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

Toke, David; Breukers, Sylvia; Wolsink, Maarten

doi:10.1016/j.rser.2006.10.021

Cited by 358 publications

(253 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

229

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Whilst at present wind-power development in the UK remains relatively meagre (see Toke et al, 2008); governmentÕs ambitious renewable targets (i.e., generating 31% of electricity from renewables by 2020), coupled with the technological maturity of wind turbines, is resulting in increased prospecting for suitable sites for onshore windpower development in the UK. This level of Ôwind-prospectingÕ will inevitably increase the likelihood that new projects will be proposed in the vicinity of other existing and/or proposed schemes, making the consideration of cumulative effects (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whilst some questions remain over the optimal means by which to engage in deliberations with host communities (see, e.g., Chilvers, 2009;Petts, 2003), a burgeoning literature now speaks to the many benefits yielded by participatory planning strategies, in part due to the increased perceptions of procedural fairness that come associated with such strategies (e.g., Devine-Wright, 2005;Gross, 2007;Jobert, et al, 2007;Lange and Hehl-Lange, 2005;McClaren-Loring, 2007;Toke et al, 2008;Walker and Devine-Wright, 2008;Warren and McFadyen, 2010; see also Inhaber, 1998;Beierle and Cayford, 2002). As such, the results or this study clearly support calls for more participatory planning strategies (e.g., engage-deliberate-decide, see Walker, 2009) in order to: (a) facilitate the likelihood and speed with which proposed schemes achieve planning success; and (b) perhaps also increase the scale of local development that host communities will be willing to accept.…”

Section: Fairness and Equitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the key factors known to exert a delaying and/or detrimental impact upon the outcomes of wind farm planning applications is the presence of organised public opposition (e.g., Breukers and Wolsink, 2007;McClaren-Loring, 2007;Toke, 2005;Toke et al, 2008), which presses home the importance of research targeting a more complete understanding of the reasons why people oppose local wind-power development (particularly when attitude surveys commonly report high levels of support for wind-power in principle, e.g., BWEA, 2005;Krohn and Damborg, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

When is enough, enough? Identifying predictors of capacity estimates for onshore wind-power development in a region of the UK

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fairness and Equitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

When is enough, enough? Identifying predictors of capacity estimates for onshore wind-power development in a region of the UK

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In line with the latter study, we argue that providing environmentally acceptable development of any energy projects, including wind farms, is challenging. Conflicts related to both environmental and social impacts often occur in the wind planning process, which can influence the fate of specific wind power plants [10,11]. Community or individuals' attitudes towards wind farms are in particular strongly influenced by the visual impacts on the landscape and threats to wildlife [12,13].…”

Section: The Challenge Of Balancing Different Values In Sustainablementioning

confidence: 99%

Key criteria for sustainable wind energy planning—lessons from an institutional perspective on the impact assessment literature

Thygesen

Agarwal

2014

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation for the version of the work held in 'OpenAIR@RGU"NOTICE: this is the author's version of a work that was accepted for publication in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, [VOL 39, November 2014 Abstract 1 : An increasing number of researchers stress the importance of the national planning institution's role with respect to promoting an "effective" decision-making process in terms of bringing about sustainable energy. Impact assessment (IA) procedures are seen as having strong potential in supporting environmentally conscious energy production. This article discusses criteria for sustainable wind power planning and compares the centralised planning systems for wind energy in two countries -Norway and Scotland -as illustrating cases. We ask the following: What key criteria should be present to secure sustainable wind energy planning, and what are the critical institutional conditions to fulfil these criteria? A review of relevant IA literature reveals four key criteria for promoting sustainable wind planning: (i) clear and integrated political priorities, (ii) stakeholder involvement, (iii) strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and (iv) stringent permission and assessment requirements. We also determined that critical institutional conditions exist that effectively promote sustainable energy production: (a) coordinated energy policy institutions, (b) legitimate planning procedures, (c) that SEAs are followed in the decision-making process and (d) statutory planning regulations.

show abstract

“…I focus on this for two reasons. First, much research has found perceptions of procedural justice to be a key factor in shaping local attitudes toward private-developer wind energy projects (Gross, 2007;Haggett, 2008;Hindmarsh and Matthews, 2008;Pasqualetti, 2011;Wolsink, 2007aWolsink, , 2007bZografos and Martínez-Alier, 2009), and there is a small amount of evidence that suggests it is also important in relation to perceptions of community energy schemes (Simcock, 2014;Toke et al, 2008;Walker et al, 2010). Second, as Fuller and Bulkeley (2013) have noted, in policy and activist community renewable energy projects have often been implied as offering a (procedurally) just for of low-carbon transition -indeed, some argue that 'participatory' decision processes are an inherent and necessary part of any community energy scheme.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Simcock

2016

Land Use Policy

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

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

Cited by 358 publications

References 38 publications

When is enough, enough? Identifying predictors of capacity estimates for onshore wind-power development in a region of the UK

When is enough, enough? Identifying predictors of capacity estimates for onshore wind-power development in a region of the UK

Key criteria for sustainable wind energy planning—lessons from an institutional perspective on the impact assessment literature

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About