Local acceptance of wind energy: Factors of success identified in French and German case studies

Energy Policy ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 2751-2760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Jobert ◽  
Pia Laborgne ◽  
Solveig Mimler
2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Fink ◽  
C. Mudd ◽  
K. Porter ◽  
B. Morgenstern
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (22) ◽  
pp. 9352
Author(s):  
Andrea E. Copping ◽  
Alicia M. Gorton ◽  
Roel May ◽  
Finlay Bennet ◽  
Elise DeGeorge ◽  
...  

Acceptance of wind energy development is challenged by stakeholders’ concerns about potential effects on the environment, specifically on wildlife, such as birds, bats, and (for offshore wind) marine animals, and the habitats that support them. Communities near wind energy developments are also concerned with social and economic impacts, as well as impacts on aesthetics, historical sites, and recreation and tourism. Lack of a systematic, widely accepted, and balanced approach for measuring the potential damage to wildlife, habitats, and communities continues to leave wind developers, regulators, and other stakeholders in an uncertain position. This paper explores ecological risk-based management (RBM) in wind energy development for land-based and offshore wind installations. This paper provides a framework for the adaptation of ecosystem-based management to wind energy development and examines that framework through a series of case studies and best management practices for applying risk-based principles to wind energy. Ten case studies indicate that wind farm monitoring is often driven by regulatory requirements that may not be underpinned by scientific questions. While each case applies principles of adaptive management, there is room for improvement in applying scientific principles to the data collection and analysis. Challenges and constraints for wind farm development to meet RBM framework criteria include collecting sufficient baseline and monitoring data year-round, engaging stakeholder facilitators, and bringing together large and diverse scientific teams. The RBM framework approach may provide insights for improved siting and consenting/permitting processes for regulators and their advisors, particularly in those nations where wind energy is still in the early development stages on land or at sea.


Author(s):  
Marco Segreto ◽  
Lucas Principe ◽  
Alexandra Desormeaux ◽  
Marco Torre ◽  
Laura Tomassetti ◽  
...  

Social acceptance has proven to be a significant barrier in the implementation of renewable energy systems (hereinafter “RES”). While a general acceptance of RES is high, low local acceptance has hindered the development of renewable energy projects (hereinafter “REP”). This study assesses the determinants of local and general social acceptance of REP across Europe through a qualitative analysis from 25 case studies of the most significant social drivers and barriers that include all European countries. These case studies contain qualitative and quantitative analyses of the main factors for social acceptance of many representative groups including residents, stakeholders, and experts. Understanding the influences of social acceptance enables us to create strategies that will promote the development of REP by mitigating any public opposition.


Energies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (22) ◽  
pp. 4382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikki Kluskens ◽  
Véronique Vasseur ◽  
Rowan Benning

Policy documents in Limburg stress the importance of participation and distribution of benefits in wind energy projects, but it is not clear which modes of participation and distribution of benefits are most just, both in terms of perceived justice, and in terms of justice principles. Research shows that considering justice in renewable energy transitions increases the level of acceptance. This study aims to provide insight in what modes of participation and distribution are perceived as most just and likely to create local acceptance of wind parks. The most preferred modes are being compared to the indicators of the energy justice framework in order if they meet the criteria for a fair procedure and distribution of outcomes. Based on semi-structured interviews the analysis of the data demonstrated that different modes of participation in different phases of the process are being preferred and that a balance between modes of distribution of benefits is preferred. The results indicate that the most preferred modes of participation cannot necessarily address all indicators of procedural justice and that depending on the mode of distribution of benefits and the balance between those modes indicators of distributive justice can be addressed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document