v e been withheld f r o m the m a r k e t to force c o n s u m e r price increases. (+3.3_... d, + 2 . 8 , + 0 . 3 , +2.7) 18.1 w a n t better i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t h o w t h e energy crisis affects me a n d m y c o m m u n i t y , a n d w h a t we can do a b o u t it. (4-2.6.......,,-t-2.0, +1.1, +1.9) 35. I d o n ' t k n o w w h o m o r w h a t to believe a b o u t t h e energy situation�9 (+2.5__,+2.0, 0.3, 0.2) * T h e figures in p a r e n t h e s e s a r e cluster m e a n s for clusters X. X. l, X.2, a n d X.3, respectively. M e a n s for cluster X are u n d e r s c o r e d . 155 in the A p p e n d i x ) . O p p o s i t i o n to the siting o f nuclear p o w e r plants in n e a r b y areas a p p e a r s to be the focal p o i n t o f health a n d safety concerns. T h e s e r e s p o n d e n t s reject the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t we should accept a d d i t i o n a l risks to public health a n d safety in o r d e r to deal with the energy crisis (30, 4.0); a n d they believe t h a t not even the experts k n o w how to safely dispose o f radioactive wastes f r o m nuclear p o w e r plants (33, +3.4). T h e s e r e s p o n d e n t s express s u b s t a n t i a l s u p p o r t f o r solar energy. The}' agree t h a t renewable energy sources including solar should be e m p h a s i z e d in energy research a n d d e v e l o p m e n t (6_ +3.3); and they reject the p r o p o s i t i o n that solar energy c a n n o t m a k e m u c h difference in m e e t i n g the n a t i o n ' s energy needs over the next t w e n t y years (1_ -3.2). O t h e r sources o f s u p p l y are less significant, a l t h o u g h m o d e s t s u p p o r t exists for increasing the d o m e s t i c p r o d u c t i o n o f oil a n d gas a n d for the c o m m e r c i a l i z a t i o n o f synthetic fuels ( A p p . 10, 25). T h e s e views on s u p p l y m a y be related to expressed s u p p o r t for the goal of reducing the d e p e n d e n c e of o u r j o b s a n d i n c o m e s on foreign oil (8, +3.3). While the e m p h a s i s a p p e a r s to be on e n s u r i n g supplies o f energy (subject to e n v i r o n m e n t a l constraints), there are also signs of s u p p o r t for reducing d e m a n d . T h e s e r e s p o n d e n t s reject n o n c o n s e r v a t i o n by others as a r e a s o n for not c o n s e r v i n g themselves (43, -2.7); a n d the}, express a m o d e s t degree of s u p p o r t f o r the goal of n u r t u r i n g a r e s o u r c e - c o n s e r v i n g ethic ( A p p . 1_3.). E n e r g y prices are significant p r i m a r i l y in t e r m s o f the hardships the}' i m p o s e o n the p o o r a n d those on fixed i n c o m e s (34._._, +3.7). S o m e o f the r e s p o n d e n t s m a y include t h e m s e l v e s a m o n g those w h o h a v e e x p e r i e n c e d such e c o n o m i c hardships, even if they are not p o o r or living on fixed incomes. T h e y reject the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t c o n s u m e r prices o f energy are t o o low (26, -3.8), a p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t is the c o r n e r s t o n e of energy policy in the C a r t e r A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . T h e r e is no s y s t e m a t i c s u p p o r t f o r either the policy o f oil a n d gas price d e c o n t r o l ; o r the e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t d e c o n t r o l will lead to fair a n d efficient a l l o c a t i o n t h r o u g h the m a r k e t ; or the belief t h a t energy price increases are necessary to ensure a d e q u a t e supplies ( A p p . 28, 3, 22). All o f these are a m o n g the j u s t i f i c a t i o n s for price increases in W a s h i n g t o n . C o n s u m e r price increases are i n t e r p r e t e d in p a r t as the result o f oil a n d gas being withheld f r o m the m a r k e t (46__ +3.3). T h e v i e w p o i n t is also m a r k e d by w i d e s p r e a d distrust: T h o s e who share it disagree on a v e r a g e t h a t the oil a n d gas c o m p a n i e s deserve the t r u s t o f " p e o p l e like me" (47_.__, -3.4); t h a t the local gas a n d electric c o m p a n i e s will d o w h a t is best f o r " a l l o f us"; a n d to a lesser e x t e n t t h a t " p e o p l e like me" s h o u l d trust the President to find a solution to the energy crisis. M o r e o v e r , they believe t h a t p e o p l e w h o direct their hostility t o w a r d business or g o v e r n m e n t a r e n o t just l o o k i n g f o r s c a p e g o a t s . O n the positive side is a m o d e s t degree o f s u p p o r t for o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t w o r k f o r c o n s u m e r interests in energy issues ( A p p . 5, 38, 48, 32). R e l a t e d to these m a n i f e s t a t i o n s o f distrust is a lack o f credibility a n d a d e m a n d f o r b e t t e r i n f o r m a t i o n . M o s t o f these r e s p o n d e n t s do not k n o w w h o or w h a t to believe 156 a b o u t the energy s i t u a t i o n (35_..z +2.5). T h e r e is no systematic s u p p o r t for a g r e a t e r effort by the federal g o v e r n m e n t to sell its energy policy p r o p o s a l s to the public, or f o r the idea t h a t the t r u t h a b o u t the energy crisis is difficult to convey to the p u b l i c ( A p p . 40, 17). But these r e s p o n d e n t s d o w a n t b e t t e r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t how the energy crisis affects t h e m a n d their c o m m u n i t i e s , a n d w h a t they can d o a b o u t it (18__ z +2.6). A g e n e r a l p a t t e r n is a p p a r e n t in the core v i e w p o i n t profile. It is a selective e m p h a s i s on those aspects o f the energy s i t u a t i o n t h a t p e r t a i n to the i m m e d i a t e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f the r e s p o n d e n t s o r others like t h e m . Note, f o r e x a m p l e , t h a t the significance o f energy price increases, nuclear power, a n d o t h e r e n e r g y issues is c o n s t r u e d p r i m a r i l y in terms o f i m p a c t s o n individual citizens a n d the areas where they live. T h e s e i m p a c t s include health a n d safety, e c o n o m i c hardships, j o b a n d i n c o m e security, distrust, disorienta- tion, a n d a sense o f unfair t r e a t m e n t . A t the s a m e time, the n a t i o n a l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f these issues are generally discounted. W h e t h e r the n a t i o n needs energy price increases or nuclear power, a n d the possible T A B L E 3 P e r i p h e r a l C l u s t e r P r o f i l e s : D i f f e r e n c e s i n P r i o r i t i e s C o r e profile P e r i p h e r a l profiles X R a n k St. Mean X.1 X.2 X.3 St. M e a n St. M e a n St. M e a n 1 34 + 3 . 7 45* + 4 . 3 13" + 4 . 7 6 + 3 . 9 2 33 +3.4 34 +4. l 12 * +4.4 4 +3.6 3 6 +3.3 29* +3.3 6 +3.9 8 +3.4 4 8 +3.3 6 +3. 1 41 +3.9 29* +3.3 5 46 +3.3 8 +3.1 33 +3.7 45* +2.8 6 18 +2.6 9* +3.1 8 + 3 . 0 46 +2.7 7 35 +2.5 33 +3.1 15* +3.0 24* +2.5 8 4 +2.4 10" 4-2.8 34 +2.6 - 9 32 +2.3 46 +2.8 10 41 +2.3 - 40 27 2.1 - 41 2 2.3 48* -2.5 43 -2.6 42 5 -2.4 28* 2.6 38* 2.7 - 43 43 2.7 3* -2.9 36* -2.9 44 1 3.2 5 -2.9 5 3.1 5 - 2 . 6 45 47 3.4 2 -3.4 2 -3.3 43 -2.6 46 26 3.8 30 3:5 30 -3.9 21" 2.8 47 30 -4.0 27 -3.8 24* 4.4 26 2.9 48 16 -4.1 38* -3.9 16 4.7 1 -3.5 * I n d i c a t e s t h a t the s t a t e m e n t is n o t a m o n g t h o s e s t a t e m e n t s in the X profile that have a mean gr e a te r t h a n 12.01. 157 reasons why, are either relatively insignificant or are controversial. T h e s e n a t i o n a l implications are o f course r e m o t e with respect to individual experience. T h e r e is a t e n d e n c y to discount the o b s e r v a t i o n s a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s circulated by g o v e r n m e n t and business, which are not generally perceived as t r u s t w o r t h y sources o n the n a t i o n a l interest in energy policy. P e o p l e a p p e a r to rely on their o w n personal o b s e r v a t i o n s and interpretations [6]. I n short, the energy s i t u a t i o n f r o m the v i e w p o i n t of these citizens is quite different f r o m the one pictured in c o r p o r a t e h e a d q u a r t e r s or in W a s h i n g t o n . We shall r e t u r n to this p a t t e r n in a later section. Peripheral Viewpoints Differences in priorities a m o n g the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the p e r i p h e r a l v i e w p o i n t s are s u m m a r i z e d by s t a t e m e n t numbers, a n d means in T a b l e 3. T a b l e 3 includes all s t a t e m e n t s in the three p e r i p h e r a l v i e w p o i n t s h a v i n g m e a n s g r e a t e r than]2.5]. M o s t of these s t a t e m e n t s are also a m o n g the m o s t significant s t a t e m e n t s in the core viewpoint. T h e e x c e p t i o n s are n o t e d with a n asterisk. S t a t e m e n t s referred to in T a b l e 3 are r e p r o d u c e d in the A p p e n d i x . T h e X.1 v i e w p o i n t is m a r k e d by a g r e a t e r e m p h a s i s on n a t i o n a l energy policy, but the direction of o p i n i o n is generally the s a m e as in the core viewpoint. T h e people w h o share this p e r i p h e r a l v i e w p o i n t s u p p o r t a windfall profits t a x a n d h o r i z o n t a l divestiture o f the m a j o r oil c o m p a n i e s (45, 29); and they reject d e c o n t r o l o f oil and gas prices, a n d the s u p p o r t i n g e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t d e c o n t r o l would lead to fair a n d efficient a l l o c a t i o n t h r o u g h the m a r k e t (28, 3). H a r d s h i p s created by energy price increases a p p e a r to be a m o n g the reasons (34). C o n c e r n for public health a n d safety is also f o u n d in this v i e w p o i n t (30, 33), but it is not focused on nuclear p o w e r (16). D i s t r u s t is heightened in this viewpoint, but the focus is shifted p r i m a r i l y to the President, the experts, a n d local utilities (38, 27, a n d 5 ) . T h e s e r e s p o n d e n t s agree t h a t " p e o p l e like m e " are i g n o r e d when big business a n d big g o v e r n m e n t m a k e energy policy in W a s h i n g t o n (,2). T h e general i m p r e s s i o n is t h a t in this viewpoint, as o p p o s e d to the core v i e w p o i n t , distrust is e x p r e s s e d in o p p o s i t i o n to federal policies t h a t would p e r m i t or i n c r e a s e " m a r k e t " c o n t r o l o v e r energy at the perceived expense o f the public. T h e X.2 v i e w p o i n t is m a r k e d by a n e n h a n c e d c o n c e r n f o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n (30, 41, a n d 33) and energy c o n s e r v a t i o n . T h e s e r e s p o n d e n t s strongly e n d o r s e the goal o f n u r t u r i n g a r e s o u r c e - c o n s e r v i n g ethic (13), o p p o s e the p r o m o t i o n o f energy c o n s u m p t i o n t h r o u g h advertising (15), a n d reject one o f the r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s for not c u t t i n g b a c k on p e r s o n a l energy c o n s u m p t i o n (43). C o n c e r n s for e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n a n d c o n s e r v a t i o n a p p e a r to be focused in a rejection o f nuclear power, b o t h in the areas where the r e s p o n d e n t s live (16) and as a n energy alternative s u p p o r t e d by the federal g o v e r n m e n t (12). T h e y strongly agree t h a t the n a t i o n does have alternatives to increased d e p e n d e n c e on nuclear p o w e r (24). T h e s e t h e m e s can be discerned in the core viewpoint, but they are e n h a n c e d a n d generalized here. T h e m a j o r difference 158 between the core v i e w p o i n t and the X.2 v i e w p o i n t is that the latter shows little c o n c e r n for e n e r g y prices (26). Incidentally, representatives o f b o t h the X. 1 a n d X.2 viewpoints reject the t h r e a t or use o f military force if a n energy crisis is i m p o s e d on t h e m (2). T h e X.3 viewpoint is less h o m o g e n e o u s t h a n the others. It is m a r k e d by the strongest s u p p o r t f o r b o t h s o l a r energy a n d f o r nuclear power, and by the least s u p p o r t for e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n . I n the case o f nuclear power, there is little consensus on the location o f a nuclear p o w e r plant in the areas where these r e s p o n d e n t s live (16), but they d o believe t h a t the n a t i o n must increase its d e p e n d e n c e on nuclear p o w e r (24), a n d t h e r e is s o m e s u p p o r t f o r federal subsidies (12). T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t c o n c e r n a p p e a r s to he a n x i e t y o v e r the w o r l d e n e r g y s i t u a t i o n (4), a n d its t h r e a t to their j o b s a n d incomes. T h i s t h e m e is a p p a r e n t in the core v i e w p o i n t , but m a g n i f i e d in significance here. Sociodemographic Characteristics T h e s o c i o d e m o g r a p h i c characteristics o f the r e s p o n d e n t s , including the others (unclassified), are s u m m a r i z e d in T a b l e 4. These distributions refer to the set o f r e s p o n d e n t s a n d not to the p o p u l a t i o n at large. I n general, t h e r e are few differences a m o n g the cluster m e m b e r s . I n t e r m s o f age cohorts, the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f cluster m e m b e r s d e p a r t s only slightly f r o m the distribution e x p e c t e d o n the basis o f relative cluster size. T h e d i s t r i b u t i o n by sex c o n f o r m s even m o r e closely to the e x p e c t e d distribution. ( O t h e r studies h a v e s h o w n a t e n d e n c y for w o m e n to prefer a n t i - n u c l e a r a n d p r o - e n v i r o n m e n t positions o v e r men. These positions are m o s t a p p a r e n t in the core cluster X a n d the p e r i p h e r a l cluster X.2, as we h a v e seen.) At least one r e s p o n d e n t f r o m e a c h o f the b r o a d r e g i o n a l classifications is a m e m b e r o f each o f the clusters. I f regional differences are i m p o r t a n t in the p o p u l a t i o n , such differences are not a p p a r e n t a m o n g these respondents. D i f f e r e n c e s d o a p p e a r , however, with respect to education. T h e m e m b e r s o f the X.2 cluster, the m o s t s t r o n g l y a n t i - n u c l e a r a n d p r o - e n v i r o n m e n t , are the m o s t highly educated. F i v e o f the seven h a v e d o n e g r a d u a t e work, a n d n o n e have only 13 years o f e d u c a t i o n or less. T h e m e m b e r s o f the core cluster h a v e the next m o s t education, and the m e m b e r s o f the X . I a n d X.3 clusters have the least. T h e r e s p o n d e n t s w h o hold the m o r e idiosyncratic viewpoints, a n d are t h e r e f o r e unclassified, are d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y less e d u c a t e d a n d m o r e elderly. Nine o f the 13 r e s p o n d e n t s aged 66 a n d o v e r ( o r 69%) are a m o n g the unclassified. T w e n t y - n i n e o f the r e s p o n d e n t s with 13 years o f e d u c a t i o n or less ( o r 51%) are a m o n g the unclassified. V. Individual Interpretations I n d i v i d u a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f a s h a r e d v i e w p o i n t c a n be clarified t h r o u g h unstruc- tured, f o l l o w - u p interviews with the best representatives. T h e best representatives are TABLE 4 Sociodemographic Description o f the Respondents by Cluster 159 X X.I X.2 X.3 Others Totals Age 35 or less 36 50 51 65 66 or more No report Sex t0 2 3 6 8 29 7 3 2 4 l0 26 7 3 2 6 13 31 4 9 13 M ale 13 3 3 7 18 44 Female 13 5 4 9 22 53 No report 2 2 4 Education (Years) 13 or less 12 5 11 29 57 14 16 1 l 3 2 4 9 29 17 or more 5 5 I 2 13 No report 2 2 Region East 13 4 4 7 25 53 South 5 I 1 5 6 18 West [0 3 2 4 7 30 Totals 28 8 7 16 42 101 t h o s e r e s p o n d e n t s w h o s e Q - s o r t s h a v e t h e h i g h e s t c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e v i e w p o i n t p r o f i l e . I n t e r v i e w s w i t h f o u r o f t h e b e s t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e c o r e v i e w p o i n t a r e s u m m a r i z e d i n t.his s e c t i o n [7]. A s s h o w n i n T a b l e 5, t h e i r Q - s o r t s a r e a l s o p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h t h e p e r i p h e r a l v i e w p o i n t p r o f i l e s . T h e i n t e r v i e w s w e r e u n s t r u c t u r e d in t h a t t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s w e r e s i m p l y e n c o u r a g e d t o t a l k a b o u t t h e e n e r g y s i t u a t i o n w i t h a m i n i m u m o f s p e c i f i c a n d s u b s t a n t i v e c u e s f r o m t h e i n t e r v i e w e r . B e c a u s e t h e i n t e r v i e w s w e r e c o n d u c t e d a b o u t t w o m o n t h s a f t e r t h e Q - s o r t s , t h e y p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e d i r e c t i o n s o f e v o l u t i o n o f v i e w p o i n t s as w e l l a s p o t e n t i a l l y c o r r o b o r a t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m a n a l t e r n a t i v e o b s e r v a t i o n a l s t a n d p o i n t . M r s . A is a 5 2 - y e a r - o l d , m i d d l e - c l a s s h o u s e w i f e , w h o h a s a h i g h s c h o o l e d u c a t i o n a n d l i v e s i n a s u b u r b o f a l a r g e M i d w e s t e r n c i t y . O f a l l t h e r e s p o n d e n t s , s h e is t h e b e s t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e c o r e v i e w p o i n t . M r s . A a c k n o w l e d g e s t h a t a s a l a y m a n s h e is n o t k n o w l e d g e a b l e e n o u g h t o . k n o w h o w b a d t h e e n e r g y s i t u a t i o n is. B u t M r s . A a n d h e r 160 family a n d friends have c o m e up with " c o n c e i v a b l e solutions" and she does not u n d e r s t a n d " w h y o u r representatives either c a n ' t or w o n ' t or d o n ' t see what we see as the little p e o p l e . " M o r e o v e r , those w h o publicly c o m m e n t on the issue have not d o n e m u c h themselves to i m p r o v e the situation. I t h i n k w e h a v e t h e a b i l i t y [ i n t h i s c o u n t r y ] , a n d t h a t w e h a v e t h e k n o w - b o w , a n d if t h e m o n e y h a s t o be g o t t e n , I ' m s u r e it c a n b e g o t t e n . 1 h a v e t o . . . b e l i e v e it's a p o l i t i c a l t h i n g : T h a t t h e y won't d o a n y t h i n g a b o u t it. Mrs. A believes t h a t s o m e politicians are honest a n d principled, a n d go to W a s h i n g t o n with g o o d intentions. B u t I t h i n k o n c e t h e y g e t t h e r e the} b e c o m e p a r t o f . . . t h e W a s h i n g t o n s c e n e , l t h i n k t h e y b e c o m e i n t i m i d a t e d , a n d t h e n b e c o m e i n t i m i d a t o r s . . . I t h i n k y o u e i t h e r j o i n t h e g r o u p , o r t h e y d o n ' t l et y o u p l a y in t h e g a m e . . . Mrs. A w a n t s to believe t h e m , but feels t h a t realistically she c a n n o t . T h e y h a v e p r o m i s e d t o o m u c h a n d delivered t o o little, a n d h a v e " a n awful lot o f fence m e n d i n g '~ to do. " I t ' s not going to be easy f o r this c o u n t r y to totally believe in the men t h a t they put into office." A c c o r d i n g t o Mrs. A, the oil c o m p a n i e s are t a k i n g a d v a n t a g e o f a n u n e x p e c t e d windfall a n d getting very rich. T h e y did not realize what was happening, but n o w " t h e y like w h a t ' s h a p p e n i n g and t h e y ' r e not g o i n g to do a n y t h i n g a b o u t it." T h e y are holding b a c k p r o d u c t i o n a n d creating s h o r t a g e s to drive the price up. (Mrs. A sees s o m e parallels in increases in coffee a n d s u g a r prices a few years ago.) W h o stands to gain f r o m that? Y o u a n d I - I k n o w w e w o n ' t . T h e o i l c o m p a n i e s w i l l g e t m u c h r i c h e r . T h e y a r e s u p p o s e d t o be r e i n v e s t i n g s o m u c h o f t h i s m o n e y i n t o c r e a t i n g n e w f o r m s o f e n e r g y . I a m s u r e w i t h a g o o d a c c o u n t a n t a n d a c o u p l e o f p r o b a b l y v e r y b r i g h t p e o p l e a r o u n d t h e y c a n m a k e it l o o k o n p a p e r t h a t t h e y ' r e d o i n g it. I T A B L E 5 Correlations B e t w e e n Individual Q - S o r t s and C o r e and Peripheral V i e w p o i n t Profiles V i e w p o i n t s M r s . A 0.82 0.68 0.62 0.66 Mr. B 0.77 0.62 0.52 0.51 M r s . C 0.76 0.44 0.47 0.55 Mr. D 0.75 0.58 0.57 0.62 R e s p o n d e n t s X X. 1 X.2 X.3 16[ don't really think they will [do it] . . . 1 don't think they're really going to put that money back into production. The guy who works to keep his family together, put his kids through school he's the one who's going to suffer for it. The rich will only get richer and the poor will have Medicaid and welfare . . . The guy who works for a living won't be able to afford it . . . M r s . A b e l i e v e s t h a t e n e r g y p r i c e s a r e n o t o n l y e x c e s s i v e , b u t " r i d i c u l o u s . " " B u t t h e y h a v e t h e p e o p l e b y t h e t h r o a t - w h a t a r e y o u g o i n g t o d o ? " M r s . A ' s s k e p t i c i s m c a r r i e s o v e r t o t h e n e w s m e d i a . I don't know how much of what the media tell us is the truth either. We're at the mercy of television and the newspapers and the radio, and you don't hear anything good anymore�9 You just hear a prophet of doom. And it's d e p r e s s i n g . . , l think we are given to read and to listen to ~hat they want us to hear and read. T h e r e s u l t o f t h i s is t h a t : People like us have become distrustful, have become fearful. They've scared us, they've frightened us into thinkingthat in another 10 15-20 years. God only kno~'s, we'll have no food, we'll have no energy. There won't be a n y t h i n g . . , l don't believe that it has to be that w a y . . . I don't know the answer, I just know that there's no confidence in the government, and I think, l really believe, that we've been lied to so many times that it is just like the little boy that cried "wolf'. A t a l a t e r p o i n t M r s . A p u t s t h e m a t t e r m o r e s u c c i n c t l y : �9 . . ignorance breeds fear. An,~ that's why people panic and get scared and don't think, and do things that they wouldn't do if they stopped and thought about it. It's because they just don't know what's really going on. M r s . A r e p o r t s t h a t s h e a n d h e r h u s b a n d h a v e c u t b a c k o n t h e i r c o n s u m p t i o n o f e n e r g y , a n d h a v e d e c i d e d t o s k i p t h e i r n o r m a l s u m m e r v a c a t i o n , a d r i v e o f s e v e r a l h u n d r e d m i l e s r o u n d t r i p . Y e t s h e f e e l s l i k e s o m e t h i n g o f a s u c k e r , w i t h p e o p l e in W a s h i n g t o n , �9 . . having chauffeurs and flitting around the country�9 And then you figure, well why should 1 [cut back]?�9 . . You get to the point when you really feel, what the beck. lt's going to happen anyway, I might as well enjoy myself before it does. And that's a sick attitude�9 I don't like t h a t . . . I don't like to have my children hear me talk like that. And it frightens me when I hear my kids talk like that . . . T h i s is a p r o f o u n d c o n f l i c t f o r M r s . A , r o o t e d in p a r t in h e r e x p e r i e n c e as a c h i l d g r o w i n g u p d u r i n g W o r l d W a r I I . N o b o d y c o m p l a i n e d a b o u t m a k i n g s a c r i f i c e s t h e n ; i n d e e d , p e o p l e t o o k p r i d e i n m a k i n g s a c r i f i c e s f o r t h e c o u n t r y . B u t " t h e p r i d e i n t h e c o u n t r y ' s n o t t h e r e t o d a y . , . y o u c a n ' t h a v e p r i d e i n s o m e t h i n g y o u d o n ' t t r u s t . " T h e i n f e r e n c e is i n e s c a p a b l e t h a t M r s . A f e e l s a d e e p b u t f r u s t r a t e d n e e d t o b e l i e v e in h e r c o u n t r y a n d i t s l e a d e r s , a n d t o " p u l l t o g e t h e r a n d t r y t o d o s o m e t h i n g " as s h e o n c e d i d . T h i s n e e d is r e f l e c t e d i n h e r p r i n c i p a l s u g g e s t i o n f o r d e a l i n g w i t h t h e e n e r g y s i t u a t i o n : 162 � 9 i f t h e s i t u a t i o n is as d e s p e r a t e a s t h e y l e a d us t o b e l i e v e , t h e o n l y w a y t h a t it's g o i n g t o g e t a n y b e t t e r , is t o g e t e v e r y b o d y t o w o r k t o d o it b e t t e r . A n d t h a t c a n o n l y c o m e f r o m t h e h i g h e r - u p s . S o m e t h i n g ' s g o t t o g i v e j u s t t o m a k e p e o p l e w a n t t o d o it. I d o n ' t k n o w h o w . T h e s e c o m m e n t s by Mrs. A illuminate her i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a n u m b e r o f s t a t e m e n t s t h a t figure p r o m i n e n t l y in the core v i e w p o i n t profile. H e r c o m m e n t s b e a r i n g on several o t h e r s t a t e m e n t s , t h o u g h s u b s i d i a r y f r o m her viewpoint, are w o r t h reviewing briefly. Mrs. A is upset by o u r c o n t i n u i n g d e p e n d e n c e o n foreign sources o f oil. As she puts it, " I hate to see foreign countries h a v e such a p o w e r o v e r us." She believes that we have the resources to increase p r o d u c t i o n a n d reduce this dependency, but lack the political will. E n h a n c e d p r o d u c t i o n o f coal a n d s o l a r energy, increased refinery c a p a c i t y , a n d energy-efficient designs in new buildings are a m o n g her " c o n c e i v a b l e solutions." While nuclear p o w e r might also r e d u c e o u r dependence, she is frightened by the health a n d safety implications. She did not give the m a t t e r m u c h t h o u g h t until the accident at T h r e e Mile I s l a n d and s u b s e q u e n t disclosures o f accidents at o t h e r plants. " I d o n ' t think t h a t m o s t p e o p l e ' f u l l y u n d e r s t o o d w h a t nuclear p o w e r was a n d how powerful, h o w d a n g e r o u s , it c a n be." H o w e v e r , ~'I t h i n k if they [the authorities] have got their mind m a d e up to go the way o f nuclear power, t h e y ' r e going to d o it, and I d o n ' t think it m e a n s a hill o f beans what the p e o p l e think." Mr. B is a 3 7 - y e a r - o l d c l e r g y m a n w h o lives in a S o u t h A t l a n t i c state. H e is m o s t c o n c e r n e d a b o u t the s a f e t y o f his f a m i l y a n d w h e t h e r " o u r lives are g o i n g to be able to c o n t i n u e as they h a v e been - i f I c a n go w h e r e I w a n t to go a n d d o the things I w a n t to d o . " M o b i l i t y is a p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t m a t t e r o f life-style because Mr. B's i m p e n d i n g m o v e to a n o t h e r p a r t o f the c o u n t r y is t h r e a t e n e d by the gas s h o r t a g e a n d the t r u c k e r s ' strike. W h a t is the source o f the p r o b l e m ? W e l l . . . 1 d o n ' t k n o w . I t h i n k t h a t ' s t h e f r u s t ~ ' a t i n g p a r t o f it. I d o n ' t k n o w w h e t h e r it's g o v e r n m e n t o r w h e t h e r it's t h e o i l c o m p a n i e s , w h e t h e r it w a s j u s t p o o r p l a n n i n g f o r a l o n g t i m e . . . . I t h i n k t h e f r u s t r a t i n g t h i n g f o r m e is t h e f a c t t h a t I d o n ' t k n o w w h a t t o b e l i e v e , a n d I d o n ' t k n o w 1 c a n r e a l l y t r u s t t h e m w h e n t h e y s a y s o m e t h i n g to m e a b o u t t h e e n e r g y s t u f f . . . I f I c o u l d see t h a t t h e y w e r e r e a l l y a d d r e s s i n g t h e p r o b l e m . . . I t ' s j u s t s o n e b u l o u s a n d s o u n c e r t a i n � 9 C o u p l e d with this distrust a n d u n c e r t a i n t y is a sense o f political inefficacy: �9 . . I d o n ' t r e a l l y feel l i k e I h a v e a n y a r e n a t o d o a n y t h i n g a b o u t w h a t ' s g o i n g on. I t s e e m s t o m e t h a t t h o ~ e d e c i s i o n s a r e m a d e b y a few p e o p l e a n d I ' m n o t r e a l l y c o n v i n c e d t h a t t h e y a r e m a d e f o r t h e g o o d o f t h e p e o p l e . I t h i n k t h e y ' r e m a d e f o r t he g o o d o f t h e c o m p a n i e s , o f t h o s e p e o p l e w h o a r e g o i n g t o m a k e a l l k i n d s o f p r o f i t s o f f t h i s o i l stuff�9 Mr. B has recently c o m e to believe in t h e l o n g - t e r m p o t e n t i a l o f solar energy, and s u p p o r t s c o n s e r v a t i o n as a m a t t e r o f p e r s o n a l a n d public action. But he describes nuclear safety a n d the d i s p o s a l o f r a d i o a c t i v e wastes as a m a i n concern, a n d his c o m m e n t s o n the accident at T h r e e Mile I s l a n d stand out in t e r m s o f intensity. H e was " a n g r y " t h a t such plants had been built in p o p u l a t e d areas. And, 163 �9 . . it seems like they had people in there who don't even know what they are doing. It also seems like the people who are supposedly able to regulate these things don't really have that much control over them, don't even have a whole lot of expertise in them. It's kind of shattering. M r s . C is a 5 5 - y e a r - o l d h o u s e w i f e w h o d o e s v o l u n t e e r w o r k a n d l i v e s i n a n u p p e r - c l a s s n e i g h b o r h o o d o f a W e s t e r n c i t y . F o r h e r , " t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t t h i n g is t h a t n e w s o u r c e s o f e n e r g y s h o u l d b e d e v e l o p e d a s r a p i d l y a s p o s s i b l e . " T h e s e i n c l u d e g a s o h o l , o i l s h a l e , s o l a r e n e r g y , a n d " a l l o f t h e n a t u r a l t h i n g s w e c a n u s e . " S h e is " v e r y m u c h o p p o s e d " t o n u c l e a r p o w e r : �9 . . we're gonna poison the world for our next generations to come because there's no place to put the waste. I just wish that the?,, would close down the ones that they started already and use all the money that they are funneling into that program [in] these other programs. I think we're playing with God when we mess around with that stuff. M r s . C b e l i e v e s t h a t e n e r g y p r i c e s a r e probably f a i r a n d . r e a s o n a b l e i f t h e y d o n o t c o n t i n u e t o g o u p , b u t i f p r o d u c t i o n is b e i n g w i t h h e l d t o r a i s e p r i c e s , " ' t h a t ' s w r o n g . " " I a m f o r t u n a t e t h a t w e c a n p a y f o r t h o s e t h i n g s w i t h o u r i n c o m e . I f e e l v e r y b a d f o r p e o p l e w i t h f i x e d i n c o m e s . " A l t h o u g h it is a p p a r e n t l y n o t n e c e s s a r y f o r f i n a n c i a l r e a s o n s , M r s . C h a s r e d u c e d t h e u s e o f h e r a u t o m o b i l e t o t h e p o i n t t h a t s h e p a y s n o m o r e f o r g a s o l i n e , i n s p i t e o f r e c e n t l a r g e i n c r e a s e s i n t h e p r i c e . M r s . C p r o f e s s e s s k e p t i c i s m , . . . about everything and everybody anymore. 1 don't even like to hear news anymore, it's so d i s c o u r a g i n g . . . I don't have much faith in the President anymore or [in] the oil companies�9 M r s . C n o t e d a t a l a t e r p o i n t i n t h e i n t e r v i e w t h a t p e o p l e i n h e r a r e a p l a c e m o r e t r u s t i n l o c a l l e a d e r s . " T h e y f e e l t h e y h a v e a l i t t l e m o r e c o n t r o l o v e r t h e m . " M r . D is a 2 7 - y e a r - o l d h e a v y c o n s t r u c t i o n w o r k e r w h o l i v e s n e a r a l a r g e m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a i n a P l a i n s s t a t e . F r o m h i s v i e w p o i n t , �9 . . the most important thing is t h a t . . , changes need to be made to supply enough energy for the national growth. I think it's important to maintain the life-style of this country, which is probably one of the highest in the w o r l d . . . With technology, if there's an honest attempt made by all parties involved, we can start relying more heavily on our renewable energy sources and start conserving our fossil f u e l s . . . T h e s e n e e d s a r e r e l a t e d , i n M r . D ' s v i e w , t o l a r g e r p r o b l e m s o f s o c i a l a n d p o l i t i c a l s t a b i l i t y . H e b e l i e v e s t h a t p e o p l e " w i t h t h e b i g b u c k " h a v e t a k e n a d v a n t a g e o f t h e e n e r g y s i t u a t i o n a n d u n d e r m i n e d t h e l i f e - s t y l e s , t h e s t a n d a r d s o f l i v i n g , o f t h e l o w e r a n d m i d d l e c l a s s e s . T h i s p r o b l e m , 164 �9 . . has to be worked out or you're going to run into real problems . . . you [will] get a massive discontent of the greater portions of this country, which are an educated people. I mean it's not a bunch of ignorant masses that are going to take somebody's word for something�9 They know better�9 I think that's the only threat to this country as far as revolution, and if they disturb enough people at the same time due to something like t h i s . . . Mr. D r e t u r n e d to this t h e m e at t h e e n d o f the i n t e r v i e w w h e n a s k e d if he w o u l d like to m a k e a s u m m f f r y s t a t e m e n t . Yes. 1 think the country is going to have to do it peaceably. They're going to have to take the whole society into account and treat them like men, 'cause if you try and do something and put the whole burden on the shoulders of the guy that's hurting the worst anyway, you're going to run into trouble. Mr. D. has little f a i t h in g o v e r n m e n t " r e d t a p e a n d b u r e a u c r a c y . " He also has little f a i t h t h a t t h e m a j o r oil c o m p a n i e s will a c c e p t r e a s o n a b l e profits a n d a v o i d t a k i n g " t o o big o f a bite at s o m e b o d y else's e x p e n s e w h e n it's j u s t t o t a l l y u n n e c e s s a r y . " He s u p p o r t s his c o n t e n t i o n t h a t e n e r g y price i n c r e a s e s a r e c o n t r i v e d by r e f e r r i n g to his o w n o b s e r v a t i o n s m a d e at j 6 b s a r o u n d p o w e r p l a n t s a n d oil refineries: " . . . the r e a s o n s p u t o u t for the i n c r e a s e s in prices j u s t d o n ' t j i b e with w h a t I ' m s e e i n g every d a y . " T o M r . D, n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s a r e " p o t e n t i a l l y h a r m f u l to p e o p l e " a n d t h e r e is n o need for t h e g o v e r n m e n t to r u s h t h e m o n line. They're going to have a bad accident and they're going to have everything out: "O. K., we're going to shut these down." So all of a sudden you've got all these things just sitting there, monuments to nothing. He e x p e c t e d s o m e t h i n g like t h e i n c i d e n t at T h r e e M i l e I s l a n d w o u l d h a p p e n , a n d he h a d h e a r d o f " a t least a h a l f a d o z e n o t h e r i n c i d e n t s t h a t n e v e r hit t h e news" f r o m f e l l o w c o n s t r u c t i o n w o r k e r s . M r . D believes t h a t a l a r g e n u m b e r o f s m a l l , d e c e n - t r a l i z e d g e n e r a t i n g s o u r c e s is a m u c h m o r e r e l i a b l e w a y to go, d e s p i t e r e s i s t a n c e by g o v e r n m e n t a n d i n d u s t r y . T h e l o c a l p o w e r c o m p a n y a p p a r e n t l y f r u s t r a t e d his a t t e m p t t o p u t u p a s m a l l w i n d g e n e r a t o r a n d tie it i n t o t h e l i n e b e t w e e n t h e m e t e r a n d t h e b r e a k e r b o x in his n e w h o m e . T h e s e i n t e r v i e w s a r e i n t e n d e d to clarify i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f the p r i n c i p a l s t a t e m e n t s in t h e c o r e v i e w p o i n t a n d to suggest s o m e of t h e o r i g i n s of these i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . I t is b e y o n d t h e s c o p e o f this p a p e r to a t t e m p t a n e v a l u a t i o n o f the o p i n i o n s v o l u n t e e r e d in t e r m s o f t h e i r g r o u n d i n g in the facts o f t h e c u r r e n t c o n t e x t a n d t h e v a l u e s t h a t have b e e n a s s i m i l a t e d i n t o A m e r i c a n c u l t u r e t h r o u g h c e n t u r i e s of e x p e r i e n c e . T w o o b s e r v a t i o n s c a n be m a d e by w a y of c o n c l u s i o n , h o w e v e r . O n e is t h a t these o p i n i o n s c a n n o t be easily d i s m i s s e d as u n r e a l i s t i c o r u n w o r t h y i n p u t s to p o l i c y p l a n n i n g a n d e v a l u a t i o n [8]. A n o t h e r is t h a t f o r p r o m o t i o n a l p u r p o s e s , t h e r e a l i s m a n d m o r a l w o r t h of these o p i n i o n s is a s e c o n d a r y c o n s i d e r a t i o n . T h e s e o p i n i o n s , to the 165 e x t e n t they are shared, are i m p o r t a n t factors in shaping the success or failure o f any a t t e m p t to mobilize the public behind an energy plan or to elicit v o l u n t a r y compliance with energy policies already enacted. VI. T h e E v o l u t i o n o f V i e w p o i n t s In this section we consider the pattern of evolution of citizen viewpoints, b o t h past and prospective. Short-Term M o r e t h a n a year ago, a pilot study using a similar Q -sam p l e in a M i d w e s t e r n city revealed three public viewpoints on energy policy. T h e y emphasized: ( l ) Energy c o n s e r v a t i o n and e n v i r o n m e n t a l protect i o n , with little faith in either experts or the federal government. (2) Energy p r o d u c t i o n increases, m a i n t e n a n c e of living standards, and rejection of higher energy prices, with distrust of the federal g o v e r n m e n t and the energy industries. (3) Rejection of g o v e r n m e n t intervention, faith in the market, an d the need for higher energy prices, coupled with distrust of the public. According to an independent estimate, the second viewpoint comprised a b o u t two-thirds to t h r e e - q u a r t e r s of the national p o p u l a t i o n , while the first and third viewpoints included a b o u t one-eighth and one-tenth, respectively [9]. A l t h o u g h the pilot study is far f r o m conclusive, it does provide a suggestive benchmark. Based on similarities with the current results, the second viewpoint in the pilot study appears to be the c o m m o n a n t e c e d e n t of b o t h the core viewpoint X and the peripheral viewpoints X. 1 and X.3; the first viewpoint appears to be the direct an t eced en t o f the X.2 viewpoint; and the third (or m a r k e t - o r i e n t e d ) viewpoint appears to have d i s a p p e a r e d as a distinctive, shared viewpoint. T o be sure, a n u m b e r o f the r e s p o n d e n t s in the c u r r e n t study sorted certain statements (App. 28, 3, 45, 29, 26) in ways that can be interpreted as market-oriented, an d six respondents p r o v i d e d a relatively consistent pattern in this direction. But the m ark et -o ri en t ed perspectives of these six are s u b o r d i n a t e to other perspectives, and the distances a m o n g their Q-sorts are relatively large. One is classified as a m e m b e r of X, a n o t h e r as a m e m b e r o f X.2, and the remaining f o u r are scattered a m o n g the unclassified peripheral respondents. Based on differences between the earlier results and the current results, it appears that health, safety, and e n v i r o n m e n t a l concerns have intensified relative to others over time; and that opinions on nuclear power have intensified and shifted in the direction o f o p p o s i t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y o p p o s i t i o n to the siting o f new nuclear plants in n e a r b y areas. T h e most plausible i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is that these changes represent the impact of the incident at T h r e e Mile Island, which focused and sustained a t t e n t i o n in the news f o r several weeks. (Quite unintentionally, the Q-sorts were o b t a i n e d in the five-week period immediately following the incident.) 166 R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the core v i e w p o i n t are now s t r o n g l y o p p o s e d to new nuclear p o w e r plants in the areas where they live, h a v i n g been impressed, p r e s u m a b l y , by the i m p a c t o f the incident on people like themselves in the H a r r i s b u r g area. (See the c o m m e n t s on the incident in the interview s u m m a r i e s above.) A p p a r e n t l y , nuclear p o w e r is n o w perceived less as a source o f energy t h a t c o n t r i b u t e s to d o m e s t i c energy p r o d u c t i o n a n d living s t a n d a r d s t h a n as a t h r e a t to public health, safety, a n d the e n v i r o n m e n t . T h o u g h r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the X.1 v i e w p o i n t are less o p p o s e d to new nuclear p o w e r plants in their areas t h a n are the representatives o f the core viewpoint, they are now noticeably m o r e concerned a b o u t public health a n d safety. T h e representatives o f the X.3 v i e w p o i n t a p p e a r to be unaffected. T h e i r s h a r e d viewpoint remains a r o u g h a p p r o x i m a t i o n to the second viewpoint in the pilot study. I n short, the incident at T h r e e Mile I s l a n d a p p e a r s to have precipitated m o v e m e n t o f the second p i l o t - s t u d y v i e w p o i n t in the direction o f the first, a n d mitigated the differences b e t w e e n tlae two. At the s a m e time, the issue o f n u c l e a r siting raised by the incident a p p e a r s to have split the second v i e w p o i n t into two peripheral variations. I n a r o u g h a n d a p p r o x i m a t e way, this p a t t e r n o f e v o l u t i o n a p p e a r s to a c c o u n t f o r the principal differences between the results o f the two studies. T h e i m p a c t o f the incident at T h r e e Mile Island as r e c o n s t r u c t e d here m a y dissipate in relative intensity as T h r e e Mile I s l a n d recedes f u r t h e r into the past a n d o t h e r events d o m i n a t e public attention. T h e u n s t r u c t u r e d interviews s u m m a r i z e d a b o v e p r o v i d e s o m e p r e l i m i n a r y indications. A l t h o u g h s t r o n g o p i n i o n s were still expressed in o p p o s i t i o n to nuclear p o w e r in J u n e 1979, o t h e r issues were d e e m e d m o r e i m p o r t a n t . Longer-Term O t h e r t h e m e s in the core a n d p e r i p h e r a l viewpoints - e c o n o m i c insecurities (if not hardships), distrust, disbelief, disaffection, a n d u n d e r t o n e s o f m o r a l o u t r a g e - have t e n d e d to persist o v e r several years. T h i s persistence is r o o t e d in r e c u r r i n g events, p a r t i c u l a r l y sustained energy price increases a n d i n t e r m i t t e n t shortages, and state- m e n t s a b o u t t h e m circulated t h r o u g h the n a t i o n a l news media. T h e s e are the principal ways in which the energy s i t u a t i o n enters into the experience o f individual citizens a n d to s o m e extent c o o r d i n a t e s their viewpoints [10]. A struggle o v e r n a t i o n a l energy policy is c o n d u c t e d t h r o u g h the news m e d i a because the p r i n c i p a l factions o f the p o l i c y - m a k i n g elite have been u n a b l e to agree a m o n g themselves on a n u m b e r o f key issues, despite their access to expert o p i n i o n and analyses [11]. U n d e r these circumstances, each faction perceives a n o p p o r t u n i t y to a d v a n c e its policy p o s i t i o n s a n d interests by a p p e a l s to a larger audience. D i a g n o s e s a n d p r e s c r i p t i o n s circulated to the p u b l i c t h r o u g h the news m e d i a by one f a c t i o n tend to be c o n t r a d i c t e d by one or m o r e o f the others, who s o m e t i m e s also a t t e m p t to discredit the o p p o s i t i o n directly. M o r e o v e r , s o m e s t a t e m e n t s circulated f o r public c o n s u m p t i o n are perceived to be c o n t r a d i c t e d by o b s e r v a t i o n s a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s t h a t citizens can m a k e on their own. F o r e x a m p l e , the a s s e r t i o n t h a t we are faced with 167 a p r o f o u n d crisis tends to be u n d e r m i n e d w h e n projected s h o r t a g e s d o not materialize; a n d the localized a n d t r a n s i t o r y s h o r t a g e s t h a t have o c c u r r e d t e n d to be i n t e r p r e t e d in p a r t as d e l i b e r a t e a t t e m p t s to force price increases [12]. M e a n w h i l e , e v e r y o n e has experienced increases in gasoline a n d utility bills, but few perceive significant progress t o w a r d such widely a c c l a i m e d goals as r e d u c i n g o u r d e p e n d e n c e o n foreign sources o f oil. T h e s h o r t - t e r m i m p a c t s on the public are not exclusively or even p r i m a r i l y e c o n o m i c . T o be sure, p o o r a n d f i x e d - i n c o m e h o u s e h o l d s h a v e suffered e c o n o m i c hardships. But middle- and u p p e r - i n c o m e h o u s e h o l d s so far have been able to a c c o m m o d a t e increased energy costs with relatively m i n i m a l strain on h o u s e h o l d budgets, a n d energy shortages so far have been localized a n d t e m p o r a r y for all i n c o m e classes. O n e i m p o r t a n t i m p a c t is the calling into question of p r i o r beliefs. F o r example: - S o m e o n e m u s t u n d e r s t a n d the situation. But why do the experts disagree? W e h a v e a lot o f k n o w - h o w in this c o u n t r y . But why c a n ' t we soh, e the p r o b l e m ? - W e ' v e m a n a g e d so far. But what's going to h a p p e n in the future? - I p a y m o r e for energy now. But why d o e s n ' t this increase energy supplies? - A m e r i c a n s pull t o g e t h e r in a crisis. But is there really a crisis? - I ' m r e a d y to do m y part. But a m I being t a k e n for a sucker if I do? - O t h e r s h a v e been affected the s a m e w a y I have been. But why d o n ' t they listen to us? T h i s is a g o v e r n m e n t o f the people. But does it p r o t e c t the interests o f people like me? A n o t h e r i m p a c t is to question the preferences built into individual life-styles: - W h a t will I have to give up? Still a n o t h e r is to question previous loyalties: - W h o m can I trust? W h e r e such questions are difficult to resolve at the p e r s o n a l level, anxieties a n d insecurities c u m u l a t e a n d w e a k e n the c o n s t r a i n t s o f r e a s o n a n d conscience. T h i s increases the d e m a n d for e m o t i o n a l l y satisfying r a t h e r t h a n realistic or just solutions, O n e such e m o t i o n a l l y satisfying " s o l u t i o n " is s c a p e g o a t i n g , which provides t e m p o r a r y relief o f the s y m p t o m s (catharsis) [13]. It is no accident t h a t p e r s o n a l insecurities arising f r o m the energy situation ( a n d o t h e r sources as well) are displaced o n the President, the g o v e r n m e n t generally, the oil a n d gas industry, o t h e r energy industries, a n d the like. F o r one thing, they figure m o s t p r o m i n e n t l y in the energy d e b a t e in W a s h i n g t o n , as c o v e r e d in the news o v e r the last several years. F o r a n o t h e r , they have consistently f o c u s e d a n d refocused the d e b a t e on energy price increases. T h a t e n e r g y prices s h o u l d increase is largely a m a t t e r o f consensus in W a s h i n g t o n . W h a t has been at issue is: W h o should a d m i n i s t e r the price increases, at w h a t rate, and w h o should dispose o f the proceeds? T h e principal o p t i o n s are g o v e r n m e n t and business ( t h r o u g h reliance o n " m a r k e t " processes). T h e energy price d e b a t e e n c o u r - ages the a s s u m p t i o n t h a t g o v e r n m e n t a n d business are to blame: citizens tend to view 168 energy price increases as the p r o b l e m , not the solution [14]. G o v e r n m e n t and business, in short, are b o t h highly visible and plausible targets. T h e effects are multiple a n d reinforcing. Responsibility and b l a m e are focused on g o v e r n m e n t a n d business. This f u r t h e r undermines trust in g o v e r n m e n t a n d business, a l r e a d y in d o u b t before the 1973-1974 oil e m b a r g o . Distrust further reinforces the t e n d e n c y to discount s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t the n a t i o n ' s energy situation f r o m these sources, s o m e t i m e s w i t h o u t e x a m i n i n g t h e m carefully. P e o p l e fall b a c k on their own o b s e r v a t i o n s a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s in a n a t t e m p t to m a k e sense o f the situation. But this selective focus leaves m a n y key questions unresolved, a n d insecurities are f u r t h e r e x a c e r b a t e d . F o r the r e s p o n d e n t s included in this study, w h a t e v e r hopes r e m a i n for a better f u t u r e a p p e a r to be displaced o n s o l a r e n e r g y a n d to a lesser degree c o n s u m e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s . B o t h s o l a r energy a n d c o n s u m e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s so far have a s s u m e d a relatively peripheral role in the n a t i o n a l energy debate. T h e s y m p t o m s o f such a d j u s t m e n t s a p p e a r to be manifest in the viewpoints e x p l o r e d in this s t u d y a n d in p r e v i o u s studies. T h e energy s i t u a t i o n viewed f r o m the grass r o o t s is indeed different f r o m the energy s i t u a t i o n as seen f r o m W a s h i n g t o n . T h e political p r o b l e m so f a r is less the existence o f these differences a n d the c u m u l a t i o n o f insecurities t h a n o u r inability to deal with t h e m constructively. At s o m e level, however, the c u m u l a t i o n o f insecurities interferes with c o n s t r u c t i v e p r o b l e m solving. A L o o k A h e a d W h a t c h a n g e s in v i e w p o i n t s m i g h t o c c u r o v e r the r e m a i n d e r of 19797 T h e m o s t p r o b a b l e p r o j e c t i o n is f u r t h e r intensification o f insecurities. Reassurances, pessimistic forecasts, a n d a d d i t i o n a l plans a n d e x h o r t a t i o n s f r o m W a s h i n g t o n or f r o m c o r p o r a t e h e a d q u a r t e r s will p r o b a b l y have little effect on the e v o l u t i o n o f public viewpoints, unless they d e p a r t substantially f r o m previous a n n o u n c e m e n t s a n d m a k e sense in t e r m s o f the direct e x p e r i e n c e o f individual citizens. B o t h practice a n d s y s t e m a t i c inquiry indicate t h a t p r o p a g a n d a a n d o t h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s t h a t are inconsistent with p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s t e n d to have little effect, unless s u p p o r t e d by s o m e t h i n g m o r e t h a n words. A m o n g the key p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s in this instance are distrust a n d disbelief. W h a t e v e r is said a n d d o n e in W a s h i n g t o n or c o r p o r a t e h e a d q u a r t e r s , the price increases n o w o r i g i n a t i n g in p a r t in the Middle E a s t will generate a d d i t i o n a l tension, a n d this will be e x a c e r b a t e d by the i m p e n d i n g recession. S o m e c h a n g e s are possible, however. U n a n t i c i p a t e d events like the incident at T h r e e Mile I s l a n d c a n n o t be ruled out in nuclear policy o r in energy policy generally. A n o t h e r possibility is t h a t the early stages o f the 1980 P r e s i d e n t i a l election c a m p a i g n will surface a p e r s o n w h o can t a p the existing tension a n d insecurities, satisfy the needs for credibility a n d reassurance, a n d m o b i l i z e the public behind new energy policies that could be c o n s t r u c t i v e o r destructive. I f one " s o l u t i o n " to the e m o t i o n a l d e m a n d s o f the s i t u a t i o n is scapegoating, a n o t h e r m a y be blind sub- servience to a leader w h o a p p e a r s to satisfy those demands. 169 Still a n o t h e r possibility is t h a t p e r s o n a l insecurities, social tension, a n d a general sense of crisis m a y be deliberately e x a c e r b a t e d by w o r d or deed, o n the e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t citizens a n d o r g a n i z e d g r o u p s w o u l d t h e r e f o r e s u b o r d i n a t e their perceived self- interests a n d pull t o g e t h e r in c o n c e r t e d ( a n d p e r h a p s desperate) action. W h e t h e r s o m e t h i n g like this has a l r e a d y o c c u r r e d in e n e r g y policy is difficult to d e t e r m i n e on the evidence available. I n a n y case, a g r e e m e n t on m a j o r energy issues has been realized d u r i n g s h o r t - t e r m emergencies such as the 1973 -1974 oil e m b a r g o ; a n d recent gasoline s h o r t a g e s o n the West a n d East C o a s t s have been viewed as a m a j o r p r o m o t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t y . Finally, there is a possibility o f a concerted a t t e m p t to deflect responsibility a n d b l a m e for the energy situation a w a y f r o m the principals in the d o m e s t i c policy d e b a t e a n d t o w a r d a l t e r n a t i v e targets overseas, p a r t i c u l a r l y the o i l - e x p o r t i n g countries. W h a t e v e r the consequences for d o m e s t i c politics, this tactic entails a n increased risk o f c u r t a i l m e n t s in the g l o b a l s u p p l y o f oil a n d a n increased risk o f a r m e d conflict. A d v o c a t e s o f n o n v i o l e n t a c t i o n m a y be partially reassured t h a t the public for the t i m e being is p r e d i s p o s e d against the t h r e a t or use o f military force (see App. 2). T h e p r o b l e m of p r o j e c t i n g s h o r t - t e r m m o v e m e n t s in citizen viewpoints is particu- larly difficult in the current situation. O n the one hand, heightened p e r s o n a l insecurities, social tension, a n d distrust are destabilizing. T h e inner c o n s t r a i n t s o f conscience a n d r e a s o n have been weakened, a n d there exists a n e n o r m o u s a m o u n t of e m o t i o n a l energy t h a t can be t a p p e d a n d c h a n n e l e d in m a n y directions. O n the o t h e r h a n d , the political s t a l e m a t e in W a s h i n g t o n , which a c c o u n t s in p a r t for the e m o t i o n a l climate, is r o o t e d in p e r c e p t u a l a n d political rigidities t h a t have persisted a n d intensified o v e r several years. W h e t h e r the s t a l e m a t e will be b r o k e n or circumvented, and if so how, are the key uncertainties. VII. C o n c l u s i o n O u r energy p r o b l e m s are at least as m u c h perceptual, political, a n d m o r a l as they are e c o n o m i c a n d technical. T h e cost o f o u r present inability to solve these p r o b l e m s c a n n o t be m e a s u r e d in dollars or B T U ' s alone. T h e cost includes not only distrust a n d disbelief, which c o m p l i c a t e the a d o p t i o n of policies t h a t might otherwise be acceptable; it also includes declining confidence in o u r institutions of g o v e r n m e n t , law, a n d politics. F o u n d e d on m o r a l consensus, these institutions are prerequisites f o r the o r d e r l y c o n d u c t o f the m y r i a d t r a n s a c t i o n s t h a t t a k e place in a m o d e r n society. T h e s e t r a n s a c t i o n s include, o f course, the p r o d u c t i o n a n d e x c h a n g e o f g o o d s a n d services, a n d the d e v e l o p m e n t a n d d i s s e m i n a t i o n o f technical innovations. Declining confidence in public institutions is m u c h m o r e t h a n a m i n o r externality: it could t u r n out to be the m a j o r cost o f the energy crisis. T o m i n i m i z e the cost o f the t r a n s i t i o n to a s u s t a i n a b l e energy future, the i m m e d i a t e t a s k is to reduce the rising levels o f social tension a n d p e r s o n a l insecurities. T h e s e increase the risks o f e m o t i o n a l l y satisfying but destructive " s o l u t i o n s . " T h e t a s k is 170 complicated by widespread public o p p o s i t i o n to the m a j o r energy policy alternatives a d v a n c e d so far. It is f u r t h e r c o m p l i c a t e d by distrust o f leaders identified with those alternatives, distrust sufficiently pervasive to render ineffective their future p r o m o - tional efforts [15]. A l t h o u g h payoffs that are tangible and visible to the public might eventually dissipate these barriers, the major policies n o w in place o r p ro p o sed are not e x p e c t e d to realize such payoffs in the short run. R e s t o r a t i o n of trust and confidence is a long-run proposition. We need to rethink energy policies in both the public and private sectors, taking into a c c o u n t the viewpoints that exist at the grass roots. On e possibility fo r ci rcu m v en t i n g the existing perceptual and political barriers and p ro v i d i n g tangible and visible payoffs in the short run is a decentralized strategy [16]. T h e federal g o v e r n m e n t might encourage local communities to deal with certain aspects o f the energy situation, particularly energy c o n s e r v a t i o n and the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f small-scale technologies to utilize renewable resources like solar energy [17]. O u r results show a significant degree of public consensus on the need to develop renewable resources like solar energy (6_ 1), and to p r o v i d e " b e t t e r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t how the energy crisis affects me and my c o m m u n i t y , and what we can do a b o u t it" (18) (see Tab l e 2). In any case, those who are influential in energy policy, and who would therefore be the prime targets in an eruption o f moral outrage, have the largest stake in the cultivation of alternative strategies. 171 N o t e s 1 O n Q - t e c h n i q u e s , see W. S t e p h e n s o n . The Study o[ Behavior: Q-Technique and lts Methodology (Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y of C h i c a g o Press, 1953); S. R. Brown, " I n t e n s i v e analysis in political research," Political Methodology, I ( W i n t e r , 1974), pp. 1-25: a n d a text by S. R. B r o w n f o r t h c o m i n g f r o m the Yale University Press. R e c e n t d e v e l o p m e n t s are reviewed in Operant Subjectivity, edited by S. R. B r o w n at K e n t S t a t e University, Kent, O h i o 44242. 2 A t h e o r e t i c a l f r a m e w o r k is u s e d to s a m p l e the universe o f relevant s t a t e m e n t s , a n d not to i m p o s e one set o f m e a n i n g s (the investigators') on the s t a t e m e n t s to t h e e x c l u s i o n of others. T he f r a m e w o r k u s e d to develop this Q - s a m p l e is based on eight value categories (power, respect, rectitude, affection, wealth, well-being, skill, e n l i g h t e n m e n t ) a n d five categories o f the p r o b l e m - o r i e n t a t i o n (goals, trends, c o n d i t i o n s , projections, policy alternatives). T h e last category, policy alternatives, was used twice. E a c h o f t h e 8 X 6 = 48 c o n c e p t u a l possibilities is r e p r e s e n t e d by one s t a t e m e n t in the Q - s a m p l e . As r e p r o d u c e d in t h e A p p e n d i x , t h e c o l u m n s f r o m left to right r e p r e s e n t t h e v a l u e categories in t h e o r d e r listed above; t h e rows f r o m t o p to b o t t o m r e p r e s e n t the categories o f t h e p r o b l e m - o r i e n t a t i o n in the order listed above. F o r e x a m p l e , s t a t e m e n t 8_.(We s h o u l d do w h a t e v e r we c a n to m a k e o u r j o b s a n d i n c o m e s less d e p e n d e n t on f o r e i g n oil) c a n ~be f o u n d in the first row a n d c o l u m n . It f o r m u l a t e s a power goal, reduced d e p e n d e n c e . F o r a n e x p l i c a t i o n o f these categories, see H. D. Lasswell, .4 Pre- View o f Policy Sciences (New York: Elsevier, [971), Chs. 2 a n d 3. 3 T h e s t a n d a r d text is P. H. A. S h e a t h a n d R. R. Sokal, Numerical Taxonomy: The Principles and Practice o f Numerical Classification ( S a n Francisco: W. H. F r e e m a n . [973). See also K. D. Bailey, "'Cluster A n a l y s i s , " in Sociological Methodology 1975 ( S a n Francisco: J o s s e y - B a s s , 1974), C h a p t e r 2, edited by D. R. Heise; a n d R. K. Blashfield a n d M. S. Aldenderfer. "Whe literature on cluster analysis," Muhivariate Behavioral Research, 13 ( J u l y 1978), pp. 271-295. 4 S n e a t h a n d Sokal, op. cit., p. 222. 5 A n a n a l o g y illustrates t h e point. T o d i s t i n g u i s h apples, o r a n g e s , a n d o t h e r kinds o f fruit, it is sufficient to d r a w a small, diverse s a m p l e t h a t includes at least a few s p e c i m e n s o f each. A large, r a n d o m s a m p l e is s u p e r f l u o u s for this p u r p o s e , a l t h o u g h essential for e s t i m a t i n g t h e p r o p o r t i o n s o f pre-specified types in t h e p o p u l a t i o n f r o m s a m p l e data. T h e r e are no s a m p l i n g d i s t r i b u t i o n s to assist the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of cluster results, even if r a n d o m s a m p l i n g p r o c e d u r e s are used in d a t a collection. 6 O n this point see t h e interview s u m m a r i e s in the n e x t section a n d Bee Angell a n d Associates, Inc.. " A Q u a l i t a t i v e S t u d y o f C o n s u m e r A t t i t u d e s T o w a r d E n e r g y C o n s e r v a t i o n " [ N o v e m b e r , 1975), prepared for t h e Office o f E n e r g y C o n s e r v a t i o n a n d E n v i r o n m e n t , Federal E n e r g y A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . In verbaxim c o m m e n t s m a d e in u n s t r u c t u r e d g r o u p d i s c u s s i o n s , people t e n d to s u p p o r t their o p i n i o n s o n energy issues with f i r s t - h a n d o b s e r v a t i o n s or with s e c o n d - h a n d o b s e r v a t i o n s f r o m relatives a n d a c q u a i n t - ances. S t a t e m e n t s a n d a c t i o n s by t h e P r e s i d e n t a n d b u s i n e s s leaders are n o t c o n s i s t e n t l y used for the s a m e purpose. O n the c o n t r a r y , t h e y tend to be rejected explicitly. 7 All interviews were c o n d u c t e d by one o f t h e two a u t h o r s or both. T h e interview with Mrs. A t o o k place in h e r h o m e o n J u n e 19. T h e interviews w i t h Mr. B, Mrs. C, a n d Mr. D were d o n e by l o n g - d i s t a n c e t e l e p h o n e on J u n e 28. D u r i n g t h e s a m e period we interviewed f o u r o t h e r r e s p o n d e n t s w h o were a m o n g the best r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the p e r i p h e r a l v i e w p o i n t s . T h e s e interviews are not s u m m a r i z e d here because o f space limitations. 8 F o r e x a m p l e , b o t h public o p i n i o n s a n d e x p e r t o p i n i o n s are selective, b u t in different ways. T h e t e n d e n c y o f t h e f o r m e r to rely o n f i r s t - h a n d o b s e r v a t i o n s in t h e i m m e d i a t e s u r r o u n d i n g s is not necessarily less reliable ( a c c o r d i n g to c o n v e n t i o n s o f evidence) t h a n the t e n d e n c y o f t h e latter to rely on o b s e r v a t i o n s f r o m a r o u n d t h e c o u n t r y or the globe t h a t are m a n y times r e m o v e d f r o m direct e x p e r i e n c e , a g g r e g a t e d , a n d filtered t h r o u g h a n u m b e r o f interested parties. T h e C o n g r e s s has persistently q u e s t i o n e d t h e d e p e n d a b i l i t y a n d the credibility o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n u s e d in n a t i o n a l energy policy p l a n n i n g a n d e v a l u a t i o n . See, for e x a m p l e , the C o n g r e s s i o n a l l y m a n d a t e d r e p o r t o f the P r o f e s s i o n a l A u d i t a n d Review T e a m , Activities o f the Qffice o f Energy In/ormation and Analysis. Federal Energy Administration ( D e c e m b e r 5, 1978). M o r e o v e r , the principle o f g o v e r n m e n t of, by, a n d for t h e people is at least as s t r o n g in o u r c u l t u r a l heritage as the principle t h a t s y s t e m a t i c inquiry s h o u l d e n l i g h t e n public policy. (Notes c o n t i n u e d on page 174) 8. W e sh o u ld d o w h at ev er w e ca n to m ak e o u r jo b s an d in co m es le ss d ep en d en t o n f o re ig n o il . (+ 3 .3 ,4 3 1 , + 3 .0 , + 3 ,4 ) 36 . E n vi ro n m e m a l ac ti v is ts h av e cr ip p le d t h e g ro w th o f th e n u cl ea r p o w er m d n sl ry in l h is c o u n tr y . ( 0. 9, + 2 .4 , 2. 9, + 0 .4 ) 46 _. = O il a n d n at u ra l g as h av e b ee n w it h h el d fr o m t h e m ar k et to f o rc e co n su m er p ri ce i n cr ea se s. (+ 3. 3, + 2. 8, + 0 .3 , + 2 ,7 ) 44 ,_. .~ R en ew ab le e n er g y s o u rc es li k e so la r p o w er a n d s m al l ri v er d am s co u ld b e co n tr o ll ed by p eo p le i n th is c o m m u n it y . (+ 0 .7 , + I, 0 , + 0 .1 , 0. 2) 29 . l su p p o rt l aw s to p re ve nt th e m a jo r o il co m pa ni es fr o m c o n - tr o lli n g o th e r en er gy s ou rc es l ik e c o a l u ra n iu m , a n d s o la r co lle c- to rs . (+ 1 .9 , + 3 .3 , + 2 .1 , + 3 .3 ) 2.. .~ If a n e n er g y c ri si s is i n tp o se d o n us , [ w o u ld su pp m -I l h e Ih re al o r us e o f m il il ar y f o rc e to d ea l w it h i t. 1 2 .3 , 3 .4 , 3 .3 , 1. 4) A pp en di x: Th e Q -S a m p le o f 4 8 S ta le m e n ls 4 2 . E n er g y s el f- re li an ce i n ea ch lo ca l c, ,m m tu n it y sh o u ld b e a b as ic p ri n ci p le o f n at io n al en er g y p o li cy . 13 , W e sh o u ld n u rt u re a r es o u rc e- co n se rv in g e th ic , in w h ic h h u m an sa ti sf ac ti o n d ~ p en d s m u ch le ss o n m at er ia l co n su m p ti o n . (+ I. I, + 1 8 ,+ 2 .0 , 0 8 ) (+ 1 ,7 ,+ 1 .1 ,+ 4 ,7 , + 1 2 ) 9_ ,;. P eo p le l ik e m e ar e ig n o re d w h en b ig g o v er n n te n t an d b ig b u si n es s m ak e en er g y p o li cy i n W a sh in g to n (+ 1 .3 , + 3 . l, + (I .7 , + 0 .3 ) 21 . It 's t h e re sp o n si b il it y ol t h e g as a n d e le ct ri c c o m p a n y to m ak e su re w e h av e p le n ty o f en er g y (0 .3 , 1. 9, 2. 0, 2, 8) 14 . A d v er ti se m en ts an d sp ee ch es te ll in g p eo p le w h at t o t h in k a n d d o a b o u t en er g y a re o ft en in su lt in g . 20 . Im p ro v em en ts in t h e A m er ic an sl an d ar d o f li v in g d ep en d o n th e p ro d u ct io n an d u se o f m o re ,e n er g y . ( 0. 4, + 1 .0 , + 0 .3 , 0 ,3 ) (+ 0 .9 . 0 .3 , 2. 3, + 0 .9 ) 23 : E v en tu al ly w e sh al l le ar n 1 o re sp ec t th e n at u ra l en v ir o n - m en t ra th er fl la n o v er w h eh n It , (+ 1 .8 , t0 .q , + 1 .0 , + 1 .8 ) I 1. I w is h t h e g o v e, rn m en t w o u ld as k m e w h at I th in k a b o u t th e en er g y s it u at io n . (+ I. 0 , + 0 .6 , 0. I , + ) ,2 ) 31 , I w an t m y r ep re se n ta ti v es in W as h in g to n to m ak e w h at ev er d ea ls a re n ec es sa ry to g et s o m e ac ti o n o n e n er g y p o li cy . (- I. 3 . + 2 .4 , 0 .9 ,+ 1 ,0 ) 3 ~ T h e m ar k et w il l al lo ca te e n er g y su p p li es e ff ic ie n tl y a n d fa ir ly w h en p ri ce s ar e n u l o n g er c o n - tr o ll ed b y th e g o v er n m en t. ( 1. 0, 2. 9, - I.I , 1 6 ) 15 . ] th in k i t's w ro n g t o p ro m o te in cr ea se d e n e rg y co n su m p ti o n th ro u g h a d ve rt is in g c am pa ig ns . (+ 0 .6 . + 1 .8 , + 3 .0 , + 1 .2 ) 4 3 . I w O n' l cu t b ac k c, u m y e n er # y us e u n li ] o th er s m ak e th e sa m e sa cr il ic e. (2 3 , 0 .i , 2 .6 , 2 .6 ) 38 . P eo p le l ik e m e sh o u ld tr u st t h e P re si d en t to l in d a s o lu ti o n to t h e en er g y c ri si s. (1 .9 , 3. 9, 2 .7 ,- 2 .1 ) 47 ~ T h e o il a n d g as c o m p an ie s d es er v e th e tr u st o f p eo p le li k e m e. (3 .4 , 2. ~ . 1 .6 . 1 4 ) T ho ,~ e p eu p le w h o d ir ec t lh ei r h o st il it y t o w ar d b u si n es s o r g o v er n - m en t w h en e n er g y p ro b le m s ar is e ar e .j us t lo o k in g f o r sc ap eg o at s. ( 1 ,7 . 2. 5, 0. 4, + 0 .9 ) 5. ..a P eo p le i n th is c o m m u n it y w il l tr u st th e lo ca l g as a n d e le ct ri c co m - p an ie s to d 'J w h at 's b es t Io r al l o f us , ( 2. 4, 2 .9 , 3 .1 , 2 .6 ) 7. I t h in k w e sh o u ld g et t o g et h er in th is c o m m u n it y to w o rk o n o u r o w n l o ca l en er g y p ro b le m s. (+ I ,0 . + 2 .0 , + 0 .9 , + 0 .1 ) 32 , I su p p o rt o rg a n iz a ti o n s th a l w o rk f o r co n su m er in te re st s o n en er g y i ss u es . (+ 2 3 , +1 .6 , ~ 1 .6 , + 2 2 ~ .% l', ,a I( 1. W e sh o u ld in cr ea se th e p ro - d u c ti o n c, f {i ll a n d g as i n th e U .S . as r ap id ]) ' as p o sb ib le . { + 1 .8 .+ 2 .8 , 0 .6 , + I. 4 ) 2 6 ; C o n su m e r pr ic e~ , o f g a so b n e , n a u ra l g as . fu el o a n d el ec tr ic iP v ar e to o l ow '. ( 3 .8 , 1. 9, 0 ,0 , 2. 9) 22 __ : T il e A m c ri c a n p eo p le c an h a, ,c m o re e n er g y o n ly i f th ey a r~ " w il li n g t o p ay h ig h er p ri ce s Io r it . ( I, I, 2. 4, I. I, 0. 9) 4. I h e w u rl d is h ea d ed to w ar d sk v rn c k e ti n g o il p ri ce s an d w id e- sp re ad cn e[ g y s h n rl ag e: -, i n tl' ,t" m id -1 9 8 0 's . (+ 2 ,4 , + 1 .3 , + 2 .1 . + 3 .6 ) 2 g . [ su p p o rt [e lI I v al o fg o ', e rn Il le n l re g u ]a ll o n s al ld e rm t ro b , O il o il a n d n a u lr a l g as p ri ce s. ( 0. 8, 26 , 4 I.( ), 1. 2) 45 ..: l ~ ,u p p o rl t ax es o n t h e w in d - fa ll p r, .d it ', o f ah e o il a n d gi n, in d u st ry . (4 1. 7, f4 .3 . + 1 6, 4 2 .8 1 3( }. W e sh o u ld a cc ep t a d d it io n a l ri sk s to p u b li c h e a lt h a n d ~, a[ et y in o rd e r to d e a l w it h th e cn ~ '[g y cr is is . ( 4. 0, 3. 5. 3. 9. 1. 6) 37 __ : P eo p le li k e Tn r ar c T ir ed o f se ei n g " th e en er g y cr is is " in t h e h ea d li n es al te r al l th c. se , ,r ea rs . ( 0 .1 ,- I- 0 .5 . I. I, 1. 3} ~4 . A n in cr ea se in g a~ a n d el ec tr ic b il ls m ea n. ', m o re h a rd sh ip Ju t iL le p o o r a n d th o se o n l ix cd in co m es . (+ 3 .7 , 4 4 .1 , 4 2. 6, + 2 3 ) 24 . R c a li sl ic a lb , ti lt : n at io n h as no a lt er n at iv e b il l to i n cr ea se ils d e p e n d e n c e o n n il e[ ca r p o w er . ( 1, 0. + 1. 8, 4. 4, +2 .5 ) 16 . I h a~ c n o o b ic cl io n to I ]T C lo ca ti o n ol a n ew n u cl ea r p o w er p la n l in t h e ar ea w , h er e I li v e. (4 .1 , 0. 9. 4 .7 ,+ 0 .9 ) 4 1 . [ su p p o rl ~ ig o ro tl s en fo rc e m en t o l ex is ti n g r p ro te ct io n I/ iw s a n d re g u la ti o n s. (+ 2 .3 . + 1 .5 . 4 3 .9 , 4 l. l) 27 __ ~ O n ly t h e ex p er t. ', ~ ,h ou ld b e co n si d er ed c o m p e te n t to s a+ ,, w h at ca n b e d o n e a b o u t th e en er g y si tu at io n . (2 .1 . 3. ~ , 1. 3, 2. 4) 33 . N o t ev en Ih e ex p er ts k n o w h o w t o s af cl y d is p o se o 1 ra d io - ac ti v e w as tc s [l o m n u cl ea r p o w r p la n ts . (+ 3 .4 , + 3. 1, 4 3 .7 , + 1 .3 ) 19 m . N ew e n er g y Ic ch n o lo g ie s cr ea te as m a n y pr ob le m -' , as th ey ~ o lv e. ( 0. 0, 4 1. 3, 1. 4, 1. 6) 1. O v e r th e il ex t Iw en ty y ea rm .~ ol ar e n er g y lU St c an '! m a k e n lu eh d if fe re n ce in m ee ti n g t h e n at io n 's en er g y n ee d s. ( 3. 2, t). O , 1. 0, 3. 5) ~ . I su p p o lt )e d e ra l g u vc ln m e n l su b si d ie s fo r th e c o m m e rc ia h z a - fi o n o f ga .~ ol in e m a d e ]r o n l co al a n d ~ ha k" (+ 1 .6 ,4 1 .4 , 0. I , i 1. 6) 12 . I op po ~ ,c t h e le d er al g u v cr n - n le n f' s pr ol 'T 10 {i oH ~) [ I~ IIC (C ~I I" p( cw et th ro u g h su b si d ie s an d o th er a d v an ta g es . (+ 0 .1 , I. I, + 4 .4 . 1. 4) 6. E n er g y re se ar ch an d d e' ,+ el o p m cn t .' ~ o u ld e m p h a si z e re n ew ab le en er g y so u rc es li k e so la r ~ n er g y . (+ 3 .3 , + 3 .1 , -~ 3 .9 , + 3. 'O ) 35 . I d o u 'l k n o w w h o o r w h at to b el ie v e a b o u t th e en er g y s il u a ti o n . (+ 2 .5 ,+ 2 .0 , 0 .3 , (I .2 ) 17 . B ec au se Ih e tr u th a b o u t th e en er g y c li si s is s o c o m p le x , it 's d if li cu h to , ex p la in to t h e p u b li c. ( 0 .4 , 1. 3, 0 .0 , + 0 .5 ) 39 ~ A n~ , cl ti ci cn t an d el le ct iv c en er g y p o b c} w il l h a ve to b e d ir ec te d b y t h e fe d er al g o v e rn m e n t. (+ 0 .2 , 1. 0, (} .1 , 2. 1) IN . ] w an l b el ie r in lo rl n a tl o n ab l~ tl l h o w t he : c n e lg y c ri sL ,, ai fe ct ~ , m c a n d m y c o m m u n it y , a n d w h at w e ca n d o a b o u t i[ . 1 + 2 .6 . 4 2 .0 . + l. I, + 1 .9 ) 40 . I w o u ld li k e Io s ee m o re e ll ,a rt b y lh e g < w cr n n ]e n l to s el l it s en er g y p o li cy p ro p o sa ls t,a I h e pu bl i, .'. (+ 0 .4 , { 1. 0, (} .6 , + 1 .4 ) -- ,4 L. o. a 174 9 T h e results are reported in R. D. Brunner, "'Citizen Viewpoints on Energy: R i c h m o n d , Indiana" ( M a r c h , 1978). T h e i n d e p e n d e n t estimate was made by the f o r m e r D i r e c t o r o f M a r k e t i n g Research, Office o f Energy C o n s e r v a t i o n a n d E n v i r o n m e n t , Federal Energy A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . It was based on s t a t e m e n t s in the Q-sample that distinguished the three viewpoints and were similar to items that had been included in a number o f national sample surveys s p o n s o r e d by the FEA. 10 This analysis i n c o r p o r a t e s p r o p o s i t i o n s f r o m a n u m b e r o f studies o f public o p i n i o n and mass m o v e m e n t s , including several classics: W. L i p p m a n n , Public Opinion (New York: T h e Free Press, 1965 ed.); H. D. Lasswell, Psychopathology and Politics (New York: Viking Press, 1960 ed.), especially Ch. X; H. D. Lasswell, World Politics and Personal Insecurity(New York: T h e Free Press, 1965 ed.), especially Part III; and H. D. Lasswell and A. Kaplan, Power a n d S o c i e t y (New tlaven: Yale University Press, 1950), especially the c h a p t e r on symbols. F o r a brief analysis o f the interplay o f symbols, conditions, a n d public opinion in the 1973 1974 oil embargo, see R. D. Brunner, " A n ' i n t e n t i o n a l ' alternative in public opinion research," American Journal o f Political Science, X X I (August, 1977), pp. 454-459. 11 O n the diversity o f interests a m o n g the policy-making elites see " I n d u s t r y ' s views on the critical choices," New York Times(April 20, 1977) a n d the n u m e r o u s published critiques o f major Presidential energy initiatives such as the N a t i o n a l Energy Plan i n t r o d u c e d in April 1977. A glimpse o f the politics o f energy policy p l a n n i n g can be f o u n d in L. H. L a p h a m , " T h e energy debacle," Harper's (August, 1977), pp. 58ff. Ideological differences a m q n g energy policy experts are a persistent t h e m e in t h e w o r k o f A. B. Lo~ins, particularly "'Cost risk benefit assessments in energy policy," George Washington University Law Review, 45 (August, 1977), pp. 911 943. 12 C o m m e n t s on press coverage o f projected natural gas shortages can be found in R. M orris, " W h a t e v e r happened to the natural gas crisis?" Columbia Journalism Review ( M a r c h / A p r i l , 1976), pp. 32ff. See also, E. M. Kennedy, " F u e l price decontrol is a mistake," Challenge ( M a y - J u n e , 1979), pp. 59-60. 13 S c a p e g o a t i n g is n o t limited to m e m b e r s o f the general public. See J. Reston, " W h o ' s to bl~/me?" New York Times ( M a y 13, 1979), p. E21, a n d a letter in response from W. D. B u r n h a m published in the T i m e s ( M a y 23, 1979), p. A26. 14 C o n s i d e r the following by J, S. Milstein, " H o w C o n s u m e r s Feel A b o u t Eriergy: Attitudes and Behavior During t h e Winter a n d Spring o f 1976-77" (U.S. D e p a r t m e n t o f Energy, June, 1977), p. 11: P e o p l e d o not want to pay higher prices for energy because higher energy prices are the p r o b l e m to a majority o f people. Higher energy prices are o f great c o n c e r n to people because they are personally experienced weekly and monthly t h r o u g h gasoline and utility bills. Thus people are baffled by proposals to solve the energy p r o b l e m by raising energy prices to consumers: H o w can you solve high prices by making t h e m even higher? 15 M o r e precisely, the p r o b l e m is s y m b o l inflation. In parallel with m o n e t a r y inflation, it is a case o f t o o m a n y w o r d s and n u m b e r s chasing t o o few verifiable meanings from the viewpoint o f the "buyer." T h e effect is to render ineffective the principal i n s t r u m e n t o f policy in the s h o r t run, the m a n i p u l a t i o n o f symbols. C o m p a r e Mrs. A's c o m m e n t s on the " b o y crying wolf.'" 16 Strategy is used here in the sense o f A. M. Rivlin: A general principle which, if widely accepted, provides a stable and constructive c o n t e x t for the c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f specific plans designed to implement it. See "Social Policy: Alternative Strategies for the Federal G o v e r n m e n t " (W. S. W o y t i n s k y Lecture No. 3, Institute o f Public Policy Studies a n d D e p a r t m e n t o f Economics, T h e University o f Michigan, 1973). 17 A small n u m b e r o f c o m m u n i t i e s a r o u n d the country already have achieved remarkable results t h r o u g h local energy initiatives with very little national publicity. See the Hearings on Local Energy Policies, May 22, J u n e 5 and 9, 1978, o f the Energy and P o w e r S u b c o m m i t t e e , under C h a i r m a n J. D. Dingell, C o m m i t t e e on Interstate a n d F o r e i g n C o m m e r c e , U.S. H o u s e o f Representatives (S erial No. 95 135). A n analysis o f t h e hearings a n d o t h e r sources can be f o u n d in R. D. B r u n n e r (1980), ~'Decentralized Energy Policies," Public Policy 28:71-91.