Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

International Survey on Bioenergy Knowledge, Perceptions, and Attitudes Among Young Citizens

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study with an international perspective, investigated the state of knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes among young students toward bioenergy in Finland, Slovakia, Taiwan, and Turkey. A total of 1,903 students with an average age of 15 years from 19 rural and urban schools participated in this study. The study found statistically significant differences in students’ bioenergy knowledge with respect to the countries. Only a small percentage of the students in each country were able to demonstrate a high level of bioenergy knowledge. In overall, the gender and rural–urban differences did not play a significant role in determining students’ level of bioenergy knowledge. The students appeared to be very critical of bioenergy and especially of the issues related to bioenergy production from forests. They demonstrated positive attitudes in terms of their willingness to learn about bioenergy and its use in their daily life. The study found statistically significant effects of gender and locality on students’ perceptions of bioenergy. Most knowledgeable students in bioenergy appeared to be most critical in their perceptions and attitudes toward bioenergy. The principal component analysis revealed three distinct dimensions of students’ perceptions and attitudes toward bioenergy viz., “motivation”, “critical”, and “practical”. A broader societal support is needed for the introduction of bioenergy in many countries and young generation’s positive attitudes to this matter is certainly important for people who will create policies in this area. More efforts are needed to support young students so that they understand the multi-dimensional issues related to bioenergy by allowing them to have practical experiences with bioenergy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abhary K, Adriansen HK, Begovac F (2009) Some basic aspects of knowledge. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 1(1):1753–1758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Adelle C, Withana S (2008) EU and US public perceptions of environmental, climate change and energy issues. Institute for European Environmental Policies, UK http://ieep.org.uk/publications/pdfs/t_page/eu_us_public_perceptions.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2009

  3. Askew MF (2006) European union and bioenergy-biofuel. www.rice.edu/energy/publications/eventpres/biofuels/Biofuels_Askew%20_092506.pdf. Accessed 15 July 2009

  4. Bal S, Samancı NK, Bozkurt O (2007) University Students’ Knowledge and Attitude about Genetic Engineering. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ 3(2):119–126

    Google Scholar 

  5. Barr S (2007) Factor influencing environmental attitudes and behaviors: a UK case study of household waste management. Environ Behav 39(4):435–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. BECA (Baltic Energy Conservation Agency) (2009) Pellet market country report Slovakia. http://www.forcebioenergy.dk/pelletsatlas_docs/showdoc.asp?id=090826102915&type=doc&pdf=true. Accessed 21 April 2010

  7. Bechtel RB, Verdugo VC, Pinhiero JQ (1999) Environmental belief systems: United States, Brazil and Mexico. J Cross-Cult Psychol 30(1):122–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bergmann A, Colombo S, Hanley N (2008) Rural versus urban preferences for renewable energy developments. Ecol Econ 65(3):616–625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. BERR (2008) Renewable energy awareness and attitudes research. Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, Government of UK

  10. Bogner FX, Wiseman M (1997) Environmental perception of rural and urban pupils. J Environ Psychol 17(2):111–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brotman JS, Moore FM (2008) Girls and science: a review of four themes in the science education literature. J Res Sci Teach 45(9):971–1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brown CE, Kim SC, Stichler JF, Fields W (2010) Predictors of knowledge, attitudes, use and future use of evidence-based practice among baccalaureate nursing students at two universities. Nurse Educ Today 30(6):521–527

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bush SR (2008) The social science of sustainable bio-energy production in Southeast Asia. Biofuels Bioprod Bioref 2(2):126–132

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Buttel F (1992) Environmentalization: origins, processes, and implications of rural social change. Rural Sociol 57(1):1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chen F, Lu SM, Wang E, Tseng KT (2010) Renewable energy in Taiwan. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 14(7):2029–2038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Davidson AR, Yantis S, Norwood M, Montano DE (1985) Amount of information about the attitude object and attitude–behavior consistency. J Pers Soc Psychol 49:1184–1198

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Dawson V, Schibeci R (2003) Western Australian High School Students’ attitudes towards biotechnology processes. J Biol Educ 38(1):7–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Demirbas A (2001) Energy balance, energy sources, energy policy, future developments and energy investments in Turkey. Energy Convers Manage 42(10):1239–1258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. de Pauw JB, Petegem P (2010) A cross-national perspective on youth environmental attitudes. Environmentalist 30(2):133–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. de Vries, Bert JM, van Vuuren, Detlef P, Hoogwijk et al (2007) Renewable energy sources: their global potential for the first-half of the 21st century at a global level: an integrated approach. Energy Policy 35(4):2590–2610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Douglas M, Gasper D, Ney S, Thompson M (1998) “Human needs and wants”. In: Rayner S, Malone EL (eds) Human choice and climate change, vol. 1: the societal framework, Ch. 3. Battelle Memorial Institute, Ohio, USA

    Google Scholar 

  22. EECA (Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority, New Zealand) (2008) Public perceptions of renewable energy. http://www.eeca.govt.nz/sites/all/files/renewable-energy-nielsen-research-report-may-08.pdf. Accessed 10 Nov 2009

  23. Erdogan M, Özel M, Uşak M, Prokop P (2009) Development and validation of an instrument to measure University Students’ Biotechnology Attitude. J Sci Educ Technol 18(3):255–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Erdogdu E (2008) An expose’ of bioenergy and its potential and utilization in Turkey. Energy Policy 36(6):2182–2190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Eurobarometer (2006) Energy attitudes towards energy. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  26. Eurobarometer (2007) Energy technologies: knowledge, perceptions, measures. Report produced by directorate general communication for the directorate-general for research. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  27. Eurostat (2010) Key figures on Europe—2010 edition. European Commission, Brussels, pp 1–252

    Google Scholar 

  28. Evans GW, Brauchle G, Haq A, Steckler R, Wong K, Shapiro E (2007) Young children’s environmental attitudes and behaviors. Environ Behav 39(5):635–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Fargione J, Hill J, Tilman D, Polasky S, Hawthorne P (2008) Land clearing and biofuel carbon debt. Science 319:1235–1238

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. FAO (2005) Global forest resources assessment 2005. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  31. FAO (2008) The state of food and agriculture 2008. Biofuels: prospects, risks and opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fančovičová J, Prokop P (2010) Development and initial psychometric assessment of the plant attitude questionnaire. J Sci Educ Technol 19(5):415–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Franke GR, Nadler SS (2008) Culture, economic development, and national ethical attitudes. J Bus Res 61(3):254–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Gerbens-Leenes W, Hoekstra AY, van der Meer TH (2009) The water footprint of bioenergy. PNAS 106(25):10219–10223

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Gokcol C, Dursun B, Alboyaci B, Sunan E (2009) Importance of biomass energy as alternative to other sources in Turkey. Energy Policy 37(2):424–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Goldman D, Yavetz B, Pe’er S (2006) Environmental literacy in teacher training in Israel: environmental behavior in new students. J Environ Educ 38(1):3–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Goodrum D, Hackling M, Rennie L (2001) The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools. Research report. Training and Youth Affairs. http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/5DF3591E-DA7C-4CBD-A96C-CE404B552EB4/1546/sciencereport.pdf. Accessed 10 Sept 2010

  38. Greenberg M (2009) Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: analysis of US national and site-specific data. Energy Policy 37(8):3242–3249

    Google Scholar 

  39. Halder P, Pietarinen J, Nuutinen S, Pelkonen P (2010) Young citizens’ knowledge and perceptions of bioenergy and future policy implications. Energy Policy 38(6):3058–3066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Halder P, Nuutinen S, Pietarinen J, Pelkonen P (2011) Bioenergy and the youth: analyzing the role of school, home, and media from future policy perspectives. Appl Energy 88(4):1233–1240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Harlen W (2006) Teaching, learning and assessing science 5–12, 4th edn. Sage, Bristol

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hawthorne M, Alabaster T (1999) Citizen 2000: development of a model of environmental citizenship. Glob Environ Change 9(1):25–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Herrera M (1992) Environmental and political participation: towards a new system of social beliefs and values. J Appl Soc Psychol 22(8):657–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Hill J, Nelson E, Tilman D, Polasky S, Tiffany D (2006) Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. PNAS 103(30):11206–11210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. IEA (2007) Energy policies of IEA countries, Finland 2007. OECD/IEA, Paris, pp 7–11

    Google Scholar 

  46. IEA (2010a) Bioenergy annual report 2010. http://www.ieabioenergy.com/DocSet.aspx?id=6506&ret=lib. Accessed 15 April 2010

  47. IEA (2010b) Share of total energy supply in 2008—Slovak Republic. http://www.iea.org/stats/pdf_graphs/SKTPESPI.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2011

  48. IEA (2011) Selected 2008 Indicators for Chinese Taipei. http://www.iea.org/stats/indicators.asp?COUNTRY_CODE=TW. Accessed 21 Jan 2011

  49. Intelligent Energy Europe (2009) Energy education: changing their habits in our lifetime. Project Report http://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/library/doc/ka_reports/education09_en.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2009

  50. Iqbal HM, Shahzad S, Sohail S (2010) Gender differences in Pakistani high school students’ views about science. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2(2):4689–4694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Jenkins EW, Pell RG (2006) “Me and the environmental challenges”: a survey of english secondary school students’ attitudes towards the environment. Int J Sci Educ 28(7):765–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Jones MG, Howe A, Rua MJ (2000) Gender differences in students’ experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists. Sci Educ 84(2):180–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Kaiser FG, Oerke B, Bogner FX (2007) Behavior-based environmental attitude: development of an instrument for adolescents. J Environ Psychol 27(3):242–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Kärhä K (2010) Industrial supply chains and production machinery of forest chips in Finland. Biomass Bioenergy. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.11.016

    Google Scholar 

  55. Keam S, McCormick N (2008) Implementing sustainable bioenergy production—a compilation of tools and approaches. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, pp 1–32

    Google Scholar 

  56. Klepaker T, Almendingen SF, Tveita J (2007) Young Norwegian students’ preferences for learning activities and the influence of these activities on the students’ attitudes to performance in science. NorDiNa 1:45–56

    Google Scholar 

  57. Kollmuss A, Agyeman J (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? EnvironEducRes 8(3):239–260

    Google Scholar 

  58. Landis DA, Gardiner MM, van der Werf W, Swinton SM (2008) Increasing corn for biofuel production reduces biocontrol services in agricultural landscapes. PNAS 105(51):20552–20557

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Lapola DM, Schaldach R, Alcamo J (2010) Indirect land-use changes can overcome carbon savings from biofuels in Brazil. PNAS 107(8):3388–3393

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Laurence WF (2007) Switch to corn promotes Amazon deforestation. Science 318:1721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Lee MH, Johanson RB, Tsai CC (2007) Exploring Taiwanese High School Students’ conceptions of and approaches to learning science through a structural equation modeling analysis. Sci Educ 92(2):191–220

    Google Scholar 

  62. Liou HM (2010) Policies and legislation driving Taiwan’s development of renewable energy. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 14(7):1763–1781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. McCormick K, Kåberger T (2007) Key barriers for bioenergy in Europe: economic conditions, know-how and institutional capacity, and supply chain co-ordination. Biomass Bioenergy 31(7):443–452

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Meerah TSM, Halim L, Nadeson T (2010) Environmental citizenship: what level of knowledge, attitudes, skill and participation the students own? Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2(2):5715–5719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Milfont TL (2007) Psychology of environmental attitudes: a cross-cultural study of their content and structure. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  66. Milfont TL, Duckitt J, Wagner C (2010) A cross-cultural test of the value-attitude-behavior hierarchy. J Appl Soc Psychol 40(11):2791–2813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Miller PH, Blessing JS, Schwartz S (2006) Gender differences in High-school Students’ views about science. Int J Sci Educ 28(4):363–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Ministry of Economy of Slovakia (2006) Energy Policy of the Slovak Republic. 1–51.

  69. Mitchell D (2008) A note on rising food prices. Policy Research Working Paper 4682. Development Prospects Group, the World Bank, 1–21

  70. OECD Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA) (2003) Scientific literacy. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/38/29/33707226.pdf. Accessed 14 Sept 2010

  71. Oikari M, Kärhä K, Palander T, Pajuoja H, Ovaskainen H (2010) Analyzing the views of wood harvesting professionals related to the approaches for increasing the cost-efficiency of wood harvesting from young stands. Silva Fennica 44(9):481–495

    Google Scholar 

  72. Osborne J, Simon S, Collins S (2003) Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. Int J Sci Edu 25(9):1049–1079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Owens S, Driffill L (2008) How to change attitudes and behaviours in the context of energy. Energy Policy 36(12):4412–4418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Pao HT (2009) Forecasting energy consumption in Taiwan using hybrid nonlinear models. Energy 34(10):1438–1446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Pao HT (2009) Forecast of electricity consumption and economic growth in Taiwan by state space modeling. Energy 34(11):1438–1446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Prokop P, Lešková A, Kubiatko M, Dirand C (2007) Slovakian students’ knowledge of and attitudes toward biotechnology. Int J Sci Educ 29(7):895–907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Prokop P, Prokop M, Tunnicliffe SD (2007) Is biology boring? Student attitudes toward biology. J Biol Educ 42(1):36–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Resch G, Held A, Faber T, Panzer C, Toro F (2008) Potentials and prospects for renewable energies at global scale. Energy Policy 36(11):4048–4056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Rohracher H, Bogner T, Späth P, Faber F (2004) Improving the public perception of bioenergy in the EU. Final Report to the European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/res/sectors/doc/bioenergy/bioenergy_perception.pdf. Accessed 14 July 2009

  80. Saunders CD, Brook AT, Myers OE (2006) Using psychology to save biodiversity and human well-being. Conserv Biol 20(3):702–705

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Schahn J, Holzer E (1990) Studies of individual environmental concern. The role of knowledge, gender, and background variables. Environ Behav 22(6):767–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Schlegel J, Rupf R (2010) Attitudes towards potential animal flagship species in nature conservation: a survey among students of different educational institutions. J Nat Conserv 18(4):278–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RH et al (2008) Use of US croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land use change. Science 319:1238–1240

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Segon V, Støer D, Domac J, Yang K (2004) Raising the awareness of bioenergy benefits: results of two public surveys on attitudes, perceptions and knowledge. IEA Bioenergy/Task 29 Report

  85. Sheffield J (1997) The role of energy efficiency and renewable energies in the future world energy market. Renewable Energy 10:315–318, World Renewable Energy Congress IV, Renewable Energy, Energy Efficiency and the Environment

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Shen J, Saijo T (2007) Re-examining the relations between socio-demographic characteristics and individual environmental concern: evidence from Shanghai data. J Environ Psychol 28(1):42–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Soimakallio S, Mäkinen T, Ekholm T, Pahkala K, Mikkola H, Paappanen T (2009) Greenhouse gas balances of transportation biofuels, electricity and heat generation in Finland - Dealing with the uncertainties. Energy Policy 37(1):80–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Spuzic S, Xing K, Abhary K (2008) Some examples of ambiguities in cross-disciplinary terminology. Int J Technol Knowl Soc 4(2):19–28

    Google Scholar 

  89. Statistics Finland (2009) Energy. http://www.stat.fi/tup/suoluk/suoluk_energia_en.html. Accessed 17 July 2009

  90. Stern PC (2000) Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J Soc Issues 56(3):407–424

    Google Scholar 

  91. Stupak I, Asikainen A, Jonsell M et al (2007) Sustainable utilisation of forest biomass for energy - Possibilities and problems: policy, legislation, certification, and recommendations and guidelines in the Nordic, Baltic, and other European countries. Biomass Bioenergy 31(10):666–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. TFB (1995) The third island-wide forest resources and landuse inventory, 1983–1993. Taiwan Forestry Bureau, Taipei

    Google Scholar 

  93. Thornley P, Prins W (2008) Public perceptions and bioenergy: some remarks in preparation of the workshop scheduled for the Themalnet meeting in Vicenza, October 2008. http://www.thermalnet.co.uk/docs/Barriers%20Precisfinal.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2009

  94. The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) (2007) Science performance in the United States and Internationally. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009001_2.pdf. Accessed 30 Mar 2009

  95. Trumper R (2006) Factors affecting Junior High School Students’ Interest in physics. J Sci Educ Technol 15(1):47–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Tsai WT, Chou YH (2006) An overview of renewable energy utilization from municipal solid waste (MSW) incineration in Taiwan. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 10(5):491–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Tsai WT, Lan HF, Lin DT (2008) An analysis of bioethanol utilized as renewable energy in the transportation sector in Taiwan. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 12(5):1364–1382

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Tsai WT (2007) Bioenergy from landfill gas (LFG) in Taiwan. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 11(2):331–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Tsai WT, Lin DT (2009) Overview analysis of bioenergy from livestock manure management in Taiwan. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 13(9):2682–2688

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Tsai WT, Lin CC, Yeh CW (2007) An analysis of biodiesel fuel from waste edible oil in Taiwan. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 11(5):838–857

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. UNCATD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) (2007) The Biofuels Controversy. http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/ditcted200712_en.pdf Accessed 24 April 2010

  102. UN-Energy (2007) Sustainable bioenergy: a framework for decision makers. http://esa.un.org/un-energy/pdf/susdev.Biofuels.FAO.pdf Accessed 18 April 2010

  103. U.S. Census Bureau, International Data Base (2010) Age distribution, by country or Area. http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/. Accessed 21 Jan 2011

  104. Valkila N, Saari A (2010) Urgent need for new approach to energy policy: the case of Finland. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 14(7):2068–2076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Van Petegem P, Blieck A (2006) The environmental worldview of children: a cross-cultural perspective. Environ Educ Res 12(5):625–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Wegner DT, Kelly JR (2008) Social psychological dimensions of bioenergy development and public acceptance. Bioenerg Res 1(2):107–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. White RT (1988) Learning science. B. Blackwell, UK

    Google Scholar 

  108. World Development Indicators (2010). The World Bank. http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators. Accessed 20 Jan 2011

  109. Outlook WE (2010) World energy outlook 2010, executive summary, © OECD/IEA. International Energy Agency, Paris, France, p 18

    Google Scholar 

  110. Worsley A, Skrzypiec G (1998) Environmental attitudes of senior secondary school students in South Australia. Glob Environ Change 8(3):209–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Yuenyong C, Jones A, Yutakom N (2008) A comparison of Thailand and New Zealand students’ ideas about energy related to technological and societal issues. Int J Sci Math Educ 6:293–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Zelezny LC, Chua PP, Aldrich C (2000) Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. J Soc Stud 56(3):443–457

    Google Scholar 

  113. Zografakis N, Menegaki AN, Tsagarakis KP (2008) Effective education for energy efficiency. Energy Policy 36(8):3226–3232

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The Authors are thankful to the three anonymous reviewers for their suggestions, which helped to improve the manuscript. The authors are also thankful to Ms. Veera Tahvanainen and Mr. Ashraful Alam for their expert comments. The authors acknowledge the contributions by Christine Kurçak and F. Shine Edizer in improving the English language of the manuscript. In addition, the authors acknowledge all the survey respondents, the schools, and the municipality authorities in each country for their cooperation. Finally yet importantly, the authors acknowledge the generous funding support by the OKKA-säätiö Foundation (Helsinki, Finland).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Pavol Prokop

    Present address: Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, 845 06, Bratislava, Slovakia

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, 80101, Joensuu, Finland

    Pradipta Halder & Paavo Pelkonen

  2. Department of Biology, Faculty of Education, Trnava University, Priemyselná 4, 918 43, Trnava, Slovakia

    Pavol Prokop

  3. Department of Earth Sciences, Science Education Center and Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University, No. 88, Sec. 4, Ting-Chou Rd., Taipei, Taiwan

    Chun-Yen Chang

  4. Zirve University, TR27260, Gaziantep, Turkey

    Muhammet Usak

  5. School of Educational Sciences and Psychology, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, 80101, Joensuu, Finland

    Janne Pietarinen

  6. School of Applied Educational Science and Teacher Education, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, 80101, Joensuu, Finland

    Sari Havu-Nuutinen

  7. Marmara University, 34000, Istanbul, Turkey

    Mustafa Cakir

Authors
  1. Pradipta Halder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pavol Prokop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chun-Yen Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Muhammet Usak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Janne Pietarinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sari Havu-Nuutinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Paavo Pelkonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mustafa Cakir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pradipta Halder.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Halder, P., Prokop, P., Chang, CY. et al. International Survey on Bioenergy Knowledge, Perceptions, and Attitudes Among Young Citizens. Bioenerg. Res. 5, 247–261 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-011-9121-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-011-9121-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation