Research Problem Energy projects are developed and executed in a complex network of interconnected actors, whom depend on each other’s resources for reaching their individual interests and goals with regard to the project. These actors have a diversity of values (convictions or beliefs of what is worth striving for society to be good), perspectives and goals. Energy projects can give rise to controversies due to the different perceptions of actors regarding the project and its implementation process (the institutions in which the technology is embedded). Whereas controversies may be perceived as barriers for the implementation of energy projects, they can also provide opportunities for the articulation of conflicting values. In that light, the notion of responsible innovation can add a normative dimension to the governance of energy projects. Responsible innovation endorses the inclusion of the diversity of relevant public values to the development and implementation of energy projects. Hence, the responsible governance of energy projects implies creating strategies and solutions to accommodate the variety of values at stake. For values to be accommodated in energy projects, they first need to be identified. The public debate can be used as a mean for the identification of relevant public values. However, this may prove challenging. The implementation of energy projects is a dynamic process, consisting of a series of intertwined decisions, involving different groups of actors at different decision-making times and places. The multiplicity of decisions lead actors to express different values or conceptualizations of the same value according to the topic under discussion. Hence, beyond methodological challenges, issues of power and agenda setting may lead to the contestation of the legitimacy of the identified values. The politics involved in the decision-making process may influence how values are articulated and when. Power imbalances may lead to emphasis on the values of powerful actors in the public debate. In addition, the process of agenda setting within arenas may encourage the expression of the values that “fit” the topic under discussion, while others remain hidden. Hence, the most frequently expressed values might not reflect the most relevant values from a democratic perspective. In fact, if the expression of values depends on specific groups of actors interacting at particular times and places, the legitimacy of the identified values might be contested. The multiplicity of interactions in energy projects is reflected in different aspects of the decision-making process, such as the locations of decision-making (arenas), the degree of coordination between actors with similar goals (coalitions) and the interventions aimed at steering the process in desired directions (strategies). Therefore, this thesis focused on exploring how these aspects of the decision-making process shaped the expression of values in the public debate – the rhetoric use of values. Case study: shale gas exploration in Lancashire In that light, a case study was deemed necessary to facilitate an in-depth exploration of the dynamics of the decision-making process. The exploration of shale gas in Lancashire, UK was selected for several reasons. The occurrence of two earth tremors in 2011, related to the first fracking well built in Lancashire, led to a moratorium of the technique that lasted 18 months. Afterwards, the safe development of fracking was supported through the development of a proper institutional environment. The exploration activities were reactivated by Cuadrilla’s proposal to develop the sites at Roseacre Woods and Preston New Road in Lancashire. This decision started a formal decision-making process surrounded by uncertainties and controversy. The uncertainties were related to the potential benefits and impacts of fracking in the environment, surrounding communities and the economy. The controversy was raised by the multitude of perspectives over if and how to implement the technique. Due to this combination of characteristics, this case was found suitable to analyse the research problem at hand. Hence, this report aimed at answering the following research question: How has the rhetoric use of values been shaped by the arenas, coalitions and strategies in the decision-making process on shale gas in Lancashire, UK? Research Methodology Based on the research question, the research was divided into two parts based on the theoretical and empirical needs. First, the theoretical research was done by means of a literature review of the theories of decision-making in networks and VSD. Second, the empirical research was executed by means of a qualitative longitudinal analysis of newspaper articles available regarding the decision-making process in Lancashire, UK. As this method generates a large amount of data, a focus was kept on the aims of the research to select the data for analysis. Conclusion The rhetoric use of values refers to the expression of values in the debate. The dynamics of the decision-making process might shape the expression of values in three ways. First, strategies may act as triggers for actors to highlight specific values or conceptualizations of values. Second, arenas constrained the expression of (conceptualizations of) values according to the topic under discussion. In addition, not all actors can participate in the different arenas, which might limit their participation in the articulation of values of the different arenas. Finally, coalitions acted as platforms for actors to express the different conceptions of values through the execution of join actions.