IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v3y2010i1p1-22d6744.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Wind Power Installations on Coastal Tourism

Author

Listed:
  • Meredith Blaydes Lilley

    () (Center for Carbon-free Power Integration, College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, 19716, USA)

  • Jeremy Firestone

    () (Center for Carbon-free Power Integration, College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, 19716, USA)

  • Willett Kempton

    () (Center for Carbon-free Power Integration, College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, 19716, USA)

Abstract

We surveyed more than 1,000 randomly sampled, out-of-state tourists at Delaware, USA beaches in 2007. After providing respondents with wind turbine project photo-simulations at several distances, we inquired about the effect development would have on visitation. Approximately one-quarter stated that they would switch beaches if an offshore wind project was located 10 km from the coast, with avoidance diminishing with greater distance from shore. Stated avoidance is less than: avoidance with a fossil fuel power plant located the same distance inland; attraction to a beach with offshore wind turbines; and the percentage stating they would likely pay to take a boat tour.

Suggested Citation

  • Meredith Blaydes Lilley & Jeremy Firestone & Willett Kempton, 2010. "The Effect of Wind Power Installations on Coastal Tourism," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 3(1), pages 1-22, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:3:y:2010:i:1:p:1-22:d:6744
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/3/1/1/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/3/1/1/
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Strachan & David Lal, 2004. "Wind Energy Policy, Planning and Management Practice in the UK: Hot Air or a Gathering Storm?," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(5), pages 549-569.
    2. W. Douglass Shaw, 2002. "Testing the Validity of Contingent Behavior Trip Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(2), pages 401-414.
    3. Ladenburg, Jacob, 2010. "Attitudes towards offshore wind farms--The role of beach visits on attitude and demographic and attitude relations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1297-1304, March.
    4. Bishop, Ian D. & Miller, David R., 2007. "Visual assessment of off-shore wind turbines: The influence of distance, contrast, movement and social variables," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 814-831.
    5. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    6. Dalton, G.J. & Lockington, D.A. & Baldock, T.E., 2008. "A survey of tourist attitudes to renewable energy supply in Australian hotel accommodation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 2174-2185.
    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. Voltaire, Louinord & Koutchade, Obafèmi Philippe, 2020. "Public acceptance of and heterogeneity in behavioral beach trip responses to offshore wind farm development in Catalonia (Spain)," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    2. Parsons, George & Firestone, Jeremy & Yan, Lingxiao & Toussaint, Jenna, 2020. "The effect of offshore wind power projects on recreational beach use on the east coast of the United States: Evidence from contingent-behavior data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    3. Waldo, Åsa, 2012. "Offshore wind power in Sweden—A qualitative analysis of attitudes with particular focus on opponents," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 692-702.
    4. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    5. Westerberg, Vanja & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Lifran, Robert, 2013. "The case for offshore wind farms, artificial reefs and sustainable tourism in the French mediterranean," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 172-183.
    6. Carr-Harris, Andrew & Lang, Corey, 2019. "Sustainability and tourism: the effect of the United States’ first offshore wind farm on the vacation rental market," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 51-67.
    7. Teisl, Mario F. & Noblet, Caroline L. & Corey, Richard R. & Giudice, Nicholas A., 2018. "Seeing clearly in a virtual reality: Tourist reactions to an offshore wind project," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 601-611.
    8. Hall, Damon M. & Lazarus, Eli D., 2015. "Deep waters: Lessons from community meetings about offshore wind resource development in the U.S," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 9-17.
    9. Ladenburg, Jacob & Dahlgaard, Jens-Olav, 2012. "Attitudes, threshold levels and cumulative effects of the daily wind-turbine encounters," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 40-46.
    10. Ladenburg, Jacob & Möller, Bernd, 2011. "Attitude and acceptance of offshore wind farms—The influence of travel time and wind farm attributes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4223-4235.
    11. Asif Khan & Sughra Bibi & Ardito Lorenzo & Jiaying Lyu & Zaheer Udden Babar, 2020. "Tourism and Development in Developing Economies: A Policy Implication Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(4), pages 1-1, February.
    12. Broekel, Tom & Alfken, Christoph, 2015. "Gone with the wind? The impact of wind turbines on tourism demand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 506-519.
    13. Ladenburg, Jacob & Termansen, Mette & Hasler, Berit, 2013. "Assessing acceptability of two onshore wind power development schemes: A test of viewshed effects and the cumulative effects of wind turbines," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 45-54.
    14. Borch, Kristian, 2018. "Mapping value perspectives on wind power projects: The case of the danish test centre for large wind turbines," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 251-258.
    15. Edita Tverijonaite & Anna Dóra Sæþórsdóttir & Rannveig Ólafsdóttir & C. Michael Hall, 2019. "Renewable Energy in Wilderness Landscapes: Visitors’ Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(20), pages 1-23, October.

    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. Westerberg, Vanja & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Lifran, Robert, 2013. "The case for offshore wind farms, artificial reefs and sustainable tourism in the French mediterranean," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 172-183.
    2. Ladenburg, Jacob & Termansen, Mette & Hasler, Berit, 2013. "Assessing acceptability of two onshore wind power development schemes: A test of viewshed effects and the cumulative effects of wind turbines," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 45-54.
    3. D׳Souza, Clare & Yiridoe, Emmanuel K., 2014. "Social acceptance of wind energy development and planning in rural communities of Australia: A consumer analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 262-270.
    4. Ladenburg, Jacob, 2010. "Attitudes towards offshore wind farms--The role of beach visits on attitude and demographic and attitude relations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1297-1304, March.
    5. Ladenburg, Jacob & Dahlgaard, Jens-Olav, 2012. "Attitudes, threshold levels and cumulative effects of the daily wind-turbine encounters," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 40-46.
    6. Langer, Katharina & Decker, Thomas & Roosen, Jutta & Menrad, Klaus, 2016. "A qualitative analysis to understand the acceptance of wind energy in Bavaria," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 248-259.
    7. Waldo, Åsa, 2012. "Offshore wind power in Sweden—A qualitative analysis of attitudes with particular focus on opponents," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 692-702.
    8. John Whitehead & Daniel Phaneuf & Christopher Dumas & Jim Herstine & Jeffery Hill & Bob Buerger, 2010. "Convergent Validity of Revealed and Stated Recreation Behavior with Quality Change: A Comparison of Multiple and Single Site Demands," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 91-112, January.
    9. Ladenburg, Jacob & Lutzeyer, Sanja, 2012. "The economics of visual disamenity reductions of offshore wind farms—Review and suggestions from an emerging field," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(9), pages 6793-6802.
    10. Franziska Voelckner, 2006. "An empirical comparison of methods for measuring consumers’ willingness to pay," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 137-149, April.
    11. Ruud Hoevenagel, 1996. "The validity of the contingent valuation method: Perfect and regular embedding," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 57-78, January.
    12. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    13. Egan, Kevin & Herriges, Joseph, 2006. "Multivariate count data regression models with individual panel data from an on-site sample," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 567-581, September.
    14. Michael Ahlheim & Oliver Frör & Antonia Heinke & Alwin Keil & Nguyen Minh Duc & Pham Van Dinh & Camille Saint-Macary & Manfred Zeller, 2008. "Landslides in mountainous regions of Northern Vietnam: Causes, protection strategies and the assessment of economic losses," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 298/2008, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
    15. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Hirsh, Richard F., 2008. "Island wind-hydrogen energy: A significant potential US resource," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1928-1935.
    16. Dasgupta, Partha, 2000. "Valuation and Evaluation: Measuring the Quality of Life and Evaluating Public Policy," Discussion Papers dp-00-24, Resources For the Future.
    17. Schipmann, Christin & Qaim, Matin, 2011. "Supply chain differentiation, contract agriculture, and farmers’ marketing preferences: the case of sweet pepper in Thailand," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 108349, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    18. Lienhoop, Nele & Ansmann, Till, 2011. "Valuing water level changes in reservoirs using two stated preference approaches: An exploration of validity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1250-1258, May.
    19. Richard D. Smith, 2008. "Contingent valuation in health care: does it matter how the ‘good’ is described?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 607-617, May.
    20. Stina Hökby & Tore Söderqvist, 2003. "Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay for Environmental Services in Sweden," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(3), pages 361-383, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    wind power; offshore; tourism; beach; contingent behavior;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy
    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • Q41 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q43 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy and the Macroeconomy
    • Q47 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy Forecasting
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q49 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Other

    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:gam:jeners:v:3:y:2010:i:1:p:1-22:d:6744. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com/ .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.