IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/manmar/v11y2016i3p532-543n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public reactions towards wind energy instalments. Case study: Romania and the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • Nichifor Maria Alexandra

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

Wind energy experienced an exponential development in the past two decades, forming a main source of energy today, but also a frequently encountered issue of debate due to the increased proximity of wind turbines to citizens’ residence, especially in the case of the Western part of the European Union. Although the benefits of renewable sources of energy represent a compulsory effort towards ensuring sustainable energy strategies for the future, due to the increased pressure of balancing climate change, limitation of traditional energy resources and economic competition, the expansion of wind parks has caused strong reactions of local communities in many regions leading to the reorganization of public exposure strategies of many companies in the field. This research intends to offer a sample of public perceptions of wind turbines depending on several influence factors, based on the answers of 64 Dutch citizens and 40 Romanian respondents. Through the implementation of the Delphi method based on questionnaires and interviews, an overview of perceptions towards placement of wind turbines in the two analyzed countries has been offered, providing significant answers to the influence factors of public reactions for or against wind turbines. The main results of the research revealed the importance of financial benefits in increasing public acceptance of wind farms, as well as several subjective factors, such as the visual impact of wind turbines and onshore or offshore placement, that contribute to a positive or negative behavior of citizens towards it.

Suggested Citation

  • Nichifor Maria Alexandra, 2016. "Public reactions towards wind energy instalments. Case study: Romania and the Netherlands," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 11(3), pages 532-543, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:manmar:v:11:y:2016:i:3:p:532-543:n:4
    DOI: 10.1515/mmcks-2016-0014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/mmcks-2016-0014
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/mmcks-2016-0014?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Groothuis, Peter A. & Groothuis, Jana D. & Whitehead, John C., 2008. "Green vs. green: Measuring the compensation required to site electrical generation windmills in a viewshed," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1545-1550, April.
    2. Berndt, M.L., 2015. "Influence of concrete mix design on CO2 emissions for large wind turbine foundations," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 608-614.
    3. Ståle Navrud & Kirsten Grønvik Bråten, 2007. "Consumers' Preferences for Green and Brown Electricity : a Choice Modelling Approach," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 117(5), pages 795-811.
    4. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2692-2704, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. van Rensburg, Thomas M. & Kelley, Hugh & Jeserich, Nadine, 2015. "What influences the probability of wind farm planning approval: Evidence from Ireland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 12-22.
    2. Petter Gudding & Gorm Kipperberg & Craig Bond & Kelly Cullen & Eric Steltzer, 2018. "When a Good Is a Bad (or a Bad Is a Good)—Analysis of Data from an Ambiguous Nonmarket Valuation Setting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, January.
    3. Soon, Jan-Jan & Ahmad, Siti-Aznor, 2015. "Willingly or grudgingly? A meta-analysis on the willingness-to-pay for renewable energy use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 877-887.
    4. Petrova, Maria A., 2016. "From NIMBY to acceptance: Toward a novel framework — VESPA — For organizing and interpreting community concerns," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1280-1294.
    5. Shen, Shiran Victoria & Cain, Bruce E. & Hui, Iris, 2019. "Public receptivity in China towards wind energy generators: A survey experimental approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 619-627.
    6. Leer Jørgensen, Marie & Anker, Helle Tegner & Lassen, Jesper, 2020. "Distributive fairness and local acceptance of wind turbines: The role of compensation schemes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    7. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    8. Andrew D. Krueger & George R. Parsons & Jeremy Firestone, 2011. "Valuing the Visual Disamenity of Offshore Wind Power Projects at Varying Distances from the Shore: An Application on the Delaware Shoreline," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(2), pages 268-283.
    9. Cohen, Jed J. & Reichl, Johannes & Schmidthaler, Michael, 2014. "Re-focussing research efforts on the public acceptance of energy infrastructure: A critical review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 4-9.
    10. Jacquet, Jeffrey B., 2012. "Landowner attitudes toward natural gas and wind farm development in northern Pennsylvania," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 677-688.
    11. Kermagoret, Charlène & Levrel, Harold & Carlier, Antoine & Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne, 2016. "Individual preferences regarding environmental offset and welfare compensation: a choice experiment application to an offshore wind farm project," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 230-240.
    12. Brennan, Noreen & Van Rensburg, Thomas M, 2016. "Wind farm externalities and public preferences for community consultation in Ireland: A discrete choice experiments approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 355-365.
    13. Guo, Yue & Ru, Peng & Su, Jun & Anadon, Laura Diaz, 2015. "Not in my backyard, but not far away from me: Local acceptance of wind power in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 722-733.
    14. Mills, Sarah Banas & Bessette, Douglas & Smith, Hannah, 2019. "Exploring landowners’ post-construction changes in perceptions of wind energy in Michigan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 754-762.
    15. Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Ohl, Cornelia & Hartje, Volkmar, 2010. "Landscape externalities from onshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 82-92, January.
    16. Mattmann, Matteo & Logar, Ivana & Brouwer, Roy, 2016. "Wind power externalities: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 23-36.
    17. Simona Bigerna & Paolo Polinori, 2015. "Assessing the Determinants of Renewable Electricity Acceptance Integrating Meta-Analysis Regression and a Local Comprehensive Survey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-24, August.
    18. Ioannidis, Romanos & Koutsoyiannis, Demetris, 2020. "A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    19. Dugstad, Anders & Grimsrud, Kristine & Kipperberg, Gorm & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2020. "Acceptance of wind power development and exposure – Not-in-anybody's-backyard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    20. Alexander Zerrahn, 2017. "Wind Power: Mitigated and Imposed External Costs and Other Indirect Economic Effects," DIW Roundup: Politik im Fokus 111, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    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:vrs:manmar:v:11:y:2016:i:3:p:532-543:n:4. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.