IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i18p9672-d635180.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Acceptance of Gas, Wind, and Solar Energies in the Canary Islands

Author

Listed:
  • Rosario J. Marrero

    (Department of Clinical Psychology, Psychobiology and Methodology, Universidad de La Laguna, 38205 Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain)

  • Juan Andrés Hernández-Cabrera

    (Department of Clinical Psychology, Psychobiology and Methodology, Universidad de La Laguna, 38205 Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain)

  • Ascensión Fumero

    (Department of Clinical Psychology, Psychobiology and Methodology, Universidad de La Laguna, 38205 Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain)

  • Bernardo Hernández

    (Department of Cognitive, Social and Organizational Psychology, Universidad de La Laguna, 38205 Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain)

Abstract

Background: This study tested a theoretical model including key psychosocial factors that could be involved in the acceptance of different energy sources (gas, wind, and solar); Methods: Participants were 550 adult residents of the Canary Islands. Variables assessed were information and utility (normative motives), perceived risk and perceived benefits (gain motives), and negative and positive emotions (hedonic motives), with acceptance of each of the three energy sources as outcome variables; Results: It was found that renewable energies (wind and solar) had a higher degree of acceptance than non-renewable energy (gas). The proposed model satisfactorily explained the social acceptance of the three energy sources, although the psychosocial factors involved differed by energy source. The gain motives, mainly perceived benefits, were associated to a greater extent with gas energy, whereas normative motives, such as utility, and hedonic motives, such as positive emotions, had greater weight for renewables. Gender differences in gas energy were found. Information about renewable energy increased positive emotions and acceptance, whereas information about fossil fuel-based energy generated more negative emotions and perceived risk, decreasing acceptance; Conclusions: Utility, perceived benefits and positive emotions were involved on the acceptance of both renewables and non-renewables. The theoretical model tested seems to be useful for understanding the psychosocial functioning of the acceptance of the various energy sources as an essential aspect for the transition of non-renewable to renewable energies.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosario J. Marrero & Juan Andrés Hernández-Cabrera & Ascensión Fumero & Bernardo Hernández, 2021. "Social Acceptance of Gas, Wind, and Solar Energies in the Canary Islands," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-15, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:18:p:9672-:d:635180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/18/9672/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/18/9672/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Enevoldsen, Peter & Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2016. "Examining the social acceptance of wind energy: Practical guidelines for onshore wind project development in France," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 178-184.
    2. Cuesta, M.A. & Castillo-Calzadilla, T. & Borges, C.E., 2020. "A critical analysis on hybrid renewable energy modeling tools: An emerging opportunity to include social indicators to optimise systems in small communities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    3. Merethe Dotterud Leiren & Stine Aakre & Kristin Linnerud & Tom Erik Julsrud & Maria-Rosaria Di Nucci & Michael Krug, 2020. "Community Acceptance of Wind Energy Developments: Experience from Wind Energy Scarce Regions in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-22, February.
    4. Judith I. M. de Groot & Elisa Schweiger & Iljana Schubert, 2020. "Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies: An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1226-1243, June.
    5. Kardooni, Roozbeh & Yusoff, Sumiani Binti & Kari, Fatimah Binti, 2016. "Renewable energy technology acceptance in Peninsular Malaysia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 1-10.
    6. Lígia M. Costa Pinto & Sara Sousa & Marieta Valente, 2021. "Explaining the Social Acceptance of Renewables through Location-Related Factors: An Application to the Portuguese Case," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-13, January.
    7. Sharpton, Tara & Lawrence, Thomas & Hall, Margeret, 2020. "Drivers and barriers to public acceptance of future energy sources and grid expansion in the United States," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    8. Jeuland, Marc & Fetter, T. Robert & Li, Yating & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Usmani, Faraz & Bluffstone, Randall A. & Chávez, Carlos & Girardeau, Hannah & Hassen, Sied & Jagger, Pamela & Jaime, Mónica , 2021. "Is energy the golden thread? A systematic review of the impacts of modern and traditional energy use in low- and middle-income countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    9. Kraeusel, Jonas & Möst, Dominik, 2012. "Carbon Capture and Storage on its way to large-scale deployment: Social acceptance and willingness to pay in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 642-651.
    10. Firestone, Jeremy & Kempton, Willett, 2007. "Public opinion about large offshore wind power: Underlying factors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1584-1598, March.
    11. Cicia, Gianni & Cembalo, Luigi & Del Giudice, Teresa & Palladino, Andrea, 2012. "Fossil energy versus nuclear, wind, solar and agricultural biomass: Insights from an Italian national survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 59-66.
    12. Sütterlin, Bernadette & Siegrist, Michael, 2017. "Public acceptance of renewable energy technologies from an abstract versus concrete perspective and the positive imagery of solar power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 356-366.
    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. Rodríguez-Segura, Francisco Javier & Osorio-Aravena, Juan Carlos & Frolova, Marina & Terrados-Cepeda, Julio & Muñoz-Cerón, Emilio, 2023. "Social acceptance of renewable energy development in southern Spain: Exploring tendencies, locations, criteria and situations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    2. Edyta Nartowska & Marta Styś-Maniara & Tomasz Kozłowski, 2023. "The Potential Environmental and Social Influence of the Inorganic Salt Hydrates Used as a Phase Change Material for Thermal Energy Storage in Solar Installations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-21, January.

    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. Rodríguez-Segura, Francisco Javier & Osorio-Aravena, Juan Carlos & Frolova, Marina & Terrados-Cepeda, Julio & Muñoz-Cerón, Emilio, 2023. "Social acceptance of renewable energy development in southern Spain: Exploring tendencies, locations, criteria and situations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    2. Sigurd Hilmo Lundheim & Giuseppe Pellegrini-Masini & Christian A. Klöckner & Stefan Geiss, 2022. "Developing a Theoretical Framework to Explain the Social Acceptability of Wind Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-24, July.
    3. Bhowmik, Chiranjib & Bhowmik, Sumit & Ray, Amitava, 2018. "Social acceptance of green energy determinants using principal component analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1030-1046.
    4. Anabela Botelho & Lina Lourenço-Gomes & Lígia M. Costa Pinto & Sara Sousa & Marieta Valente, 2018. "Discrete-choice experiments valuing local environmental impacts of renewables: two approaches to a case study in Portugal," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 145-162, December.
    5. Hübner, Gundula & Leschinger, Valentin & Müller, Florian J.Y. & Pohl, Johannes, 2023. "Broadening the social acceptance of wind energy – An Integrated Acceptance Model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(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. Phimsupha Kokchang & Yuan Zhao & Suthirat Kittipongvises, 2023. "Understanding Citizens’ Perceptions and Attitudes toward Energy Restructuring under China’s NDC for Quality of Life: A Case of Linfen City," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 13(5), pages 566-576, September.
    8. Contu, Davide & Strazzera, Elisabetta, 2022. "Testing for saliency-led choice behavior in discrete choice modeling: An application in the context of preferences towards nuclear energy in Italy," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    9. Muhammad Aslam Mohd Safari & Nurulkamal Masseran & Alias Jedi & Sohif Mat & Kamaruzzaman Sopian & Azman Bin Abdul Rahim & Azami Zaharim, 2020. "Rural Public Acceptance of Wind and Solar Energy: A Case Study from Mersing, Malaysia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-24, July.
    10. Zobeidi, Tahereh & Komendantova, Nadejda & Yazdanpanah, Masoud, 2022. "Social media as a driver of the use of renewable energy: The perceptions of instagram users in Iran," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    11. Vuichard, Pascal & Stauch, Alexander & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2021. "Keep it local and low-key: Social acceptance of alpine solar power projects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    12. Rahman, Arief & Richards, Russell & Dargusch, Paul & Wadley, David, 2023. "Pathways to reduce Indonesia’s dependence on oil and achieve longer-term decarbonization," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 1305-1323.
    13. Alló, Maria & Loureiro, Maria L., 2014. "The role of social norms on preferences towards climate change policies: A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 563-574.
    14. Mohd Chachuli, Fairuz Suzana & Mat, Sohif & Ludin, Norasikin Ahmad & Sopian, Kamaruzzaman, 2021. "Performance evaluation of renewable energy R&D activities in Malaysia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 544-560.
    15. Anna Bartczak & Wiktor Budziński & Bernadeta Gołębiowska, 2018. "Impact of beliefs about negative effects of wind turbines on preference heterogeneity regarding renewable energy development in Poland," Working Papers 2018-19, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    16. Elena De Luca & Cecilia Nardi & Laura Gaetana Giuffrida & Michael Krug & Maria Rosaria Di Nucci, 2020. "Explaining Factors Leading to Community Acceptance of Wind Energy. Results of an Expert Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-23, April.
    17. Gegg, Per & Wells, Victoria, 2019. "The development of seaweed-derived fuels in the UK: An analysis of stakeholder issues and public perceptions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    18. Jinjin Guan & Harald Zepp, 2020. "Factors Affecting the Community Acceptance of Onshore Wind Farms: A Case Study of the Zhongying Wind Farm in Eastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    19. Landeta-Manzano, Beñat & Arana-Landín, Germán & Calvo, Pilar M. & Heras-Saizarbitoria, Iñaki, 2018. "Wind energy and local communities: A manufacturer’s efforts to gain acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 314-324.
    20. Abdeshahian, Peyman & Lim, Jeng Shiun & Ho, Wai Shin & Hashim, Haslenda & Lee, Chew Tin, 2016. "Potential of biogas production from farm animal waste in Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 714-723.

    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:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:18:p:9672-:d:635180. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.