IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/122326.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Supporting BLUE Growth: Eliciting Stakeholders' preferences for Multiple-Use Offshore Platforms

Author

Listed:
  • Davila, Osiel Gonzalez
  • Koundouri, Phoebe
  • Souliotis, Ioannis
  • Kotroni, Erasmia
  • Chen, Wenting
  • Haggett, Claire
  • Lu, Shiau-Yun
  • Rudolph, David

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to elicit stakeholder preferences in relation to different Multiple Use Offshore Platforms (MUOP) designs produced by the TROPOS project (www.troposplatform.eu) for the Liuqiu Island, Taiwan using the Choice Experiment (CE) method. To authors/ acknowledge, this is the first non-market valuation of multiple use offshore platforms and definitely the first using CE in this context. The MUOP concept is defined as a floating platform moored in Taiwan shallow waters located offshore and concerned as a sustainable and ecologic location, which supports the development of the local economy and serves as an example of sustainable development in offshore environments. The CE was conducted on tourists and residents of the area. A ranking preference technique with visual aids was used, in order to obtain a more complete characterization of the respondents � preference structure. The attributes used were the environmental impacts of the modules (using an ecosystem services approach), the level of mitigation, the existence of renewable energy production and leisure facilities. The results show that residents would be less likely to support the development of such a project, compared to tourists that would be willing to pay a daily tax for the leisure and renewable energy facilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Davila, Osiel Gonzalez & Koundouri, Phoebe & Souliotis, Ioannis & Kotroni, Erasmia & Chen, Wenting & Haggett, Claire & Lu, Shiau-Yun & Rudolph, David, 2015. "Supporting BLUE Growth: Eliciting Stakeholders' preferences for Multiple-Use Offshore Platforms," MPRA Paper 122326, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:122326
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/122326/1/MPRA_paper_122326.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tsoutsos, Theocharis & Tsouchlaraki, Androniki & Tsiropoulos, Manolis & Serpetsidakis, Michalis, 2009. "Visual impact evaluation of a wind park in a Greek island," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(4), pages 546-553, April.
    2. Concu, Nanni & Atzeni, Gianfranco, 2012. "Conflicting preferences among tourists and residents," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1293-1300.
    3. Paudel, Krishna P. & Caffey, Rex H. & Devkota, Nirmala, 2011. "An Evaluation of Factors Affecting the Choice of Coastal Recreational Activities," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 167-179, May.
    4. Ladenburg, Jacob, 2008. "Attitudes towards on-land and offshore wind power development in Denmark; choice of development strategy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 111-118.
    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. Ladenburg, Jacob & Dahlgaard, Jens-Olav, 2012. "Attitudes, threshold levels and cumulative effects of the daily wind-turbine encounters," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 40-46.
    2. Wenting Chen & Phoebe Koundouri & Osiel Gonzalez Davila & Claire Haggett & David Rudolph & Shiau-Yun Lu & Chia-Fa Chi & Jason Yu & Lars Golmen & Yung-Hsiang Ying, 2020. "Social acceptance and socioeconomic effects of Multi-Use Offshore Developments:Theory and Applications in MERMAID and TROPOS projects," DEOS Working Papers 2021, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    3. Dimitropoulos, Alexandros & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2009. "Assessing the determinants of local acceptability of wind-farm investment: A choice experiment in the Greek Aegean Islands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1842-1854, May.
    4. Ladenburg, Jacob, 2010. "Attitudes towards offshore wind farms--The role of beach visits on attitude and demographic and attitude relations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1297-1304, March.
    5. Tampakis, Stilianos & Τsantopoulos, Georgios & Arabatzis, Garyfallos & Rerras, Ioannis, 2013. "Citizens’ views on various forms of energy and their contribution to the environment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 473-482.
    6. Konstantinos, Ioannou & Georgios, Tsantopoulos & Garyfalos, Arabatzis, 2019. "A Decision Support System methodology for selecting wind farm installation locations using AHP and TOPSIS: Case study in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace region, Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 232-246.
    7. Ho, Lip-Wah & Lie, Tek-Tjing & Leong, Paul TM & Clear, Tony, 2018. "Developing offshore wind farm siting criteria by using an international Delphi method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 53-67.
    8. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    9. 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).
    10. Molina-Ruiz, José & Martínez-Sánchez, María José & Pérez-Sirvent, Carmen & Tudela-Serrano, Mari Luz & García Lorenzo, Mari Luz, 2011. "Developing and applying a GIS-assisted approach to evaluate visual impact in wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 1125-1132.
    11. Molnarova, Kristina & Sklenicka, Petr & Stiborek, Jiri & Svobodova, Kamila & Salek, Miroslav & Brabec, Elizabeth, 2012. "Visual preferences for wind turbines: Location, numbers and respondent characteristics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 269-278.
    12. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Bylicki, Michał & Budziński, Wiktor & Buczyński, Mateusz, 2022. "Valuing externalities of outdoor advertising in an urban setting – the case of Warsaw," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    13. Angelo Antoci & Paolo Russu & Pier Luigi Sacco & Giorgio Tavano Blessi, 2022. "Preying on beauty? The complex social dynamics of overtourism," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 17(1), pages 379-400, January.
    14. Manchado, Cristina & Otero, César & Gómez-Jáuregui, Valentín & Arias, Rubén & Bruschi, Viola & Cendrero, Antonio, 2013. "Visibility analysis and visibility software for the optimisation of wind farm design," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 388-401.
    15. Gordon Menzies & Mario du Preez & Michael C. Sale & Stephen G. Hosking, 2011. "Measuring the indirect costs associated with the establishment of a wind farm: An application of the Contingent Valuation Model," Working Papers 258, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    16. Fitiwi, Desta Z. & Lynch, Muireann & Bertsch, Valentin, 2020. "Power system impacts of community acceptance policies for renewable energy deployment under storage cost uncertainty," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 893-912.
    17. Gebreslassie, Mulualem G., 2020. "Public perception and policy implications towards the development of new wind farms in Ethiopia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    18. Vuichard, Pascal & Stauch, Alexander & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2021. "Keep it local and low-key: Social acceptance of alpine solar power projects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    19. Tsoutsos, T. & Tsitoura, I. & Kokologos, D. & Kalaitzakis, K., 2015. "Sustainable siting process in large wind farms case study in Crete," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 474-480.
    20. Ping, Xiaoge & Jiang, Zhigang & Li, Chunwang, 2012. "Social and ecological effects of biomass utilization and the willingness to use clean energy in the eastern Qinghai–Tibet plateau," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 828-833.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Choice Experiment; Multiple Use Offshore Platform; Ranking Preference technique;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H0 - Public Economics - - General
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification
    • Z18 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Public Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pra:mprapa:122326. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.