IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/srt/wpaper/0221.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Biogas dilemma: an analysis on the Social Approval of large new plants

Author

Listed:
  • Massimiliano Mazzanti

    (University of Ferrara; SEEDS, Italy)

  • Marco Modica

    (Gran Sasso Science Institute, Italy.)

  • Andrea Rampa

    (Ministry of Economy and Finance – Directorate of Economic and Fiscal Studies; SEEDS, Italy)

Abstract

The degree of social acceptance of biogas as a renewable green energy source is still somewhat disregarded. Although many initiatives have focused on the construction of new biogas plants around the world, with Italy as a relevant actor in the field, local protests on the construction of new plants are frequent in some areas. This study aims to analyse the determinants of citizens’ perceptions regarding the construction of new biomass plants in their neighbouring areas. In particular, the focus is on prior knowledge of the production process of biogas as well as on other individual characteristics. The investigation is based on two repeated surveys administered to citizens living in proximity to two Italian local areas in which the construction of new large biogas plants is planned: the provinces of Oristano in Sardinia and Andria in Apulia. The first survey analyses the main variables correlated with the degree of biogas acceptability with a focus on the role played by biogas knowledge. The second set of surveys focuses on the role of participatory processes and information campaigns undertaken by policy makers and environmental associations to increase the social acceptance of communities regarding the construction of new biogas plants.

Suggested Citation

  • Massimiliano Mazzanti & Marco Modica & Andrea Rampa, 2021. "The Biogas dilemma: an analysis on the Social Approval of large new plants," SEEDS Working Papers 0221, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Apr 2021.
    • Handle: RePEc:srt:wpaper:0221
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sustainability-seeds.org/papers/RePec/srt/wpaper/0221.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2021
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.sustainability-seeds.org/papers/RePec/srt/wpaper/0221.pdf
    File Function: Revised version, 2021
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walter Santagata & Giovanni Signorello, 2000. "Contingent Valuation of a Cultural Public Good and Policy Design: The Case of ``Napoli Musei Aperti''," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 24(3), pages 181-204, August.
    2. Cainelli, Giulio & D’Amato, Alessio & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2020. "Resource efficient eco-innovations for a circular economy: Evidence from EU firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    3. Charles Warren & Carolyn Lumsden & Simone O'Dowd & Richard Birnie, 2005. "'Green On Green': Public perceptions of wind power in Scotland and Ireland," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(6), pages 853-875.
    4. Clinch, J Peter & Murphy, Anthony, 2001. "Modelling Winners and Losers in Contingent Valuation of Public Goods: Appropriate Welfare Measures and Econometric Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(470), pages 420-443, April.
    5. Modica, Marco, 2017. "Does the construction of biogas plants affect local property values?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 169-172.
    6. Ho-Young Kim & So-Yeon Park & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2016. "Public Acceptability of Introducing a Biogas Mandate in Korea: A Contingent Valuation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-16, October.
    7. Dobers, Geesche M., 2019. "Acceptance of biogas plants taking into account space and place," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    8. Zemo, Kahsay Haile & Panduro, Toke Emil & Termansen, Mette, 2019. "Impact of biogas plants on rural residential property values and implications for local acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1121-1131.
    9. Akerlof, George A & Dickens, William T, 1982. "The Economic Consequences of Cognitive Dissonance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 307-319, June.
    10. van der Horst, Dan, 2007. "NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2705-2714, May.
    11. Corsini, Filippo & Certomà, Chiara & Dyer, Mark & Frey, Marco, 2019. "Participatory energy: Research, imaginaries and practices on people' contribute to energy systems in the smart city," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 322-332.
    12. Kortsch, Timo & Hildebrand, Jan & Schweizer-Ries, Petra, 2015. "Acceptance of biomass plants – Results of a longitudinal study in the bioenergy-region Altmark," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 690-697.
    13. Emmann, Carsten H. & Arens, Ludwig & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2013. "Individual acceptance of the biogas innovation: A structural equation model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 372-378.
    14. Soland, Martin & Steimer, Nora & Walter, Götz, 2013. "Local acceptance of existing biogas plants in Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 802-810.
    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. Lisiak-Zielińska, Marta & Jałoszyńska, Sylwia & Borowiak, Klaudia & Budka, Anna & Dach, Jacek, 2023. "Perception of biogas plants: A public awareness and preference - A case study for the agricultural landscape," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    2. Altsitsiadis, E. & Kaiser, M. & Tsakas, A. & Kyriakidis, A. & Stamos, A., 2024. "Investigating the Regional and Individual Drivers of the Support for Renewable Energy Transition: The Role of Severe Material Deprivation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2419, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    3. Mateusz Nowak & Wiktor Bojarski & Wojciech Czekała, 2024. "Economic and Energy Efficiency Analysis of the Biogas Plant Digestate Management Methods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-19, June.
    4. González, Ruben & García-Cascallana, José & Gómez, Xiomar, 2023. "Energetic valorization of biogas. A comparison between centralized and decentralized approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    5. Zhao Xin-gang & Wang Wei & Hu Shuran & Lu Wenjie, 2023. "How to Promote the Application of Biogas Power Technology: A Perspective of Incentive Policy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-11, February.
    6. Liu, Changyu & Sun, Yongxiang & Li, Dong & Bian, Ji & Wu, Yangyang & Li, Pengfei & Sun, Yong, 2022. "Influence of enclosure filled with phase change material on photo-thermal regulation of direct absorption anaerobic reactor: Numerical and experimental study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    7. Ahmad, Munir & Khan, Irfan & Shahzad Khan, Muhammad Qaiser & Jabeen, Gul & Jabeen, Hafiza Samra & Işık, Cem, 2023. "Households' perception-based factors influencing biogas adoption: Innovation diffusion framework," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PE).
    8. Aleksandra Lubańska & Jan K. Kazak, 2023. "The Role of Biogas Production in Circular Economy Approach from the Perspective of Locality," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-15, April.

    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. Lisiak-Zielińska, Marta & Jałoszyńska, Sylwia & Borowiak, Klaudia & Budka, Anna & Dach, Jacek, 2023. "Perception of biogas plants: A public awareness and preference - A case study for the agricultural landscape," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    2. Zemo, Kahsay Haile & Panduro, Toke Emil & Termansen, Mette, 2019. "Impact of biogas plants on rural residential property values and implications for local acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1121-1131.
    3. Stanislav Martinát & Justyna Chodkowska-Miszczuk & Marián Kulla & Josef Navrátil & Petr Klusáček & Petr Dvořák & Ladislav Novotný & Tomáš Krejčí & Loránt Pregi & Jakub Trojan & Bohumil Frantál, 2022. "Best Practice Forever? Dynamics behind the Perception of Farm-Fed Anaerobic Digestion Plants in Rural Peripheries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, March.
    4. Krekel, Christian & Rechlitz, Julia & Rode, Johannes & Zerrahn, Alexander, 2020. "Quantifying the Externalities of Renewable Energy Plants Using Wellbeing Data: The Case of Biogas," IZA Discussion Papers 13959, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Dobers, Geesche M., 2019. "Acceptance of biogas plants taking into account space and place," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    6. Marco Segreto & Lucas Principe & Alexandra Desormeaux & Marco Torre & Laura Tomassetti & Patrizio Tratzi & Valerio Paolini & Francesco Petracchini, 2020. "Trends in Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Across Europe—A Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-19, December.
    7. Mathilde van Dijk & Annet-Jantien Smit & Jan-Peter Nap, 2023. "Message Framing and Attitudes Toward Green Gas Facilities in Rural Communities of The Netherlands," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    8. Mark Booker Nielsen & Rikke Lybæk & Tyge Kjær, 2022. "Successfully Navigating the Project Lifecycle for Deployment of Centralized Biogas Projects—The Case of Solrød Biogas," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-21, August.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Mark Booker Nielsen, 2022. "Identifying Challenges and Drivers for Deployment of Centralized Biogas Plants in Denmark," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-28, June.
    12. Kolb, Sebastian & Plankenbühler, Thomas & Frank, Jonas & Dettelbacher, Johannes & Ludwig, Ralf & Karl, Jürgen & Dillig, Marius, 2021. "Scenarios for the integration of renewable gases into the German natural gas market – A simulation-based optimisation approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    13. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    14. Krekel, Christian & Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Does the presence of wind turbines have negative externalities for people in their surroundings? Evidence from well-being data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 221-238.
    15. Zerrahn, Alexander & Krekel, Christian, 2015. "Sowing the Wind and Reaping the Whirlwind? The Effect of Wind Turbines on Residential Well-Being," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 112956, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. Pepermans, Yves & Loots, Ilse, 2013. "Wind farm struggles in Flanders fields: A sociological perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 321-328.
    17. Josef Navrátil & Stanislav Martinát & Tomáš Krejčí & Petr Klusáček & Richard J. Hewitt, 2021. "Conversion of Post-Socialist Agricultural Premises as a Chance for Renewable Energy Production. Photovoltaics or Biogas Plants?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, November.
    18. Gravelle, Timothy B. & Lachapelle, Erick, 2015. "Politics, proximity and the pipeline: Mapping public attitudes toward Keystone XL," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 99-108.
    19. Lee, Gi-Eu & Loveridge, Scott & Joshi, Satish, 2017. "Local acceptance and heterogeneous externalities of biorefineries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 328-336.
    20. Brannstrom, Christian & Gorayeb, Adryane & de Sousa Mendes, Jocicléa & Loureiro, Caroline & Meireles, Antonio Jeovah de Andrade & Silva, Edson Vicente da & Freitas, Ana Larissa Ribeiro de & Oliveira, , 2017. "Is Brazilian wind power development sustainable? Insights from a review of conflicts in Ceará state," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 62-71.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Biomass; Local Acceptance; Local public goods; waste management; renewable energy; Circularity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • H49 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Other

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:srt:wpaper:0221. 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: Alessandro Palma (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sustainability-seeds.org .

    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.