Low-carbon but corrupt? Bribery, inappropriateness and unfairness concerns in Danish energy policy

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Low-carbon but corrupt? Bribery, inappropriateness and unfairness concerns in Danish energy policy. / Jørgensen, Marie Leer.

In: Energy Research & Social Science, Vol. 70, 101663, 2020.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Jørgensen, ML 2020, 'Low-carbon but corrupt? Bribery, inappropriateness and unfairness concerns in Danish energy policy', Energy Research & Social Science, vol. 70, 101663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101663

APA

Jørgensen, M. L. (2020). Low-carbon but corrupt? Bribery, inappropriateness and unfairness concerns in Danish energy policy. Energy Research & Social Science, 70, [101663]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101663

Vancouver

Jørgensen ML. Low-carbon but corrupt? Bribery, inappropriateness and unfairness concerns in Danish energy policy. Energy Research & Social Science. 2020;70. 101663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101663

Author

Jørgensen, Marie Leer. / Low-carbon but corrupt? Bribery, inappropriateness and unfairness concerns in Danish energy policy. In: Energy Research & Social Science. 2020 ; Vol. 70.

Bibtex

@article{66852f3a9501432fa5bb4f93b7936eb8,
title = "Low-carbon but corrupt?: Bribery, inappropriateness and unfairness concerns in Danish energy policy",
abstract = "This article explores the role of a Danish community benefit scheme in promoting local acceptance of wind energy projects and discusses the role of regulation. The paper presents findings, obtained from qualitative focus groups and interviews with local citizens in three wind energy projects. The analysis shows that the local citizens were ambivalent about the scheme. The community projects generally were perceived positively, but a number of critical reactions to the scheme were also identified. The categories into which local concerns fell were: bribery, legitimacy and administration of the schemes. A key finding was that some local citizens dismissed the scheme as inappropriate to address and redress the adverse impacts related to the wind project. Overall, the many challenges identified indicate that the Danish scheme failed to boost local acceptance. It was also evident from the Danish experience that a regulatory framework does not in itself address key concerns such as bribery as has been suggested in the literature on non-regulatory developer-led schemes in the UK. The findings raise questions about the effectiveness of community benefits as compensation tools aiming to promote local acceptance. A future role of such schemes in fair and equitable benefit-sharing is discussed.",
keywords = "Community benefits, Compensation, Local acceptance, Wind energy, Fairness, Benefit-sharing, COMMUNITY BENEFITS, SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE, WIND FARMS, ACCEPTABILITY, COMPENSATION, PERCEPTIONS",
author = "J{\o}rgensen, {Marie Leer}",
year = "2020",
doi = "10.1016/j.erss.2020.101663",
language = "English",
volume = "70",
journal = "Energy Research & Social Science",
issn = "2214-6296",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Low-carbon but corrupt?

T2 - Bribery, inappropriateness and unfairness concerns in Danish energy policy

AU - Jørgensen, Marie Leer

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - This article explores the role of a Danish community benefit scheme in promoting local acceptance of wind energy projects and discusses the role of regulation. The paper presents findings, obtained from qualitative focus groups and interviews with local citizens in three wind energy projects. The analysis shows that the local citizens were ambivalent about the scheme. The community projects generally were perceived positively, but a number of critical reactions to the scheme were also identified. The categories into which local concerns fell were: bribery, legitimacy and administration of the schemes. A key finding was that some local citizens dismissed the scheme as inappropriate to address and redress the adverse impacts related to the wind project. Overall, the many challenges identified indicate that the Danish scheme failed to boost local acceptance. It was also evident from the Danish experience that a regulatory framework does not in itself address key concerns such as bribery as has been suggested in the literature on non-regulatory developer-led schemes in the UK. The findings raise questions about the effectiveness of community benefits as compensation tools aiming to promote local acceptance. A future role of such schemes in fair and equitable benefit-sharing is discussed.

AB - This article explores the role of a Danish community benefit scheme in promoting local acceptance of wind energy projects and discusses the role of regulation. The paper presents findings, obtained from qualitative focus groups and interviews with local citizens in three wind energy projects. The analysis shows that the local citizens were ambivalent about the scheme. The community projects generally were perceived positively, but a number of critical reactions to the scheme were also identified. The categories into which local concerns fell were: bribery, legitimacy and administration of the schemes. A key finding was that some local citizens dismissed the scheme as inappropriate to address and redress the adverse impacts related to the wind project. Overall, the many challenges identified indicate that the Danish scheme failed to boost local acceptance. It was also evident from the Danish experience that a regulatory framework does not in itself address key concerns such as bribery as has been suggested in the literature on non-regulatory developer-led schemes in the UK. The findings raise questions about the effectiveness of community benefits as compensation tools aiming to promote local acceptance. A future role of such schemes in fair and equitable benefit-sharing is discussed.

KW - Community benefits

KW - Compensation

KW - Local acceptance

KW - Wind energy

KW - Fairness

KW - Benefit-sharing

KW - COMMUNITY BENEFITS

KW - SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE

KW - WIND FARMS

KW - ACCEPTABILITY

KW - COMPENSATION

KW - PERCEPTIONS

U2 - 10.1016/j.erss.2020.101663

DO - 10.1016/j.erss.2020.101663

M3 - Journal article

VL - 70

JO - Energy Research & Social Science

JF - Energy Research & Social Science

SN - 2214-6296

M1 - 101663

ER -

ID: 255212329