IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i21p13835-d952530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying and Explaining Public Preferences for Renewable Energy Sources in Qatar

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmed K. Nassar

    (Policy, Planning and Development Program, Department of International Affairs, College of Arts and Sciences, Qatar University, Doha P.O. Box 2713, Qatar)

Abstract

As a major natural gas and oil producer, Qatar has made significant strides towards its energy transition. This paper uses a survey research design with statistical tests to investigate citizens’ preferences for a wide range of energy resources. In this study, participants were asked to prioritize energy sources based on their environmental impact, price, benefits to Qatar’s economy, support of energy security, and ability to create jobs. The results showed that approximately two-thirds of the sample (n = 354) preferred renewable energy sources, particularly solar, which ranks first. Renewable energy sources were more likely to be favored by the group with greater knowledge of energy sources than those with limited knowledge, except for solar energy, which was preferred by both groups. Additionally, both natural gas and wind rank second in terms of preference, followed by hydropower. In contrast, nuclear power was not ranked, indicating a strong opposition to this type of energy. The study provides an evidence-based example of the tendency of citizens in a hydrocarbon-rich country to prefer renewable energy sources and natural gas. The energy policymakers need to collaborate with local communities so that citizens can participate in important future energy discussions to develop a personal connection to climate solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmed K. Nassar, 2022. "Identifying and Explaining Public Preferences for Renewable Energy Sources in Qatar," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-17, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13835-:d:952530
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13835/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13835/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Behrouz Pirouz & Natale Arcuri & Behzad Pirouz & Stefania Anna Palermo & Michele Turco & Mario Maiolo, 2020. "Development of an Assessment Method for Evaluation of Sustainable Factories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-15, February.
    2. Zyadin, Anas & Puhakka, Antero & Ahponen, Pirkkoliisa & Cronberg, Tarja & Pelkonen, Paavo, 2012. "School students' knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes toward renewable energy in Jordan," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 78-85.
    3. Okonkwo, Eric C. & Wole-Osho, Ifeoluwa & Bamisile, Olusola & Abid, Muhammad & Al-Ansari, Tareq, 2021. "Grid integration of renewable energy in Qatar: Potentials and limitations," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    4. Reiche, Danyel, 2010. "Energy Policies of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries--possibilities and limitations of ecological modernization in rentier states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2395-2403, May.
    5. Greenberg, Michael, 2009. "Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: Analysis of US national and site-specific data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3242-3249, August.
    6. Silvia Colombo & Mohamed El Harrak & Nicolò Sartori, 2016. "The Future of Natural Gas : Markets and Geopolitics," Books & Reports, Policy Center for the New South, number 9.
    7. Coilín ÓhAiseadha & Gerré Quinn & Ronan Connolly & Michael Connolly & Willie Soon, 2020. "Energy and Climate Policy—An Evaluation of Global Climate Change Expenditure 2011–2018," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-49, September.
    8. Ertör-Akyazı, Pınar & Adaman, Fikret & Özkaynak, Begüm & Zenginobuz, Ünal, 2012. "Citizens’ preferences on nuclear and renewable energy sources: Evidence from Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 309-320.
    9. Shawn Olson Hazboun & Hilary Schaffer Boudet, 2020. "Public Preferences in a Shifting Energy Future: Comparing Public Views of Eight Energy Sources in North America’s Pacific Northwest," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    10. Corner, Adam & Venables, Dan & Spence, Alexa & Poortinga, Wouter & Demski, Christina & Pidgeon, Nick, 2011. "Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: Exploring British public attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 4823-4833, September.
    11. Halder, Pradipta & Pietarinen, Janne & Havu-Nuutinen, Sari & Pelkonen, Paavo, 2010. "Young citizens' knowledge and perceptions of bioenergy and future policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 3058-3066, June.
    12. Schmitt, Rebecca, 2015. "Bridging the Attitude-Preference-Gap: A Cognitive Approach To Preference Formation," MPRA Paper 68480, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    14. 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.
    15. Adler, David B. & Jha, Akshaya & Severnini, Edson, 2020. "Considering the nuclear option: Hidden benefits and social costs of nuclear power in the U.S. since 1970," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    16. West, J. & Bailey, I. & Winter, M., 2010. "Renewable energy policy and public perceptions of renewable energy: A cultural theory approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5739-5748, October.
    17. Bird, Deanne K. & Haynes, Katharine & van den Honert, Rob & McAneney, John & Poortinga, Wouter, 2014. "Nuclear power in Australia: A comparative analysis of public opinion regarding climate change and the Fukushima disaster," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 644-653.
    18. Buldur, Serkan & Bursal, Murat & Yalcin Erik, Nazan & Yucel, Eren, 2020. "The impact of an outdoor education project on middle school students’ perceptions and awareness of the renewable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    19. de Lucena, André Frossard Pereira & Szklo, Alexandre Salem & Schaeffer, Roberto & de Souza, Raquel Rodrigues & Borba, Bruno Soares Moreira Cesar & da Costa, Isabella Vaz Leal & Júnior, Amaro Olimpio P, 2009. "The vulnerability of renewable energy to climate change in Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 879-889, March.
    20. Chaikumbung, Mayula, 2021. "Institutions and consumer preferences for renewable energy: A meta-regression analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    21. Thomas, Melanee & DeCillia, Brooks & Santos, John B. & Thorlakson, Lori, 2022. "Great expectations: Public opinion about energy transition," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    22. Gürsan, C. & de Gooyert, V., 2021. "The systemic impact of a transition fuel: Does natural gas help or hinder the energy transition?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    23. Oene Wiegman & Jan M. Gutteling & Bernard Cadet, 1995. "Perception of Nuclear Energy and Coal in France and the Netherlands," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 513-521, August.
    24. Schulz, Armin W., 2015. "Preferences Vs. Desires: Debating The Fundamental Structure Of Conative States," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(2), pages 239-257, July.
    25. Kardooni, Roozbeh & Yusoff, Sumiani Binti & Kari, Fatimah Binti & Moeenizadeh, Leila, 2018. "Public opinion on renewable energy technologies and climate change in Peninsular Malaysia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(PA), pages 659-668.
    26. Pinar Ertor Akyazi & Fikret Adaman & Begum Ozkaynak & Unal Zenginobuz, 2012. "Citizens’ Preferences over Nuclear and Renewable Energy Sources: Evidence from Turkey," Working Papers 2012/01, Bogazici University, Department of Economics.
    27. R. Darrell Bock, 1958. "Remarks on the test of significance for the method of paired comparisons," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 23(4), pages 323-334, December.
    28. Carlos Méndez & Yusuf Bicer, 2019. "Qatar’s Wind Energy Potential with Associated Financial and Environmental Benefits for the Natural Gas Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    29. Benjamin A. Lyons & Heather Akin & Natalie Jomini Stroud, 2020. "Proximity (Mis)perception: Public Awareness of Nuclear, Refinery, and Fracking Sites," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 385-398, February.
    30. Jaesun Wang & Seoyong Kim, 2018. "Comparative Analysis of Public Attitudes toward Nuclear Power Energy across 27 European Countries by Applying the Multilevel Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.
    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. Arndt, Christoph, 2023. "Climate change vs energy security? The conditional support for energy sources among Western Europeans," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    2. Ediger, Volkan Ş. & Kirkil, Gokhan & Çelebi, Emre & Ucal, Meltem & Kentmen-Çin, Çiğdem, 2018. "Turkish public preferences for energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 492-502.
    3. Ozcan, Mustafa, 2019. "Factors influencing the electricity generation preferences of Turkish citizens: Citizens' attitudes and policy recommendations in the context of climate change and environmental impact," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 381-393.
    4. 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.
    5. Anshelm, Jonas & Simon, Haikola, 2016. "Power production and environmental opinions – Environmentally motivated resistance to wind power in Sweden," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1545-1555.
    6. Norifumi Tsujikawa & Shoji Tsuchida & Takamasa Shiotani, 2016. "Changes in the Factors Influencing Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power Generation in Japan Since the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 98-113, January.
    7. Jobin, Marilou & Siegrist, Michael, 2018. "We choose what we like – Affect as a driver of electricity portfolio choice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 736-747.
    8. Wang, Yu & Gu, Jibao & Wu, Jianlin, 2020. "Explaining local residents’ acceptance of rebuilding nuclear power plants: The roles of perceived general benefit and perceived local benefit," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    9. Lee, You-Kyung, 2020. "Sustainability of nuclear energy in Korea: From the users’ perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    10. Nomsa Phindile Nkosi & Johane Dikgang, 2021. "South African Attitudes About Nuclear Power: The Case of the Nuclear Energy Expansion," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(5), pages 138-146.
    11. Agnieszka Janik & Adam Ryszko & Marek Szafraniec, 2021. "Determinants of the EU Citizens’ Attitudes towards the European Energy Union Priorities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-32, August.
    12. Hassan, Md. Kamrul & Pelkonen, Paavo & Pappinen, Ari, 2014. "Rural households’ knowledge and perceptions of renewables with special attention on bioenergy resources development – Results from a field study in Bangladesh," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 454-464.
    13. Sofia-Despoina Papadopoulou & Niki Kalaitzoglou & Maria Psarra & Sideri Lefkeli & Evangelia Karasmanaki & Georgios Tsantopoulos, 2019. "Addressing Energy Poverty through Transitioning to a Carbon-Free Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
    14. Melikoglu, Mehmet, 2016. "The role of renewables and nuclear energy in Turkey׳s Vision 2023 energy targets: Economic and technical scrutiny," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1-12.
    15. Uji, Azusa & Prakash, Aseem & Song, Jaehyun, 2021. "Does the “NIMBY syndrome” undermine public support for nuclear power in Japan?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PA).
    16. Vladimir M. Cvetković & Adem Öcal & Yuliya Lyamzina & Eric K. Noji & Neda Nikolić & Goran Milošević, 2021. "Nuclear Power Risk Perception in Serbia: Fear of Exposure to Radiation vs. Social Benefits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    17. Guo, Yue & Ren, Tao, 2017. "When it is unfamiliar to me: Local acceptance of planned nuclear power plants in China in the post-fukushima era," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 113-125.
    18. Soni, Anmol, 2018. "Out of sight, out of mind? Investigating the longitudinal impact of the Fukushima nuclear accident on public opinion in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 169-175.
    19. Lee, Juyong & Reiner, David M., 2023. "Determinants of public preferences on low-carbon energy sources: Evidence from the United Kingdom," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 284(C).
    20. 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.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13835-:d:952530. 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.