IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v117y2017icp70-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of a visual analytics decision support tool for wind farm placement planning in Alberta: Findings from a focus group study

Author

Listed:
  • Adagha, Ovo
  • Levy, Richard M.
  • Carpendale, Sheelagh
  • Gates, Cormack
  • Lindquist, Mark

Abstract

In socially-embedded tasks like planning the location of wind farms, certain evaluation methods have been used to establish the viability of decision support tools. These methods often consider the usability and technical functionality of decision support tools, users' tasks, and other important characteristics. However, such evaluations provide only a partial assessment of the prototype design process because the perception of usefulness, ease of use on tasks, and common barriers to use, from the point of view of the people who use the tool, are not always sufficiently integrated. The study in this article employs the focus group methodology to evaluate AB–WINDEC – a place-specific decision support tool designed to match the socio-technical requirements of stakeholders involved in wind farm placement planning in Alberta. In this context, the main purpose of the focus group was to elicit real-world perspectives from stakeholders who will eventually use the tool. The results of the study suggest that AB–WINDEC can be useful for educational purposes, public engagement, high-level analysis, risk assessment, and collaboration between wind energy decision makers and stakeholders. Feedback from the stakeholders also led to additional requirements and insight on how the design of the prototype needs to be modified to increase its usefulness and ease of use. Further, the findings provided relevant information on social considerations and potential barriers that can influence the acceptance and use of AB-WINDEC in real-world conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Adagha, Ovo & Levy, Richard M. & Carpendale, Sheelagh & Gates, Cormack & Lindquist, Mark, 2017. "Evaluation of a visual analytics decision support tool for wind farm placement planning in Alberta: Findings from a focus group study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 70-83.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:117:y:2017:i:c:p:70-83
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.01.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162517300288
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.01.007?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. McKeown, Charles & Adelaja, Adesoji & Calnin, Benjamin, 2011. "On developing a prospecting tool for wind industry and policy decision support," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 905-915, February.
    2. Tomoya Yanagisawa & Dominique Guellec, 2009. "The Emerging Patent Marketplace," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2009/9, OECD Publishing.
    3. Parker, Andrew M. & Srinivasan, Sinduja V. & Lempert, Robert J. & Berry, Sandra H., 2015. "Evaluating simulation-derived scenarios for effective decision support," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 64-77.
    4. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Waage, Sissel & Winthrop, Robert, 2013. "A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 27-39.
    5. Jane T. Bertrand & Judith E. Brown & Victoria M. Ward, 1992. "Techniques for Analyzing Focus Group Data," Evaluation Review, , vol. 16(2), pages 198-209, April.
    6. Jamil Khan, 2003. "Wind power planning in three Swedish municipalities," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(4), pages 563-581.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jessica Weber, 2023. "Coordination Challenges in Wind Energy Development: Lessons from Cross-Case Positive Planning Approaches to Avoid Multi-Level Governance ‘Free-Riding’," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-25, October.
    2. International Finance Corporation & World Bank, 2010. "Solar Lighting for the Base of the Pyramid," World Bank Publications - Reports 28423, The World Bank Group.
    3. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    4. Trutnevyte, Evelina & McDowall, Will & Tomei, Julia & Keppo, Ilkka, 2016. "Energy scenario choices: Insights from a retrospective review of UK energy futures," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 326-337.
    5. Chryssoula Pentheroudakis, 2015. "Innovation in the European Digital Single Market: The Role of Patents," JRC Research Reports JRC96728, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Brinkley, Catherine, 2018. "The conundrum of combustible clean energy: Sweden's history of siting district heating smokestacks in residential areas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 526-532.
    7. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    8. Lundin, Erik, 2022. "Geographic price granularity and investments in wind power: Evidence from a Swedish electricity market splitting reform," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    9. Warziniack, Travis & Sims, Charles & Haas, Jessica, 2019. "Fire and the joint production of ecosystem services: A spatial-dynamic optimization approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Rasmussen, Laura Vang & Mertz, Ole & Christensen, Andreas E. & Danielsen, Finn & Dawson, Neil & Xaydongvanh, Pheang, 2016. "A combination of methods needed to assess the actual use of provisioning ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 75-86.
    11. Grimpe, Christoph & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2016. "Complementarities in the search for innovation—Managing markets and relationships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2036-2053.
    12. Cátia da Silva & Ana Paula Barbosa‐Póvoa & Ana Carvalho, 2022. "Towards sustainable development: Green supply chain design and planning using monetization methods," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1369-1394, May.
    13. You Zuo & Lin Zhang, 2023. "Research on Local Ecosystem Cultural Services in the Jiangnan Water Network Rural Areas: A Case Study of the Ecological Green Integration Demonstration Zone in the Yangtze River Delta, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, July.
    14. Klimanova, O.A. & Bukvareva, E.N. & Yu, Kolbowsky E. & Illarionova, O.A., 2023. "Assessing ecosystem services in Russia: Case studies from four municipal districts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    15. Cabral, Pedro & Feger, Clément & Levrel, Harold & Chambolle, Mélodie & Basque, Damien, 2016. "Assessing the impact of land-cover changes on ecosystem services: A first step toward integrative planning in Bordeaux, France," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 318-327.
    16. 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.
    17. Kolo, Horst & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2020. "Optimizing forest management for timber production, carbon sequestration and groundwater recharge," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    18. Allen, David E. & McAleer, Michael & Powell, Robert J. & Singh, Abhay K., 2017. "Volatility Spillovers from Australia's major trading partners across the GFC," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 159-175.
    19. Gaglio, M. & Aschonitis, V. & Pieretti, L. & Santos, L. & Gissi, E. & Castaldelli, G. & Fano, E.A., 2019. "Modelling past, present and future Ecosystem Services supply in a protected floodplain under land use and climate changes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 403(C), pages 23-34.
    20. Alicja Krzemień & Juan José Álvarez Fernández & Pedro Riesgo Fernández & Gregorio Fidalgo Valverde & Silverio Garcia-Cortes, 2022. "Valuation of Ecosystem Services Based on EU Carbon Allowances—Optimal Recovery for a Coal Mining Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-21, December.

    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:tefoso:v:117:y:2017:i:c:p:70-83. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.