IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i13p4997-d1181013.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Landscape Democracy and the Implementation of Renewable Energy Facilities

Author

Listed:
  • Finn Arler

    (Department of Planning, Aalborg University, Rendsburggade 14, DK-9000 Aalborg, Denmark)

  • Karl Sperling

    (Department of Planning, Aalborg University, Rendsburggade 14, DK-9000 Aalborg, Denmark)

  • Kristian Borch

    (Ruralis—Institute for Rural and Regional Research, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway
    Department of Planning, Aalborg University, A. C. Meyers Vænge 15, DK-2450 København SV, Denmark)

Abstract

The internationally accepted goal of eliminating climate gas emissions implies substantial investments in renewable energy (RE) facilities. This will inevitably lead to major impacts on landscapes. Landscape concerns linked to RE facilities are already leading to controversies in many local communities. In this article, we focus on the question of landscape democracy related to the establishment of RE facilities. Based on recommendations from the European Landscape Convention, an analytical framework is presented identifying three main dimensions of landscape democracy, followed by an overview of arrangements, procedures, and methods that are or may be used to encourage democracy. The procedures and methods are analyzed based on examples from Denmark and Norway. This is followed by an analysis of decision levels with a special focus on the principle of subsidiarity. Finally, recommendations are presented to strengthen landscape democracy in relation to the installation of RE facilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Finn Arler & Karl Sperling & Kristian Borch, 2023. "Landscape Democracy and the Implementation of Renewable Energy Facilities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-27, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:13:p:4997-:d:1181013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/13/4997/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/13/4997/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ida-Elisabeth Andersen & Birgit Jæger, 1999. "Scenario workshops and consensus conferences: Towards more democratic decision-making," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(5), pages 331-340, October.
    2. Turner, R. Kerry & Paavola, Jouni & Cooper, Philip & Farber, Stephen & Jessamy, Valma & Georgiou, Stavros, 2003. "Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 493-510, October.
    3. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    4. Finn Arler, 2011. "Landscape Democracy in a Globalizing World: The Case of Tange Lake," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(4), pages 487-507.
    5. Clark, Judy & Burgess, Jacquelin & Harrison, Carolyn M., 2000. ""I struggled with this money business": respondents' perspectives on contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 45-62, April.
    6. Hvelplund, Frede & Djørup, Søren, 2019. "Consumer ownership, natural monopolies and transition to 100% renewable energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 440-449.
    7. Borch, Kristian & Munk, Anders K. & Dahlgaard, Vibeke, 2020. "Mapping wind-power controversies on social media: Facebook as a powerful mobilizer of local resistance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    8. Leer Jørgensen, Marie & Anker, Helle Tegner & Lassen, Jesper, 2020. "Distributive fairness and local acceptance of wind turbines: The role of compensation schemes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    9. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    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. Izabela Jonek-Kowalska & Sara Rupacz, 2023. "The Innovative Nature of Selected Polish Companies in the Energy Sector Compared to the Use of Renewable Energy Sources from a Financial and an Investor’s Perspective," Resources, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, December.

    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. Tumaneng-Diete, Tessie & Page, Ashley & Binney, Jim, 2005. "Assessing the economic values of exotic invasive plants on areas of conservation significance in Queensland," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 139287, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Schlapfer, Felix, 2008. "Contingent valuation: A new perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 729-740, February.
    3. Vatn, Arild, 2005. "Rationality, institutions and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 203-217, November.
    4. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    6. Smith, V. Kerry & Mansfield, Carol, 1998. "Buying Time: Real and Hypothetical Offers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 209-224, November.
    7. Lori D. Snyder & Robert N. Stavins & Alexander F. Wagner, 2003. "Private Options to Use Public Goods Exploiting Revealed Preferences to Estimate Environmental Benefits," Working Papers 2003.49, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Tonin, Stefania, 2018. "Citizens’ perspectives on marine protected areas as a governance strategy to effectively preserve marine ecosystem services and biodiversity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 189-200.
    9. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design and Contingent Valuation: The NOAA Panel's No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(2), pages 335-338, May.
    10. John C. Whitehead & Timothy C. Haab & Ju‐Chin Huang, 1998. "Part‐Whole Bias in Contingent Valuation: Will Scope Effects Be Detected with Inexpensive Survey Methods?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 160-168, July.
    11. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    12. Powe, N. A. & Bateman, I. J., 2003. "Ordering effects in nested 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' contingent valuation designs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 255-270, June.
    13. Tiziana Cuccia, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse (ed.), A Handbook of Cultural Economics, Second Edition, chapter 13, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Gupta, Monika, 2016. "Willingness to pay for carbon tax: A study of Indian road passenger transport," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 46-54.
    15. Diane Dupont, 2003. "CVM Embedding Effects When There Are Active, Potentially Active and Passive Users of Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(3), pages 319-341, July.
    16. Cookson, Richard, 2000. "Incorporating psycho-social considerations into health valuation: an experimental study," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 369-401, May.
    17. Roach, Brian & Wade, William W., 2006. "Policy evaluation of natural resource injuries using habitat equivalency analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 421-433, June.
    18. Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael & Kopp, Raymond J. & Krosnick, Jon A. & Mitchell, Robert C. & Presser, Stanley & Ruud, Paul A. & Smith, V. Kerry & Conaway, Michael & Martin, Kerry, 1996. "Was the NOAA Panel Correct about Contingent Valuation?," Discussion Papers 10503, Resources for the Future.
    19. Clark, Judy & Burgess, Jacquelin & Harrison, Carolyn M., 2000. ""I struggled with this money business": respondents' perspectives on contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 45-62, April.
    20. Catherine Chambers & Paul Chambers & John Whitehead, 1997. "Historical resources, uncertainty and preservation values: An application of option and optimal stopping models," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 21(2), pages 51-61, June.

    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:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:13:p:4997-:d:1181013. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.