IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i7p2526-d158747.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emotional Responses to Energy Projects: Insights for Responsible Decision Making in a Sustainable Energy Transition

Author

Listed:
  • Goda Perlaviciute

    (Environmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen 9712 TS, The Netherlands)

  • Linda Steg

    (Environmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen 9712 TS, The Netherlands)

  • Nadja Contzen

    (Environmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen 9712 TS, The Netherlands)

  • Sabine Roeser

    (Ethics and Philosophy of Technology Section, Department of Values, Technology and Innovation, Faculty of TPM, Delft University of Technology, Delft 2628 BX, The Netherlands)

  • Nicole Huijts

    (Human-Technology Interaction Group, Department of Industrial Engineering & Innovation Sciences, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven 5600 MB, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Energy projects aimed at a sustainable energy transition can trigger strong negative emotions and resistance from the public. While practitioners are increasingly realising that they cannot simply ignore public emotions, they struggle with how to deal with people’s emotional responses and how to secure public acceptability of sustainable energy projects. We argue that a first critical step in order to adequately address emotional responses to energy projects is to understand where these emotional responses come from. We introduce a value-based approach, which entails that different characteristics of energy projects may violate or support people’s core values, which evokes emotions in people. We present a theoretical framework of the relationship between people’s values, the (perceived) implications of energy projects for these values, and people’s emotional responses to energy projects. We give examples from case studies in the literature to substantiate our reasoning, and we offer directions for future research. Our novel approach provides critical insights for project developers, decision makers, engineers, and scientists who aim to better understand the human dimension of a sustainable energy transition.

Suggested Citation

  • Goda Perlaviciute & Linda Steg & Nadja Contzen & Sabine Roeser & Nicole Huijts, 2018. "Emotional Responses to Energy Projects: Insights for Responsible Decision Making in a Sustainable Energy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-12, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2526-:d:158747
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2526/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2526/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pesch, Udo & Correljé, Aad & Cuppen, Eefje & Taebi, Behnam, 2017. "Energy justice and controversies: Formal and informal assessment in energy projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 825-834.
    2. Perlaviciute, G. & Steg, L., 2015. "The influence of values on evaluations of energy alternatives," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 259-267.
    3. Bidwell, David, 2013. "The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes towards commercial wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 189-199.
    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.
    5. Colvin, R.M. & Witt, G.Bradd & Lacey, Justine, 2016. "How wind became a four-letter word: Lessons for community engagement from a wind energy conflict in King Island, Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 483-494.
    6. Judith I. M. de Groot & Linda Steg & Wouter Poortinga, 2013. "Values, Perceived Risks and Benefits, and Acceptability of Nuclear Energy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 307-317, February.
    7. Korcaj, Liridon & Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Spada, Hans, 2015. "Intentions to adopt photovoltaic systems depend on homeowners' expected personal gains and behavior of peers," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 407-415.
    8. Judith I. M. De Groot & Linda Steg, 2010. "Morality and Nuclear Energy: Perceptions of Risks and Benefits, Personal Norms, and Willingness to Take Action Related to Nuclear Energy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(9), pages 1363-1373, September.
    9. Bouzarovski, Stefan & Simcock, Neil, 2017. "Spatializing energy justice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 640-648.
    10. Simone Dohle & Carmen Keller & Michael Siegrist, 2010. "Examining the Relationship Between Affect and Implicit Associations: Implications for Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(7), pages 1116-1128, July.
    11. Perlaviciute, Goda & Steg, Linda, 2014. "Contextual and psychological factors shaping evaluations and acceptability of energy alternatives: Integrated review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 361-381.
    12. Balcombe, Paul & Rigby, Dan & Azapagic, Adisa, 2013. "Motivations and barriers associated with adopting microgeneration energy technologies in the UK," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 655-666.
    13. Truelove, Heather Barnes, 2012. "Energy source perceptions and policy support: Image associations, emotional evaluations, and cognitive beliefs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 478-489.
    14. Slovic, Paul & Finucane, Melissa L. & Peters, Ellen & MacGregor, Donald G., 2007. "The affect heuristic," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1333-1352, March.
    15. Carmen Keller & Vivianne Visschers & Michael Siegrist, 2012. "Affective Imagery and Acceptance of Replacing Nuclear Power Plants," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(3), pages 464-477, March.
    16. Christina Demski & Alexa Spence & Nick Pidgeon, 2017. "Effects of exemplar scenarios on public preferences for energy futures using the my2050 scenario-building tool," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(4), pages 1-7, April.
    17. 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.
    18. Matthew Cotton & Patrick Devine-Wright, 2013. "Putting pylons into place: a UK case study of public perspectives on the impacts of high voltage overhead transmission lines," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(8), pages 1225-1245, October.
    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. Spampatti, Tobia & Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Brosch, Tobias, 2022. "Short and long-term dominance of negative information in shaping public energy perceptions: The case of shallow geothermal systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    2. Thomas Hoppe & Gerdien De Vries, 2018. "Social Innovation and the Energy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Cousse, Julia & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Hahnel, Ulf J.J., 2021. "Tell me how you feel about geothermal energy: Affect as a revealing factor of the role of seismic risk on public acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    5. Szabolcs Duleba & Sarbast Moslem, 2018. "Sustainable Urban Transport Development with Stakeholder Participation, an AHP-Kendall Model: A Case Study for Mersin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, October.
    6. Bidwell, David, 2023. "Tourists are people too: Nonresidents’ values, beliefs, and acceptance of a nearshore wind farm," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    7. Adrian Neacșa & Mirela Panait & Jianu Daniel Mureșan & Marian Catalin Voica & Otilia Manta, 2022. "The Energy Transition between Desideratum and Challenge: Are Cogeneration and Trigeneration the Best Solution?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-22, March.
    8. Guanghui Hou & Tong Chen & Ke Ma & Zhiming Liao & Hongmei Xia & Tianzeng Yao, 2019. "Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-22, March.
    9. Justyna Chodkowska-Miszczuk & Tomasz Starczewski & Krzysztof Rogatka & Aleksandra Lewandowska & Stanislav Martinat, 2023. "From adoration to damnation? Exploring role of media in shaping low-carbon economy in times of the COVID-19 pandemic," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 9543-9565, September.
    10. Karakislak, Irmak & Schneider, Nina, 2023. "The mayor said so? The impact of local political figures and social norms on local responses to wind energy projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    11. Huijts, Nicole M.A. & Contzen, Nadja & Roeser, Sabine, 2022. "Unequal means more unfair means more negative emotions? Ethical concerns and emotions about an unequal distribution of negative outcomes of a local energy project," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    12. Georg M. Eichler & Erich J. Schwarz, 2019. "What Sustainable Development Goals Do Social Innovations Address? A Systematic Review and Content Analysis of Social Innovation Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Buah, Eric & Linnanen, Lassi & Wu, Huapeng, 2020. "Emotional responses to energy projects: A new method for modeling and prediction beyond self-reported emotion measure," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    14. Eric Buah & Lassi Linnanen & Huapeng Wu & Martin A. Kesse, 2020. "Can Artificial Intelligence Assist Project Developers in Long-Term Management of Energy Projects? The Case of CO 2 Capture and Storage," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, November.
    15. Tanja Herdt & Víctor Muñoz Sanz, 2023. "Experts as Game Changers? A Critical Discourse Analysis of Climate Measures in the Metropolitan Region of Amsterdam," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 307-321.

    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. Jobin, Marilou & Siegrist, Michael, 2018. "We choose what we like – Affect as a driver of electricity portfolio choice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 736-747.
    2. 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).
    3. Plum, Christiane & Olschewski, Roland & Jobin, Marilou & van Vliet, Oscar, 2019. "Public preferences for the Swiss electricity system after the nuclear phase-out: A choice experiment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 181-196.
    4. Seoyong Kim & Jae Eun Lee & Donggeun Kim, 2019. "Searching for the Next New Energy in Energy Transition: Comparing the Impacts of Economic Incentives on Local Acceptance of Fossil Fuels, Renewable, and Nuclear Energies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-32, April.
    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. Inna Čábelková & Wadim Strielkowski & Irina Firsova & Marina Korovushkina, 2020. "Public Acceptance of Renewable Energy Sources: a Case Study from the Czech Republic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, April.
    7. Lombard, Andrea & Ferreira, Sanette, 2014. "Residents' attitudes to proposed wind farms in the West Coast region of South Africa: A social perspective from the South," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 390-399.
    8. Spampatti, Tobia & Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Brosch, Tobias, 2022. "Short and long-term dominance of negative information in shaping public energy perceptions: The case of shallow geothermal systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    9. Cousse, Julia & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Hahnel, Ulf J.J., 2021. "Tell me how you feel about geothermal energy: Affect as a revealing factor of the role of seismic risk on public acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    10. Hugo Lucas & Ruth Carbajo & Tomoo Machiba & Evgeny Zhukov & Luisa F. Cabeza, 2021. "Improving Public Attitude towards Renewable Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-16, July.
    11. Andrew B. Moynihan & Geertje Schuitema, 2020. "Values Influence Public Acceptability of Geoengineering Technologies Via Self-Identities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-33, June.
    12. Michael Siegrist & Joseph Árvai, 2020. "Risk Perception: Reflections on 40 Years of Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2191-2206, November.
    13. Astrid Buchmayr & Luc Van Ootegem & Jo Dewulf & Elsy Verhofstadt, 2021. "Understanding Attitudes towards Renewable Energy Technologies and the Effect of Local Experiences," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    14. Bidwell, David, 2023. "Tourists are people too: Nonresidents’ values, beliefs, and acceptance of a nearshore wind farm," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    15. Phillips, Keri L. & Hine, Donald W. & Phillips, Wendy J., 2019. "How projected electricity price and personal values influence support for a 50% renewable energy target in Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 853-860.
    16. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Ziefle, M., 2021. "What drives public acceptance of sustainable CO2-derived building materials? A conjoint-analysis of eco-benefits vs. health concerns," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    17. Lienert, Pascal & Suetterlin, Bernadette & Siegrist, Michael, 2015. "Public acceptance of the expansion and modification of high-voltage power lines in the context of the energy transition," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 573-583.
    18. 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.
    19. Wang, Jing & Li, Yazhou & Wu, Jianlin & Gu, Jibao & Xu, Shuo, 2020. "Environmental beliefs and public acceptance of nuclear energy in China: A moderated mediation analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    20. 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.

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2526-:d:158747. 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.