Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKlain, Sarah C.
dc.contributor.authorSatterfield, Terre
dc.contributor.authorSinner, Jim
dc.contributor.authorEllis, Joanne
dc.contributor.authorChan, Kai M.A.
dc.date.accessioned2017-10-03T12:49:34Z
dc.date.available2017-10-03T12:49:34Z
dc.date.issued2017-07-19
dc.identifier.citationKlain SC, Satterfield T, Sinner J, Ellis JI, Chan KMA (2018) Bird Killer, Industrial Intruder or Clean Energy? Perceiving Risks to Ecosystem Services Due to an Offshore Wind Farm. Ecological Economics 143: 111–129. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.030.
dc.identifier.issn0921-8009
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.030
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10754/625689
dc.description.abstractProposals to develop renewable energy technologies may threaten local values, which can generate opposition. Efforts to explain this opposition have focused on perceived negative aesthetic and environmental impact. Less attention has been paid to a fuller suite of the perceived risks and benefits associated with new energy technologies. This paper thus investigates impacts of an offshore wind farm pertaining to individual perceptions and judgments, and why risks to some ecosystem services might be cause for greater public concern than others. We find that this difference can be attributed to the affective and intuitive ways in which people perceive risk. Our mixed-methods design used interviews (n=27) that involved risk-benefit weighting tasks and an animated visualization to help people imagine an offshore wind farm in a familiar place. We found that affectively-loaded impacts (harm to charismatic wildlife and visual intrusion) were assigned greater weight than more easily quantifiable impacts (displacement of fishing, impact to tourism, cost of compliance with regulations). Interviewees identified increased regional energy self-sufficiency as the most valued potential benefit of an offshore wind farm. These results have implications for ecosystem service assessments generally and, more specifically, for our understanding of ‘affective’ dimensions of development proposals.
dc.description.sponsorshipWe thank Cawthron Institute for their collaboration made possible with Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) funding for this work (contract MAUX1208). We also thank members of the Connecting Human and Natural Systems lab group for useful feedback on early drafts. Evan Jones provided essential animation assistance. We also thank the following research assistants: Ruaridh Davies, Jakob Öberg, Allison Thompson, Calum Watt and Adrian Semmelink.
dc.publisherElsevier BV
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800916313854
dc.subjectRisk Perception
dc.subjectPsychometric Risk Paradigm
dc.subjectEcosystem Services
dc.subjectRenewable Energy
dc.subjectOffshore Wind Farm
dc.subjectEnvironmental Impacts
dc.titleBird Killer, Industrial Intruder or Clean Energy? Perceiving Risks to Ecosystem Services Due to an Offshore Wind Farm
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentRed Sea Research Center (RSRC)
dc.contributor.departmentBiological and Environmental Sciences and Engineering (BESE) Division
dc.identifier.journalEcological Economics
dc.contributor.institutionCollege of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Science, Oregon State University, 104 CEOAS Administration Building, 101 SW 26th St, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA
dc.contributor.institutionInstitute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
dc.contributor.institutionCawthron Institute, Private Bag 2, Nelson, New Zealand
kaust.personEllis, Joanne
dc.date.published-online2017-07-19
dc.date.published-print2018-01


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record