A case-control study of support/opposition to wind turbines: Perceptions of health risk, economic benefits, and community conflict

Thirty years of North American wind energy acceptance research: What have we learned?

“…In studies of people near existing wind facilities, 70%-90% of respondents express positive or neutral attitudes (Baxter et al, 2013;Fergen & Jacquet, 2016;Mulvaney et al, 2013b;Pasqualetti & Butler, 1987;Petrova, 2014;Slattery et al, 2012). Nonetheless, the 10%-30% of individuals who do not support proposed wind developments or hold negative attitudes toward existing facilities-as well as the factors influencing those positions-are of strong interest to the research community.…”

“…Positive economic aspects of wind energy development include rural economic development (Mulvaney et al, 2013b) including creation of jobs and other economic opportunities (Slattery et al, 2012), local tax revenue and/or lower tax rates for individuals (Slattery et al, 2012), increased tourism (Groth & Vogt, 2014), reduced electricity rates (Baxter et al, 2013) and landowner compensation (Jacquet, 2012). Landowner compensation, however, is not a universally positive socioeconomic impact for individuals living near turbines.…”

“…That is to say, people are creating the problems, not technology" (Pasqualetti, 2011b, p. 202)  Suggestions that the motivation of wind energy acceptance research is to help meet federal or state level renewable energy goals (e.g., Mulvaney et al, 2013) Such positivist language has appeared regularly in the U.S. research to date (such as: Gipe, 1995;Klick & Smith, 2010;Olson-Hazboun et al, 2016;Pasqualetti, 2011b;Sovacool, 2009), but is less present in prominent Canadian research (such as: Baxter et al, 2013;Fast et al, 2016;Shaw et al, 2015;Walker et al, 2014bWalker et al, , 2014c, and rare in research rooted in humanistic geography (such as: Abbott, 2010;Phadke, 2013;Walker et al, 2014b), which tends to express more empathy toward affected communities.…”

“…Baxter et al, 2013;Bidwell, 2013;Firestone & Kempton, 2007;Firestone et al, 2012b;Groothuis et al, 2008;Groth & Vogt, 2014;Olson-Hazboun et al, 2016;Pasqualetti & Butler, 1987;Petrova, 2014;Slattery et al, 2012;Thayer & Freeman, 1987). Some of these studies have used convenience samples rather than robust random samples, further limiting their external validity (e.g.…”

“…Although asking individuals about their opinions toward hypothetical or proposed wind facilities can help answer certain research questions (e.g., about facilities, like offshore U.S. wind farms, that do not yet exist), these studies cannot reflect the unique feelings and experiences of residents living near existing turbines. Moreover, many studies around existing wind projects have not adequately examined the population living nearest to the turbines by oversampling and/or isolating the nearest residents for unique analyses (such as: Baxter et al, 2013;Bidwell, 2013;Fergen & Jacquet, 2016;Groth & Vogt, 2014;Olson-Hazboun et al, 2016;Pasqualetti & Butler, 1987;Petrova, 2014;Slattery et al, 2012;Thayer & Freeman, 1987). As such, numerous researchers have called for research focusing on residents closest to wind turbines (Hoen et al, 2011;Walker et al, 2014a).…”