European Geologist Journal 57

Capturing the social acceptability of geothermal energy in northern Canada: An interdisciplinary initiative involving communities

by Alice Friser¹*, Fiona Chapman², Mafalda M. Miranda², Diane Gorcy¹ and Jasmin Raymond²

¹ Université du Québec en Outaouais

² Institut national de la recherche scientifique ; 490 rue de la Couronne Québec (QC) G1K 9A9. 

Contact: alice.friser@uqo.ca

Abstract

The aim of this article is to stress the importance of collaboration between disciplines and with communities in order to study issues of social acceptability. To reach this aim, this paper draws lessons from “Geothermal resources for energy transition: Building capacity through engagement with northern communities”, a two-year ongoing project designed by geothermal researchers to understand the social acceptability of geothermal energy in northern Canada through two-way capacity. Collaboration between geothermal researchers and social scientists facilitated informative exchanges with community members despite several challenges, such as the poor image that some Indigenous communities have of Western scientists, and the research fatigue these communities regularly experience. The interdisciplinary approach is essential to design a solid research protocol adapted to each community, engage research participants, and run the project.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

1. Introduction

In northern Canada, about 80 communities [1] (Figure 1) are not connected to a territorial or provincial power grid or a natural gas distribution network. These off-grid communities, despite green-initiatives from local governments, rely heavily on diesel generators to meet their electricity demands. These communities, as well as those in Yukon and the Northwest territories, which are connected to territorial grids, also primarily rely on imported fuels, either fossil or biomass, to meet their space heating needs.

Figure 1: Distribution of geothermal potential in Canada by end use and location of power grid and remote communities (adapted from [2]). Provinces: BC – British Columbia, AB – Alberta, SK – Saskatchewan, MB – Manitoba, ON – Ontario, QC – Quebec, NL – Newfoundland and Labrador, NB – New Brunswick, NS – Nova Scotia, PE – Prince Edward. Territories: YT – Yukon Territory, NT – Northwest Territories, NU – Nunavut.

This dependence on imported fuels is expensive, polluting and keeps off-grid communities in a situation of insecurity that could lead to social and economic upheaval [3]. In this context, geothermal energy, a renewable energy produced from the heat within the earth, is an interesting alternative to provide a reliable source of energy that could meet the base-load power and/or heating needs of off-grid communities [1]. Geothermal resources could also be used to support northern food production by heating greenhouses [4].

In a report published in 2012, Grasby et al. [2] highlight Canada’s geothermal potential and how geothermal development could benefit remote northern communities, particularly those located in the Yukon and the Northwest Territories (Figure 1). The geological framework in Yukon and the Northwest Territories suggests that high-temperature resources for electricity generation and low-temperature resources for direct use of heat (e.g., space heating applications) may be accessible. On a smaller scale, geothermal heat pumps, which is a well-established industry in southern Canada [5], could be used to heat individual buildings in off-grid communities.

Geothermal energy across northern Canada could improve the energy security of remote communities. However, geothermal resources should not be exploited without local support. Any energy project, even a renewable one, can be controversial and even abandoned if clashing with public values, concerns and visions of progress, deemed unfair or promoted by developers seen as untrustworthy or not transparent enough [6]. However, while geothermal research and exploration is underway in many northern Canadian communities, the social acceptability of these projects remains unknown. In fact, there are few studies focused on the social acceptability of geothermal energy globally [6]. Only two studies are from southern Canada [7,8] and one involves Indigenous Peoples [9]. Some additional research has assessed the energy preferences of northern residents in Canada; however, these do not mention, or very briefly mention, geothermal resources [10-14].

This raises an important research question: “Why, despite the extensive literature on the potential of geothermal energy in remote communities, do few studies mention geothermal energy when addressing the energy preferences of northern residents?”. To answer this question, this article outlines several reasons that may explain the gap in the literature of social acceptability studies related to geothermal energy.

Our second research question, “What is the best way to incorporate social acceptability studies into geothermal research projects?”, explores how best to address this gap. The answer to this question is drawn upon lessons learned from an ongoing research project centred on interdisciplinary work between social acceptability and geothermal energy experts, and collaboration with Indigenous communities in northern Canada.

Overall, the objective of this article is to highlight why collaboration between disciplines and with communities is essential to understand the social acceptability of geothermal energy.

2. Explaining the lack of studies on geothermal social acceptability in northern Canada

Several potential reasons, some general and others more specific to Canadian northern communities, can be outlined to justify this lack of research. The first explanation lies in the mutual lack of awareness of researchers in the natural and social sciences. Despite an openness to interdisciplinarity, geothermal specialists are usually trained to study geothermal energy from a natural sciences’ perspective and are not prepared to address social acceptability issues. Many natural scientists are not trained in social science research and qualitative methods. As a result, they tend to adopt a solely natural science approach in their geothermal research. Designing a research project to evaluate the social acceptability of geothermal resource development requires a strong understanding of qualitative research methods, primarily taught in the social sciences.

Natural scientists may also be limited by requirements implemented by funding agencies which require researchers to meet specific objectives within their area of expertise [15]. In contrast, few social science researchers – including researchers specialised in social acceptability issues – are familiar with geothermal energy at-large or developments in Canada. This lack of familiarity results in few geothermal studies from a social science perspective [16]. In addition, a social acceptability study would require researchers to be able to explain a proposed project in layman terms and be able to answer questions community members may have concerning the resource. Many social scientists do not have the expertise to provide the baseline information about the resource or address specific geothermal questions.

Furthermore, it is also worth to highlight the ambiguity surrounding the concept of social acceptability. Social acceptability, that we define as the collective judgement that deems a project superior to known alternatives, including the status quo [17], is a key factor for the successful implementation of any type of project, including renewable energy projects. Social acceptability has nonetheless aroused suspicion [18]. Some see this as a new way of thinking about project management, while others see it as an empty concept used by promoters and decision-makers, anxious to control opposition. In professional and academic literature, the concept is either depicted as a condition for the success of a project or decision, or identified by promoters and consultants as a strategic tool. As a result, some geothermal researchers may avoid the topic, due to fear of association with malicious promoters or misinterpretation and misuse of the concept.

The lack of research into the social acceptability of geothermal energy in remote northern Canada may also be related to the lack of regulatory frameworks around geothermal energy. So far, although several Canadian provinces and territories have significant geothermal potential, only British Columbia, Alberta and Nova Scotia have established provincial frameworks to govern the development of their geothermal resources. The northern territories (Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut) and other provinces have not adopted a regulatory framework [19]. As a result, it is not clear who owns the geothermal resources, and conflicts may rise. In this context, after applying for a permit for the right to explore, researchers may not be particularly keen to consult local communities for their detailed views on exploration and the techniques that could be used during exploitation, such as hydraulic fracturing.

Furthermore, while motivated with good intent to do collaborative and locally useful research, scientists may not know how to engage effectively with local communities. Many remote communities have experience with helicopter research and approach new researchers with scepticism. Helicopter research describes research that is completed based on short visits that aim to extract data to be processed and published elsewhere without further community engagement. Funding structures in academia contribute to perpetuating helicopter research, since they do not allocate time for adequate connections to be built between researchers and community members. Social and natural scientists exclude local community from further engaging about data collection, analysis, or interpretation when conducting this type of research. As a result, the knowledge and perspectives of local and Indigenous Peoples are often ignored even though they have long-term knowledge of the area and understand the community energy needs and challenges. In some cases, communities may never see the study’s findings, nor experience any benefits from the work undertaken [20,21]. Helicopter research carried out in the past have tarnished community and scientists’ relationships such that new researchers may find it challenging to approach local communities.

This brings us to a fifth explanation. For a developer to maximise the social acceptability of their project, they must first identify whether the community is interested in its concept. In recent years, however, Indigenous communities across Canada have repetitively been approached to participate in research studies, surveys, and interviews to share their knowledge on the same topics and give their opinion on various projects likely to affect them. This recent impulse for participatory democracy is a positive development, particularly considering that Canada’s Indigenous populations have historically had projects imposed on them without any chance to object. Nevertheless, given the large number of projects on which they are now asked for their opinion, many Indigenous communities are experiencing research fatigue [20,22]. So, when asked to participate in a study about a project still in the ideation stage, they may not want to, even if they favour renewable energy development. Consequently, geothermal researchers may find it difficult to establish a partnership with the community and add a social component to their research.

What if some research projects could only get off the ground through collaboration between researchers from different disciplines, in partnership with Indigenous communities? This is what we highlighted and exemplified by an ongoing project on the social acceptability of geothermal energy in Canada’s North. In what follows, we present this project and highlight the ways in which collaboration has contributed to the project success so far.

3. Learning from an ongoing project on geothermal social acceptability in northern communities

3.1. Project’s genesis

The current climate change panorama has given rise to a rapid growth in research projects focusing on the energy transition of remote northern communities. However, the majority of these projects fail to address the residents’ needs, priorities [23] and their rights to free, prior, and informed consent for developments on their territories or that affect them [13]. If research projects intend to help establishing policies for a sustainable energy transition, northern communities’ priorities should be considered. Energy research projects should be guided by communities and not the other way around. However, for this to happen, there is a need for researchers and communities to build local and long-term capacity. Knowledge transfer from researchers to northern residents and vice-versa, can help energy research projects be built with support of local knowledge and can help northern residents advance their own visions of energy transition [24]. This is the rationale behind the project “Geothermal resources for energy transition: Building capacity through engagement with northern communities”, a two-year study developed by Canadian geothermal researchers highly active in the north and in partnership with social acceptability scientists to facilitate two-way capacity sharing.

This project has three objectives:

1. To transfer the knowledge researchers have acquired in the course of their work on the potential use of geothermal resources to the northern communities concerned;
2. To allow communities to express their views on the potential uses of geothermal resources;
3. To find out about Indigenous vision of progress, their needs and their priorities regarding the energy transition.

To make this project a reality, its investigators, specialised in geothermal energy, had to seek out complementary skills to add a social acceptability component to their research. In addition, researchers had to approach the communities concerned by their exploration projects to gather their opinions on their work. Therefore, they asked researchers specialising in social acceptability to join their team and concluded a research agreement with two selected communities with significant geothermal potential: one in the Yukon and one in the Northwest Territories (see research protocol on Table 1).

Table 1: Research protocol.

As of now, the data collection and analysis in Yukon and in the Northwest Territories have been completed. In the community visited in Yukon, out of 70 residents, 8 people attended the workshops, 18 filled a questionnaire and 8 were interviewed. In the community visited in the Northwest Territories, with a population of 1200, 100 people attended the workshop, 37 filled a questionnaire and 17 were interviewed. While these figures may seem low compared to other projects using similar data collection techniques, they are high for a project involving Indigenous communities. Indeed, as mentioned earlier, very few communities agree to take part in research projects. Moreover, most of the people surveyed and interviewed for this project are among the most influential in their communities.

3.2. Why collaboration matters

The interdisciplinary collaboration required by this project serves, above all, the communities and researchers of northern Canada. It offers the former the opportunity to make free, prior and informed decisions on the potential development of geothermal projects on their territory and a report to keep track of these decisions. For the latter, it offers the opportunity to conduct geothermal exploratory work guided by local needs. However, the benefits of interdisciplinary collaboration continue beyond.

While the idea for this project came from the geothermal team who had worked extensively in remote communities, the methodological expertise of the social acceptability team enabled the project to proceed. This was not the first study of this kind for the geothermal team, who had contributed to two surveys on the social acceptability of geothermal energy in Canada. However, they had never conducted interviews or developed a research strategy that could use mixed methods, both of which are necessary for this project, to gain an in-depth understanding of participants’ values and concerns. Interdisciplinary collaboration solved this problem by meeting researchers’ needs for qualitative research methods. Such collaboration also enabled them to build a solid research protocol that would fit the project’s objectives, satisfy the selected communities to the point of concluding a research agreement, and meet the requirements of several research ethics offices.

In the field, this research project has shown that geothermal and social acceptability researchers complement each other. While geothermal researchers provide insights into geothermal energy in the local context, social acceptability researchers ensure that participants understand the technical information and its implications. By working together, researchers can mitigate the power relationship induced by expertise, and succeed in turning interviews with participants into lively discussions rather than simple interrogations. Using plain language to explain technical concepts is also an important aspect to take into consideration.

An essential aspect is the involvement of a community representative with whom the project can be discussed. This person can ensure that the questionnaire and interview questions are properly framed, and that informative content is easily accessible to community members. The team was able to count on this type of support in the two communities visited.

Another lesson learned from this research project is that regular and prolonged presence in the community is beneficial when it is not possible to work alongside someone who is already well integrated into the community. In the Northwest Territories, the team was able to count on the daily support of a community representative, a specialist in energy issues. In Yukon, the team was in contact with a community representative, but her support was more limited since she could not visit the community during fieldwork. However, one of the team’s researchers was able to visit the community weekly to bi-weekly over a six-month period prior to fieldwork. This repeated presence in the community was found to be useful not only for understanding community dynamics and building mutual respect and trust, but also for understanding the local energy context, to best develop the project questionnaire and adapt the interview guide accordingly. Attending First Nations research summits and community events was an excellent opportunity to socialise with community members and explore their interest in participating in the research project.

A last point, often overlooked, is obtaining prior information about ongoing research, whether it is related to the energy context or not. For instance, exchanges with local researchers on current research projects can be helpful for contextualised interactions about both research and general experience working on a traditional territory. It is also helpful to learn which questions community members had already been asked and the types of exchanges that community members had already had with local researchers. By making an effort to establish contacts with other researchers, projects can lessen the burden on community members, mitigate research fatigue and lead northern residents to be more open to participating and sharing their views.

4. Conclusions

Collaboration between researchers from different disciplines and Indigenous communities is essential to design useful research projects adapted to contemporary challenges. The collaboration highlighted herein allowed for the achievement of an interdisciplinary project to evaluate the social acceptability of geothermal energy in a subset of Canada’s remote northern communities. Beyond developing a research project, this paper highlighted other benefits of collaboration, including a solid research protocol, actively engaged research participants, and the smooth operation of the project. Above all, this collaboration helped to address three reasons that can explain the absence of similar studies. Mutual lack of awareness of researchers in the natural and social sciences was mitigated with collaborative fieldwork preparation and operation. Helicopter research was mitigated with repeated presence or close contact with a local community representative and research agreements that satisfied the expectations of both sides. Research fatigue was mitigated by obtaining information about past and ongoing research projects.

Collaboration, however, is not a natural process and it is easier to initiate collaborative relationships than maintaining them. Yet, it is by nurturing relationships and showing respect for those involved that interdisciplinary collaboration can benefit all parties. For meaningful and effective collaborative relationships with Indigenous communities, all interested researchers, regardless of their area of study, should undergo appropriate training before going to the field. It is imperative to be self-informed through literature or exchange with other researchers, have an open mind and, where appropriate, spend time with community members outside the context of their research.

Author Contributions: Conceptualisation, A.F., F.C., M.M.M., D.G. and J.R.; methodology, A.F., F.C., M.M.M., D.G. and J.R.; validation, A.F., F.C., M.M.M., D.G. and J.R.; formal analysis, A.F., F.C. and D.G.; investigation, A.F., F.C., M.M.M., D.G. and J.R.; resources, A.F., F.C., M.M.M., D.G. and J.R.; data curation, A.F., F.C. and D.G.; writing—original draft preparation, A.F.; writing—review and editing, A.F., F.C., M.M.M., D.G. and J.R.; visualisation, A.F., F.C., M.M.M., D.G. and J.R.; supervision, A.F and J.R.; project administration, A.F., M.M.M. and J.R.; funding acquisition, A.F., M.M.M. and J.R.. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: The interdisciplinary project “Geothermal resources for energy transition: Building capacity through engagement with northern communities” was funded by Natural Resources Canada through the GEM-GeoNorth program.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Miranda, MM; Comeau, F-A; Raymond, J; Gosselin, L; Grasby, SE; Wigston, A; Dehghani-Sanij, A; Sternbergh, S; Perreault, S. Geothermal resources for energy transition: A review of research undertaken for remote northern Canadian communities. European Geologist 2022, 54. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7882811
2. Grasby, SE; Allen, DM; Bell, S; Chen, Z; Ferguson, G; Jessop, A; Kelman, M; Ko, M; Majorowicz, J; Moore, M; Raymond, J; Therrien, R. Geothermal Energy Resource Potential of Canada, Open File 6914; Geological Survey of Canada: Ottawa (ON), Canada, 2012, 322 p. https://doi.org/10.4095/291488
3. Pinto, H; Gates, ID. Why is it so difficult to replace diesel in Nunavut, Canada? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2022, 157, 112030.
4. Kinney, C; Dehghani-Sanij, AR; Mahbaz, SB; Dusseault, MB; Nathwani, JS; Fraser, RA. Geothermal energy for sustainable food production in Canada’s remote northern communities. Energies 2019, 12(21), 4058. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12214058
5. Raymond, J; Malo, M; Tanguay, D; Grasby, S; Bakhteyar, F. Direct Utilization of Geothermal Energy from Coast to Coast: a Review of Current Applications and Research in Canada. Proceedings, World Geothermal Congress 2015, Melbourne, Australia, April 19-25, 2015.
6. Friser, A. et al. Geothermal energy’s social acceptability in Quebec and Canada. In Geothermal Energy and Society, 2nd ed. Manzella, A., Allansdottir, A., Pellizzone, A. Springer, Cham (accepted).
7. Malo, F; Raymond, J; Malo, M. L’acceptabilité sociale des projets d’énergie géothermique au Québec, Rapport de recherche 1662; INRS: Québec (QC), Canada, 2016, 58 p. http://espace.inrs.ca/4030/1/R1662.pdf
8. Balzan-Alzate, D; López-Sánchez, J; Blessent, D; Raymond, J; Dezayes, C; Portela, JP; Restrepo, ER; Rendón, DM; Malo, M; Goderniaux, P; Daniele, L; Le Borgne, T. An online survey to explore the awareness and acceptance of geothermal energy among an educated segment of the population in five European and American countries. Geothermal Energy 2021, 9, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40517-021-00188-x
9. Chitsaz, S. Fort Nelson First Nation-Owned Tu Deh-Kah Geothermal Project: A socio-economic Study. Master of Science thesis, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology, University of Alberta, 2022.
10. Mercer, N; Parker, P; Hudson, A; Martin, D. Off-grid energy sustainability in Nunatukavut, Labrador: Centering Inuit voices on heat insecurity in diesel-powered communities. Energy Research & Social Science 2020, 62, 101382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.101382
11. Hoicka, CE; Savic, K; Campney, A. Reconciliation through renewable energy? A survey of Indigenous communities, involvement, and peoples in Canada. Energy Research & Social Science 2021, 74, 101897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101897
12. McMaster, R. Attributes of socio-technical baseline capacities for energy transition in the North: Opportunities and challenges for Gwich’in communities, Northwest Territories. Master of Science thesis, Department of Geography and Planning, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, 2022.
13. Mercer, N; Hudson, A; Martin, D; Parker, P. “That’s Our Traditional Way as Indigenous Peoples”: Towards a Conceptual Framework for Understanding Community Support of Sustainable Energies in NunatuKavut, Labrador. Sustainability 2020, 12(15), 6050. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156050
14. Paquet, A; Cloutier, G; Blais, M. Renewable Energy as a Catalyst for Equity? Integrating Inuit Interests with Nunavik Energy Planning. Urban Planning 2021, 6, 338-350. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v6i4.4453
15. Wong, C; Ballegooyen, K; Ignace, L; Johnson, MJ (Gùdia); Swanson, H. Towards reconciliation: 10 Calls to Action to natural scientists working in Canada. FACETS 2020, 5(1), 769–783. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2020-0005
16. Spijkerboer, R; Turhan, E; Roos, A; Billi, M; Vargas-Payera, S; Opazo, J; Armiero, M. Out of steam? A social science and humanities research agenda for geothermal energy. Energy Research & Social Science 2022, 92, 102801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102801
17. Gendron, C. Penser l’acceptabilité sociale: au-delà de l’intérêt, les valeurs. Communiquer 2014, 11. https://doi.org/10.4000/communiquer.584
18. Friser, A. 2021. L’acceptabilité sociale. In Vocabulaire de la co-construction. Leyrie et M. Foudriat ; ESF : Montrouge.
19. Huang, K; Hickson, C; Grasby SE; Smejkal, E; Miranda, M; Raymond, J; Fraser, D; Harbottle, K; Torres, DA; Ebell, J; Dixon, J; Olsen, E; Drobot, A; Vany, J; Marcia, K; Colpron, M; Dehghani-Sanij, A; Wigston, A; Brasnet, G; Usworth, M; Harms, P. Geothermal Energy Country Update – Canada. 2023. Available online: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a1f36c951a58415cee41f51/t/6503dac831653d3f98fe82f2/1694751437900/Geothermal+Canada+WGC+2023_To+Post.pdf (accessed March 6, 2024).
20. Kater, I. Natural and Indigenous sciences: reflections on an attempt to collaborate. Regional Environmental Change 2022, 22, 109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-022-01967-3
21. Minasny, B; Fiantis, D; Mulyanto, B; Sulaeman, Y; Widyatmanti, W. Global soil science research collaboration in the 21st century: time to end helicopter research. Geoderma 2020, 373:114299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114299
22. Chilisa, B; Tsheko, GN. Mixed methods in Indigenous research: building relationships for sustainable intervention outcomes. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 2014, 8(3), 222–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689814527878
23. Duran, S; Hrenyk, J; Sahinyazan, FG; Salmon, E. Re-righting renewable energy research with Indigenous communities in Canada. Journal of Cleaner Production 2024, 445, 141264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141264
24. Lavoie, K. Écouter les savoirs traditionnels pour lutter contre les changements climatiques. Available online: https://www.aquilon.nt.ca/Article/Ecouter-les-savoirs-traditionnels-pour-lutter-contre-les-changements-climatiques-202203241608/default.aspx (accessed March 6, 2024).

This article has been published in European Geologist Journal 57 – Geology at the interdisciplinary nexus: Why does collaboration matter

Read here the full issue: