IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v89y2019ics0264837718319641.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Power and perception – From paradigms of specialist disciplines and opinions of expert groups to an acceptance for the planning of onshore windfarms in England – Making a case for Social Impact Assessment (SIA)

Author

Listed:
  • Muthoora, Tara
  • Fischer, Thomas B.

Abstract

Starting point for the research underlying this paper was the question why there were low rates of planning approval for Community Energy (CE) onshore windfarms in England, despite an overall supportive policy position. In order to get an indication for possible reasons, results of an in-depth review of one community driven project are provided; the Valley Wind Cooperative (VWC) in Kirklees, West Yorkshire. Importantly, a disconnect between policy and practice is observed. Views and associated perceptions of experts of certain disciplines, including e.g. landscape architecture, ecology and tourism development represent specialised but not necessarily more widely shared values of local communities. They play a particular important role in explaining the disconnect. In the presence of an overall positive attitude towards windfarm proposals of local communities, this is problematic as it prevents socially accepted projects from gaining approval. Whilst social impact assessment (SIA) can facilitate debate and community support, trade-offs between different views need to be balanced and should not be dominated by perceptions of particular (disciplinary) groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Muthoora, Tara & Fischer, Thomas B., 2019. "Power and perception – From paradigms of specialist disciplines and opinions of expert groups to an acceptance for the planning of onshore windfarms in England – Making a case for Social Impact Assess," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:89:y:2019:i:c:s0264837718319641
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718319641
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104198?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. 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.
    2. Hans Wiklund, 2011. "Why High Participatory Ideals Fail In Practice: A Bottom-Up Approach To Public Nonparticipation In Eia," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(02), pages 159-178.
    3. 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.
    4. Jones, Christopher R. & Eiser, J. Richard, 2009. "Identifying predictors of attitudes towards local onshore wind development with reference to an English case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4604-4614, November.
    5. Bronfman, Nicolás C. & Jiménez, Raquel B. & Arévalo, Pilar C. & Cifuentes, Luis A., 2012. "Understanding social acceptance of electricity generation sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 246-252.
    6. Larsen, Sanne Vammen & Hansen, Anne Merrild & Nielsen, Helle Nedergaard, 2018. "The role of EIA and weak assessments of social impacts in conflicts over implementation of renewable energy policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 43-53.
    7. 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.
    8. John Phylip-Jones & Thomas B. Fischer, 2013. "Eia For Wind Farms In The United Kingdom And Germany," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 1-30.
    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. Iwona Markuszewska, 2021. "The Energy Landscape versus the Farming Landscape: The Immortal Era of Coal?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-23, October.
    2. Nath, Sanchayan & Shams, Jahin & van Laerhoven, Frank & Driessen, Peter, 2022. "The impact of decision-making on conflict: Rethinking the roles of technocrats and residents during Tidal River Management in coastal Bangladesh," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    3. Jonathan Doh & Pawan Budhwar & Geoffrey Wood, 2021. "Long-term energy transitions and international business: Concepts, theory, methods, and a research agenda," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(5), pages 951-970, July.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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).
    4. Kortsch, Timo & Hildebrand, Jan & Schweizer-Ries, Petra, 2015. "Acceptance of biomass plants – Results of a longitudinal study in the bioenergy-region Altmark," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 690-697.
    5. 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.
    6. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    7. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    8. Seungkook Roh & Jin Won Lee & Qingchang Li, 2019. "Effects of Rank-Ordered Feature Perceptions of Energy Sources on the Choice of the Most Acceptable Power Plant for a Neighborhood: An Investigation Using a South Korean Nationwide Sample," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-21, March.
    9. Zaunbrecher, Barbara S. & Linzenich, Anika & Ziefle, Martina, 2017. "A mast is a mast is a mast…? Comparison of preferences for location-scenarios of electricity pylons and wind power plants using conjoint analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 429-439.
    10. van Rensburg, Thomas M. & Kelley, Hugh & Jeserich, Nadine, 2015. "What influences the probability of wind farm planning approval: Evidence from Ireland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 12-22.
    11. 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.
    12. Cohen, Jed J. & Reichl, Johannes & Schmidthaler, Michael, 2014. "Re-focussing research efforts on the public acceptance of energy infrastructure: A critical review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 4-9.
    13. Windemer, Rebecca, 2023. "Acceptance should not be assumed. How the dynamics of social acceptance changes over time, impacting onshore wind repowering," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    14. Mills, Sarah Banas & Bessette, Douglas & Smith, Hannah, 2019. "Exploring landowners’ post-construction changes in perceptions of wind energy in Michigan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 754-762.
    15. József Kádár & Martina Pilloni & Tareq Abu Hamed, 2023. "A Survey of Renewable Energy, Climate Change, and Policy Awareness in Israel: The Long Path for Citizen Participation in the National Renewable Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-16, February.
    16. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    17. Gorsevski, Pece V. & Cathcart, Steven C. & Mirzaei, Golrokh & Jamali, Mohsin M. & Ye, Xinyue & Gomezdelcampo, Enrique, 2013. "A group-based spatial decision support system for wind farm site selection in Northwest Ohio," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 374-385.
    18. Pepermans, Yves & Loots, Ilse, 2013. "Wind farm struggles in Flanders fields: A sociological perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 321-328.
    19. Dessi, F. & Ariccio, S. & Albers, T. & Alves, S. & Ludovico, N. & Bonaiuto, M., 2022. "Sustainable technology acceptability: Mapping technological, contextual, and social-psychological determinants of EU stakeholders’ biofuel acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    20. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.

    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:lauspo:v:89:y:2019:i:c:s0264837718319641. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.