IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v137y2020ics0301421519306731.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding community acceptance of a potential offshore wind energy project in different locations: An island-based analysis of ‘place-technology fit’

Author

Listed:
  • Devine-Wright, Patrick
  • Wiersma, Bouke

Abstract

Understanding the factors influencing community acceptance of renewable energy projects such as offshore wind farms is important for achieving a transition to low carbon energy sources. However, to date community acceptance research has concentrated on responses to actual proposals, seeking to explain local objections. ‘Upstream’ research that investigates the ‘place-technology fit’ of a potential renewable energy project before it is proposed is scarce, yet can inform technology deployment by taking local knowledge and preferences into account. We address this gap in a study conducted in Guernsey, Channel Islands. Data was collected using a survey (n = 468) co-designed with island policy makers presenting technical, economic and locational details of a potential offshore wind project. Results show that acceptance of the same project design differed significantly across alternative development locations. Regression analyses compared the roles of personal, context and project-related factors in explaining acceptance for each site. Support for using wind energy for local electricity supply was the most important predictor of acceptance, and this variable mediated the relationship between island energy security and community acceptance. We conclude that place matters for community acceptance and that security and autonomy are co-benefits of local renewable energy projects that deserve further research.

Suggested Citation

  • Devine-Wright, Patrick & Wiersma, Bouke, 2020. "Understanding community acceptance of a potential offshore wind energy project in different locations: An island-based analysis of ‘place-technology fit’," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:137:y:2020:i:c:s0301421519306731
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111086
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519306731
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111086?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Foxon, Timothy J., 2013. "Transition pathways for a UK low carbon electricity future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 10-24.
    2. Firestone, Jeremy & Kempton, Willett, 2007. "Public opinion about large offshore wind power: Underlying factors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1584-1598, March.
    3. Jeffrey B. Jacquet & Richard C. Stedman, 2014. "The risk of social-psychological disruption as an impact of energy development and environmental change," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(9), pages 1285-1304, September.
    4. Swofford, Jeffrey & Slattery, Michael, 2010. "Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: Local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2508-2519, May.
    5. Bouke Wiersma & Patrick Devine‐Wright, 2014. "Public engagement with offshore renewable energy: a critical review," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(4), pages 493-507, July.
    6. Ekins, Paul, 2004. "Step changes for decarbonising the energy system: research needs for renewables, energy efficiency and nuclear power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(17), pages 1891-1904, November.
    7. Andrew D. Krueger & George R. Parsons & Jeremy Firestone, 2011. "Valuing the Visual Disamenity of Offshore Wind Power Projects at Varying Distances from the Shore: An Application on the Delaware Shoreline," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(2), pages 268-283.
    8. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    9. Howarth, Candice & Monasterolo, Irene, 2017. "Opportunities for knowledge co-production across the energy-food-water nexus: Making interdisciplinary approaches work for better climate decision making," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 103-110.
    10. Gill Valentine, 2006. "Relevance and Rigour: The Advantages of Reusing and Scaling up Qualitative Data," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 38(3), pages 413-415, March.
    11. Jones, Christopher R. & Richard Eiser, J., 2010. "Understanding 'local' opposition to wind development in the UK: How big is a backyard?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 3106-3117, June.
    12. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Batel, Susana & Aas, Oystein & Sovacool, Benjamin & Labelle, Michael Carnegie & Ruud, Audun, 2017. "A conceptual framework for understanding the social acceptance of energy infrastructure: Insights from energy storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 27-31.
    13. Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2011. "Enhancing local distinctiveness fosters public acceptance of tidal energy: A UK case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 83-93, January.
    14. Aitken, Mhairi, 2010. "Why we still don't understand the social aspects of wind power: A critique of key assumptions within the literature," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1834-1841, April.
    15. Andrew D. Krueger & George R. Parsons & Jeremy Firestone, 2011. "Valuing the Visual Disamenity of Offshore Wind Projects at Varying Distances from the Shore: An Application on the Delaware Shoreline," Working Papers 11-04, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    16. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    17. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2692-2704, May.
    18. McLachlan, Carly, 2009. "'You don't do a chemistry experiment in your best china': Symbolic interpretations of place and technology in a wave energy case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5342-5350, December.
    19. Kerr, Sandy & Watts, Laura & Colton, John & Conway, Flaxen & Hull, Angela & Johnson, Kate & Jude, Simon & Kannen, Andreas & MacDougall, Shelley & McLachlan, Carly & Potts, Tavis & Vergunst, Jo, 2014. "Establishing an agenda for social studies research in marine renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 694-702.
    20. Ladenburg, Jacob & Lutzeyer, Sanja, 2012. "The economics of visual disamenity reductions of offshore wind farms—Review and suggestions from an emerging field," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(9), pages 6793-6802.
    21. Graham, Jessica B. & Stephenson, Janet R. & Smith, Inga J., 2009. "Public perceptions of wind energy developments: Case studies from New Zealand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3348-3357, September.
    22. Christina Demski & Wouter Poortinga & Lorraine Whitmarsh & Gisela Böhm & Stephen Fisher & Linda Steg & Resul Umit & Pekka Jokinen & Pasi Pohjolainen, 2018. "National context is a key determinant of energy security concerns across Europe," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 3(10), pages 882-888, October.
    23. Geraint Ellis & John Barry & Clive Robinson, 2007. "Many ways to say 'no', different ways to say 'yes': Applying Q-Methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(4), pages 517-551.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Park, Seona & Yun, Sun-Jin & Cho, Kongjang, 2024. "Energy justice: Lessons from offshore wind farm siting conflicts in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    2. Bayulgen, Oksan & Atkinson-Palombo, Carol & Buchanan, Mary & Scruggs, Lyle, 2021. "Tilting at windmills? Electoral repercussions of wind turbine projects in Minnesota," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    3. Samiha Mjahed Hammami & Heyam Abdulrahman Al Moosa, 2021. "Place Attachment in Land Use Changes: A Phenomenological Investigation in Residents’ Lived Experiences with a Renewable Energy Project Deployment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    4. Virtanen, E.A. & Lappalainen, J. & Nurmi, M. & Viitasalo, M. & Tikanmäki, M. & Heinonen, J. & Atlaskin, E. & Kallasvuo, M. & Tikkanen, H. & Moilanen, A., 2022. "Balancing profitability of energy production, societal impacts and biodiversity in offshore wind farm design," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    5. le Maitre, Julia & Ryan, Geraldine & Power, Bernadette & O'Connor, Ellen, 2023. "Empowering onshore wind energy: A national choice experiment on financial benefits and citizen participation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    6. Salak, B. & Lindberg, K. & Kienast, F. & Hunziker, M., 2021. "How landscape-technology fit affects public evaluations of renewable energy infrastructure scenarios. A hybrid choice model," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    7. Upham, Dr Paul & Sovacool, Prof Benjamin & Ghosh, Dr Bipashyee, 2022. "Just transitions for industrial decarbonisation: A framework for innovation, participation, and justice," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    8. Georgia Skiniti & Tryfon Daras & Theocharis Tsoutsos, 2022. "Analysis of the Community Acceptance Factors for Potential Wind Energy Projects in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-35, November.
    9. le Maitre, Julia & Ryan, Geraldine & Power, Bernadette & Sirr, Gordon, 2024. "Mechanisms to promote household investment in wind energy: A national experimental survey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    10. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Peacock, Adam, 2024. "Putting energy infrastructure into place: A systematic review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    11. Sigurd Hilmo Lundheim & Giuseppe Pellegrini-Masini & Christian A. Klöckner & Stefan Geiss, 2022. "Developing a Theoretical Framework to Explain the Social Acceptability of Wind Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-24, July.
    12. Anna Codemo & Ambra Barbini & Ahi Mantouza & Anastasios Bitziadis & Rossano Albatici, 2023. "Integration of Public Perception in the Assessment of Licensed Solar Farms: A Case Study in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-25, June.
    13. Lange, Marcus & Cummins, Valerie, 2021. "Managing stakeholder perception and engagement for marine energy transitions in a decarbonising world," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    14. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Homes of the future: Unpacking public perceptions to power the domestic hydrogen transition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    15. Zárate-Toledo, Ezequiel & Wood, Paul & Patiño, Rodrigo, 2021. "In search of wind farm sustainability on the Yucatan coast: Deficiencies and public perception of Environmental Impact Assessment in Mexico," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    16. Lode, M.L. & te Boveldt, G. & Coosemans, T. & Ramirez Camargo, L., 2022. "A transition perspective on Energy Communities: A systematic literature review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    17. Hübner, Gundula & Leschinger, Valentin & Müller, Florian J.Y. & Pohl, Johannes, 2023. "Broadening the social acceptance of wind energy – An Integrated Acceptance Model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    18. Na Li & Rudi Hakvoort & Zofia Lukszo, 2021. "Cost Allocation in Integrated Community Energy Systems—Social Acceptance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-24, September.
    19. Govindan, Kannan, 2023. "Pathways to low carbon energy transition through multi criteria assessment of offshore wind energy barriers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    20. Nuortimo, Kalle & Harkonen, Janne & Breznik, Kristijan, 2024. "Global, regional, and local acceptance of solar power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    21. Pascaris1, Alexis S. & Schelly, Chelsea & Rouleau, Mark & Pearce, Joshua M., 2021. "Do Agrivoltaics Improve Public Support for Solar Photovoltaic Development? Survey Says: Yes!," SocArXiv efasx, Center for Open Science.
    22. Cranmer, Alexana & Broughel, Anna Ebers & Ericson, Jonathan & Goldberg, Mike & Dharni, Kira, 2023. "Getting to 30 GW by 2030: Visual preferences of coastal residents for offshore wind farms on the US East Coast," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Rudolph & Claire Haggett & Mhairi Aitken, 2018. "Community benefits from offshore renewables: The relationship between different understandings of impact, community, and benefit," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(1), pages 92-117, February.
    2. Bonar, Paul A.J. & Bryden, Ian G. & Borthwick, Alistair G.L., 2015. "Social and ecological impacts of marine energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 486-495.
    3. Langer, Katharina & Decker, Thomas & Roosen, Jutta & Menrad, Klaus, 2016. "A qualitative analysis to understand the acceptance of wind energy in Bavaria," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 248-259.
    4. Russell, Aaron & Bingaman, Samantha & Garcia, Hannah-Marie, 2021. "Threading a moving needle: The spatial dimensions characterizing US offshore wind policy drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    5. Petrova, Maria A., 2016. "From NIMBY to acceptance: Toward a novel framework — VESPA — For organizing and interpreting community concerns," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1280-1294.
    6. Bidwell, David, 2013. "The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes towards commercial wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 189-199.
    7. Janhunen, Sari & Hujala, Maija & Pätäri, Satu, 2014. "Owners of second homes, locals and their attitudes towards future rural wind farm," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 450-460.
    8. Landeta-Manzano, Beñat & Arana-Landín, Germán & Calvo, Pilar M. & Heras-Saizarbitoria, Iñaki, 2018. "Wind energy and local communities: A manufacturer’s efforts to gain acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 314-324.
    9. Carlisle, Juliet E. & Kane, Stephanie L. & Solan, David & Bowman, Madelaine & Joe, Jeffrey C., 2015. "Public attitudes regarding large-scale solar energy development in the U.S," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 835-847.
    10. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    11. Ruano-Chamorro, Cristina & Castilla, Juan Carlos & Gelcich, Stefan, 2018. "Human dimensions of marine hydrokinetic energies: Current knowledge and research gaps," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 1979-1989.
    12. Manuel Gardt & Tom Broekel & Philipp Gareis, 2021. "Blowing against the winds of change? The relationship between anti-wind initiatives and wind turbines in Germany," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2119, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2021.
    13. Guo, Yue & Ru, Peng & Su, Jun & Anadon, Laura Diaz, 2015. "Not in my backyard, but not far away from me: Local acceptance of wind power in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 722-733.
    14. Russell, Aaron & Firestone, Jeremy & Bidwell, David & Gardner, Meryl, 2020. "Place meaning and consistency with offshore wind: An island and coastal tale," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    15. Fast, Stewart & Mabee, Warren, 2015. "Place-making and trust-building: The influence of policy on host community responses to wind farms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 27-37.
    16. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    17. Kontogianni, A. & Tourkolias, Ch. & Skourtos, M. & Damigos, D., 2014. "Planning globally, protesting locally: Patterns in community perceptions towards the installation of wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 170-177.
    18. Lombard, Andrea & Ferreira, Sanette, 2014. "Residents' attitudes to proposed wind farms in the West Coast region of South Africa: A social perspective from the South," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 390-399.
    19. Strazzera, Elisabetta & Mura, Marina & Contu, Davide, 2012. "Combining choice experiments with psychometric scales to assess the social acceptability of wind energy projects: A latent class approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 334-347.
    20. John Colton & Kenneth Corscadden & Stewart Fast & Monica Gattinger & Joel Gehman & Martha Hall Findlay & Dylan Morgan & Judith Sayers & Jennifer Winter & Adonis Yatchew, 2016. "Energy Projects, Social Licence, Public Acceptance and Regulatory Systems in Canada: A White Paper," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 9(20), May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:137:y:2020:i:c:s0301421519306731. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.