This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Why does the expansion of wind energy sometimes meet with local resistance, even though renewable energy generally enjoys broad support? RIFS researcher Jörg Radtke used a representative survey of 6,284 people in North Rhine-Westphalia to investigate which social characteristics are linked to the acceptance of wind energy.
The paper is published in the journal Energy Policy. The key finding: political orientation is significantly more closely linked to attitudes toward wind energy than place of residence. The frequently assumed urban–rural divide proves to be comparatively weak in the statistical analyses.
This is particularly evident in people's support for expanding wind energy in their own district. Respondents who do not intend to vote for the AfD score around 3.6 on a scale of 1 to 5 in both rural and urban areas. Among respondents intending to vote for the AfD, however, the scores are around 1.5 in both rural and urban settings.
The differences between urban and rural areas within the same political group are minor. Even when other social characteristics are taken into account, political orientation shows by far the strongest structural correlation with local acceptance of wind energy. "Our findings contradict the notion that conflicts over wind energy can be explained primarily by a divide between urban and rural areas," says Radtke.
"More decisive are the political orientations, relationships of trust and notions of fair procedures through which people assess specific wind energy projects." However, political differences are not the only relevant factor. Trust in independent science, planning authorities, politicians, the media and other public institutions is closely linked to support for wind energy, as are perceptions of fair procedures and transparent siting decisions. If such project-related factors are included in the statistical models, a significantly larger share of the differences in local support can be explained.
"A fair process cannot be reduced to a single instrument," explains Radtke. "What matters is transparent decision-making on where projects are sited, opportunities for early public involvement and clearly defined benefits for local communities. Financial participation can be one component, but it should be embedded within a broader, credible process." Despite differing political outlooks, citizens tend to have similar information needs.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
