Articles | Volume 7, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-1679-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-1679-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Review article
| 
11 Aug 2022
Review article |
| 11 Aug 2022
| 11 Aug 2022
Public acceptance of wind energy – concepts, empirical drivers and some open questions
Michael Ruddat
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
ZIRIUS – Research Center for Interdisciplinary Risk and Innovation Studies, University of Stuttgart, Seidenstr. 36, 70174 Stuttgart, Germany
Cited articles
AEE – Agentur für Erneuerbare Energien: Akzeptanz in der Fläche, Protest im Lokalen? Studie zur Windenergie an Land, AEE, Renews Spezial 90, Berlin, https://www.unendlich-viel-energie.de, last access: 30 December 2020.
Aitken, M.: Why we still don't understand the social aspects of wind power: A critique of key assumptions within the literature, Energ. Policy, 38, 1834–1841, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.11.060, 2010a.
Aitken, M.: Wind power and community benefits. Challenges and opportunities, Energ. Policy, 38, 6066–6075, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.062, 2010b.
Alcántara, S., Bach, N., Kuhn, R., and Ullrich, P.: Demokratietheorie und Partizipationspraxis – Analyse und Anwendungspotentiale deliberativer Verfahren, Springer VS, ISBN 978-3-658-11220-2, 2016.
Ajzen, I.: The Theory of Planned Behavior, Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec., 50, 179–211, https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T, 1991.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M.: Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, ISBN 9780139364433, 1980.
Allen, P. T.: Public Participation in Resolving Environmental Disputes and the Problem of Representativeness, Risk: Health, Safety and Environment, 297, 297–308, 1998.
Bell, D., Gray, T., and Haggett, C.: The “Social Gap” in Wind Farm Siting Decisions. Explanations and Policy Responses, Environ. Polit., 14, 460–477, https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010500175833, 2005.
Bellaby, P.: Foreword to Theme 1: Concepts of trust and methods for investigating it, Energ. Policy, 38, 2615–2616, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.05.034, 2010.
Bishop, I. D.: Determinants of threshold of visual impact: the case of wind turbines, Environ. Plann. B, 29, 707–718, https://doi.org/10.1068/b12854, 2002.
Böhm, G. and Tanner, C.: Environmental Risk Perception, in: Environmental Psychology – An Introduction, 2nd Edn., edited by: Steg, L. and De Groot, J. I. M., Wiley, NJ, 16–25, ISBN 9781119241041, 2019.
Boudet, H. S.: Public perceptions of and responses to new energy technologies, Nature Energy, 4, 446–455, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-019-0399-x, 2019.
Breukers, S. and Wolsink, M.: Wind power implementation in changing institutional landscapes: An international comparison, Energ. Policy, 35, 2737–2750, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.004, 2007.
Cohen, J. J., Reichl, J., and Schmidthaler, M.: Re-focussing research efforts on the public acceptance of energy infrastructure. A critical review, Energy, 76, 4–9, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.12.056, 2014.
De Vente, J., Reed, M. S., Stringer, L. C., Valente, S., and Newig, J.: How does the context and design of participatory decision making processes affect their outcomes? Evidence from sustainable land management in global dry-lands, Ecol. Soc., 21, 24, https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08053-210224, 2016.
Devine-Wright, P.: Beyond NIMBYism. Towards an Integrated Framework for Understanding Public Perceptions of Wind Energy, Wind Energy, 8, 125–139, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.124, 2005.
Devine-Wright, P.: Reconsidering public attitudes and public acceptance of renewable energy technologies: a critical review, Working Paper 1.4, School of Environment and Development, University of Manchester, http://geography.exeter.ac.uk/beyond_nimbyism/deliverables/bn_wp1_4.pdf (last access: 6 May 2015), 2007.
Di Nucci, M. R., Krug, M., Will, A., and Vondran, S.: Akzeptanzfaktoren und akzeptanzfördernde Maßnahmen beim Ausbau der Windenergie, Energiewirtschaftliche Tagesfragen, 70, 29–34, 2020.
Douglas, M. and Wildavsky, A.: Risiko und Kultur, in: Riskante Technologien, edited by: Krohn, W. and Krücken, G., Frankfurt a. M., 113–138, ISBN 978-3-518-28698-2, 1993.
Eagly, A. H. and Chaiken, S.: The Psychology of Attitudes, Wadsworth, Belmont, http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2214-6296(21)00101-8/h0375 (last access: 5 August 2022), 1993.
Earle, T. C. and Cvetkovich, G. T.: Social Trust – Toward a Cosmopolitan Society, Praeger, Westport, ISBN 0-275-94845-5, 1995.
Ellis, G. and Ferraro, G.: The social acceptance of wind energy. Where we stand and the path ahead, JRC Science for Policy Report, https://doi.org/10.2789/696070, 2016.
European Commission: Public Awareness and Acceptance of CO2 capture and storage, Report, Special Eurobarometer 364, Wave 75.1, TNS Opinion & Social, European Commission, https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/848 (last access: 5 August 2022), 2011.
FA Wind (Fachagentur Wind an Land): Umfrage zur Akzeptanz der Windenergie an Land – Herbst 2020. Ergebnisse einer repräsentativen Umfrage zur Akzeptanz der Nutzung und des Ausbaus der Windenergie an Land in Deutschland, FA Wind, Berlin, https://www.fachagentur-windenergie.de, last access: 30 December 2020.
Firestone, J., Hoen, B., Rand, J., Elliot, D., Hübner, G., and Pohl, J.: Reconsidering barriers to wind power projects: community engagement, developer transparency and place, J. Environ. Pol. Plan., 20, 370–386, https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2017.1418656, 2018.
Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S., and Keeney, R.: Acceptable Risk, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 13 978-0521241649, 1981.
Groth, T. M. and Vogt, C.: Residents' perceptions of wind turbines: An analyses of two townships in Michigan, Energ. Policy, 65, 251–260, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.055, 2014.
Haggett, C.: Understanding public responses to offshore wind power, Energ. Policy, 39, 503–510, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.10.014, 2011.
Hall, N., Ashworth, P., and Devine-Wright, P.: Societal acceptance of wind farms. Analysis of four common themes across Australian case studies, Energ. Policy, 58, 200–208, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.009, 2013.
Harper, M., Anderson, B., James, P. A. B., and Bahaj, A. S.: Onshore wind and the likelihood of planning acceptance: Learning from a Great Britain context, Energ. Policy, 128, 954–966, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.01.002, 2019.
Hildebrand, J., Rau, I., and Schweizer-Ries, P.: Akzeptanz und Beteiligung. Ein ungleiches Paar, in: Handbuch Energiewende und Partizipation, edited by: Holstenkamp, L. and Radtke, J., Springer VS, Wiesbaden, 195–210, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-09416-4, 2017.
Hoen, B., Firestone, J., Rand, J., Elliot, D., Hübner, G., Pohl, J., Wiser, R., Lantz, E., Haac, T. R., and Kaliski, K.: Attitudes of U. S. Wind Turbine Neighbors: Analysis of a Nationwide Survey, Energ. Policy, 134, 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.110981, 2019.
Hübner, G. and Hahn, C.: Akzeptanz des Stromnetzausbaus in Schleswig-Holstein, Abschlussbericht zum Forschungsprojekt, Halle, http://www.akzeptanz-offshore-windenergie.de/downloads/106/Forschungsbericht.pdf
(last access: 5 August 2022), 2013.
Hübner, G. and Pohl, G.: Mehr Abstand – mehr Akzeptanz? Ein umweltpsychologischer Studienvergleich, Fachagentur Windenergie an Land, Berlin, https://www.fachagentur-windenergie.de/fileadmin/files/Akzeptanz/FA-Wind_Abstand-Akzeptanz_Broschuere_2015.pdf (last access: 5 August 2022), 2015.
Hübner, G., Pohl, J., Warode, J., Gotchev, B., Ohlhorst, D., Krug, M., Salecki, S., and Peters, W.: Akzeptanzfördernde Faktoren erneuerbarer Energien, BfN-Skripte 551, Bonn, https://doi.org/10.19217/skr551, 2020.
Huijts, N. M. A., Midden, C. J. H., and Meijnders, A. L.: Social acceptance of carbon dioxide storage, Energ. Policy, 35, 2780–2789, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.007, 2007.
Hüsing, B., Bierhals, R., Bührlen, B., Friedewald, M., Kimpeler, S., Menrad, K., Wengel, J., Zimmer, R., and Zoche, P.: Technikakzeptanz und Nachfragemuster als Standortvorteil, Abschlussbericht, Fraunhofer-Institut für Systemtechnik und Innovationsforschung (Frauenhofer ISI), Karlsruhe, https://publica-rest.fraunhofer.de/server/api/core/bitstreams/6e7b3140-1129-4ebe-999d-c25b49382bf6/content
(last access: 5 August 2022), 2002.
IASS – Institute for Advanced Sustainable Studies: Soziales Nachhaltigkeitsbarometer der Energiewende 2019, IASS, Potsdam, https://doi.org/10.2312/iass.2020.010, 2020.
Johnson, B. B.: Exploring dimensionality in the origins of hazard-related trust, J. Risk. Res., 2, 325–354, https://doi.org/10.1080/136698799376763, 1999.
Jones, C. R. and Eiser, J. R.: Identifying predictors of attitudes towards local onshore wind development with reference to an English case study, Energ. Policy, 37, 4604–4614, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.06.015, 2009.
Jones, C. R. and Eiser, J. R.: Understanding “local” opposition to wind development in the UK. How big is a backyard?, Energ. Policy, 38, 3106–3117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.01.051, 2010.
Kasperson, J. X., Kasperson, R. E., Pidgeon, N., and Slovic, P.: The social amplification of risk: assessing fifteen years of research and theory, in: The social amplification of risk, edited by: Pidgeon, N., Kasperson, R. E., and Slovic, P., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 13–46, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511550461, 2003.
Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X., and Ratick, S.: The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework, Risk Anal., 8, 177–187, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x, 1998.
Klinke, A. and Renn, O.: A New Approach to Risk Evaluation and Management: Risk-Based, Precaution-Based, and Discourse-Based Strategies, Risk Anal., 22, 1071–1094, https://doi.org/10.1111/1539-6924.00274, 2002.
Krohn, S. and Damborg, S.: On Public Attitudes Towards Wind Power, Renew. Energ., 16, 954–960, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(98)00339-5, 1999.
Langer, K., Decker, T., and Menrad, K.: Public participation in wind energy projects located in Germany: Which form of participation is the key to acceptance?, Renew. Energ., 112, 63–73, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.021, 2017.
Liebe, U.: Zahlungsbereitschaft für kollektive Umweltgüter – Soziologische und ökonomische Analysen, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90464-1, 2007.
Liebe, U. and Dobers, G. M.: Decomposing public support for energy policy: What drives acceptance of and intentions to protest against renewable energy expansion in Germany?, Energy Research & Social Science, 47, 247–260, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.09.004, 2019.
Lucke, D.: Akzeptanz. Legitimität in der “Abstimmungsgesellschaft”, Leske + Budrich, Opladen, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-09234-6, 1995.
Luhmann, N.: Vertrauen. Ein Mechanismus der Reduktion sozialer Komplexität, 5th edn., Stuttgart, ISBN 9783838540047, 2014.
Nanz, P. and Fritsche, M.: Handbuch Bürgerbeteiligung, Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, Bonn, https://www.bpb.de/system/files/dokument_pdf/Handbuch_Buergerbeteiligung.pdf
(last access: 5 August 2022), 2012.
Pasqualetti, M. J.: Wind Energy Landscapes: Society and Technology in the California Desert, Society and Natural Ressources, 14, 689–699, https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920152524882, 2001.
Pedersen, E. and Larsman, P.: The impact of visual factors on noise annoyance among people living in the vicinity of wind turbines, J. Environ. Psychol., 28, 379–389, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.02.009, 2008.
Pedersen, E. and Persson Waye, K.: Perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise – a dose-response relationship, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 116, 3460–3470, https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1815091, 2004.
Perlaviciute, G. and Steg, L.: Contextual and psychological factors shaping evaluations and acceptability of energy alternatives: Integrated review and research agenda, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 35, 361–381, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.003, 2014.
Petermann, T. and Scherz, C.: TA und (Technik-)Akzeptanz(-forschung), Technikfolgenabschätzung – Theorie und Praxis, 14, 45–53, 2005.
Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T.: The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion, Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 19, 123–205, 1986.
Petty, R. E. and Wegener, D. T.: The Elaboration Likelihood Model: Current Status and Controversies, in: Dual Processes Theories in Social Psychology, edited by: Chaiken, S. and Trope, Y., The Guilford Press, New York, 41–72, ISBN 9781572304215, 1999.
Rademacher, L., Lintemeier, K., and Kretschmer, H.: Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung bei Infrastrukturprojekten als Herausforderung für Politik und Verwaltung, in: Öffentliche Verwaltung – Verwaltung in der Öffentlichkeit, edited by: Kocks, K., Knorre, S., and Knocks, J. N., Springer VS, 165–184, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28008-6, 2020.
Rand, J. and Hoen, B.: Thirty years of North American wind energy acceptance research: What have we learned?, Energy Research & Social Science, 29, 135–148, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.05.019, 2017.
Renn, O.: Risikowahrnehmung der Kernenergie, Campus, Frankfurt am Main, ISBN 978-3-593-33043-3, 1984.
Renn, O.: The Challenge of Integrating Deliberation and Expertise: Participation and Discourse in Risk Management, in: Risk Analysis and Society: An Interdisciplinary Characterization of the Field, edited by: McDaniels, T. L. and Small, M. J., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 289–366, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511814662, 2004.
Renn, O.: Risk Governance – Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World, Earthscan, London, ISBN 9781844072927, 2008.
Renn, O. and Levine, D.: Credibility and trust in risk communication, in: Communicating risks to the public: International perspectives, edited by: Kasperson, R. E. and Stallen, P. J. M., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 175–218, https://doi.org/10.18419/opus-7321, 1991.
Renn, O., Burns, W. J., Kasperson, J. X., Kasperson, R. E., and Slovic, P.: The Social Amplification of Risk: Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Applications, J. Soc. Issues, 48, 137–160, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1992.tb01949.x, 1992.
Reusswig, F., Braun, F., Heger, I., Ludewig, T., Eichenauer, E., and Wiebke, L.: Against the wind: Local opposition to the German Energiewende, Util. Policy, 41, 214–227, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2016.02.006, 2016.
Ruddat, M. and Mayer, V.: Wie beteiligen? Die Sicht der Verwaltung auf kommunale Partizipationsprozesse anhand von Fallbeispielen in Herrenberg und Stuttgart, Stuttgarter Beiträge zur Risiko- und Nachhaltigkeitsforschung, Nr. 38, Stuttgart, https://doi.org/10.18419/opus-10839, 2020.
Ruddat, M. and Renn, O.: Wie die Energiewende in Baden-Württemberg gelingen kann, Energiewirtschaftliche Tagesfragen, 62, 59–62, 2012.
Ruddat, M. and Sonnberger, M.: Wie die Bürgerinnen und Bürger ihre Rolle bei der Energiewende sehen, Energiewirtschaftliche Tagesfragen, 65, 121–125, 2015.
Ruddat, M. and Sonnberger, M.: Von Protest bis Unterstützung – eine empirische Analyse lokaler Akzeptanz von Energietechnologien im Rahmen der Energiewende in Deutschland, Kolner Z. Soziol. Soz., 71, 437–455, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-019-00628-4, 2019.
Sauer, A., Frieder L., Suda, M., and Weiland, U.: Steigerung der Akzeptanz von FFH-Gebieten, BfN-Skripte 144, München, https://www.bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/skript144.pdf (last access: 26 April 2018), 2005.
Sauter, R. and Watson, J.: Strategies for the deployment of micro-generation: Implications for social acceptance, Energ. Policy, 35, 2770–2779, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.006, 2007.
Schäfer, M. and Keppler, D.: Modelle der
technikorientierten Akzeptanzforschung. Überblick und Reflexion
am Beispiel eines Forschungsprojekts zur Implementierung innovativer
technischer Energieeffizienz-Maßnahmen, Discussion Paper des
Zentrums für Technik und Gesellschaft, Nr. 34, Technische Universität Berlin, http://www.tu-berlin.de/ztg/menue/publikationen/discussion_papers/ (last access: 4 May 2018), 2013.
Schwarz, N.: Feelings as Information: Moods Influence Judgements and Processing Strategies, in: Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgement, edited by: Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., and Kahnemann, D., Cambridge University Press, 534–547, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808098, 2002.
Schweizer-Ries, P.: Energy sustainable communities. Environmental psychological investigations, Energ. Policy, 36, 4126–4135, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.06.021, 2008.
Schweizer-Ries, P., Rau, I., and Zoellner, J.: Aktivität und Teilhabe – Akzeptanz Erneuerbarer Energien durch Beteiligung steigern, Projektabschlussbericht, Magdeburg, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271197704_Aktivitat_und_Teilhabe_-_Akzeptanz_Erneuerbarer_Energien_durch_Beteiligung_steigern
(last access: 5 August 2022), 2010.
Siegrist, M.: The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology, Risk Anal., 20, 195–204, https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.202020, 2000.
Siegrist, M.: Die Bedeutung von Vertrauen bei der Wahrnehmung und Bewertung von Risiken, Arbeitsbericht, Akademie für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Baden-Württemberg, Nr. 197, Akademie für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart, https://doi.org/10.18419/opus-8678, 2001.
Slovic, P.: Perception of Risk, Science, 236, 280–285, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507, 1987.
Slovic, P.: Perceived Risk, Trust and Democracy, Risk Anal., 13, 675–682, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01329.x, 1993.
Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., and McGregor, D. E.: Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk and Rationality, Risk Anal., 24, 311–322, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00433.x, 2004.
Sonnberger, M. and Ruddat, M.: Die gesellschaftliche Wahrnehmung der Energiewende – Ergebnisse einer deutschlandweiten Repräsentativbefragung. Unter Mitwirkung von: Oliver Wedderhoff und Antje Salup (beide Fraunhofer-Institut für Solare Energiesysteme ISE), Stuttgarter Beiträge zur Risiko- und Nachhaltigkeitsforschung, Nr. 34, Stuttgart, https://doi.org/10.18419/opus-9018, 2016.
Sonnberger, M. and Ruddat, M.: Local and socio-political acceptance of wind farms in Germany, Technol. Soc., 51, 56–65, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2017.07.005, 2017.
Sonnberger, M. and Ruddat, M.: Disclosing Citizens' Perceptual Patterns of the Transition to Renewable Energy in Germany, Nat. Cult., 13, 253–280, https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2018.130204, 2018.
Starr, C.: Social Benefits versus Technological Risk, Science, 165, 1232–1238, 1969.
Steentjes, K., Pidgeon, N., Poortinga, W., Corner, A., Arnold, A., Böhm, G., Mays, C., Poumadère, M., Ruddat, M., Scheer, D., Sonnberger, M., and Tvinnereim, E.: European Perceptions of Climate Change: Topline findings of a survey conducted in four European countries in 2016, Cardiff University, Cardiff, https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/98660/7/EPCC.pdf (last access: 5 August 2022), 2017.
Swofford, J. and Slattery, M.: Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas. Local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making, Energ. Policy, 38, 2508–2519, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.046, 2010.
Upham, P., Oltra, C., and Boso, A.: Towards a cross-paradigmatic framework of the social acceptance of energy systems, Energy Research & Social Science, 8, 100–112, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.05.003, 2015.
Van der Horst, D.: NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies, Energ. Policy, 35, 2705–2714, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.012, 2007.
Van der Horst, D. and Toke, D.: Exploring the landscape of wind farm developments; local area characteristics and planning process outcomes in rural England, Land Use Policy, 27, 214–221, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.05.006, 2010.
Walter, G. and Gutscher, H.: Generelle Befürwortung von Windkraftanlagen vor Ort vs. Befürwortung spezifischer Windkraftprojekte: Der Einfluss von Projekt- und Verfahrensparametern, Umweltpsychologie, 17, 124–144, 2013.
Warren, C. R. and McFadyen, M.: Does community ownership affect public attitudes to wind energy? A case study from south-west Scotland, Land Use Policy, 27, 204–213, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.12.010, 2010.
Warren, C. R., Lumsden, C., O'Dowd, S., and Birnie, R. V.: “Green On Green”: public perceptions of wind power in Scotland and Ireland, J. Environ. Plann. Man., 48, 853–875, https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560500294376, 2005.
Webler, T.: “Right” Discourse in Citizen Participation: An Evaluative Yardstick, in: Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation – Evaluating New Models for Environmental Discourse, edited by: Renn, O., Webler, T., and Wiedmann, P., Kluwer, Dordrecht and Boston, 35–86, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0131-8, 1995.
Wildavsky, A. and Dake, K.: Theories of Risk Perception: Who Fears What and Why?, in: Risk and modern Society, edited by: Löfstedt, R. and Frewer, F., Earthscan Publications, London, 101–114, ISBN 10 1853834998, 1998.
Wolsink, M.: The social impact of a large wind turbine, Environ. Impact. Asses., 8, 323–334, 1988.
Wolsink, M.: Entanglement of Interests and Motives: Assumptions behind the NIMBY-theory on Facility Siting, Urban Stud., 31, 851–866, 1994.
Wolsink, M.: Planning of renewable schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation, Energ. Policy, 35, 2692–2704, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.001, 2007a.
Wolsink, M.: Wind power implementation. The nature of public attitudes: Equity and fairness instead of “backyard motives”, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 11, 1188–1207, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2005.10.005, 2007b.
Wüstenhagen, R., Wolsink, M., and Bürer, M. J.: Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept, Energ. Policy, 35, 2683–2691, 2007.
Short summary
This is a review article concerning the main factors influencing acceptance of wind energy. Research has shown that risk and benefit perceptions, the fair distribution of these risks and benefits, participation in the decision-making process, trust in relevant actors like local authorities, and the management of, for example, visual impacts of wind turbines can have effects on the acceptance of wind projects. Open questions remain concerning, for example, what a fair distribution is.
This is a review article concerning the main factors influencing acceptance of wind energy....
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint