IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pclm00/0000768.html

Participatory processes and local project leadership can decrease perceived trade-offs of renewable energy projects

Author

Listed:
  • Javier Feller Valero
  • Simon Montfort
  • Claudia R Binder

Abstract

Achieving net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions requires the rapid deployment of renewable energy. Yet, renewable energy projects often generate trade-offs or synergies with biodiversity conservation, landscape protection, and local economic interests. While prior research has emphasized objective trade-offs, political debates are often shaped by perceived trade-offs, including second-order perceptions, meaning what stakeholders believe others perceive to be trade-offs and synergies. Despite their importance for political dynamics, these perceptions remain insufficiently analysed. Here, we address this research gap and examine how different forms of participation, local project leadership, and trust influence stakeholder perceptions of trade-offs and synergies in alpine photovoltaic (PV) projects. Drawing on a mixed-methods analysis of two alpine PV projects in Switzerland in Savognin (Sursés) and Sedrun (Tujetsch), we conceptualize trade-offs and synergies and the measurement of second-order beliefs using a scoping review, and track perception shifts using social network analysis based on 11 semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders. As such, we offer a novel conceptual and methodological tool for detecting shifts in support or opposition over time. This can be useful in many other stakeholder analyses and also for practitioners involved in the planning of renewable energy projects. Substantively, we show that informal, timely, and responsive participatory processes, coupled with trusted local project leadership, reduce perceived trade-offs and increase project acceptance. Overall, our analysis provides a set of tools for mapping stakeholder coalition dynamics based on second-order perceptions and provides important insights into how to adequately balance trade-offs and synergies when harmonizing national-level renewable targets with local needs.

Suggested Citation

  • Javier Feller Valero & Simon Montfort & Claudia R Binder, 2025. "Participatory processes and local project leadership can decrease perceived trade-offs of renewable energy projects," PLOS Climate, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(12), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pclm00:0000768
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pclm.0000768
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/climate/article?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0000768
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/climate/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0000768&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000768?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    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. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "Fair play in energy policy decisions: Procedural fairness, outcome fairness and acceptance of the decision to rebuild nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 292-300.
    2. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    3. Songsore, Emmanuel & Buzzelli, Michael, 2014. "Social responses to wind energy development in Ontario: The influence of health risk perceptions and associated concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 285-296.
    4. Bauwens, Thomas, 2019. "Analyzing the determinants of the size of investments by community renewable energy members: Findings and policy implications from Flanders," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 841-852.
    5. Evangelos Tsiaras & Stergios Tampekis & Costas Gavrilakis, 2025. "Public Perceptions and Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Projects in Epirus, Greece: The Role of Education, Demographics and Visual Exposure," World, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16, August.
    6. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Coffey, Stephanie, 2016. "Building a sustainable energy future, one community at a time," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 867-880.
    7. 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).
    8. József Kádár & Martina Pilloni & Tareq Abu Hamed, 2023. "A Survey of Renewable Energy, Climate Change, and Policy Awareness in Israel: The Long Path for Citizen Participation in the National Renewable Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-16, February.
    9. Russell, Aaron & Bingaman, Samantha & Garcia, Hannah-Marie, 2021. "Threading a moving needle: The spatial dimensions characterizing US offshore wind policy drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    10. Zilliox, Skylar & Smith, Jessica M., 2017. "Memorandums of understanding and public trust in local government for Colorado's unconventional energy industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 72-81.
    11. Sebastian Schär & Jutta Geldermann, 2021. "Adopting Multiactor Multicriteria Analysis for the Evaluation of Energy Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    12. García, Victoria Gómez & Bartolomé, Mercedes Montero, 2010. "Rural electrification systems based on renewable energy: The social dimensions of an innovative technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 303-311.
    13. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    14. Copena, Damián & Simón, Xavier, 2018. "Wind farms and payments to landowners: Opportunities for rural development for the case of Galicia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 38-47.
    15. Mouter, Niek & de Geest, Auke & Doorn, Neelke, 2018. "A values-based approach to energy controversies: Value-sensitive design applied to the Groningen gas controversy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 639-648.
    16. Mumtaz Derya Tarhan, 2015. "Renewable Energy Cooperatives: A Review of Demonstrated Impacts and Limitations," Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises, vol. 4(1), pages 104-120, August.
    17. Valentine, Scott Victor, 2010. "A STEP toward understanding wind power development policy barriers in advanced economies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 2796-2807, December.
    18. Radtke, Jörg, 2025. "E-participation in energy transitions: What does it mean? Chances and challenges within Germany's Energiewende," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    19. Lukanov, Boris R. & Krieger, Elena M., 2019. "Distributed solar and environmental justice: Exploring the demographic and socio-economic trends of residential PV adoption in California," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    20. Shan Zhou & Douglas S. Noonan, 2019. "Justice Implications of Clean Energy Policies and Programs in the United States: A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, February.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pclm00:0000768. 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: climate (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/climate .

    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.