IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v122y2018icp429-437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Large-scale photovoltaics? Yes please, but not like this! Insights on different perspectives underlying the trade-off between land use and renewable electricity development

Author

Listed:
  • Späth, Leonhard

Abstract

The need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the electricity sector requires an increase in renewable generation capacity. However, the necessary space for power generation infrastructure can be in conflict with other uses of available land and different perspectives on how the development of renewable electricity should occur can lead to stakeholder oppositions. In an explorative study, I used Q methodology to inquire how affected stakeholders perceived the development of a photovoltaic solar park in Switzerland. This allowed me to identify possible ways to alleviate conflicts between designating land for agricultural use and renewable electricity development. The results show that while most identified worldviews among stakeholders agreed large roof surfaces should be prioritized for solar panels, remaining divergences explain tensions that threatened the realization of the solar park. Two perspectives were in conflict: on one side, actors defending a strict protection of agricultural land; on the other, actors who considered it appropriate to build solar panels on fields. The results also suggest that renewable energy expansion should preserve a balance between large-scale and small-scale photovoltaic power development to be socially acceptable amongst a broad spectrum of stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:122:y:2018:i:c:p:429-437
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.07.029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421518304762
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.07.029?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. Adil, Ali M. & Ko, Yekang, 2016. "Socio-technical evolution of Decentralized Energy Systems: A critical review and implications for urban planning and policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1025-1037.
    2. 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.
    3. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Batel, Susana & Aas, Oystein & Sovacool, Benjamin & Labelle, Michael Carnegie & Ruud, Audun, 2017. "A conceptual framework for understanding the social acceptance of energy infrastructure: Insights from energy storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 27-31.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. del Río, Pablo & Linares, Pedro, 2014. "Back to the future? Rethinking auctions for renewable electricity support," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 42-56.
    7. 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.
    8. Dupraz, C. & Marrou, H. & Talbot, G. & Dufour, L. & Nogier, A. & Ferard, Y., 2011. "Combining solar photovoltaic panels and food crops for optimising land use: Towards new agrivoltaic schemes," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 2725-2732.
    9. Batlle, C. & Pérez-Arriaga, I.J. & Zambrano-Barragán, P., 2012. "Regulatory design for RES-E support mechanisms: Learning curves, market structure, and burden-sharing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 212-220.
    10. Matthew Cotton & Patrick Devine-Wright, 2011. "Discourses of Energy Infrastructure Development: A Q-Method Study of Electricity Transmission Line Siting in the UK," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(4), pages 942-960, April.
    11. Chiabrando, Roberto & Fabrizio, Enrico & Garnero, Gabriele, 2009. "The territorial and landscape impacts of photovoltaic systems: Definition of impacts and assessment of the glare risk," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2441-2451, December.
    12. 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.
    13. Hermelingmeier, Verena & Nicholas, Kimberly A., 2017. "Identifying Five Different Perspectives on the Ecosystem Services Concept Using Q Methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 255-265.
    14. Robin Curry & John Barry & Andew McClenaghan, 2013. "Northern Visions? Applying Q methodology to understand stakeholder views on the environmental and resource dimensions of sustainability," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(5), pages 624-649, June.
    15. Brewer, Justin & Ames, Daniel P. & Solan, David & Lee, Randy & Carlisle, Juliet, 2015. "Using GIS analytics and social preference data to evaluate utility-scale solar power site suitability," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 825-836.
    16. Turney, Damon & Fthenakis, Vasilis, 2011. "Environmental impacts from the installation and operation of large-scale solar power plants," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 3261-3270, August.
    17. Fernandez-Jimenez, L. Alfredo & Mendoza-Villena, Montserrat & Zorzano-Santamaria, Pedro & Garcia-Garrido, Eduardo & Lara-Santillan, Pedro & Zorzano-Alba, Enrique & Falces, Alberto, 2015. "Site selection for new PV power plants based on their observability," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 7-15.
    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. Scognamiglio, Alessandra, 2016. "‘Photovoltaic landscapes’: Design and assessment. A critical review for a new transdisciplinary design vision," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 629-661.
    2. 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).
    3. Anna Codemo & Ambra Barbini & Ahi Mantouza & Anastasios Bitziadis & Rossano Albatici, 2023. "Integration of Public Perception in the Assessment of Licensed Solar Farms: A Case Study in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-25, June.
    4. Oudes, D. & Stremke, S., 2021. "Next generation solar power plants? A comparative analysis of frontrunner solar landscapes in Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    5. 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).
    6. 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).
    7. Maarten Wolsink, 2020. "Framing in Renewable Energy Policies: A Glossary," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-31, June.
    8. Carlisle, Juliet E. & Kane, Stephanie L. & Solan, David & Bowman, Madelaine & Joe, Jeffrey C., 2015. "Public attitudes regarding large-scale solar energy development in the U.S," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 835-847.
    9. Salak, B. & Lindberg, K. & Kienast, F. & Hunziker, M., 2021. "How landscape-technology fit affects public evaluations of renewable energy infrastructure scenarios. A hybrid choice model," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    12. von Wirth, Timo & Gislason, Linda & Seidl, Roman, 2018. "Distributed energy systems on a neighborhood scale: Reviewing drivers of and barriers to social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2618-2628.
    13. McNicholas, Grace & Cotton, Matthew, 2019. "Stakeholder perceptions of marine plastic waste management in the United Kingdom," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 77-87.
    14. 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).
    15. Botelho, Anabela & Lourenço-Gomes, Lina & Pinto, Lígia & Sousa, Sara & Valente, Marieta, 2017. "Accounting for local impacts of photovoltaic farms: The application of two stated preferences approaches to a case-study in Portugal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 191-198.
    16. Sánchez-Pantoja, Núria & Vidal, Rosario & Pastor, M. Carmen, 2018. "Aesthetic impact of solar energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 227-238.
    17. Kim, Byungil & Han, SangUk & Heo, Jae & Jung, Jaehoon, 2020. "Proof-of-concept of a two-stage approach for selecting suitable slopes on a highway network for solar photovoltaic systems: A case study in South Korea," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 366-377.
    18. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Wiersma, Bouke, 2020. "Understanding community acceptance of a potential offshore wind energy project in different locations: An island-based analysis of ‘place-technology fit’," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    19. 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.
    20. Hyland, Marie & Bertsch, Valentin, 2018. "The Role of Community Involvement Mechanisms in Reducing Resistance to Energy Infrastructure Development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 447-474.

    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:122:y:2018:i:c:p:429-437. 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.