Beyond Rhetoric to Understanding Determinants of Wind Turbine Support and Conflict in Two Ontario, Canada Communities

Abstract

Tbe literature concerning local opposition to wind turbine developments has relatively few case studies exploring the felt impacts of people living with turbines in tbeir daily lives. Aitken even suggests that such residents are subtly or overtly cast as deviants in the current literature. Our mixed-methods, grounded-theory case study of two communities in Ontario, Canada provides insights about such residents though twenty-six face-to-face in-depth interviews, 152 questionnaires, and basic spatial analysis involving locals who have been living with operating turbines for several years. Despite being neighbours the communities differ on several measures including the spatial clustering of turbines. Opposition is significantly predicted by: health, siting process, economic benefits, and visual aesthetic variables. Though a majority supports the turbines we focus on the interplay of that majority with those experiencing negative impacts, particularly related to health. We highlight an asymmetry of impacts at the local level on those who oppose turbines, which is supported by rhetorical confiict at multiple scales. The findings point to the need for greater attention to mitigating impacts, including conflict, by understanding how siting policies interact with social processes at the local level.

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

“…Unfair distribution of costs and benefits may lead to intra-community and/or rural-urban conflicts (Hirsh & Sovacool, 2013;Larson & Krannich, 2016;Pasqualetti, 2000;Phadke, 2013;Rule, 2014;Sovacool, 2009;Walker et al, 2014c) or injustices toward indigenous communities (Huesca-Pérez et al, 2016). Phadke (2013, p. 248) summarizes this conflict: "Rural communities at the forefront of new energy development are asking why they are disproportionately being asked to carry the weight of the new carbon economy while urban residents continue their conspicuous use of energy."…”

“…Some of these studies have used convenience samples rather than robust random samples, further limiting their external validity (e.g. Landry et al, 2012;Mulvaney et al, 2013b;Walker et al, 2014c). Fast and Mabee (2015, p. 27) suggest that this qualitative, case-study nature of wind acceptance research "does not translate well to conventional policy making."…”

“…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.…”

“…Perceived negative socioeconomic impacts include reduced property values (Abbott, 2010;Firestone & Kempton, 2007;Hoen et al, 2015), decreased tourism (Landry et al, 2012;Lilley et al, 2010;Lutzeyer, 2013), increased traffic (Slattery et al, 2012), exacerbating economic inequality (Walker et al, 2014b(Walker et al, , 2014c, impacts to fishing and other recreational opportunities (Firestone et al, 2009), and increased electricity rates (Baxter et al, 2013). Impacts on electricity rates are seen as a two-sided coin, with supporters citing reduced rates and opponents citing increased rates (Firestone et al, 2012a).…”

Distance matters. Assessing socioeconomic impacts of the Dukovany nuclear power plant in the Czech Republic: Local perceptions and statistical evidence

“…In this sense, greater attention should be paid to research on the ex-post perceptions of the outcomes of existing power plants and the 'asymmetries of impact' (Walker et al, 2014). The primary objective of this study is to assess the effect of geographical distance on the intensity of socioeconomic impacts of nuclear power plants on surrounding communities.…”