IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/renene/v249y2025ics0960148125008547.html

The present and future of offshore wind in Spain: An analysis of discourses

Author

Listed:
  • Cerdá, Emilio
  • López-Otero, Xiral
  • Quiroga, Sonia
  • Soliño, Mario

Abstract

Offshore wind energy has major potential in Spain, which is seeking to install 3000 MW by 2030. This technology is subject to considerable social debate, yet to date there has been no analysis that allows having systematized information about the opinions, values and subjective beliefs related to offshore wind energy. We present a novel study based on the Q-method, which allows identifying discourses about offshore wind energy according to the opinions of several stakeholders. Based on the opinions of 207 individuals, four discourses are identified. These discourses differ according to the level of expertise of the participants. The majority discourse highlights that the development of offshore wind in Spain will have major economic impacts and that its environmental impacts are not very relevant. The motivations behind this discourse are far removed from the arguments related to the fight against climate change included in European policies. The second discourse by order of importance argues that there are other alternatives to offshore wind and that affected stakeholders need to be involved in the decision-making, and it expresses concern about the negative impacts of offshore wind. This becomes the main discourse if we consider only individuals who are non-experts on energy matters.

Suggested Citation

  • Cerdá, Emilio & López-Otero, Xiral & Quiroga, Sonia & Soliño, Mario, 2025. "The present and future of offshore wind in Spain: An analysis of discourses," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:renene:v:249:y:2025:i:c:s0960148125008547
    DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2025.123192
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148125008547
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.renene.2025.123192?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Cláudio Albuquerque Frate & Christian Brannstrom, 2019. "How Do Stakeholders Perceive Barriers to Large-Scale Wind Power Diffusion? A Q-Method Case Study from Ceará State, Brazil," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, May.
    3. Gkeka-Serpetsidaki, Pandora & Tsoutsos, Theocharis, 2022. "A methodological framework for optimal siting of offshore wind farms: A case study on the island of Crete," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PD).
    4. Nytte, Sharon & Navrud, Ståle & Alfnes, Frode, 2024. "Social acceptance of new floating offshore wind power: Do attitudes towards existing offshore industries matter?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    5. Karlõševa, Aljona & Nõmmann, Sulev & Nõmmann, Tea & Urbel-Piirsalu, Evelin & Budziński, Wiktor & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick, 2016. "Marine trade-offs: Comparing the benefits of off-shore wind farms and marine protected areas," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 127-134.
    6. 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.
    7. Cerdá, Emilio & López-Otero, Xiral & Quiroga, Sonia & Soliño, Mario, 2024. "Willingness to pay for renewables: Insights from a meta-analysis of choice experiments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    8. Frate, Claudio Albuquerque & Brannstrom, Christian, 2017. "Stakeholder subjectivities regarding barriers and drivers to the introduction of utility-scale solar photovoltaic power in Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 346-352.
    9. Georgia Skiniti & Tryfon Daras & Theocharis Tsoutsos, 2022. "Analysis of the Community Acceptance Factors for Potential Wind Energy Projects in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-35, November.
    10. 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.
    11. Noori Akhtar-Danesh, 2018. "qfactor: A command for Q-methodology analysis," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 18(2), pages 432-446, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Bergmann, Ariel & Hanley, Nick & Wright, Robert, 2006. "Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1004-1014, June.
    14. Frate, Cláudio Albuquerque & Brannstrom, Christian & de Morais, Marcus Vinícius Girão & Caldeira-Pires, Armando de Azevedo, 2019. "Procedural and distributive justice inform subjectivity regarding wind power: A case from Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 185-195.
    15. Moon, Sungho & Kim, Youngwoo & Kim, Minsang & Lee, Jongsu, 2023. "Policy designs to increase public and local acceptance for energy transition in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    16. Russell, Aaron & Firestone, Jeremy, 2022. "More than a feeling: Analyzing community cognitive and affective perceptions of the Block Island offshore wind project," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 214-224.
    17. Joalland, Olivier & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre, 2023. "Developing large-scale offshore wind power programs: A choice experiment analysis in France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    18. 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.
    19. Lucas Seghezzo & Gretchen Sneegas & Wendy Jepson & Christian Brannstrom & Sydney Beckner & Kyungsun Lee, 2024. "The use and potential of Q method in environmental planning and management," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 67(12), pages 2721-2747, October.
    20. Kim, Hyo-Jin & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2019. "Social acceptance of offshore wind energy development in South Korea: Results from a choice experiment survey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-1.
    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.
    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. 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).
    2. Cerdá, Emilio & López-Otero, Xiral & Quiroga, Sonia & Soliño, Mario, 2024. "Willingness to pay for renewables: Insights from a meta-analysis of choice experiments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    3. 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).
    4. León-Vielma, J.E. & Ramos-Real, F.J. & Hernández Hernández, J.F. & Rodríguez-Brito, María Gracia, 2023. "An integrative strategy for Venezuela's electricity sector (VES), from an analysis of stakeholder perspectives," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. Andrés Lorente de las Casas & Ivelina Mirkova & Francisco J. Ramos-Real, 2021. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions of the Possible Energy Sustainability Solutions in the Hotels of the Canary Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-26, June.
    6. 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.
    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. Héctor M. Núñez & Adán L. Martínez-Cruz & Jaime Sainz-Santamaría, 2025. "Preferences for Renewable Energies and Green Jobs in Mexico City," Working Papers 2025-05, Banco de México.
    9. Frate, Cláudio Albuquerque & Barroso, Giovanni Cordeiro & de Carvalho, Paulo Cesar Marques, 2025. "Exploring perspectives on photovoltaic prosumerism in advancing a fair energy transition in Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    10. Walter, Kara A. & Thacher, Jennifer & Chermak, Janie M., 2023. "Examining willingness to pay for energy futures in a fossil and renewable energy-rich locale," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    11. Faulques, Martin & Bonnet, Jean & Bourdin, Sébastien & Juge, Marine & Pigeon, Jonas & Richard, Charlotte, 2022. "Generational effect and territorial distributive justice, the two main drivers for willingness to pay for renewable energies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. García, Jorge H. & Cherry, Todd L. & Kallbekken, Steffen & Torvanger, Asbjørn, 2016. "Willingness to accept local wind energy development: Does the compensation mechanism matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 165-173.
    13. Aurore, Fransolet & Marek, Hudon & Adriano, La Gioia & Meyer, Sandrine, 2026. "Mapping visions of a just transition: A Q survey of Belgian stakeholders," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    14. Bollino, Carlo Andrea & D’Errico, Maria Chiara & Martini, Barbara, 2026. "Willingness to pay for green energy: Evidence from Italian households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 209(PA).
    15. Christian A. Oberst & Reinhard Madlener, 2015. "Prosumer Preferences Regarding the Adoption of Micro†Generation Technologies: Empirical Evidence for German Homeowners," Working Papers 2015.07, International Network for Economic Research - INFER.
    16. Nobuyuki Ito & Kenji Takeuchi & Takahiro Tsuge & Atsuo Kishimoto, 2012. "The Motivation behind Behavioral Thresholds: A Latent Class Approach," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(3), pages 1831-1847.
    17. Cláudio Albuquerque Frate & Christian Brannstrom, 2019. "How Do Stakeholders Perceive Barriers to Large-Scale Wind Power Diffusion? A Q-Method Case Study from Ceará State, Brazil," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, May.
    18. Lim, Xin-Le & Lam, Wei-Haur, 2014. "Public Acceptance of Marine Renewable Energy in Malaysia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 16-26.
    19. Joalland, Olivier & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre, 2023. "Developing large-scale offshore wind power programs: A choice experiment analysis in France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:renene:v:249:y:2025:i:c:s0960148125008547. 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.journals.elsevier.com/renewable-energy .

    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.