Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T04:29:24.683Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Landscape Stewardship in Wind Energy Conflicts

Between Cultural Myths and Interests

from Part II - Landscape Stewardship on the Ground

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2017

By
Bleta Arifi ,
Georg Winkel  and
Chantal Ruppert-Winkel
Edited by
Claudia Bieling  and
Tobias Plieninger
Claudia Bieling
Affiliation:
Universität Hohenheim, Stuttgart
Tobias Plieninger
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen
Get access

Summary

Landscape-related conflicts caused by wind energy use are an increasingly important issue for landscape stewardship. In this chapter, literature on conflicts at the landscape-wind energy nexus is reviewed. Altogether 65 scholarly articles are examined with the emphasis on the following elements: Theoretical perspective and methods, conceptualisation of landscape and importance of landscape in renewable energy conflicts, suggestions for governing landscape-energy conflicts and links to the concept of landscape stewardship. We find that a non-essentialist perspective dominates in literature, emphasising the importance of cultural biases and the (place related) symbolic meaning of landscape. In contrast, material interests are understudied. We argue that there is a need to undertake a more thorough investigation of the latter dimension, i.e. the distributive aspect of wind energy and landscape conflicts. The implication for landscape stewardship is to acknowledge and align both – cultural biases and material interests – through conflict resolution strategies which emphasise both societal participation and financial compensation mechanisms or local ownership models for wind energy installations. Finally we illustrate our argument by introducing the case of the Simmern Solidarity Pact, an instrument which has been used to conciliate aesthetic preferences and distributive issues through a combination of financial compensation and planning rules.
Type
Chapter
Information
The Science and Practice of Landscape Stewardship , pp. 167 - 181
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abromas, J. (2011). Some aspects of the assessment of visual impact of wind turbines on landscape of Western Lithuania. Rural Development, 5, 298–302.Google Scholar
Adelaja, S., Shaw, J., Beyea, W. & McKeown, C. (2010). Renewable energy potential on brownfield sites: A case study of Michigan. Energy Policy, 38, 7021–7030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aitken, M. (2008). Power and Wind Power: Exploring Experiences of Renewable Energy Planning Processes in Scotland. PhD thesis. Aberdeen: Robert Gordon University.Google Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, J., Ellis, G. & Robinson, C. (2008). Cool rationalities and hot air: A rhetorical approach to understanding debates on renewable energy. Global Environmental Politics, 8, 67–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brittan, G. G. (2001). Wind, energy, landscape: Reconciling nature and technology. Philosophy & Geography, 4, 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowell, R. (2010). Wind power, landscape and strategic, spatial planning – The construction of ‘acceptable locations’ in Wales. Land Use Policy, 27, 222–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Waal, R. & Stremke, S. (2014). Energy transition: Missed opportunities and emerging challenges for landscape planning and designing. Sustainability, 6, 4386–4415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine-Wright, P. (2005). Beyond NIMBYism: Towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy, 8, 125–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine-Wright, P. (2009). Rethinking NIMBYism: The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place-protective action. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 19, 426–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine-Wright, P. & Howes, Y. (2010). Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: A wind energy case study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 271–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dohmen, F. & Hornig, F. (2004). Die große Luftnummer. Der Spiegel, 14, 80–97.Google Scholar
Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of political action in a democracy. Journal of Political Economy, 65, 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ek, K. & Persson, L. (2014). Wind farms – where and how to place them? A choice experiment approach to measure consumer preferences for characteristics of wind farm establishments in Sweden. Ecological Economics, 105, 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, G., Barry, J. & Robinson, C. (2006). Renewable Energy and Discourses of Objection: Towards Deliberative Policy-making. Summary of Main Research Findings. Belfast: Queen's University.Google Scholar
Fast, S. & Mabee, W. (2015). Place-making and trust-building: The influence of policy on host community responses to wind farms. Energy Policy, 81, 27–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firestone, J., Bates, A. & Knapp, L. (2015). See me, feel me, touch me, heal me: Wind turbines, culture, landscapes, and sound impressions. Land Use Policy, 46, 241–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gailing, L. & Leibenath, M. (2010). Diskurse, Institutionen und Governance: Sozialwissenschaftliche Zugänge zum Untersuchungsgegenstand Kulturlandschaft. Berichte zur Deutschen Landeskunde, 84, 9–25.Google Scholar
Gailing, L. & Leibenath, M. (2013). The social construction of landscapes: Two theoretical lenses and their empirical applications. Landscape Research, 40, 123–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gee, K. (2010). Offshore wind power development as affected by seascape values on the German North Sea coast. Land Use Policy, 27, 185–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, J. B., Stephenson, J. R. & Smith, I. J. (2009). Public perceptions of wind energy developments: Case studies from New Zealand. Energy Policy, 37, 3348–3357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, C. (2007). Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance. Energy Policy, 35, 2727–2736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, N., Ashworth, P. & Devine-Wright, P. (2013). Societal acceptance of wind farms: Analysis of four common themes across Australian case studies. Energy Policy, 58, 200–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, P. B. (2002). Rational-Choice-Theorie. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.Google Scholar
Hindmarsh, R. (2013). Hot air ablowin! ‘Media-speak’, social conflict, and the Australian ‘decoupled’ wind farm controversy. Social Studies of Science, 44, 194–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hindmarsh, R. & Matthews, C. (2008). Deliberative speak at the turbine face: Community engagement, wind farms, and renewable energy transitions, in Australia. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 10, 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jobert, A., Laborgne, P. & Mimler, S. (2007). Local acceptance of wind energy: Factors of success identified in French and German case studies. Energy Policy, 35, 2751–2760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. R. & Eiser, R. J. (2010). Understanding ‘local’ opposition to wind development in the UK: How big is a backyard? Energy Policy, 38, 3106–3117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kontogianni, A., Tourkolias, C., Skourtos, M. & Damigos, D. (2014). Planning globally, protesting locally: Patterns in community perceptions towards the installation of wind farms. Renewable Energy, 66, 170–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krauss, W. (2010). The ‘Dingpolitik’ of wind energy in northern German landscapes: An ethnographic case study. Landscape Research, 35, 195–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunz, V. (2004). Rational Choice. Frankfurt: Campus-Verlag.Google Scholar
Leibenath, M. (2013a). Energiewende und Landschafts-Governance: Empirische Befunde und theoretische Perspektiven. In Neue Energielandschaften – Neue Perspektiven der Landschaftsforschung, Gailing, L. & Leibenath, M. (eds.). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien, pp. 45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibenath, M. (2013b). Konstruktivistische, interpretative Landschaftsforschung: Prämissen und Perspectiven. In Wie werden Landschaften gemacht? Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf die Konstituierung von Kulturlandschaften, Leibenath, M., Heiland, S., Kilper, H. & Tzschaschel, S. (eds.). Bielefeld: transkript Verlag, pp. 7–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibenath, M. (2014). Landschaft im Diskurs: Welche Landschaft? Welcher Diskurs? Naturschutz und Landschaftsplannung, 46, 124–129.Google Scholar
Leibenath, M. & Otto, A. (2012). Diskursive Konstituierung von Kulturlandschaft am Beispiel politischer Windenergiediskurse in Deutschland. Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 70, 119–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibenath, M. & Otto, A. (2013). Local debates about ‘landscape’ as viewed by German regional planners: Results of a representative survey in a discourse-analytical framework. Land Use Policy, 32, 366–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibenath, M. & Otto, A. (2014). Competing wind energy discourses, contested landscapes. Landscape Online, 38, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mariel, P., Meyerhoff, J. & Hess, S. (2013). Heterogeneous preferences toward landscape externalities of wind turbines – combining choices and attitudes in a hybrid model. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 647–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, K. & Milbourne, P. (2014). Constructing a ‘landscape justice’ for windfarm development: The case of Nant Y Moch, Wales. Geoforum, 53, 104–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadaï, A. & van der Horst, D. (2010). Introduction: Landscapes of energies. Landscape Research, 35, 143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otto, A. & Leibenath, M. (2013). Windenergielandschaften als Konfliktfeld: Landschaftskonzepte, Argumentationsmuster und Diskurskoalitionen. In Neue Energielandschaften – Neue Perspektiven der Landschaftsforschung, Gailing, L. & Leibenath, M. (eds.). Wiesbaden: Springer VS, pp. 65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasqualetti, M. J. (2000). Morality, space and the power of wind-energy landscapes. The Geographical Review, 90, 381–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasqualetti, M. J. (2011). Opposing wind energy landscapes: A search for common cause. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 101, 907–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phadke, R. (2010). Steel forests or smoke stacks: The politics of visualisation in the Cape Wind controversy. Environmental Politics, 19, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phadke, R. (2011). Resisting and reconciling big wind: Middle landscape politics in the new American West. Antipode, 43, 754–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, M., Montanes, C. & Fueyo, N. (2010). A method for the assessment of the visual impact caused by the large-scale deployment of renewable-energy facilities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30, 240–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rygg, B. J. (2012). Wind power – An assault on local landscapes or an opportunity for modernization? Energy Policy, 48, 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21, 129–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabatier, P. A. & Weible, C. (2007). The advocacy coalition framework: Innovations and clarifications. In Theories of the Policy Process, Sabatier, P. A. (ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp.189–220.Google Scholar
Selman, P. (2010). Learning to love the landscapes of carbon-neutrality. Landscape Research, 35, 157–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solli, J. (2010). Where the eagles dare? Enacting resistance to wind farms through hybrid collectives. Environmental Politics, 19, 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szarka, J. (2004). Wind power, discourse coalitions and climate change: Breaking the stalemate? European Environment, 14, 317–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thayer, R. L. & Freeman, C. M. (1987). Altamont – public perceptions of a wind energy landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning, 14, 379–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, M., Ellis, R. & Wildavsky, A. B. (1990). Cultural Theory, 4th edn. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Toke, D., Breukers, S. & Wolsink, M. (2008). Wind power deployment outcomes: How can we account for the differences? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12, 1129–1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torres Sibille, A. del C., Cloquell-Ballester, V.-A. & Darton, R. (2009). Development and validation of a multicriteria indicator for the assessment of objective aesthetic impact of wind farms. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13, 40–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Horst, D. (2014). Landscapes of lost energy: Counterfactual geographical imaginary for a more sustainable society. Moravian Geographical Reports, 22, 66–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Horst, D. & Toke, D. (2010). Exploring the landscape of wind farm developments; local area characteristics and planning process outcomes in rural England. Land Use Policy, 27, 214–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, C. R. & McFadyen, M. (2010). Does community ownership affect public attitudes to wind energy? A case study from south-west Scotland. Land Use Policy, 27, 204–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winkel, G. & Sotirov, M. (2015). Whose integration is this? European forest policy between the gospel of coordination, institutional competition, and a new spirit of integration. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32, 1–19.Google Scholar
Wolsink, M. (2000). Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: Institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renewable Energy, 21, 49–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolsink, M. (2007). Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation. Energy Policy, 35, 2692–2704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolsink, M. (2010). Near-shore wind power – protected seascapes, environmentalists’ attitudes, and the technocratic planning perspective. Land Use Policy, 27, 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zografos, C. & Martinez-Alier, J. (2009). The politics of landscape value: A case study of wind farm conflict in rural Catalonia. Environment and Planning A, 41, 1726–1744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×