Wind power deployment outcomes: How can we account for the differences?

This paper aims to understand different outcomes of implementation of wind power deployment programmes. Geographical variables such as quantity of wind resources are in themselves insufficient to explain patterns of implementation of wind power. To enhance the review of the factors affecting wind power deployment we also made a systematic comparison of six country cases: Denmark, Spain, Germany, Scotland, the Netherlands, and England/Wales. The impact of four key institutional variables is examined and put into a scheme of a set of potential hypothesis about their inter-relationships. These are influenced by different national traditions: planning systems; financial support mechanisms; landscape protection organisations and patterns of ownership of wind power. (1) Planning systems, which favour wind power are essential, and in all cases national planning policies generally intend to support wind power development, but planning institutions show a wide variety with clear differences in implementation results. (2) Systems of financial support are also a sine qua non for development but they also vary in their effectiveness across country and time in the study. Robust and consistent support regimes in Denmark, Germany and Spain have speeded developments. (3) Landscape protection organisations vary in strength in a range between England/Wales (very strong and influential) to Spain (non-existent). Strong and effective opposition to wind developments is always primarily rooted in landscape values. (4) Local ownership patterns coincide with higher rates of wind power deployment than remote, corporate ownership. Local involvement recruits conditional support for projects and is related to traditions of energy activism. Such traditions are strongest in Denmark and Germany and weakest in Spain, England/Wales and Scotland.

[1]  Alain Nadaï,et al.  “Planning”, “siting” and the local acceptance of wind power: Some lessons from the French case , 2007 .

[2]  H. Lund,et al.  Conflicting views of sustainability: The case of wind power and nature conservation in Denmark , 1998 .

[3]  Catherine Mitchell,et al.  THE ENGLAND AND WALES NON-FOSSIL FUEL OBLIGATION: History and Lessons , 2000 .

[4]  Vicki Norberg-Bohm,et al.  Technology policy and renewable energy: public roles in the development of new energy technologies , 1999 .

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

[6]  P. Hall,et al.  Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms , 1996 .

[7]  J. Mahoney.  Path dependence in historical sociology , 2000 .

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

[9]  F. Geels.  From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory , 2004 .

[10]  David Lowenthal,et al.  British National Identity and the English Landscape , 1991, Rural History.

[11]  Sustained diffusion of renewable energy , 2003 .

[12]  Erik Lundtang Petersen,et al.  The European Wind Atlas , 1985 .

[13]  Joseph Szarka,et al.  Wind power, policy learning and paradigm change , 2006 .

[14]  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 .

[15]  Robert L. Thayer,et al.  Altamont: Public perceptions of a wind energy landscape , 1987 .

[16]  Lucas Reijnders,et al.  Imports as a major complication: liberalisation of the green electricity market in the Netherlands , 2002 .

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

[18]  A. Jamison,et al.  The Making of the New Environmental Consciousness: A Comparative Study of the Environmental Movements in Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands , 1993 .

[19]  D. Toke.  Community Wind Power in Europe and in the UK , 2005 .

[20]  Elizabeth Devlin,et al.  Factors Affecting Public Acceptance of Wind Turbines in Sweden , 2005 .

[21]  James Mahoney,et al.  Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences , 2004, Perspectives on Politics.

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

[23]  Peter Hauge Madsen,et al.  Wind power in Denmark , 1999 .

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

[25]  Peter A. Strachan,et al.  Wind Energy Policy, Planning and Management Practice in the UK: Hot Air or a Gathering Storm? , 2004 .

[26]  M. Wolsink,et al.  Wind power implementation in changing institutional landscapes: An international comparison. , 2007 .

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

[28]  E. Pedersen,et al.  Perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise--a dose-response relationship. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

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

[31]  Martin J. Pasqualetti.  WIND POWER: Obstacles and Opportunities , 2004 .

[32]  Nick Hanley,et al.  Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain , 2002 .

[33]  D. Toke,et al.  Are Green Electricity Certificates the Way Forward for Renewable Energy? An Evaluation of the United Kingdom's Renewables Obligation in the Context of International Comparisons , 2005 .

[34]  Janne Hukkinen,et al.  Institutions in Environmental Management: Constructing Mental Models and Sustainability , 1998 .

[35]  Niels I. Meyer,et al.  Danish energy reform: policy implications for renewables , 2003 .

[36]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Wind energy policies in the Netherlands: Institutional capacity-building for ecological modernisation , 2007 .

[37]  Richard C. Dorf,et al.  Wind Power in View: Energy Landscapes in a Crowded World , 2002 .

[38]  Eckart Lange,et al.  Combining a participatory planning approach with a virtual landscape model for the siting of wind turbines , 2005 .

[39]  Javier Faulin,et al.  The outlook for renewable energy in Navarre: An economic profile , 2006 .

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

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