Beyond opposition and acceptance: examining public perceptions of the environmental and health impacts of unconventional oil and gas extraction. Matthew Cotton 1 Ioan Charnley-Parry 2 Authors pre-print version. Final version forthcoming in Current Opinion in Environmental Science and Health. Abstract This review of public perceptions of unconventional oil and gas exploration identifies four main types of study. First, UOG is analysed in terms of specific environmental and public health impacts. Second, by examining socio-economic impacts (namely the development of energy boom-towns). Third, in terms of the relationship between prior knowledge of UOG technology and public attitudes of support or opposition. Fourth, in terms of framing and discursive analysis of UOG by stakeholder groups including the print media. We identify a specific knowledge gap for environmental health professionals: that research is needed into how public and environmental health messages can be best communicated to diverse communities potentially affected by fracking, in order to directly improve public health outcomes. Highlights • The public perceptions literature is analysed in the context of primary health impacts (from environmental harm) and secondary impacts from boomtown development • Four main areas of research of identified – specific impacts, public understanding, perceptions of socio-economic impacts, framing analyses. • Further research needed into the effects of public health perceptions on other health behaviours, and the most effective communicative strategies to achieve community health outcomes. 1. Introduction The rapid development of unconventional oil and gas (hereafter UOG) resources, from tight sands, shales and coal seams using horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques, is a growing international energy policy concern. The potential profitability of UOG, as revealed in the shale boom occurring in the US, has popularised so-called fracking globally. Aside from the USA, countries such as China, Argentina, Algeria, Canada, Mexico, Australia, South Africa, Russia and Brazil (in descending order of resource magnitude) have all embarked upon shale development programmes [1], whilst smaller reserves in Europe (e.g. Denmark, the UK and Poland) have estimated net profitability and political support for extraction activities. Political support for UOG is motivated by energy security of supply, rural economic regeneration and taxation revenue concerns. UOG development is, however, banned in some countries (e.g. Scotland, Ireland and Germany), and within some regional state-level 1 Department of Environment, University of York, York, YO10 5DD. United Kingdom 2 Energy and Society Research Group, UCLan Energy, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, PR1 2HE. United Kingdom.