IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i22p15224-d974775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Conditioning Factors for Hydroelectric Development in Chile: Bases for Community Acceptance

Author

Listed:
  • Cristian Escobar-Avaria

    (Laboratory of Territorial Analysis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Renewable Natural Resources, Universidad of Chile, Av. Santa Rosa 11315, La Pintana, Santiago 1058, Chile)

  • Rodrigo Fuster

    (Laboratory of Territorial Analysis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Renewable Natural Resources, Universidad of Chile, Av. Santa Rosa 11315, La Pintana, Santiago 1058, Chile)

  • Katherinne Silva-Urrutia

    (Laboratory of Territorial Analysis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Renewable Natural Resources, Universidad of Chile, Av. Santa Rosa 11315, La Pintana, Santiago 1058, Chile)

  • Carl Bauer

    (School of Geography, Development and Environment, University of Arizona, ENR2 Building, South 4th Floor, P.O. Box 210137, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA)

  • Andrés de la Fuente

    (Laboratory of Territorial Analysis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Renewable Natural Resources, Universidad of Chile, Av. Santa Rosa 11315, La Pintana, Santiago 1058, Chile)

Abstract

Chile has defined an energy development policy in which hydropower is an important part of the energy grid. This energy source has not yet been accepted by many people in local communities. For future hydroelectric development to be more widely accepted, the Chilean Ministry of Energy developed a methodological framework called Objects of Valuation. This framework is aimed at identifying the main community interests that may condition hydroelectric development. The objective of this paper is to analyze the scope of the framework based on a review of the scientific literature and information generated through participatory activities in three basins that have high hydropower potential. Analyzing the results obtained from the application of the framework, four complementary intangible factors not represented by the framework are identified: the lack of validation of a formal participatory process, under-recognition of different worldviews, distrust regarding the development of hydroelectricity, and a sense of self-determination in the community. These factors could potentially condition community acceptance of hydroelectricity, thereby limiting the framework as a decision-making tool. We recommend that this methodological framework should be complemented by the incorporation of intangible elements in the decision-making process, using a systematic tool applicable to spatial planning and strategic environmental-assessment processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristian Escobar-Avaria & Rodrigo Fuster & Katherinne Silva-Urrutia & Carl Bauer & Andrés de la Fuente, 2022. "Understanding Conditioning Factors for Hydroelectric Development in Chile: Bases for Community Acceptance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-21, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15224-:d:974775
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15224/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15224/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norman Myers & Russell A. Mittermeier & Cristina G. Mittermeier & Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca & Jennifer Kent, 2000. "Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities," Nature, Nature, vol. 403(6772), pages 853-858, February.
    2. Cordoves-Sánchez, Minerva & Vallejos-Romero, Arturo, 2019. "Social construction of risk in non-conventional renewable energy: Risk perception as a function of ecosystem services in La Araucanía, Chile," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 261-270.
    3. Mar¨ªa Eugenia Merino & Mar¨ªa Elena Bello, 2014. "Discourse Coalitions in the Controversy around the HydroAysen Project in the Patagonia Region of Chile," International Journal of Social Science Studies, Redfame publishing, vol. 2(3), pages 1-11, July.
    4. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    5. Sebastián Huneeus & Sergio Toro & Juan Pablo Luna & Diego Sazo & Andrés Cruz & Daniel Alcatruz & Bryan Castillo & Camila Bertranou & Javier Cisterna, 2021. "Delayed and Approved: A Quantitative Study of Conflicts and the Environmental Impact Assessments of Energy Projects in Chile 2012–2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-13, June.
    6. Shahriyar Nasirov & Carlos Silva & Claudio A. Agostini, 2015. "Investors’ Perspectives on Barriers to the Deployment of Renewable Energy Sources in Chile," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, April.
    7. Simsek, Yeliz & Lorca, Álvaro & Urmee, Tania & Bahri, Parisa A. & Escobar, Rodrigo, 2019. "Review and assessment of energy policy developments in Chile," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 87-101.
    8. Schulz, Christopher & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Glenk, Klaus & Ioris, Antonio A.R., 2017. "The Value Base of Water Governance: A Multi-Disciplinary Perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 241-249.
    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. Neveen Hamza & Ruben Paul Borg & Liberato Camilleri & Charalampos Baniotopoulos, 2022. "Experts versus the Public: Perceptions of Siting Wind Turbines and Performance Concerns," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Jie Ren & Jar-Der Luo & Ke Rong, 2020. "How Do Venture Capitals Build Up Syndication Ecosystems for Sustainable Development?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, May.
    3. Koecklin, Manuel Tong & Longoria, Genaro & Fitiwi, Desta Z. & DeCarolis, Joseph F. & Curtis, John, 2021. "Public acceptance of renewable electricity generation and transmission network developments: Insights from Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    4. Laxmi D. Bhatta & Sunita Chaudhary & Anju Pandit & Himlal Baral & Partha J. Das & Nigel E. Stork, 2016. "Ecosystem Service Changes and Livelihood Impacts in the Maguri-Motapung Wetlands of Assam, India," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-14, June.
    5. Ünal, Berat Berkan & Onaygil, Sermin & Acuner, Ebru & Cin, Rabia, 2022. "Application of energy efficiency obligation scheme for electricity distribution companies in Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    6. Lyhne, Ivar & Aaen, Sara Bjørn & Nielsen, Helle & Kørnøv, Lone & Larsen, Sanne Vammen, 2018. "Citizens’ self-mobilization, motivational factors, and the group of most engaged citizens: The case of a radioactive waste repository in Denmark," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 433-442.
    7. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    8. McLennan, D. & Sharma, R., 2012. "The Delivering Ecological Services Index (DESI)," Working papers 119, Rimisp Latin American Center for Rural Development.
    9. Taran Loper & Victoria L. Crittenden, 2017. "Energy Security: Shaping The Consumer Decision Making Process In Emerging Economies," Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, Faculty of Economics, Vilnius University, vol. 8(1).
    10. Caviedes, Julián & Ibarra, José Tomás & Calvet-Mir, Laura & Álvarez-Fernández, Santiago & Junqueira, André Braga, 2024. "Indigenous and local knowledge on social-ecological changes is positively associated with livelihood resilience in a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage System," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    11. Baral, Nabin & Rabotyagov, Sergey, 2017. "How much are wood-based cellulosic biofuels worth in the Pacific Northwest? Ex-ante and ex-post analysis of local people's willingness to pay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 99-106.
    12. Maeda, Eduardo Eiji & Clark, Barnaby J.F. & Pellikka, Petri & Siljander, Mika, 2010. "Modelling agricultural expansion in Kenya's Eastern Arc Mountains biodiversity hotspot," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 609-620, November.
    13. 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).
    14. Kaufmann, Nicholas & Carolus, Thomas & Starzmann, Ralf, 2019. "Turbines for modular tidal current energy converters," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 451-460.
    15. Jaiswal, Sreeja & Balietti, Anca & Schäffer, Daniel, 2023. "Environmental Protection and Labor Market Composition," Working Papers 0736, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    16. P.W.J. de Bijl & Helanya Fourie, 2019. "The energy transition: Does ownership matter for realizing public interest objectives?," Working Papers 19-24, Utrecht School of Economics.
    17. Chomitz, Kenneth M. & Thomas, Timothy S. & Brandão, Antônio Salazar P., 2005. "The economic and environmental impact of trade in forest reserve obligations: a simulation analysis of options for dealing with habitat heterogeneity," Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural (RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 43(4), January.
    18. Dugstad, Anders & Grimsrud, Kristine & Kipperberg, Gorm & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2020. "Acceptance of wind power development and exposure – Not-in-anybody's-backyard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    19. Antoine Boche & Clément Foucher & Luiz Fernando Lavado Villa, 2022. "Understanding Microgrid Sustainability: A Systemic and Comprehensive Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.
    20. Vringer, Kees & Carabain, Christine L., 2020. "Measuring the legitimacy of energy transition policy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).

    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:22:p:15224-:d:974775. 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.