Near-shore wind power—Protected seascapes, environmentalists’ attitudes, and the technocratic planning perspective

Wolsink, Maarten

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.04.004

Cited by 139 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This idea is extremely naïve and siting issues offshore are just as relevant as onshore (Haggett, 2008). The case is analysed based on actor and process data and a survey among people that are most committed to the Wadden region, which is an internationally significant and ecologically sensitive landscape (Wolsink, 2009). The siting case on water management concerns Oolderveste, project comprising 850 mainly luxury family dwellings to be built in 2002 in within the river Meuse's floodplain southwest of the city of Roermond (Wolsink, 2006; survey by Jonk and Wolsink, 2003).…”

Section: Methods and Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A survey among the members of the WaddenVereniging showed that a landscape that should be most protected, the WaddenSea itself, was selected to build the wind farm. The survey also showed that turbines are not considered a threat in all types of landscape, for example turbines alongside the Afsluitdijk (the 32 km long large dyke separating Wadden Sea and IJsselmeer) would have been acceptable for a majority (Wolsink, 2009). Subsequently, the WaddenVereniging applied its strategic influence to obstruct the entire project.…”

Section: Wind Power Policymentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contested environmental policy infrastructure: Socio-political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities

Wolsink

2010

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

Self Cite

207

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Link to publicationCitation for published version (APA): Wolsink, M. (2010). Contested environmental policy infrastructure: socio-political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30(5), 302-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2010.01.001 General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: http://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. AbstractDecisions to build new infrastructure are often contested. The general idea is that such infrastructure is considered to serve the (proclaimed) public interests, whereas the impact or risk is concentrated at a smaller scale, for example in local communities. The nature of such risk is that it concerns threats to environmental quality. A frequently arising type of environmental conflict arises when the proclaimed public good lies within the domain of environmental policy and sustainability. Impact assessments are essential parts of identification and assessment of acceptability and risks associated with projects, plans or programs. The social acceptability of building infrastructure as a part of environmental policy, however, is hardly conceptually defined so far, and the role of policy appraisal methods is unclear. The social acceptance of environmental-policy infrastructure is conceptually defined as institutionally determined, and will be elaborated in three cases. The first case is the policy domain of renewable energy implementation, which is a major component of climate change mitigation strategies. The empirical basis comes mainly from studies on the implementation of wind power. The second case concerns the building of waste infrastructure, which is part of environmental policies that, however, not only focus upon sound waste management and disposal, but primarily upon waste minimization (the 'waste management hierarchy'). The third case is the Dutch policy on space-water management, that tries to implement a new style of management that contrasts with the current style of water management and governance that is based on control and 'hard' infrastructure. This is now becoming the spearhead of climate change adaptation policy. All three cases show a large variety of social acceptance issues, in which the appraisal of the impact of siting the facilities is confronted with the desirability of the policies. Th...

show abstract

Section: Methods and Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Wind Power Policymentioning

confidence: 98%

Contested environmental policy infrastructure: Socio-political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities

Wolsink

2010

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

Self Cite

207

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…So far we have found that coastal areas may be less expensive to produce smaller amounts of electricity than far shore areas, where resources seem unlimited, but this comes at the cost of higher cost sensitivity to planning issues including conservation and alternative area use, which can be confirmed by Wolsink [25]. They are also less sensitive to variations of investment costs.…”

Section: Sensitivity Analysesmentioning

confidence: 73%

Evaluation of offshore wind resources by scale of development

Möller

Hong

Lonsing³

et al. 2012

Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Offshore wind energy has developed rapidly in terms of turbine and project size, and currently undergoes a significant up-scaling to turbines and parks at greater distance to shore and deeper waters. Expectations to the positive effect of economies of scale on power production costs, however, have not materialized as yet. On the contrary, anticipated electricity generation costs have been on the increase for each increment of technology scale. Moreover, the cost reductions anticipated for progressing along a technological learning curve have are not apparent, and it seems that not all the additional costs can be explained by deeper water, higher distance to shore, bottlenecks in supply or higher raw material costs. The present paper addresses the scale of offshore wind parks for Denmark and invites to reconsider the technological and institutional choices made. Based on a continuous resourceeconomic model operating in a geographical information systems (GIS) environment, which describes resources, costs and area constraints in a spatially explicit way, the relation between project size, location, costs and ownership is analysed. Two scenarios are presented, which describe a state-of-the-art development as well as a sketch of smaller, locally owned parks that may have several economic advantages but require a greater planning and acceptance because of higher visual impact and area competition.

show abstract

“…The third element of the framework recognises that the implementation process of a community wind project involves multiple decisions and stages (McLaren et al, 2013) -for example, about the location of wind turbines with a given locality (Wolsink, 2010), about whether the project should receive planning permission (Cowell et al, 2011), or the fundamental choice of which technology should be utilised (Barry and Ellis, 2011). For each of these decisions, people may have expectations about who should be included, the extent of influence they should have, and the types of information that should be provided with.…”

Section: Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Procedural justice and the implementation of community wind energy projects: A case study from South Yorkshire, UK

Simcock

2016

Land Use Policy

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights Examines perceptions of 'procedural justice' in the implementation of a community wind project.  Challenges the notion that community energy projects will always be considered locally fair. Provides lessons of how procedural justice might be achieved in community energy schemes. AbstractIn policy and activist discourses there is often an expectation that community wind energy projects will avoid the conflicts and local opposition often associated with private-developer-led developments.However, the empirical validity of this assertion has not been widely investigated. In previous research on private-developer wind projects, the fairness of decision-making processes ('procedural justice') during project implementation has been identified as an important factor in shaping local acceptance, but has not been deeply studied in relation to community-led schemes. Using in-depth qualitative research of a proposed community wind project in South Yorkshire, this paper examines stakeholder interpretations of procedural justice during the design and siting of this scheme. Although the project leaders explicitly aimed for a fair and 'democratic' implementation process, considerable conflict emerged over whether this goal was achieved. The analysis shows that these conflicting views were the result, firstly, of different normative expectations of what 'procedural justice' actually meant and involved, and, secondly, of contrasting stakeholder experiences of the decision processes that were utilised. It cannot be assumed that community wind projects will always be considered procedurally just at the local level, with much resting on the details of how they are undertaken.

show abstract

Near-shore wind power—Protected seascapes, environmentalists’ attitudes, and the technocratic planning perspective

Abstract: Link to publication Citation for published version (APA):Wolsink, M. (2010). Near-shore wind power -protected seascapes, environmentalists' attitudes, and the technocratic planning perspective. Land Use Policy, 27(2), 195-203.

Cited by 139 publications

References 54 publications

Contested environmental policy infrastructure: Socio-political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities

Contested environmental policy infrastructure: Socio-political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities

Evaluation of offshore wind resources by scale of development

Procedural justice and the implementation of community wind energy projects: A case study from South Yorkshire, UK

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About