IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/enejou/v42y2021i4p47-90.html

Drivers of People’s Preferences for Spatial Proximity to Energy Infrastructure Technologies: A Cross-country Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jason Harold
  • Valentin Bertsch
  • Thomas Lawrence
  • Magie Hall

Abstract

Many countries plan to decarbonise their energy systems by increasing energy efficiency and expanding the use of renewable energy sources (RES). Such actions require significant investments in new energy infrastructures. While people are generally accepting of these infrastructures, opposition sometimes arises when these developments are sited at close proximity to people’s residences. Therefore, it is important to understand what actually drives people’s preferences for spatial proximity to different energy infrastructure technologies. This study examines the factors influencing people’s proximity preferences to a range of different energy technologies using a cross-country econometric analysis of the stated preference data from an unprecedented survey conducted on nationally representative samples of the population in Ireland, the U.S. and Germany. The survey involved more than 4,500 participants in total. This paper presents the data and selected results from a generalised ordered logit model for each energy technology surveyed.These are; wind turbines, solar power technology, biomass power plant, coal-fired power plant and natural gas power plant. The results show that, in general,German and Irish citizens are willing to accept energy infrastructures at smaller distances to their homes than their U.S. counterparts. Moreover, attitudinal factors are found to shape people’s preferences more consistently than any of the socio-demographic characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason Harold & Valentin Bertsch & Thomas Lawrence & Magie Hall, 2021. "Drivers of People’s Preferences for Spatial Proximity to Energy Infrastructure Technologies: A Cross-country Analysis," The Energy Journal, , vol. 42(4), pages 47-90, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:enejou:v:42:y:2021:i:4:p:47-90
    DOI: 10.5547/01956574.42.4.jhar
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5547/01956574.42.4.jhar
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5547/01956574.42.4.jhar?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. Sunak, Yasin & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "The impact of wind farm visibility on property values: A spatial difference-in-differences analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 79-91.
    2. 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.
    3. Groothuis, Peter A. & Groothuis, Jana D. & Whitehead, John C., 2008. "Green vs. green: Measuring the compensation required to site electrical generation windmills in a viewshed," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1545-1550, April.
    4. Wolsink, Maarten, 2000. "Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 49-64.
    5. J. Scott Long & Jeremy Freese, 2006. "Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables using Stata, 2nd Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LLC, edition 2, number long2, March.
    6. Liebe, Ulf & Bartczak, Anna & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "A turbine is not only a turbine: The role of social context and fairness characteristics for the local acceptance of wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 300-308.
    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. Greaker, Mads & Hagem, Cathrine & Skulstad, Andreas, 2024. "Offsetting schemes and ecological taxes for wind power production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    2. Longoria, Genaro & Lynch, Muireann & Farrell, Niall & Curtis, John, 2024. "The impact of extended decision times in planning and regulatory processes for energy infrastructure," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    3. Vivien Fisch-Romito & Marc Jaxa-Rozen & Xin Wen & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2025. "Multi-country evidence on societal factors to include in energy transition modelling," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 10(4), pages 460-469, April.

    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. Harold, Jason & Bertsch, Valentin & Lawrence, Thomas & Hall, Magie, 2018. "Drivers of people's preferences for spatial proximity to energy infrastructure technologies: a cross-country analysis," Papers WP583, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    2. Bishop, Ian D. & Stock, Christian, 2010. "Using collaborative virtual environments to plan wind energy installations," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 2348-2355.
    3. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    4. Zaunbrecher, Barbara S. & Linzenich, Anika & Ziefle, Martina, 2017. "A mast is a mast is a mast…? Comparison of preferences for location-scenarios of electricity pylons and wind power plants using conjoint analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 429-439.
    5. Maria De Salvo & Sandra Notaro & Giuseppe Cucuzza & Laura Giuffrida & Giovanni Signorello, 2021. "Protecting the Local Landscape or Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions? A Study on Social Acceptance and Preferences towards the Installation of a Wind Farm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-19, November.
    6. Mattmann, Matteo & Logar, Ivana & Brouwer, Roy, 2016. "Wind power externalities: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 23-36.
    7. 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.
    8. John C. Pierce & Rachel M. Krause & Sarah L. Hofmeyer & Bonnie J. Johnson, 2021. "Explanations for Wind Turbine Installations: Local and Global Environmental Concerns in the Central Corridor of the United States?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-11, September.
    9. 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.
    10. Joly, Machteld & De Jaeger, Simon, 2021. "Not in my backyard: A hedonic approach to the construction timeline of wind turbines in Flanders, Belgium," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    11. Toonen, Hilde M. & Lindeboom, Han J., 2015. "Dark green electricity comes from the sea: Capitalizing on ecological merits of offshore wind power?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1023-1033.
    12. Nelson, Hal T. & Wikstrom, Kris & Hass, Samantha & Sarle, Kirsten, 2021. "Half-length and the FACT framework: Distance-decay and citizen opposition to energy facilities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    13. Jones, Christopher R. & Richard Eiser, J., 2010. "Understanding 'local' opposition to wind development in the UK: How big is a backyard?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 3106-3117, June.
    14. Petrova, Maria A., 2016. "From NIMBY to acceptance: Toward a novel framework — VESPA — For organizing and interpreting community concerns," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1280-1294.
    15. 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.
    16. Luigi Maffei & Massimiliano Masullo & Maria Di Gabriele & Nefta-Eleftheria P. Votsi & John D. Pantis & Vincenzo Paolo Senese, 2015. "Auditory Recognition of Familiar and Unfamiliar Subjects with Wind Turbine Noise," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, April.
    17. Choi, Jihye & Kim, Justine Jihyun & Lee, Jongsu, 2024. "Public willingness to pay for mitigating local conflicts over the construction of renewable energy facilities: A contingent valuation study in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    18. Slattery, Michael C. & Johnson, Becky L. & Swofford, Jeffrey A. & Pasqualetti, Martin J., 2012. "The predominance of economic development in the support for large-scale wind farms in the U.S. Great Plains," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 3690-3701.
    19. Alphan, H., 2021. "Modelling potential visibility of wind turbines: A geospatial approach for planning and impact mitigation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    20. Zander, Kerstin K. & Mathur, Deepika & Mathew, Supriya & Garnett, Stephen T., 2024. "Public views about the world's largest proposed solar farm in remote Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).

    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:sae:enejou:v:42:y:2021:i:4:p:47-90. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.