The role of distance and type of location in the local acceptability of wind parks: A case study in the Netherlands

Plans for wind energy projects are often met with local opposition. Building on prior evidence, we expected, that the higher the proximity to the wind locations, the fewer people would accept the planned wind parks, and that people would prefer wind parks in industrial areas over natural areas. The unexplored question is whether people would only care about nature in their immediate surroundings, or more generally (i.e., interaction between proximity and naturalness). We examined this in a real-life setting, using a quasi-experimental design. The Dutch Province of South-Holland identified three possible locations for developing wind parks: (i) a mostly natural and densely inhabited area, (ii) an industrial area, with a potential to build new homes, and (iii) an area with mostly agricultural and greenhouse activity. Overall, we found low acceptability, echoing public controversy around wind parks in the Netherlands. The closer people lived to each location, the less acceptable they found wind parks in that location, in line with the proximity hypothesis. Yet, these effects were small, and wind turbines in the natural area were less acceptable irrespective of the proximity. The results add to the accumulating criticism of the popular NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) wisdom that people do not want anything near them out of self-interest. We discuss the results in the light of the literature on energy justice and spatial justice. To understand local acceptability, it is critical to engage with local concerns instead of relying on heuristics such as distance or landscape type.