IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v140y2020ics0301421520301750.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The public's perception of run-of-the-river hydropower across Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Venus, Terese E.
  • Hinzmann, Mandy
  • Bakken, Tor Haakon
  • Gerdes, Holger
  • Godinho, Francisco Nunes
  • Hansen, Bendik
  • Pinheiro, António
  • Sauer, Johannes

Abstract

A large share of future European hydropower projects will be run-of-the-river schemes. To understand the potential for RoR hydropower development and modernization of the technology as an opportunity for sustainable decentralization, we use the Q-methodology to compare public values about RoR hydropower in German, Portuguese and Swedish case studies. Four perspectives on the importance of RoR hydropower emerged from our analysis: (i) maintain regional control, (ii) fight climate change, (iii) promote citizen well-being and (iv) protect natural ecosystems. Strong preferences for regional control imply RoR should be managed as distributed generation rather than viewed as part of a centralized, national system like traditional large-scale reservoir hydropower. Based on the importance of citizen well-being and ecological measures, operators could adopt strategies such as river widening and the reconstruction of secondary channels, which help control floods, create recreational opportunities as well as enhance ecological habilitation and biodiversity. Additionally, policymakers could support rigorous monitoring programs to assess the ecological impact of RoR.

Suggested Citation

  • Venus, Terese E. & Hinzmann, Mandy & Bakken, Tor Haakon & Gerdes, Holger & Godinho, Francisco Nunes & Hansen, Bendik & Pinheiro, António & Sauer, Johannes, 2020. "The public's perception of run-of-the-river hydropower across Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:140:y:2020:i:c:s0301421520301750
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111422
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421520301750
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111422?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jurasz, Jakub & Ciapała, Bartłomiej, 2017. "Integrating photovoltaics into energy systems by using a run-off-river power plant with pondage to smooth energy exchange with the power gird," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 21-35.
    2. Stamatios Ntanos & Grigorios Kyriakopoulos & Miltiadis Chalikias & Garyfallos Arabatzis & Michalis Skordoulis, 2018. "Public Perceptions and Willingness to Pay for Renewable Energy: A Case Study from Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    3. Matthew J. Kotchen & Michael R. Moore & Frank Lupi & Edward S. Rutherford, 2006. "Environmental Constraints on Hydropower: An Ex Post Benefit-Cost Analysis of Dam Relicensing in Michigan," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(3), pages 384-403.
    4. Kelly-Richards, Sarah & Silber-Coats, Noah & Crootof, Arica & Tecklin, David & Bauer, Carl, 2017. "Governing the transition to renewable energy: A review of impacts and policy issues in the small hydropower boom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 251-264.
    5. Ming Lu & Alin Lin & Jiyi Sun, 2018. "The Impact of Photovoltaic Applications on Urban Landscapes Based on Visual Q Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Reiche, Danyel & Bechberger, Mischa, 2004. "Policy differences in the promotion of renewable energies in the EU member states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 843-849, May.
    7. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    8. Malesios, Chrisovalantis & Arabatzis, Garyfallos, 2010. "Small hydropower stations in Greece: The local people's attitudes in a mountainous prefecture," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 2492-2510, December.
    9. Saha, Parmita & Idsø, Johannes, 2016. "New hydropower development in Norway: Municipalities׳ attitude, involvement and perceived barriers," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 235-244.
    10. Díaz, Paula & Adler, Carolina & Patt, Anthony, 2017. "Do stakeholders’ perspectives on renewable energy infrastructure pose a risk to energy policy implementation? A case of a hydropower plant in Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 21-28.
    11. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    12. Tabi, Andrea & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2017. "Keep it local and fish-friendly: Social acceptance of hydropower projects in Switzerland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P1), pages 763-773.
    13. Ribeiro, Fernando & Ferreira, Paula & Araújo, Madalena & Braga, Ana Cristina, 2014. "Public opinion on renewable energy technologies in Portugal," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 39-50.
    14. Andy Stirling, 2014. "Transforming Power: social science and the politics of energy choices," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-03, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    15. Paish, Oliver, 2002. "Small hydro power: technology and current status," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 6(6), pages 537-556, December.
    16. Botelho, Anabela & Ferreira, Paula & Lima, Fátima & Pinto, Lígia M. Costa & Sousa, Sara, 2017. "Assessment of the environmental impacts associated with hydropower," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 896-904.
    17. Frey, Gary W. & Linke, Deborah M., 2002. "Hydropower as a renewable and sustainable energy resource meeting global energy challenges in a reasonable way," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(14), pages 1261-1265, November.
    18. Manzano-Agugliaro, Francisco & Taher, Myriam & Zapata-Sierra, Antonio & Juaidi, Adel & Montoya, Francisco G., 2017. "An overview of research and energy evolution for small hydropower in Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 476-489.
    19. Sandra Volken & Gabrielle Wong-Parodi & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2019. "Public awareness and perception of environmental, health and safety risks to electricity generation: an explorative interview study in Switzerland," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 432-447, April.
    20. Loomis, John & Kent, Paula & Strange, Liz & Fausch, Kurt & Covich, Alan, 2000. "Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 103-117, April.
    21. Maarten Wolsink & Sylvia Breukers, 2010. "Contrasting the core beliefs regarding the effective implementation of wind power. An international study of stakeholder perspectives," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(5), pages 535-558.
    22. Geraint Ellis & John Barry & Clive Robinson, 2007. "Many ways to say 'no', different ways to say 'yes': Applying Q-Methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(4), pages 517-551.
    23. Gullberg, Anne Therese & Ohlhorst, Dörte & Schreurs, Miranda, 2014. "Towards a low carbon energy future – Renewable energy cooperation between Germany and Norway," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 216-222.
    24. Kataria, Mitesh, 2009. "Willingness to pay for environmental improvements in hydropower regulated rivers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 69-76, January.
    25. Davies, B.B. & Hodge, I.D., 2007. "Exploring environmental perspectives in lowland agriculture: A Q methodology study in East Anglia, UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 323-333, March.
    26. Andrea Klinglmair & Markus Gilbert Bliem & Roy Brouwer, 2015. "Exploring the public value of increased hydropower use: a choice experiment study for Austria," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 315-336, November.
    27. Maarten Wolsink, 2018. "Co-production in distributed generation: renewable energy and creating space for fitting infrastructure within landscapes," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 542-561, May.
    28. Kalkbrenner, Bernhard J. & Yonezawa, Koichi & Roosen, Jutta, 2017. "Consumer preferences for electricity tariffs: Does proximity matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 413-424.
    29. Jaccard, Mark & Melton, Noel & Nyboer, John, 2011. "Institutions and processes for scaling up renewables: Run-of-river hydropower in British Columbia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 4042-4050, July.
    30. 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.
    31. Mattmann, Matteo & Logar, Ivana & Brouwer, Roy, 2016. "Hydropower externalities: A meta-analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 66-77.
    32. Aiora Zabala & Unai Pascual, 2016. "Bootstrapping Q Methodology to Improve the Understanding of Human Perspectives," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, February.
    33. Karlstrøm, Henrik & Ryghaug, Marianne, 2014. "Public attitudes towards renewable energy technologies in Norway. The role of party preferences," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 656-663.
    34. Kumar, Deepak & Katoch, S.S., 2014. "Sustainability indicators for run of the river (RoR) hydropower projects in hydro rich regions of India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 101-108.
    35. Bridge, Gavin & Bouzarovski, Stefan & Bradshaw, Michael & Eyre, Nick, 2013. "Geographies of energy transition: Space, place and the low-carbon economy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 331-340.
    36. Bergmann, Ariel & Colombo, Sergio & Hanley, Nick, 2008. "Rural versus urban preferences for renewable energy developments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 616-625, April.
    37. Tarroja, Brian & AghaKouchak, Amir & Samuelsen, Scott, 2016. "Quantifying climate change impacts on hydropower generation and implications on electric grid greenhouse gas emissions and operation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 295-305.
    38. Mario Cools & Elke Moons & Brecht Janssens & Geert Wets, 2009. "Shifting towards environment-friendly modes: profiling travelers using Q-methodology," Transportation, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 437-453, July.
    39. Kaundinya, Deepak Paramashivan & Balachandra, P. & Ravindranath, N.H., 2009. "Grid-connected versus stand-alone energy systems for decentralized power--A review of literature," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 2041-2050, October.
    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. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    2. Zhang, Dongcheng & Jiang, Hanchen & Qiang, Maoshan, 2023. "Public attitudes toward hydropower in China: The role of information provision and partisan identification," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    3. Schulz, Christopher & Saklani, Udisha, 2021. "The future of hydropower development in Nepal: Views from the private sector," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1578-1588.
    4. Venus, Terese E. & Sauer, Johannes, 2022. "Certainty pays off: The public's value of environmental monitoring," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Ptak, Thomas & Crootof, Arica & Harlan, Tyler & Kelly, Sarah, 2022. "Critically evaluating the purported global “boom” in small hydropower development through spatial and temporal analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    6. Terese E. Venus & Nicole Smialek & Joachim Pander & Atle Harby & Juergen Geist, 2020. "Evaluating Cost Trade-Offs between Hydropower and Fish Passage Mitigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-30, October.
    7. Venus, Terese E. & Strauss, Felix & Venus, Thomas J. & Sauer, Johannes, 2021. "Understanding stakeholder preferences for future biogas development in Germany," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    8. Hessam Golmohamadi, 2022. "Demand-Side Flexibility in Power Systems: A Survey of Residential, Industrial, Commercial, and Agricultural Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-16, June.
    9. Kuriqi, Alban & Pinheiro, António N. & Sordo-Ward, Alvaro & Bejarano, María D. & Garrote, Luis, 2021. "Ecological impacts of run-of-river hydropower plants—Current status and future prospects on the brink of energy transition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).

    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. Kelly-Richards, Sarah & Silber-Coats, Noah & Crootof, Arica & Tecklin, David & Bauer, Carl, 2017. "Governing the transition to renewable energy: A review of impacts and policy issues in the small hydropower boom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 251-264.
    2. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    3. Venus, Terese E. & Sauer, Johannes, 2022. "Certainty pays off: The public's value of environmental monitoring," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    4. Elke Kellner, 2019. "Social Acceptance of a Multi-Purpose Reservoir in a Recently Deglaciated Landscape in the Swiss Alps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-22, July.
    5. Späth, Leonhard, 2018. "Large-scale photovoltaics? Yes please, but not like this! Insights on different perspectives underlying the trade-off between land use and renewable electricity development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 429-437.
    6. Ptak, Thomas & Crootof, Arica & Harlan, Tyler & Kelly, Sarah, 2022. "Critically evaluating the purported global “boom” in small hydropower development through spatial and temporal analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    7. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    8. 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).
    9. Sara Sousa & Anabela Botelho & Lígia M. Costa Pinto & Marieta Valente, 2019. "How Relevant Are Non-Use Values and Perceptions in Economic Valuations? The Case of Hydropower Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-18, August.
    10. Mattmann, Matteo & Logar, Ivana & Brouwer, Roy, 2016. "Hydropower externalities: A meta-analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 66-77.
    11. Tabi, Andrea & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2017. "Keep it local and fish-friendly: Social acceptance of hydropower projects in Switzerland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P1), pages 763-773.
    12. Huaranca, Laura Liliana & Iribarnegaray, Martín Alejandro & Albesa, Federico & Volante, José Norberto & Brannstrom, Christian & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2019. "Social Perspectives on Deforestation, Land Use Change, and Economic Development in an Expanding Agricultural Frontier in Northern Argentina," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Escribano, Gonzalo & González-Enríquez, Carmen & Lázaro-Touza, Lara & Paredes-Gázquez, Juandiego, 2023. "An energy union without interconnections? Public acceptance of cross-border interconnectors in four European countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    14. Plum, Christiane & Olschewski, Roland & Jobin, Marilou & van Vliet, Oscar, 2019. "Public preferences for the Swiss electricity system after the nuclear phase-out: A choice experiment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 181-196.
    15. Dogmus, Özge Can & Nielsen, Jonas Ø., 2019. "Is the hydropower boom actually taking place? A case study of a South East European country, Bosnia and Herzegovina," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 278-289.
    16. Mayeda, A.M. & Boyd, A.D., 2020. "Factors influencing public perceptions of hydropower projects: A systematic literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    17. Baharoon, Dhyia Aidroos & Rahman, Hasimah Abdul & Fadhl, Saeed Obaid, 2016. "Publics׳ knowledge, attitudes and behavioral toward the use of solar energy in Yemen power sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 498-515.
    18. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    19. Kosorić, Vesna & Huang, Huajing & Tablada, Abel & Lau, Siu-Kit & Tan, Hugh T.W., 2019. "Survey on the social acceptance of the productive façade concept integrating photovoltaic and farming systems in high-rise public housing blocks in Singapore," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 197-214.
    20. Gabriela O. Chiciudean & Rezhen Harun & Felix H. Arion & Daniel I. Chiciudean & Camelia F. Oroian & Iulia C. Muresan, 2018. "A Critical Approach on Sustainable Renewable Energy Sources in Rural Area: Evidence from North-West Region of Romania," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-15, August.

    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:eee:enepol:v:140:y:2020:i:c:s0301421520301750. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.