Understanding public responses to offshore wind power

This paper is about understanding the role and importance of public responses to offshore wind power. It builds on a framework for understanding social acceptance and opposition to onshore turbines, and reviews the emerging research on offshore wind. While less is known about how people will respond to offshore than onshore wind, there is now an emerging body of research. From this literature, several common factors which influence responses have emerged and are discussed here: the (continued) role of visual impact; place attachment to the local area; lack of tangible benefits; relationships with developers and outsiders; and the role of the planning and decision-making systems. The paper argues that, as with onshore developments, the public should be included in decision-making about offshore wind farms, and that they have a key role which should not be underestimated. The paper concludes with some thoughts about the means to involve people and how effected communities might be effectively acknowledged, identified and engaged.

[1]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Wind power deployment outcomes: How can we account for the differences? , 2008 .

[2]  Jacob Ladenburg,et al.  Willingness to pay for reduced visual disamenities from offshore wind farms in denmark , 2007 .

[3]  Edmund C. Penning-Rowsell,et al.  New Approaches to Sustainable Hazard Management for Venice , 1998 .

[4]  Claire Haggett.  Over the Sea and Far Away? A Consideration of the Planning, Politics and Public Perception of Offshore Wind Farms , 2008 .

[5]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Wind power implementation: The nature of public attitudes: Equity and fairness instead of ‘backyard motives’ , 2007 .

[6]  Jacob Ladenburg,et al.  Stated public preferences for on-land and offshore wind power generation—a review , 2009 .

[7]  Claire Haggett,et al.  A Call for Clarity and a Review of the Empirical Evidence: Comment on Felman and Turner's ‘Why Not NIMBY?’ , 2010 .

[8]  Claire Haggett,et al.  Public Engagement in Planning for Renewable Energy , 2009 .

[9]  Patrik Söderholm,et al.  Wind power development in Sweden: Global policies and local obstacles , 2007 .

[10]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation , 2007 .

[11]  P. Devine‐Wright.  Rethinking NIMBYism: The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place‐protective action , 2009 .

[12]  Simin Davoudi,et al.  Planning for climate change: Strategies for mitigation and adaptation for spatial planners , 2009 .

[13]  G. Ellis,et al.  Many ways to say ‘no’, different ways to say ‘yes’: Applying Q-Methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals , 2007 .

[14]  Peter Phillimore,et al.  ‘If we have wrong perceptions of our area, we cannot be surprised if others do as well.’ Representing risk in Teesside's environmental politics , 2004 .

[15]  D. A. Elliott.  Public Reactions to Windfarms: The Dynamics of Opinion Formation , 1994 .

[16]  Patrick Devine-Wright,et al.  Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy , 2005 .

[17]  Kate Burningham,et al.  Using the Language of NIMBY: A topic for research, not an activity for researchers , 2000 .

[18]  Tim Gray,et al.  Offshore wind farms and commercial fisheries in the UK: A study in Stakeholder Consultation , 2005 .

[19]  W. Vermeulen,et al.  Social barriers in wind power implementation in The Netherlands: Perceptions of wind power entrepreneurs and local civil servants of institutional and social conditions in realizing wind power projects , 2007 .

[20]  S. Jay.  Planners to the rescue: spatial planning facilitating the development of offshore wind energy. , 2010, Marine pollution bulletin.

[21]  Claire Haggett,et al.  Crossing the Great Divide ¿ Using Multi-method Analysis to Understand Opposition to Windfarms , 2006 .

[22]  Tim Gray,et al.  Wind farm siting—the case of offshore wind farms , 2005 .

[23]  Jacob Ladenburg,et al.  Attitudes towards offshore wind farms--The role of beach visits on attitude and demographic and attitude relations , 2010 .

[24]  Claire Haggett,et al.  Renewable Energy and the Public , 2010 .

[25]  George Marsh.  The windy isles , 2001 .

[26]  D. Horst.  NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies , 2007 .

[27]  P. Devine‐Wright,et al.  Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: A wind energy case study , 2010 .

[28]  Gordon Walker,et al.  Renewable energy and the public , 1995 .

[29]  R. Kahn.  Siting Struggles: The Unique Challenge of Permitting Renewable Energy Power Plants , 2000 .

[30]  Andrew R. Henderson,et al.  Offshore wind in Europe: The current state of the art , 2002 .

[31]  Kenneth Shockley,et al.  NIMBY, Agent-Relative Reasons and Public Reason: An Open Peer Commentary on Simon Feldman and Derek Turner's ‘Why Not NIMBY?’ , 2010 .

[32]  Charles R. Warren,et al.  ‘Green On Green’: Public perceptions of wind power in Scotland and Ireland , 2005 .

[33]  David Still,et al.  Offshore wind at Blyth , 2001 .

[34]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Dutch wind power policy : Stagnating implementation of renewables , 1996 .

[35]  Mark J. Kaiser,et al.  A comparison of offshore wind power development in europe and the U.S.: Patterns and drivers of development , 2009 .

[36]  Jacob Ladenburg,et al.  Attitudes towards on-land and offshore wind power development in Denmark; choice of development strategy , 2008 .

[37]  D. Bell,et al.  The ‘Social Gap’ in Wind Farm Siting Decisions: Explanations and Policy Responses , 2005 .

[38]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Invalid theory impedes our understanding: A critique on the persistence of the language of NIMBY , 2006 .

[39]  Martin J. Pasqualetti,et al.  Wind Energy Landscapes: Society and Technology in the California Desert , 2001 .

[40]  Rolf Wüstenhagen,et al.  Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept , 2007 .

[41]  Jeremy Firestone,et al.  The Offshore Wind Power Debate: Views from Cape Cod , 2005 .

[42]  Claire Haggett,et al.  Tilting at Windmills?: Using Discourse Analysis to Understand the Attitude-Behaviour Gap in Renewable Energy Conflicts , 2011 .

[43]  Søren Krohn,et al.  On public attitudes towards wind power , 1999 .

[44]  Mhairi Aitken,et al.  Locating ‘power’ in wind power planning processes: the (not so) influential role of local objectors , 2008 .

[45]  Hans C. Sørensen,et al.  EXPERIENCE WITH AND STRATEGIES FOR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN OFFSHORE WIND PROJECTS , 2002 .

[46]  C. Gross,et al.  Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance , 2007 .

[47]  A. Jobert,et al.  Local acceptance of wind energy: Factors of success identified in French and German case studies , 2007 .

[48]  W. Kempton,et al.  Public opinion about large offshore wind power: Underlying factors , 2007 .

[49]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Entanglement of Interests and Motives: Assumptions behind the NIMBY-theory on Facility Siting , 1994 .

[50]  E. Penning‐Rowsell,et al.  The English beach: experiences and values , 1998 .

[51]  Rebecca J. Barthelmie,et al.  Offshore windpower: a major new source of energy for Europe , 2002 .

[52]  K. C Tong,et al.  Technical and economic aspects of a floating offshore wind farm , 1998 .

[53]  David Toke,et al.  Explaining wind power planning outcomes:: some findings from a study in England and Wales , 2005 .

[54]  Jeremy Firestone,et al.  Public acceptance of offshore wind power projects in the USA , 2009 .