Local acceptance of solar farms: The impact of energy narratives

被引:20
作者
Scovell, Mitchell [1 ]
McCrea, Rod [1 ]
Walton, Andrea [1 ]
Poruschi, Lavinia [1 ]
机构
[1] Commonwealth Sci Ind Res Org CSIRO, 41 Boggo Rd, Dutton Pk, Qld 4102, Australia
关键词
Solar farm; Local acceptance; Social licence; Network model; Energy transition; Narratives; CLIMATE-CHANGE; PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE; RENEWABLE ENERGY; SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE; NUCLEAR-POWER; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE; NETWORK ANALYSIS; SCALE SOLAR; PERCEPTIONS; ATTITUDES;
D O I
10.1016/j.rser.2023.114029
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
This research explores how a new concept, support for energy transition narratives, and other commonly applied social licence factors influence local acceptance of large-scale solar farms. Producing renewable electricity re-quires deploying more large-scale renewable technology infrastructure and support of host communities will be paramount. There is a dearth of studies that investigate a comprehensive set of social licence factors that in-fluence local support of solar farms. Moreover, there is a lack of research considering how broader environmental worldview and beliefs about the energy transition influence local level support for renewable energy infra-structure. Survey data from a large, representative sample of the Australian population is analysed using a network modelling approach to identify conditional associations between variables of interest. Results reveal that general support for renewables in the energy transition had relatively strong direct and indirect associations with local acceptance in addition to social licence factors. Conversely, beliefs about the energy transition beyond the role for renewables (i.e., support for the role of natural gas, support for exporting fossil fuels and willingness to make trade-offs for a faster energy transition) had relatively weak effects on local acceptance and other social licence factors. The findings suggest that individual alignment with broader energy transition narratives explains local solar farm support beyond social licence factors. Future social licence research should consider the role of broader public narratives when investigating the factors that facilitate or impede local acceptance of renewable energy projects.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 86 条
[1]   Explaining the discrepancy between intentions and actions: The case of hypothetical bias in contingent valuation [J].
Ajzen, I ;
Brown, TC ;
Carvajal, F .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN, 2004, 30 (09) :1108-1121
[2]  
[Anonymous], Australian National Accounts: National Income, Expenditure and Product
[3]   A critical and empirical analysis of the national-local 'gap' in public responses to large-scale energy infrastructures [J].
Batel, Susana ;
Devine-Wright, Patrick .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2015, 58 (06) :1076-1095
[4]   Using a Gaussian Graphical Model to Explore Relationships Between Items and Variables in Environmental Psychology Research [J].
Bhushan, Nitin ;
Mohnert, Florian ;
Sloot, Daniel ;
Jans, Lise ;
Albers, Casper ;
Steg, Linda .
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2019, 10
[5]   The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes towards commercial wind energy [J].
Bidwell, David .
ENERGY POLICY, 2013, 58 :189-199
[6]   Network Analysis: An Integrative Approach to the Structure of Psychopathology [J].
Borsboom, Denny ;
Cramer, Angelique O. J. .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, VOL 9, 2013, 9 :91-121
[7]   Public perceptions of and responses to new energy technologies [J].
Boudet, Hilary S. .
NATURE ENERGY, 2019, 4 (06) :446-455
[8]   Narratives and networks model of the social licence [J].
Boutilier, Robert G. .
RESOURCES POLICY, 2020, 69
[9]   Understanding social acceptance of electricity generation sources [J].
Bronfman, Nicolas C. ;
Jimenez, Raquel B. ;
Arevalo, Pilar C. ;
Cifuentes, Luis A. .
ENERGY POLICY, 2012, 46 :246-252
[10]   Utility-scale solar and public attitudes toward siting: A. critical examination of proximity [J].
Carlisle, Juliet E. ;
Solan, David ;
Kane, Stephanie L. ;
Joe, Jeffrey .
LAND USE POLICY, 2016, 58 :491-501