An Array of Deficits: Unpacking NIMBY Discourses in Wind Energy Developers’ Conceptualizations of Their Local Opponents

Society and Natural Resources

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 246-260

  Burningham, Kate ^a   Barnett, Julie ^b   Walker, Gordon ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SURREY   (United Kingdom)

^b University of Bath   (United Kingdom)

^c LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

deficit models; NIMBY; renewable energy technology; siting disputes; wind farms

Indexed keywords

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; ENERGY POLICY; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; WIND FARM; WIND POWER;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84923582774     PISSN: 08941920     EISSN: 15210723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2014.933923     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Aitken, M. 2010. Why we still don't understand the social aspects of wind power: A critique of key assumptions within the literature. Energy Policy 38:1834–1841.
2. Barnett, J., K. Burningham, G. Walker, and N. Cass. 2012. Imagined publics and engagement around renewable energy in the UK. Public Understand. Sci. 21(1):36–50.
3. Barry, J., G. Ellis, and C. Robinson. 2008. Cool rationalities and hot air: A rhetorical approach to understanding debates on renewable energy. Global Environ. Polit. 8(2):67–98.
4. Bell, D., T. Gray, and C. Haggett. 2005. Policy, participation and the ‘social gap’ in wind farm siting decisions. Environ. Polit. 14(4):460–477.
5. Bell, D., T. Gray, C. Haggett, and J. Swaffield. 2013. Revisiting the ‘social gap’: Public opinion and relations of power in the local politics of wind energy. Environ. Polit. 22(1):115–135.
6. Burningham, K. 2000. Using the language of NIMBY: A topic for research, not an activity for researchers. Local Environ. 5(1):55–67.
7. Burningham, K. 2012. NIMBYism. In International encyclopedia of housing and home, vol. 5, ed. S. J. Smith M. Elsinga L. Fox O'Mahony O. Eng S. Wachter and H. Lovell 127–130. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
8. Burningham, K., J. Barnett, A. Carr, W. Wehrmeyer, and R. Clift. 2007. Industrial constructions of publics and public knowledge: A qualitative investigation of practice in the UK chemicals industry. Public Understand. Sci. 16(1):23–43.
9. Cass, N., and G. Walker. 2009. Emotion and rationality: The characterisation and evaluation of opposition to renewable energy projects. Emotion Space Society 2:62–69.
10. Dear, M. 1992. Understanding and overcoming the NIMBY syndrome. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 58(3):288–300.
11. Department of Energy & Climate Change. 2011. UK renewable energy roadmap. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/48128/2167-uk-renewable-energy-roadmap.pdf (accessed 27 May 2014).
12. Devine-Wright, P. 2007. Energy citizenship: Psychological aspects of evolution in sustainable energy technologies. In J. Framing the present, shaping the future: Contemporary Governance of sustainable technologies, ed. J. Murphy 63–86. London: Earthscan.
13. Devine-Wright, P. 2009. Rethinking NIMBYism: The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place-protective action. J. Commun. Appl. Social Psychol. 19(6):426–441.
14. Devine-Wright, P. ed. 2011. Renewable energy and the public: From NIMBY to participation. London: Earthscan.
15. Ellis, G., J. Barry, and C. Robinson. 2006. Renewable energy and discourses of objection: Towards deliberative policy making. Summary of main research findings of ESRC project, Queens University Belfast. http://www.qub.ac.uk/research-centres/REDOWelcome/filestore/Filetoupload,40561,en.pdf (accessed 27 May 2014).
16. Freudenburg, W., and S. Pastor. 1992. NIMBYs and LULUs: Stalking the syndromes. J. Social Issues 48(4):39–61.
17. Futrell, R. 2003. Framing processes, cognitive liberation, and NIMBY protest in the U.S. chemical weapons disposal conflict. Sociol. Inquiry 73(3):359–386.
18. Gardner, G. T., and P. C. Stern. 2002. Environmental problems and human behavior. Boston: Pearson.
19. Gibson, T. 2005. NIMBY and the civic good. City Commun. 4(4):381–401.
20. Haggett, C. 2010. Understanding public responses to offshore wind power. Energy Policy 39(2):503–510.
21. Haggett, C., and J. Smith. 2004. Tilting at windmills? Using discourse analysis to understand the attitude–behaviour gap in renewable energy conflicts. Paper presented at British Sociological Association conference, York, UK, 22–24 March.
22. Halpern, D., C. Bates, G. Beales, and A. Heathfield. 2004. Personal responsibility and changing behaviour: The state of knowledge and its implications for public policy. London: Prime Ministers' Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office.
23. Irwin, A., and M. Michael. 2003. Science, social theory and public knowledge. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
24. Irwin, A., P. Simmons, and G. Walker. 1999. Faulty environments and risk reasoning: The local understanding of industrial hazards. Environ. Plan. A 31:1311–1326.
25. Keeney, R. L., and D. Von Winterfeldt. 1986. Improving risk communication. Risk Anal. 6:417–424.
26. Kemp, R. 1990. Why not in my backyard? A radical interpretation of public opposition to the deep disposal of radioactive waste in the United Kingdom. Environ. Plan. A 22:1239–1258.
27. Kempton, W., J. Firestone, J. Lilley, T. Rouleau, and P. Whitaker. 2005. The offshore wind power debate: Views from Cape Cod. Coastal Manage. 33:119–149.
28. Lake, R. 1993. Rethinking NIMBY. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 59(1):87–93.
29. Law, A., and W. McNeish. 2007. Contesting the new irrational actor model: A case study of mobile phone mast protest. Sociology 41:439–456.
30. Maranta, A., M. Guggenheim, P. Gisla, and C. Pohl. 2003. The reality of experts and the imagined lay person. Acta Sociol. 46(2):150–165.
31. McGowan, F., and R. Sauter. 2005. Public opinion on energy research: A desk study for the research councils. Brighton, UK: Sussex Energy Group, Science and Technology Policy Research.
32. McLachlan, C. 2010. Technologies in place: Symbolic interpretations of renewable energy. In Nature, society and environmental crisis, ed. B. Carter and N. Charles 181–199. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell/The Sociological Review.
33. Stilgoe, J. 2007. The (co-)production of public uncertainty: UK scientific advice on mobile phone health risks. Public Understand. Sci. 16:45–61.
34. Stratton, A. 2009. Opposing wind farms should be socially taboo, says Ed Miliband. The Guardian, March 24. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/mar/24/wind-farms-opposition-ed-miliband (accessed 27 May 2014).
35. Sturgis, P., and N. Allum. 2004. Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understand. Sci. 13(1):55–74.
36. Toynbee, P. 2007. Nimbys can't be allowed to put a block on wind farms. The Guardian, January 5. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/jan/05/comment.politics (accessed 27 May 2014).
37. Van der Horst, D. 2007. NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies. Energy Policy 35:2705–2714.
38. Wexler, M. 1996. A sociological framing of the NIMBY (not-in-my-backyard) syndrome. Int. Rev. Modern Sociol. 26(1):91–110.
39. Wolsink, M. 2000. Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: Institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renew. Energy 21:49–64.
40. Wolsink, M. 2006. Invalid theory impedes our understanding: A critique on the persistence of the language of NIMBY. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 31:85–91.
41. Wolsink, M. 2012. Undesired reinforcement of harmful ‘self-evident truths’ concerning the implementation of wind power. Energy Policy 48:83–87.
42. Wolsink, M., and S. Breukers. 2010. Contrasting the core beliefs regarding the effective implementation of wind power. An international study of stakeholder perspectives. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 53(5):535–558.
43. Wright, N., and B. Nerlich. 2006. Use of the deficit model in a shared culture of argumentation: The case of foot and mouth science. Public Understand. Sci. 15:331–342.
44. Wynne, B. 1991. Knowledges in context. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 16(1):111–121.
45. Wynne, B. 2001. Creating public alienation: Expert cultures of risk and ethics on GMOs. Sci. Cult. 10(4):445–481.
46. Wynne, B. 2006. Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science—Hitting the notes, but missing the music? Commun. Genet. 9:211–220.