The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes towards commercial wind energy

Energy Policy

Volumn 58, Issue , 2013, Pages 189-199

  Bidwell, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Attitudes; Renewables; Wind energy

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDES; DEVELOPMENT PROCESS; RENEWABLE ENERGIES; RENEWABLES; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; VALUES AND BELIEFS; WIND ENERGY PROJECTS; WIND FARM DEVELOPMENT;

ELECTRIC UTILITIES; ENERGY POLICY; SURVEYS;

WIND POWER;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; NUMERICAL MODEL; PUBLIC ATTITUDE; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; WIND FARM; WIND POWER;

MICHIGAN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84877157530     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.010     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Aitken M. Why we still don't understand the social aspects of wind power: a critique of key assumptions within the literature. Energy Policy 2010, 38:1834-1841.
2. Aitken M., McDonald S., Strachan P. Locating'power' in wind power planning processes: the (not so) influential role of local objectors. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2008, 51(6):777-799.
3. Aldrich D.P. Site fights: divisive facilities and civil society in Japan and the West. Cornell University Press 2010.
4. Alhakami A.S., Slovic P. A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. Risk Analysis 1994, 14(6):1085-1096.
5. Ansolabehere S., Konisky D.M. Public attitudes toward construction of new power plants. Public Opinion Quarterly 2009, 73(3):566-577.
6. Bell D., Gray T., Haggett C. The 'social gap'in wind farm siting decisions: explanations and policy responses. Environmental Politics 2005, 14(4):460-477.
7. Bell D., Gray Tim, Haggett Claire, Joanne Swaffield Re-visiting the 'social gap': public opinion and relations of power in the local politics of wind energy. Environmental Politics 2013, 22(1):115-135. Retrieved February 15, 2013.
8. Blader Steven L., Tyler Tom R. A four-component model of procedural justice: defining the meaning of a 'Fair' process. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2003, 29(6):747-758. Retrieved March 7, 2012.
9. Breukers S., Wolsink M. Wind power implementation in changing institutional landscapes: an international comparison. Energy Policy 2007, 35(5):2737-2750.
10. Cass N., Walker G. Emotion and rationality: the characterisation and evaluation of opposition to renewable energy projects. Emotion, Space and Society 2009, 2(1):62-69.
11. Couch S.R., Kroll-Smith S. Environmental controversies, interactional resources, and rural communities: siting versus exposure disputes. Rural Sociology 1994, 59(1):25-44.
12. Devine-Wright P. Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy 2004, 8(2):125-139.
13. Devine-Wright P. Rethinking NIMBYism: the role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place-protective action. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 2009, 19(6):426-441.
14. Devine-Wright P. Renewable Energy and the Public: From NIMBY to Participation 2011, Earthscan, Washington, DC.
15. Devine-Wright P. Public engagement with large-scale renewable energy technologies: breaking the cycle of NIMBYism. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 2011, 2(1):19-26. Retrieved January 6, 2012.
16. Dietz T., Fitzgerald A., Shwom R. Environmental values. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 2005, 30:335-372.
17. Dietz Thomas, Stern Paul C. National Research Council (U S.) Panel on Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making, and National Research Council (U S.) Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change 2008, Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making. National Academies Press.
18. Dunlap R.E., van Liere K.D. A proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results: the new environmental paradigm. Journal of Environmental Education 1978, 9(1):10-19.
19. Dunlap R.E., Van Liere K.D., Mertig A.G., Jones R.E. Measuring endorsement of the new environmental paradigm: a revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues 2000, 56(3):425-442.
20. Dunlap R.E., van Liere K.D., Mertig A.G., Jones R.E. New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues 2000, 56(3):425-442.
21. Ek K. Public and private attitudes towards 'green' electricity: the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy 2005, 33(13):1677-1689.
22. Ellis G., Barry J., Robinson C. Many ways to say 'no', different ways to say 'yes': applying Q-methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2007, 50(4):517-551.
23. Finucane M.L., Alhakami A., Slovic P., Johnson S.M. The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2000, 13(1):1-17.
24. Firestone J., Kempton W. Public opinion about large offshore wind power: underlying factors. Energy Policy 2007, 35(3):1584-1598.
25. Firestone J., Kempton W., Krueger A. Public acceptance of offshore wind power projects in the USA. Wind Energy 2009, 12(2):183-202.
26. Firestone J., Willett Kempton, Meredith Blaydes Lilley, Kateryna Samoteskul Public acceptance of offshore wind power: does perceived fairness of process matter?. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2012, 55(10):1387-1402. Retrieved January 2, 2013.
27. Freudenburg William R., Pastor Susan K. NIMBYs and LULUs: stalking the syndromes. Journal of Social Issues 1992, 48(4):39-61. Retrieved January 6, 2012.
28. Frey B.S., Oberholzer-Gee F. Fair siting procedures: an empirical analysis of their importance and characteristics. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 1996, 15(3):353-376.
29. Graham J.B., Stephenson J.R., Smith I.J. Public perceptions of wind energy developments: case studies from New Zealand. Energy Policy 2009, 37(9):3348-3357.
30. Gregory Robin, Arvai Joseph, McDaniels Tim Value-focused thinking for environmental risk consultations. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy 2001, 9:249-273. Retrieved May 15, 2012.
31. Hain J.J., Ault G.W., Galloway S.J., Cruden A., McDonald J.R. Additional renewable energy growth through small-scale community orientated energy policies. Energy Policy 2005, 33(9):1199-1212.
32. Hoen B., Wiser R., Cappers P., Thayer M., Sethi G. Wind energy facilities and residential properties: the effect of proximity and view on sales prices. Journal of Real Estate Research 2011, 33(3):279-316. Retrieved February 6, 2013.
33. Johansson M., Laike T. Intention to respond to local wind turbines: the role of attitudes and visual perception. Wind Energy 2007, 10(5):435-451.
34. van der Horst D., Toke D. Exploring the landscape of wind farm developments; local area characteristics and planning process outcomes in rural England. Land Use Policy 2010, 27(2):214-221.
35. Kaplowitz S.A. The influence of moral considerations on the perceived consequences of an action. Journal of Conflict Resolution 1977, 21(3):475.
36. Kasperson Roger E., Ram Bonnie J. The public acceptance of new energy technologies. Daedalus 2013, 142(1):90-96.
37. Kempton W., Firestone J., Lilley J., Rouleau T., Whitaker P. The offshore wind power debate: views from Cape Cod. Coastal Management 2005, 33(2):119-149.
38. Kintisch E. Out of site. Science 2010, 329(5993):788.
39. Krohn S., Damborg S. On public attitudes towards wind power. Renewable Energy 1999, 16(1):954-960.
40. Ladenburg J. Attitudes towards on-land and offshore wind power development in Denmark; choice of development strategy. Renewable Energy 2008, 33(1):111-118.
41. McCright A.M., Dunlap R.E. Defeating Kyoto: the conservative movement's impact on US climate change policy. Social Problems 2003, 50(3):348-373.
42. Rabe B.G. Beyond NIMBY: Hazardous Waste Siting in Canada and the United States 1994, Cambridge University Press.
43. Renn Ortwin Risk Governance: Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World 2008, Earthscan.
44. Schively C. Understanding the NIMBY and LULU phenomena: reassessing our knowledge base and informing future research. Journal of Planning Literature 2007, 21(3):255.
45. Slimak M.W., Dietz T. Personal values, beliefs, and ecological risk perception. Risk Analysis 2006, 26(6):1689-1705.
46. Stedman R.C. Understanding place attachment among second home owners. American Behavioral Scientist 2006, 50(2):187.
47. Stern P.C. New environmental theories: toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues 2000, 56(3):407-424. Retrieved February 15, 2013.
48. Stern P.C., Kalof L., Dietz T., Guagnano G.A. Values, beliefs, and proenvironmental action: attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1995, 25(18):1611-1636.
49. Stern P.C., Dietz T., Guagnano G.A. The new ecological paradigm in social-psychological context. Environment and Behavior 1995, 27(6):723-743.
50. Stern P.C., Dietz T., Guagnano G.A. A brief inventory of values. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1998, 58(6):984-1001.
51. Swofford J., Slattery M. Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making. Energy Policy 2010, 38(5):2508-2519.
52. Szarka J. Wind power, discourse coalitions and climate change: breaking the stalemate?. European Environment 2004, 14(6):317-330.
53. Szarka J. Wind power, policy learning and paradigm change. Energy Policy 2006, 34(17):3041-3048.
54. Tanzler D. Gone with the wind? Prospects of community-owned wind energy in the United States. Wind Power and Power Politics 2010, 168-182. Routledge, New York. P.A. Strachan, D. Toke, D. Lal (Eds.).
55. Toke D., Strachan P.A. Ecological modernization and wind power in the UK. European Environment 2006, 16(3):155-166.
56. Walker G. Renewable energy and the public. Land Use Policy 1995, 12(1):49-59.
57. Walker G., Devine-Wright P. Community renewable energy: what should it mean?. Energy Policy 2008, 36(2):497-500.
58. Walker G., Cass N., Burningham K., Barnett J. Renewable energy and sociotechnical change: imagined subjectivities of the public and their implications. Environment and Planning A 2010, 42:931-947.
59. Warren C.R., Birnie R.V. Re-powering Scotland: wind farms and the 'Energy or Environment?' debate. Scottish Geographical Journal 2009, 125(2):97-126.
60. Warren C.R., Lumsden C., Dowd S.O., Birnie R.V. Green On Green: public perceptions of wind power in Scotland and Ireland. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2005, 48(6):853-875.
61. Whitfield S., Dietz T., Rosa E.A. Environmental Values, Risk Perception and Support for Nuclear Technology. Human Ecology Research Group 1999, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.
62. Whitfield S.C., Rosa E.A., Dan A., Dietz T. The future of nuclear power: value orientations and risk perception. Risk Analysis 2009, 29(3):425-437.
63. Wolsink M. Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renewable Energy 2000, 21(1):49-64.
64. 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.
65. Wolsink M. Wind power implementation: the nature of public attitudes: equity and fairness instead of 'backyard motives'. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2007, 11(6):1188-1207.
66. Wolsink M., Devilee J. The motives for accepting or rejecting waste infrastructure facilities. Shifting the focus from the planners' perspective to fairness and community commitment. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2009, 52(2):217-236. Retrieved February 6, 2013.
67. Wüstenhagen R., Wolsink M., Bürer M.J. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 2007, 35(5):2683-2691.
68. Jessup B. Plural and hybrid environmental values: a discourse analysis of the wind energy conflict in Australia and the United Kingdom. Environmental Politics 2010, 19(1):21-44.
69. van der Horst D. NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies. Energy Policy 2007, 35(5):2705-2714.