Public acceptance of offshore wind power: does perceived fairness of process matter?
This paper analyses the findings of recent mail surveys of residents living near two proposed offshore wind power projects -- Cape Wind off Massachusetts and Bluewater Wind off Delaware. In 2009, 57% supported Cape Wind, while 80% supported Bluewater Wind. To measure the relationship between perceptions of public process and substantive support or opposition, we assessed opinions of procedural fairness, local community voice and trust in developers. A plurality ofresidents in both cases is relatively satisfied with the process, while statistical modelling suggests that satisfaction with the process and outcome may be mutually reinforcing or jointly determined.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 55 (2012)
Issue (Month): 10 (April)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJEP20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:55:y:2012:i:10:p:1387-1402. 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: (Michael McNulty)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.