Public participation in decision making, perceived procedural fairness and public acceptability of renewable energy projects

Liu, Lu; Bouman, Thijs; Perlaviciute, Goda; Steg, Linda

doi:10.1016/j.egycc.2020.100013

Cited by 38 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Public participation in decision-making is expected to contribute to more democratic, better-quality, and legitimate decisions about energy projects, serving its normative, substantive, and instrumental functions, respectively (Fiorino 1990, Bidwell and Schweizer, 2020, Liu et al 2020a. Given that the merits of public participation rely on the representation of different people with different perspectives, we studied if and how people's willingness to participate in decisionmaking depends on their acceptability judgements and emotions towards local wind energy projects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…adopting smart meters), which are beyond the scope of this paper. decision-making by enabling people to influence decisions that affect them, (b) substantive-citizens can bring in multifaceted knowledge and expertise that experts may otherwise miss, and (c) instrumental-people are more likely to perceive the decision-making process as fair and accept energy projects if the public were involved in the decision-making (Fiorino 1990, Bidwell 2016, Bidwell and Schweizer 2020, Liu et al 2020a.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Opposing out loud versus supporting in silence: who wants to participate in decision-making about energy projects?

Liu

Perlaviciute²,

Squintani³

2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public participation in decision-making is widely expected to contribute to democratic society, better decisions, and higher public acceptability of energy projects. The realization of the desired functions of public participation depends, however, on who participates in decision-making. In opinion surveys about two planned wind parks in the Netherlands, we found that opponents were more willing to participate than supporters. Those who would not accept the project under any conditions were more motivated to participate than those who may accept the project if certain conditions were met. Furthermore, motivation to participate was associated with stronger negative emotions towards the project (e.g., angry, disappointed), and weaker positive emotions (e.g., happy, proud). Taken together, public preferences to participate in decision-making can affect the desired functions of public participation, as not everyone will equally participate. Our findings have important implications for energy policies primarily focusing on demographic representativeness in participation: it is also important to consider the representation of different perspectives in decision-making. Also, incorporating people’s different emotions towards energy projects can be a valuable route to effective public participation, in addition to the dominating rationalistic approach

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Opposing out loud versus supporting in silence: who wants to participate in decision-making about energy projects?

Liu

Perlaviciute²,

Squintani³

2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People are typically more positive about decision making and its outcomes when citizens or civil society organizations can participate (Arvai, 2003; Bernauer et al, 2016; Bernauer & Gampfer, 2013; Hoen et al, 2019; Walker & Baxter, 2017). This is likely because public participation is seen as a fair process that takes public interests into account, which increases public acceptability of the respective policies (Liu et al, 2020b). However, not all public participation procedures are seen as fair, and they sometimes may be seen as not transparent, not inclusive, and not taking public input seriously, which can evoke public resistance (Colvin et al, 2016; Gross, 2007; Wamsler et al, 2020).…”

Section: Normative Standards: the Four Ds Of Public Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contested climate policies and the four Ds of public participation: From normative standards to what people want

Perlaviciute

2021

WIREs Climate Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stimulating public participation in decision making is heralded as a way to get climate policies accepted by the public. Yet, little is known about whether and when public participation can increase policy acceptability. This is true in particular of practices organized by responsible parties to engage the public in decision making. Based on a vast body of interdisciplinary literature, four types of normative standards for effective public participation can be distilled, which I call the four Ds: dialogue, decision-making power, diversity, and deliberation. However, normative standards may not be enough for reaching socially acceptable climate policies, if people do not want to participate, or want to participate too late in decision making, and are not open to different perspectives. The result can be fake participation, exclusion, and polarization-all which may reduce, rather than increase, public acceptability of climate policies. Understanding public preferences for participation is therefore critical for the implementation of the four Ds and for reaching socially acceptable climate policies. This Perspective article is relevant for scientists, policy makers, NGO's, businesses, interest groups, and other parties wanting to understand how to engage the public in climate decision making.

show abstract

“…On the other hand, public opposition has gradually emerged due to its health risk impacts, both in residential and occupational settings at the same time. Public perception, acceptance, and engagement towards biomass power generation have been globally emphasized critical roles in influencing sustainable energy security [18,19]. Moreover, community mobilization and capacity building based on community-driven development (CDD) have long been recognized for empowering government, private sectors, civil society, and community networks in Thailand [20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community Capacity-Building Mobilization towards Energy Transitions in the Era of Thailand 4.0: A Case Study on Biomass Power Plants

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2015, the National Energy Policy Council (NEPC) approved the latest Alternative Energy Development Plan (AEDP) 2015–2036, targeting electricity generation from biomass, biogas, and municipal solid waste by 2036 towards the Thailand 4.0 policy. The small biomass power plants are intensively promoted, contributing to many more public concerns. Therefore, this study provided new insight using the readiness and resilience in the communities near the biomass power plant generation in Southern Thailand. The community readiness model (CRM) and community health impact assessment (CHIA) were adopted using mixed methods during January–November 2019. A total of 999 respondents replied to the questionnaires, 153 informants were interviewed, and the panel was discussed and analyzed by descriptive statistics and content analysis. Findings illustrated that all stakeholder sectors strengthened community-driven development based on the average community readiness (3.01 ± 0.11) in a vague awareness stage, only with participation in information giving (75.38%) and having an impact pain point score of 7.64 ± 0.54, which was a highly intense level used to develop the public policy towards biomass power plants. Recent advanced community tools offered new insights for the first time about community strategic plans for sustainable biomass power generation, to achieve community security and values of democracy in Southern Thailand.

show abstract

Public participation in decision making, perceived procedural fairness and public acceptability of renewable energy projects

Cited by 38 publications

References 35 publications

Opposing out loud versus supporting in silence: who wants to participate in decision-making about energy projects?

Opposing out loud versus supporting in silence: who wants to participate in decision-making about energy projects?

Contested climate policies and the four Ds of public participation: From normative standards to what people want

Community Capacity-Building Mobilization towards Energy Transitions in the Era of Thailand 4.0: A Case Study on Biomass Power Plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About