Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNabielek, Pia
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-16T10:24:56Z
dc.date.available2021-06-16T10:24:56Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifierONIX_20210616_9783854480334_24
dc.identifier.urihttps://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/49588
dc.description.abstractThere is a palpable tension between the planning and implementation of climate targets, for instance as regards renewable energy resources — among which wind power plays a significant role. This tension comes to the fore when assessing the effectiveness of spatial planning approaches to the deployment of wind energy. Planning approaches to wind power are evaluated in three European urbanised regions: South Holland (Netherlands), Lower Austria (Austria) and East Flanders (Belgium). Each region has adopted wind energy targets and introduced zoned areas in its regional planning agenda. The theory of ‘new institutionalism’ and the comparative case study method are the two pillars of this investigation. Zoning may be considered as a form of institutional design, for the introduction of zoned areas not only determines the territorial spread of wind turbines, but also configures socio-organisational entities and actors involved in implementation (developers, local residents, consultants, and public authorities). The comparative approach demonstrates that planning choices in the three case studies often yield to the concerns of higher governance levels, clearly prioritising energy policy goals above local, contextual values. In consequence, ‘zones for wind energy’ do not always gain public acceptance at the local level. Indeed, the foundation for locally supported wind energy zones is laid down in the planning process itself. This process has the potential to institutionalise a trade-off between collective purposes at a higher governance level and locally changing contexts and values. On the other hand, planning agents need to be more aware of path dependencies in spatial decisions concerning renewable energy. One of the wider implications of the planning approaches studied is that they restrict, rather than promote development. Thus, when zoned areas had to be redrawn, local opposition or ‘unwillingness’ seriously restricted the amount of leeway for reaching a consensus about alternative locations. The reason was that the formal planning exercise (zoning wind energy) implied more than an impartial territorial designation: it also communicated social consensus on land-use decisions of ´where wind turbines would come´ and ´where they would not´.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::R Earth Sciences, Geography, Environment, Planning::RP Regional and area planning::RPC Urban and municipal planning and policyen_US
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::T Technology, Engineering, Agriculture, Industrial processes::TH Energy technology and engineering::THV Alternative and renewable energy sources and technologyen_US
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::1 Place qualifiers::1D Europeen_US
dc.subject.otherspatial planning
dc.subject.otherpolicy analysis
dc.subject.otherinstitutional analysis
dc.subject.othergovernance
dc.subject.otherEurope
dc.subject.otherurbanised regions
dc.subject.otherclimate policy
dc.subject.otherrenewable energy
dc.subject.otherwind energy
dc.titleWind power deployment in urbanised regions
dc.title.alternativeAn institutional analysis of planning and implementation
dc.typebook
oapen.identifier.doi10.34727/2019/isbn.978-3-85448-033-4
oapen.relation.isPublishedBy957c0323-9030-48c6-8bd4-a008cf795a7a
oapen.relation.isbn9783854480334
oapen.imprintTU Wien Academic Press
oapen.pages238
oapen.place.publicationVienna


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record