Local acceptance of renewable energy-A case study from southeast Germany

Energy Policy

Volumn 39, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 3252-3260

  Musall, Fabian David ^a   Kuik, Onno ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Community co ownership; Local acceptance; Wind energy

Indexed keywords

ABSTRACT LEVELS; COMMUNITY CO-OWNERSHIP; COMMUNITY OWNERSHIP; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; GERMANY; LOCAL ACCEPTANCE; POSITIVE EFFECTS; PUBLIC SUPPORT; RENEWABLE CAPACITY; RENEWABLE ENERGIES; RESEARCH DESIGNS; WIND ENERGY;

IMPACT RESISTANCE; SURVEYS; WIND POWER;

RESEARCH;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; ENERGY MARKET; ENERGY PLANNING; ENERGY RESOURCE; OWNERSHIP; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; WIND POWER;

GERMANY;

EID: 79955905111     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.03.017     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Aitken M. Why we still don't understand the social aspects of wind power: a critique of key assumptions in the literature. Energy Policy 2010, 38(4):1834-1841.
2. Devine-Wright P. Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy 2005, 8(2):125-139.
3. DSTGB (German Association of Towns and Municipalities-Deutscher Städte- und Gemeindebund), 2009 Re-powering von Windenergieanlagen-Kommunale Handlungsmoeglichkeiten. 〈〉. http://www.dstgb.de/dstgb/DStGB-Dokumentationen/Nr.%2094%20-%20Repowering%20von%20Windenergieanlagen%20-%20Kommunale%20Handlungsm%C3%B6glichkeiten/doku94_repowering_barrierefrei.pdf.
4. European Commission, 2007 Euro barometer: energy technologies-knowledge, perception, measures. 〈〉. ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/energy/docs/energy_tech_eurobarometer_en.pdf.
5. European Commission, 2010. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2010-wind of change? 〈〉. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/europeans-biotechnology-in-2010_en.pdf.
6. Gipe, P., 1995. Design as if people matter: aesthetic guidelines for the wind industry. American Wind Energy Association Annual Conference, Washington, DC. Available from: 〈〉. http://www.wind-works.org/articles/design.html.
7. Krohn S., Dambourg S. On public attitudes towards wind power. Renewable Energy 1999, 16(1):954-960.
8. Renewable Energy Agency, 2010. Zschadraβ ist "Energie Kommune" des Monats. 〈〉. http://www.unendlich-viel-energie.de/de/politik/detailansicht/article/176/zschadrass-ist-energie-kommune-des-monats-maerz.html.
9. Seifert, E., 2009. Energiespargemeinde Zschadraβ- Projekte und Erfolge. Lokale Agenda 21 für Dresden e.V., press release from the 2nd of January 2009. Available from 〈〉. http://www.dresdner-agenda21.de/fileadmin/agenda21/redakteure/PM/2009-02-02_PM_Zschadrass.pdf.
10. Toke D., Breukers S., Wolsink M. Wind power deployment outcomes: how can we account for the differences?. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2008, 12(4):1129-1147.
11. Walker G. What are the barriers and incentives for community-owned means of energy production and use?. Energy Policy 2008, 36(12):4401-4405.
12. Walker G., Devine-Wright P. Community renewable energy: what should it mean?. Energy Policy 2008, 36(2):497-500.
13. Walker G., Devine-Wright P., Hunter S., High H., Evans B. Trust and community: exploring the meanings, contexts and dynamics of community renewable energy. Energy Policy 2010, 38(6):2655-2663.
14. Warren C., McFadyen M. Does community ownership affect public attitudes to wind energy? A case study from south-west Scotland. Land Use Policy 2010, 27(2):204-213.
15. Warren C.R., Lumsden C., O'Dowd S., Birnie R.V. 'Green on green': public perceptions of wind power in Scotland and Ireland. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2005, 48(6):851-873.
16. Wolsink M. Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renewable Energy 2000, 21(1):49-64.
17. Wolsink M. Planning of renewables schemes: deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation. Energy Policy 2007, 35(5):2692-2704.
18. Wolsink M. Planning: problem 'carrier' or problem 'source'?. Planning Theory & Practise 2009, 10(4):521-547.