IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v37y2009i11p4273-4283.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applying environmental-behaviour concepts to renewable energy siting controversy: Reflections on a longitudinal bioenergy case study

Author

Listed:
  • Upham, Paul

Abstract

To date, studies of energy siting controversy and of environmental psychology have barely informed one another, despite the environmental-behaviour literature potentially having considerable relevance to understanding public opposition to energy projects. This paper points towards this relevance, using the example of a longitudinal study of public objections to a 21.5Â MWe bioenergy gasifier proposed for Winkleigh in Devon, England. Local opinion surveys in 2004 and 2007 showed that public opposition to the proposed gasifier remained strong but also revealed some statistically significant change and correlations of wider interest. In the context of the environmental psychology literature, the dominant model of contextualised values, intention and behaviour, as well as other psychological approaches, are found to be helpful, both for making sense of the results and for informing a psychological research agenda on public objection to new energy infrastructure.

Suggested Citation

  • Upham, Paul, 2009. "Applying environmental-behaviour concepts to renewable energy siting controversy: Reflections on a longitudinal bioenergy case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4273-4283, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:11:p:4273-4283
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(09)00381-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Jobert, Arthur & Laborgne, Pia & Mimler, Solveig, 2007. "Local acceptance of wind energy: Factors of success identified in French and German case studies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2751-2760, May.
    2. Upreti, Bishnu Raj, 2004. "Conflict over biomass energy development in the United Kingdom: some observations and lessons from England and Wales," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 785-800, April.
    3. Wolsink, Maarten, 2000. "Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 49-64.
    4. Upham, Paul & Shackley, Simon, 2006. "The case of a proposed 21.5 MWe biomass gasifier in Winkleigh, Devon: Implications for governance of renewable energy planning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(15), pages 2161-2172, October.
    5. Owens, Susan & Driffill, Louise, 2008. "How to change attitudes and behaviours in the context of energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4412-4418, December.
    6. George Chryssochoidis & Anna Strada & Athanasios Krystallis, 2009. "Public trust in institutions and information sources regarding risk management and communication: towards integrating extant knowledge," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 137-185, March.
    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. Karwani, G.M. & Lulandala, L.L.L. & Kimaro, A. & Msigwa, Z.P., 2016. "The Role Of Short Rotation Coppice Technology In Fuelwood Supply In Rungwe District, Tanzania," International Journal of Agricultural Research, Innovation and Technology (IJARIT), IJARIT Research Foundation, vol. 6(1), June.
    2. Christian Krekel & Julia Rechlitz & Johannes Rode & Alexander Zerrahn, 2020. "Quantifying the externalities of renewable energy plants using wellbeing data: The case of biogas," CEP Discussion Papers dp1738, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    3. Martinát, Stanislav & Navrátil, Josef & Dvořák, Petr & Van der Horst, Dan & Klusáček, Petr & Kunc, Josef & Frantál, Bohumil, 2016. "Where AD plants wildly grow: The spatio-temporal diffusion of agricultural biogas production in the Czech Republic," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 85-97.
    4. 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.
    5. Mohr, Alison & Raman, Sujatha, 2013. "Lessons from first generation biofuels and implications for the sustainability appraisal of second generation biofuels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 114-122.
    6. Tate, Graham & Mbzibain, Aurelian & Ali, Shaukat, 2012. "A comparison of the drivers influencing farmers' adoption of enterprises associated with renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 400-409.
    7. Poortinga, Wouter & Spence, Alexa & Demski, Christina & Pidgeon, Nick F., 2012. "Individual-motivational factors in the acceptability of demand-side and supply-side measures to reduce carbon emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 812-819.
    8. Ntona, Eirini & Arabatzis, Garyfallos & Kyriakopoulos, Grigorios L., 2015. "Energy saving: Views and attitudes of students in secondary education," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-15.
    9. Axsen, Jonn, 2014. "Citizen acceptance of new fossil fuel infrastructure: Value theory and Canada׳s Northern Gateway Pipeline," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 255-265.
    10. Emodi, Nnaemeka Vincent & Haruna, Emmanuel Umoru & Abdu, Nizam & Aldana Morataya, Sergio David & Dioha, Michael O. & Abraham-Dukuma, Magnus C., 2022. "Urban and rural household energy transition in Sub-Saharan Africa: Does spatial heterogeneity reveal the direction of the transition?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    11. Marciano, James A. & Lilieholm, Robert J. & Teisl, Mario F. & Leahy, Jessica E. & Neupane, Binod, 2014. "Factors affecting public support for forest-based biorefineries: A comparison of mill towns and the general public in Maine, USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 301-311.

    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. Soland, Martin & Steimer, Nora & Walter, Götz, 2013. "Local acceptance of existing biogas plants in Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 802-810.
    2. Schumacher, K. & Krones, F. & McKenna, R. & Schultmann, F., 2019. "Public acceptance of renewable energies and energy autonomy: A comparative study in the French, German and Swiss Upper Rhine region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 315-332.
    3. Christian Oltra & Paul Upham & Hauke Riesch & Àlex Boso & Suzanne Brunsting & Elisabeth Dütschke & Aleksandra Lis, 2012. "Public Responses to Co2 Storage Sites: Lessons from Five European Cases," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(2-3), pages 227-248, May.
    4. Ribeiro, Fernando & Ferreira, Paula & Araújo, Madalena, 2011. "The inclusion of social aspects in power planning," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4361-4369.
    5. Jinjin Guan & Harald Zepp, 2020. "Factors Affecting the Community Acceptance of Onshore Wind Farms: A Case Study of the Zhongying Wind Farm in Eastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Ioannidis, Romanos & Koutsoyiannis, Demetris, 2020. "A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    7. Rogers, J.C. & Simmons, E.A. & Convery, I. & Weatherall, A., 2008. "Public perceptions of opportunities for community-based renewable energy projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4217-4226, November.
    8. Krekel, Christian & Rechlitz, Julia & Rode, Johannes & Zerrahn, Alexander, 2020. "Quantifying the Externalities of Renewable Energy Plants Using Wellbeing Data: The Case of Biogas," IZA Discussion Papers 13959, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Fjaestad, Maja, 2013. "Winds of time: Lessons from Utö in the Stockholm Archipelago, 1990–2001," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 124-130.
    10. Gordon Walker & Noel Cass & Kate Burningham & Julie Barnett, 2010. "Renewable Energy and Sociotechnical Change: Imagined Subjectivities of ‘the Public’ and Their Implications," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(4), pages 931-947, April.
    11. Martin, Nigel & Rice, John, 2015. "Improving Australia's renewable energy project policy and planning: A multiple stakeholder analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 128-141.
    12. Liu, Wenling & Wang, Can & Mol, Arthur P.J., 2013. "Rural public acceptance of renewable energy deployment: The case of Shandong in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1187-1196.
    13. Samiha Mjahed Hammami & Sahar Chtourou & Heyam Al Moosa, 2018. "A holistic approach to understanding the acceptance of a community‐based renewable energy project: A pathway to sustainability for Tunisia's rural region," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1535-1545, December.
    14. Fitiwi, Desta Z. & Lynch, Muireann & Bertsch, Valentin, 2020. "Power system impacts of community acceptance policies for renewable energy deployment under storage cost uncertainty," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 893-912.
    15. Carneiro, Patrícia & Ferreira, Paula, 2012. "The economic, environmental and strategic value of biomass," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 17-22.
    16. Gilles Lepesant, 2016. "Implementing EU renewable energy policy at the subnational level Navigating between conflicting interests," WIDER Working Paper Series 029, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    17. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    18. Baharoon, Dhyia Aidroos & Rahman, Hasimah Abdul & Fadhl, Saeed Obaid, 2016. "Personal and psychological factors affecting the successful development of solar energy use in Yemen power sector: A case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 516-535.
    19. Hastik, Richard & Basso, Stefano & Geitner, Clemens & Haida, Christin & Poljanec, Aleš & Portaccio, Alessia & Vrščaj, Borut & Walzer, Chris, 2015. "Renewable energies and ecosystem service impacts," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 608-623.
    20. Bertsch, Valentin & Hyland, Marie & Mahony, Michael, 2017. "What drives people's opinions of electricity infrastructure? Empirical evidence from Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 472-497.

    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:37:y:2009:i:11:p:4273-4283. 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.