How Is Social Acceptance Reflected in National Renewable Energy Plans? Evidence from Three Wind-Rich Countries
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Energy Modeling, Planning, and Social Acceptance
1.2. Wind Energy and Social Acceptance
1.3. Frameworks for Social Acceptance
- How is social acceptance articulated and responded to in National Renewable Energy Action Plans—i.e., at the macro scale?
- What are the interactions between various dimensions and scales?
- What are the implications for future policies and the deployment of wind energy in Europe?
2. Analytical Framework
3. Methodology
3.1. Case Studies
3.2. Coding and Mapping of NREAPs
- Technology (onshore wind, biomass, solar, offshore wind, biofuel, wave tidal, transport, hydro, electric heating, electric vehicles (EV), combined heat and power (CHP), geothermal, carbon capture and storage (CCS));
- Market (technology development, investments/costs, energy producers, grid, technology costs, industry sector, fuel costs, carbon tax, resource prices, resource import, resource constraint, production costs, energy system costs, energy export)
- Market/political–regulatory (efficiency measures, RE policy and support, energy targets, infrastructures, device’s geographical location, service sector, CO2 emissions and targets, sectors/sectoral, energy demand)
- Political–regulatory/community (local authorities, residential buildings, social benefits, dissemination, population and public behavior, environmental impact)
- Community (interaction with local population, social costs)
- General (incentive, behavior change).
4. National-Level Results and Discussion
4.1. Denmark
4.2. Ireland
4.3. United Kingdom
5. Aggregated Results and Discussion
- A prevalence of the market codes, in particular from the national to local scale (M2 and M3).
- A larger focus on community as energy producers (C2), compared to community at national and local individual levels (C1 and C3), which have very low mention rates.
- Medium mention rates for political–regulatory codes at the regional and local scale or among local authorities (PR2 and PR3).
- A prevalent link between M2 and M3, suggesting that, globally, market-supporting policies are designed to include and potentially prioritize local companies, An intentional broad approach to market dynamics and opportunities
- A significant link between M codes and C2, which suggests an effort to include local energy producers and prosumers into financially supporting incentives otherwise aimed at elements of the market dimension
- PR1 to Policies: Government/energy agencies decide on a policy formulated following targets set by the EU.
- Policies to PR2–3: National policies instruct regional authorities on what to prioritize.
- PR2–3 to M2–3: Regional and local authorities collaborate with regional and local companies.
- C3 to PR1–3: Elections shape local to national socio-political systems; can object to planning project.
- PR1 to C1: Past/current energy systems; dissemination of information; government actions influence the national identity.
- Policies to C2: National energy policies orchestrate possibilities for cooperatives and local production.
- Policies to C3: Effects of PR1 through energy policies at the local community level.
- C1 to C2–3: National identity affects individual opinions.
- C3 to C2: Local support (or opposition) of local producers and cooperatives.
- M1–3 to C3: Impact of wind farms from local to international developers at local level C.
- Policies to M1–3: Policies set incentives and R&D priorities that affect energy companies from the local to international scales.
6. Conclusions: Implications for Future Policies and the Development of Wind Energy in Europe
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Council of the European Union. DIRECTIVE 2009/28/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 23 April 2009 on the Promotion of the Use of Energy from Renewable Sources and Amending and Subsequently Repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC. Off. J. Eur. Union 2009, 11, 39–85. [Google Scholar]
- Pfenninger, S.; Hawkes, A.; Keirstead, J. Energy systems modeling for twenty-first century energy challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 33, 74–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horbaty, R.; Huber, S.; Ellis, G. Large-scale wind deployment, social acceptance. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Energy Environ. 2012, 1, 194–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haggett, C. Planning and persuasion: Public engagement in renewable energy decision-making. In Renewable Energy and the Public: From NIMBY to Participation; Taylor and Francis: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2013; pp. 15–28. ISBN 978-1-84977-670-7. [Google Scholar]
- Gilbert, A.; Sovacool, B. Looking the wrong way: Bias, renewable electricity, and energy modelling in the United States. Energy 2016, 94, 533–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jasanoff, S. Just transitions: A humble approach to global energy futures. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2018, 35, 11–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arnstein, S.R. A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 1969, 35, 216–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- IPCC. Renewable Energy Sources And Climate Change Mitigation—Summary for Policymakers and Technical Summary; The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- International Energy Agency. Projected Costs of Generating Electricity; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2015; Volume 2. [Google Scholar]
- European Environmental Agency. Europe’s Onshore and Offshore Wind Energy Potential; European Environment Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. Renewable Energy Progress Report; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Twidell, J.; Weir, T.; Weir, T. Renewable Energy Resources; Routledge: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2015; ISBN 978-1-31576-641-6. [Google Scholar]
- Smil, V. Power Density Primer: Understanding the Spatial Dimension of the Unfolding Transition to Renewable Electricity Generation (Part I—Definitions). Atlantic 2010, 26, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Ellis, G.; Cowell, R.; Warren, C.; Strachan, P.; Szarka, J.; Hadwin, R.; Miner, P.; Wolsink, M.; NadaÏ, A. Wind Power: Is There A “Planning Problem”? Expanding Wind Power: A Problem of Planning, or of Perception? The Problems Of Planning—A Developer's Perspective Wind Farms: More Respectful and Open Debate Needed, Not Less Planning: Problem “Carrier” or Problem “Source”? “Innovative” Wind Power Planning. Plan. Theory Pract. 2009, 10, 521–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toke, D.; Breukers, S.; Wolsink, M. Wind power deployment outcomes: How can we account for the differences? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2008, 12, 1129–1147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haggett, C. Public Opposition to Renewable Energy. In Routledge Handbook of Climate Change and Society; Lever-Tracy, C., Ed.; Routledge: Abingdon-on-Thames, UK, 2010; pp. 332–440. ISBN 978-0-20387-621-3. [Google Scholar]
- Bell, D.; Gray, T.; Haggett, C.; Swaffield, J. Re-visiting the ‘social gap’: Public opinion and relations of power in the local politics of wind energy. Environ. Polit. 2013, 22, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jolivet, E.; Heiskanen, E. Blowing against the wind-An exploratory application of actor network theory to the analysis of local controversies and participation processes in wind energy. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 6746–6754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klima-, Energi- og Forsyningsministeriet. Energiaftale—Energy Agreement; Klima-, Energi- og Forsyningsministeriet: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- British Conservative Party. The Conservative Party Manifesto 2015; The Conservative Party: London, UK, 2015.
- Wüstenhagen, R.; Wolsink, M.; Bürer, M.J. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 2683–2691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sovacool, B.K.; Ratan, P.L. Conceptualizing the acceptance of wind and solar electricity. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 5268–5279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fournis, Y.; Fortin, M.-J. From social ‘acceptance’ to social ‘acceptability’ of wind energy projects: Towards a territorial perspective. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2017, 60, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szarka, J. Wind Power in Europe; Palgrave Macmillan UK: London, UK, 2007; ISBN 978-1-349-54232-1. [Google Scholar]
- Lewis, J.I.; Wiser, R.H. Fostering a renewable energy technology industry: An international comparison of wind industry policy support mechanisms. Energy Policy 2007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huber, J. Pioneer countries and the global diffusion of environmental innovations: Theses from the viewpoint of ecological modernisation theory. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Breukers, S.; Wolsink, M. Wind power implementation in changing institutional landscapes: An international comparison. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 2737–2750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toke, D.; Strachan, P.A. Ecological modernization and wind power in the UK. Eur. Environ. 2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Batel, S.; Devine-Wright, P. Towards a better understanding of people’s responses to renewable energy technologies: Insights from Social Representations Theory. Public Underst. Sci. 2015, 24, 311–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Devine-Wright, P. Place attachment and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies. In Psychological Approaches to Sustainability: Current Trends in Theory, Research and Applications; Verdugo, V.C., Ed.; Nova Science Publishers, Inc.: Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 337–359. ISBN 978-1-62618-877-8. [Google Scholar]
- Ellis, G.; Ferraro, G. The Social Acceptance of Wind Energy: Where We Stand and the Path Ahead; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Devine-Wright, P.; Batel, S.; Aas, O.; Sovacool, B.; LaBelle, M.C.; Ruud, A. A conceptual framework for understanding the social acceptance of energy infrastructure: Insights from energy storage. Energy Policy 2017, 107, 27–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- HM Government. ELECTRICITY The Renewables Obligation Closure Order 2014; Statutory Instrument: London, UK, 2014; Volume 55, pp. 1–12.
- SLR Consulting. Wind Energy: The Challenge of Community Engagement and Social Acceptance in Ireland; National Economic and Social Council: Dublin, Ireland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Lennon, M.; Scott, M. Contending expertise: An interpretive approach to (re)conceiving wind power’s “planning problem”. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2015, 17, 593–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Department of Communications Energy and Natural Resources. Ireland’s Transition to a Low Carbon Energy Future 2015–2030; Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications: Dublin, Ireland, 2015.
- Andersen, K.S.; Termansen, L.B.; Gargiulo, M.; Ó Gallachóirc, B.P. Bridging the gap using energy services: Demonstrating a novel framework for soft linking top-down and bottom-up models. Energy 2019, 169, 277–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Danish Energy Agency. Energy Scenarios for 2020, 2035 and 2050; Danish Energy Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Energinet. Analyse af Potentialet for Landvind i Danmark i 2030; Energinet: Erritsø, Denmark, 2015; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. Renewable Energy Progress Report; Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committe and the Committee of the Regions; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2015; Volume 293, p. 16. [Google Scholar]
- Anker, H.T.; Jørgensen, M.L. Mapping of the Legal Framework for Siting of Wind Turbines—Denmark; Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Wierling, A.; Schwanitz, V.J.; Zeiß, J.P.; Bout, C.; Candelise, C.; Gilcrease, W.; Gregg, J.S. Statistical evidence on the role of energy cooperatives for the energy transition in European countries. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hvelplund, F. Renewable energy and the need for local energy markets. Energy 2006, 31, 2293–2302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hvelplund, F.K.; Meyer, N.I.; Morthorst, P.E.; Munksgaard, J.; Karnøe, P.; Hasberg, K. Policies for a Transition to 100% Renewable Energy Systems in Denmark before 2050—Technical Background Report Part 4; Department of Planning, Aalborg University: Aalborg, Denmark, 2012; ISBN 978-8-79140-419-1. [Google Scholar]
- Lund, H. Analysis. In Renewable Energy Systems: A Smart Energy Systems Approach to the Choice and Modeling of 100% Renewable Solutions, 2nd ed.; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 185–238. [Google Scholar]
- Krohn, B.S. Wind Energy Policy in Denmark: 25 Years of Success—What Now? Danish Wind Industry Association: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Sperling, K.; Hvelplund, F.; Mathiesen, B.V. Evaluation of wind power planning in Denmark—Towards an integrated perspective. Energy 2010, 35, 5443–5454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borch, K.; Nyborg, S.; Clausen, L.T.; Jørgensen, M.S. Wind2050—A transdisciplinary research partnership about wind energy. In Handbuch Energiewende und Partizipation; Springer VS: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland. Ireland’s Energy Targets—Progress, Ambition & Impacts; Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland: Dublin, Ireland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications. National Renewable Energy Action Plan Ireland; Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications: Dublin, Ireland, 2010.
- Clancy, M.; Scheer, J.; O Gallachóir, B.; Seai; Daly, H.; Dineen, D.; Rogan, F.; Cahill, C.; O’Sullivan, R.; Deane, J.P. Energy Forecasts for Ireland to 2020; The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland: Dublin, Ireland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- FitzGerald, J.; Hore, J.; Kearney, I. A Model for Forecasting Energy Demand and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Ireland; Economic and Social Research Institute: Dublin, Ireland, 2002; p. 146. [Google Scholar]
- Gallachóir, B.P.Ó.; Chiodi, A.; Gargiulo, M.; Deane, P.; Lavigne, D.; Rout Kumar, U. Irish TIMES Energy Systems Model; Environmental Protection Agency: Johnstown Castle, Ireland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland. Ireland’s Energy Projections—Progress to Targets, Challenges and Impacts; The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland: Dublin, Ireland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). White Paper Modelling—Use of the Markal Energy Model; Department of Energy and Climate Change: London, UK, 2011.
- UCL Energy Institute Policy Impacts of Our Models|UCL ENERGY INSTITUTE MODELS—UCL—London’s Global University. Available online: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/energy-models/policy-impacts-of-our-models (accessed on 12 September 2018).
- DECC. National Renewable Energy Action Plan for the United Kingdom Article 4 of the Renewable Energy Directive; Department of Energy and Climate Change: London, UK, 2009; pp. 1–160.
- Ofgem. Renewable Obligations: Closure of the Scheme to Onshore Wind (England, Wales and Scotland); Ofgem: London, UK, 2017.
- Departement for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (DBEIS). Contracts for Difference FAQs; Departement for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy: London, UK, 2017.
- Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). Budget Notice for CFD Allocation Round 1; Department of Energy and Climate Change: London, UK, 2014.
- Departement for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (DBEIS). Draft Budget Notice for the Second CFD Allocation Round; Departement for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy: London, UK, 2016.
- Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). Consultation on a Review of the Feed-In Tariffs Scheme—Government Response 17 December 2015; Department of Energy and Climate Change: London, UK, 2015.
- Department of Energy and Climate Change. DECC Review of the Feed-In Tariffs Scheme; Department of Energy and Climate Change: London, UK, 2015.
- Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). Proposed Reforms to the Existing Domestic and Non-Domestic Renewable Heat Incentive Schemes; Department of Energy and Climate Change: London, UK, 2016.
- Departement for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (DBEIS). The Renewable Heat Incentive: A Reformed and Refocused Scheme—Government Response to Consultation; Departement for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy: London, UK, 2016.
- Better Regulation Executive. HM Government Code of Practice on Consultation; Better Regulation Executive: London, UK, 2008; p. 16. [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- European Environmental Agency. Renewable Energy in Europe—Recent Growth and Knock-On Effects; European Environmental Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2017; ISBN 978-9-29213-571-3. [Google Scholar]
- International Energy Agency. United Kingdom Renewable Energy Policy Framework Summary. Available online: http://www.iea.org/policiesandmeasures/renewableenergy/?country=UnitedKingdom (accessed on 26 June 2018).
- Department of Energy and Climate Change. 2009 No. 785 ELECTRICITY, ENGLAND AND WALES The Renewables Obligation Order 2009; Department of Energy and Climate Change: London, UK, 2010; Volume 2009, ISBN 978-0-58057-654-6.
- Leiren, M.D.; Aakre, S.; Linnerud, K.; Julsrud, T.E.; Di Nucci, M.-R.; Krug, M. Community Acceptance of Wind Energy Developments: Experience from Wind Energy Scarce Regions in Europe. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Dimension | Specific Factors | ||
---|---|---|---|
Market | Competitive installation/production costs | Mechanisms for information and feedback | Access to financing |
Socio-political | Strong institutional capacity | Political commitment | Favorable legal and regulatory frameworks |
Community | Prolific community/individual ownership and use | Participatory project siting | Recognition of externalities or positive public image |
MACRO (1) Global → National | MESO (2) National → Regional | MICRO (3) Regional → Local | |
---|---|---|---|
COMMUNITY (C) | National energy identity or culture Popular perception “Zeitgeist” National opinion polls | Participatory processes Interaction between local authorities/communities | Energy cooperatives Place attachment Standardized impact studies Social mediation Public engagement Opposition (NIMBYism) Remoteness from decision-making process and places Interest in micro RE Disruption, visibility, smell and sound levels Property ownership |
Social acceptance Reasons for opposition/support Trust towards institutions and actors Distributional and procedural justices Individual perceptions of technologies Aggregated public opinion Cost/benefits for local populations Public health | |||
MARKET (M) | Globalization, internationalization strategy National and international opportunities Move to offshore wind Lobbying, influence of companies on policies Funding of R&D Business incentives Support investment Aggregated production/demand Modeling Tax targets | National interests Monopolies on regional grids Modeling Control access to grid Existing national energy production and infrastructures Green power marketing | Move to offshore wind Increasing scale of onshore wind Information meetings Increasing surface of solar and biomass Local employment |
Tendering, competition, adaptability R&D, innovations Investments and path dependency Green power marketing strategy | |||
POLITICAL–REGULATORY (PR) | National policies Assumptions on behavior change National political support EU strategies Expressions of political support for RE at national scale | Local authorities Institutionalization of frameworks that foster market and community acceptance Planning policies Invoking participation Consultation Strategic planning National strategy in regional context Expressions of political support for RE at regional scale Actions of local authorities | Siting decisions Compensation measures Local and regional elections |
Policymakers Reliable financial system Collaborative spatial planning system Governance Decision-making mechanisms Legal framework Articulation of interests and strategies |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Bout, C.; Gregg, J.S.; Haselip, J.; Ellis, G. How Is Social Acceptance Reflected in National Renewable Energy Plans? Evidence from Three Wind-Rich Countries. Energies 2021, 14, 3999. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14133999
Bout C, Gregg JS, Haselip J, Ellis G. How Is Social Acceptance Reflected in National Renewable Energy Plans? Evidence from Three Wind-Rich Countries. Energies. 2021; 14(13):3999. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14133999
Chicago/Turabian StyleBout, Celine, Jay Sterling Gregg, James Haselip, and Geraint Ellis. 2021. "How Is Social Acceptance Reflected in National Renewable Energy Plans? Evidence from Three Wind-Rich Countries" Energies 14, no. 13: 3999. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14133999