Quantifying Public Preferences for Community-Based Renewable Energy Projects in South Korea
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Methodology and Data
3.1. CE Survey
3.2. Model
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Lee, C.Y.; Lee, M.K.; Yoo, S.H. Willingness to pay for replacing traditional energies with renewable energy in South Korea. Energy 2017, 128, 284–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MOTIE. The Third Energy Master Plan; MOTIE: Sejong, Korea, 2019. (In Korean)
- Petrova, M.A. From NIMBY to acceptance: Toward a novel framework-VESPA-For organizing and interpreting community concerns. Renew. Energy 2016, 86, 1280–1294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woo, J.R.; Chung, S.; Lee, C.Y.; Huh, S.Y. Willingness to participate in community-based renewable energy projects: A contingent valuation study in South Korea. Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev. 2019, 112, 643–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aitken, M. Wind power and community benefits: Challenges and opportunities. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 6066–6075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.; Park, S.Y.; Lee, J. Do people really want renewable energy? Who wants renewable energy? Discrete choice model of reference-dependent preference in South Korea. Energy Policy 2018, 120, 761–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Álvarez-Farizo, B.; Hanley, N. Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain. Energy Policy 2002, 30, 107–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vecchiato, D.; Tempesta, T. Public preferences for electricity contracts including renewable energy: A marketing analysis with choice experiments. Energy 2015, 88, 168–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sagebiel, J.; Müller, J.R.; Rommel, J. Are consumers willing to pay more for electricity from cooperatives? Results from an online Choice Experiment in Germany. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2014, 2, 90–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Botelho, A.; Pinto, L.M.C.; Lourenço-Gomes, L.; Valente, M.; Sousa, S. Social sustainability of renewable energy sources in electricity production: An application of the contingent valuation method. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2016, 26, 429–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merino-Castello, A. Eliciting Consumers Preferences Using Stated Preference Discrete Choice Models: Contingent Ranking versus Choice Experiment. UPF Econ. Bus. Work. Paper 2003, 705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bell, D.; Gray, Y.; Haggett, C. The ‘social gap’ in wind farm siting decisions: Explanations and policy responses. Environ. Politics 2005, 14, 460–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wüstenhagen, R.; Wolsink, M.; Bürer, M.J. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 2683–2691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolsink, M. The research agenda on social acceptance of distributed generation in smart grids: Renewable as common pool resources. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 822–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, S.; Lee, H.; Kim, H.; Jang, D.H.; Kim, H.J.; Huh, J.; Cho, Y.S.; Huh, K. Improvement in policy and proactive interconnection procedure for renewable energy expansion in South Korea. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 98, 150–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, J.; Kim, B. An analysis of South Korea’s energy transition policy with regards to offshore wind power development. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 109, 71–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allen, J.; Sheate, W.R.; Diaz-Chavez, R. Community-based renewable energy in the Lake District National Park—local drivers, enablers, barriers, and solutions. Local Environ. 2012, 17, 261–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kolk, A.; van den Buuse, D. In search of viable business models for development: Sustainable energy in developing countries. Corp. Gov. 2012, 12, 551–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kellett, J. Community-based energy policy: A practical approach to carbon reduction. J. Environ. Plan. Man. 2012, 50, 381–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Camarinha-Matos, L.M.; Afsarmanesh, H.; Boucher, X. The role of collaborative networks in sustainability. In Proceedings of the Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises, St. Etienne, France, 11–13 October 2010; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Rogers, J.C.; Simmons, E.A.; Convery, I.; Weatherall, A. Public perceptions of opportunities for community-based renewable energy projects. Energy Policy 2008, 36, 4217–4226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.I.; Chhetri, A.B.; Islam, M.R. Community-based energy model: A novel approach to developing sustainable energy. Energy Sources Part B 2007, 2, 353–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, W.; Xue, X.; Liu, G.; Zhou, R. Techno-economic evaluation of a community-based hybrid renewable energy system considering site-specific nature. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 171, 1737–1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, C.R.; Eiser, J.R. Understanding ‘local’ opposition to wind development in the UK: How big is a backyard? Energy Policy 2010, 38, 3106–3117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dimitropoulos, A.; Kontoleon, A. Assessing the determinants of local acceptability of wind-farm investment: A choice experiment in the Greek Aegean Islands. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 1842–1854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalkbrenner, B.J.; Roosen, J. Citizens’ willingness to participate in local renewable energy projects: The role of community and trust in Germany. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2016, 13, 60–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Devine-Wright, P. Local aspects of UK renewable energy development: Exploring public beliefs and policy implications. Local Environ. 2005, 10, 57–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salm, S.; Hille, S.L.; Wüstenhagen, R. What are retail investors’ risk-return preferences towards renewable energy projects? A choice experiment in Germany. Energy Policy 2016, 97, 310–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masini, A.; Menichetti, E. The impact of behavioral factors in the renewable energy investment decision making process: Conceptual framework and empirical findings. Energy Policy 2011, 40, 28–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kosenius, A.K.; Ollikainen, M. Valuation of environmental and societal trade-offs of renewable energy sources. Energy Policy 2013, 62, 1148–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scarpa, R.; Willis, K. Willingness-to-pay for renewable energy: Primary and discretionary choice of British households’ for micro-generation technologies. Energy Econ. 2010, 32, 129–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Train, K. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation, 2nd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Hanley, N.; Wright, R.E. Using choice experiments to value the environment. Environ. Resour. Econ. 1998, 11, 413–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, H.J.; Lim, S.Y.; Yoo, S.H. The environmental costs of photovoltaic power plants in South Korea: A choice experiment study. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haaijer, R.; Wedel, M. Conjoint choice experiments: General characteristics and alternative model specification. In Conjoint Measurement: Methods and Applications, 3rd ed.; Gustafsson, A., Herrmann, A., Huber, F., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2003; pp. 371–412. [Google Scholar]
- KEEI (Korea Energy Economics Institute). 2019 Yearbook of Energy Statistics; KEEI: Ulsan, Korea, 2019. (In Korean) [Google Scholar]
- MOTIE. The Renewable Energy 3020 Implementation Plan; MOTIE: Sejong, Korea, 2017. (In Korean)
- Im, H.; Yun, S.J. Analysis of the policy process of the separation distance regulations of local governments concerning the location conflicts of photovoltaics facilities. New Renew. Energy 2019, 15, 61–73. (In Korean) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, Y.M.; Choung, T.R.; Son, J.H. Study on noise and low frequency noise generated by wind power plant (wind farm). J. Environ. Impact Assess. 2011, 20, 425–434. (In Korean) [Google Scholar]
- Haugen, K.M.B. International Review of Policies and Recommendations for Wind Turbine Setbacks from Residences: Setbacks, Noise, Shadow Flicker, and Other Concerns; Minnesota Department of Commerce: Saint Paul, MN, USA, 2011.
- MOTIE. Announcement of Renewable Energy 3020 Implementation and Countermeasures to Resolve Side Effects of Solar Photovoltaic and Wind Power; MOTIE: Sejong, Korea, 2018; (press release, In Korean).
- Langer, K.; Decker, T.; Menrad, K. Public participation in wind energy projects located in Germany: Which form of participation is the key to acceptance? Renew. Energy 2017, 112, 63–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lienhoop, N. Acceptance of wind energy and the role of financial and procedural participation: An investigation with focus groups and choice experiments. Energy Policy 2018, 118, 97–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, L.; Bouman, T.; Perlaviciute, G.; Steg, L. Effects of trust and public participation on acceptability of renewable energy projects in the Netherlands and China. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2019, 53, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suškevičs, M.; Eiter, S.; Martinat, S.; Stober, D.; Vollmer, E.; de Boer, C.L.; Buchecher, M. Regional variation in public acceptance of wind energy development in Europe: What are the roles of planning procedures and participation? Land Use Pol. 2019, 81, 311–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bauwens, T. Explaining the diversity of motivations behind community renewable energy. Energy Policy 2016, 93, 278–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hammami, S.M.; Chtourou, S.; Triki, A. Identifying the determinants of community acceptance of renewable energy technologies: The case study of a wind energy project from Tunisia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Langer, K.; Decker, T.; Roosen, J.; Menrad, K. A qualitative analysis to understand the acceptance of wind energy in Bavaria. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 64, 248–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bateman, I.J.; Carson, R.T.; Day, B.; Hanemann, M.; Hanley, N.; Hett, T.; Jones-Lee, M.; Loomes, G.; Mourato, S.; Özdemiroglu, E.; et al. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual; Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.: Cheltenham, UK, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- KEEI. Research on Residents Participatory New Renewable Energy Power Plant Promotion Plan; MOTIE: Sejong, Korea, 2014. (In Korean)
- Korea Energy Agency. Residents Participatory New and Renewable Power Generation Project Incentive Plan; Korea Energy Agency: Yongin, Korea, 2016. (In Korean)
- Ouedraogo, B. Household energy preferences for cooking in urban Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Energy Policy 2006, 34, 3787–3795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rao, M.N.; Reddy, B.S. Variations in energy use by Indian households: An analysis of micro level data. Energy 2007, 32, 143–153. [Google Scholar]
- McFadden, D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In Frontiers of Econometrics, 1st ed.; Zarembka, P., Ed.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1974; pp. 142–150. [Google Scholar]
- Guo, S.; Fraser, M.W. Propensity Score Analysis: Statistical Methods and Applications, 2nd ed.; SAGE: Thousands Oaks, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Borchers, A.M.; Duke, J.M.; Parsons, G.R. Does willingness to pay for green energy differ by source? Energy Policy 2007, 35, 3327–3334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, C.; Rogers, A.A.; Kragt, M.E.; Zhang, F.; Polyakov, M.; Gibson, F.; Chalak, M.; Pandit, R.; Tapsuwan, S. Consumers’ willingness to pay for renewable energy: A meta-regression analysis. Resour. Energy Econ. 2015, 42, 93–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ribeiro, F.; Ferreira, P.; Araújo, M.; Braga, A.C. Public opinion on renewable energy technologies in Portugal. Energy 2014, 69, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, H.J.; Huh, S.Y.; Woo, J.; Lee, C.Y. A comparative study on acceptance of public and local residents for renewable energy projects: Focused on solar, wind, and biomass. Innov. Stud. 2020, 15, 29–61. (In Korean) [Google Scholar]
- Burningham, K.; Barnett, J.; Walker, G. An array of deficits: Unpacking NIMBY discourses in wind energy developers’ conceptualizations of their local opponents. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2015, 28, 246–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ek, K. Public and private attitudes towards “green” electricity: The case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy 2005, 33, 1677–1689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koch, J.; Christ, O. Household participation in an urban photovoltaic project in Switzerland: Exploration of triggers and barriers. Sust. Cities Soc. 2018, 37, 420–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, B.; Hu, Y.; Wang, A.; Yu, Z.; Yu, J.; Wu, X. Critical factors of effective public participation in sustainable energy projects. J. Manag. Eng. 2018, 34, 04018029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Attribute | Attribute Level |
---|---|
RE technology | (1) Solar photovoltaic |
(2) Wind | |
(3) Biomass | |
Distance from residence | (1) 100 m |
(2) 500 m | |
(3) 1000 m | |
Participation form | (1) Bond investment |
(2) Equity investment | |
Participation level | (1) Low |
(2) High | |
Expected rate of return | (1) 2%/year |
(2) 4%/year | |
(3) 6%/year |
A | B | C | D | |
---|---|---|---|---|
RE technology | Wind | Solar Photovoltaic | Biomass | No interest to participate (Status quo) |
Distance from residence | 500 m | 1000 m (1 km) | 100 m | |
Participation form | Equity investment | Equity investment | Bond investment | |
Participation level | Low | Low | High | |
Expected rate of return | 4%/year | 6%/year | 2%/year | |
Most preferable option | V |
Type | (1) Survey for General Public | (2) Survey for Local Residents |
---|---|---|
Population | Head of household (and spouse), aged 20 to 65, nationwide | Head of household (and spouse), aged 20 to 65, living in administrative areas within 1 km of RE power plant grounds |
Sample size | 508 persons | 306 persons |
Sampling method | Sampled at random from proportional quotas based on age and region | Purposive quota sampling method |
Method | Web survey | Face-to-face interview |
Period | May 22 to May 29, 2017 | May 19 to May 30, 2017 |
Survey firm | Hankook Research |
Type | Definition | (1) Survey for General Public | (2) Survey for Local Residents |
---|---|---|---|
No. Respondents (%) | |||
Total | 508 (100%) | 306 (100%) | |
Gender | Male | 244 (52%) | 155 (50.7%) |
Female | 264 (8.5%) | 151 (49.3%) | |
Age | 19–29 | 43 (8.5%) | 12 (3.9%) |
30–39 | 103 (20.3%) | 48 (15.7%) | |
40–49 | 147 (28.9%) | 80 (26.1%) | |
50–59 | 151 (29.7%) | 107 (35.0%) | |
≥60 | 64 (12.6%) | 59 (19.3%) | |
Education level | Less than high school | 88 (17.3%) | 220 (71.9%) |
More than college | 420 (82.7%) | 86 (28.1%) | |
Type of RE power plant | Wind power | 101 (33.0%) | |
PV | 103 (33.7%) | ||
Biomass | 102 (33.3%) |
Variable | General Public | Local Residents | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coefficient (Standard Error) | MWTA (%) | Coefficient (Standard Error) | MWTA (%) | ||
Renewable energy technology | Wind | −1.2211 ** (−0.1856) | 10.3197 | −2.9697 ** (0.2475) | 15.3282 |
Solar | 0.4214 * (0.1695) | −3.5618 | −1.8350 ** (0.2236) | 9.4717 | |
Biomass | −0.9040 ** (0.1808) | 7.6395 | −2.8115 ** (0.2313) | 14.5115 | |
Distance from residence | 0.0005 ** (0.9519) | −0.0042 | 0.0006 ** (0.0002) | −0.0031 | |
Participation form (Equity) | −0.0680 (0.0964) | 0.5750 | −0.0694 (0.1274) | 0.3580 | |
Participation level (Low) | 0.0454 (0.0808) | −0.3837 | −0.2588 * (0.1180) | 1.3360 | |
Expected rate of return | 0.1183 ** (0.0287) | 0.1937 ** (0.0373) | |||
N = 1524; Pseudo R2 = 0.01 LL = −1750.080 | N = 918; Pseudo R2 = 0.022 LL = −970.149 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tanujaya, R.R.; Lee, C.-Y.; Woo, J.; Huh, S.-Y.; Lee, M.-K. Quantifying Public Preferences for Community-Based Renewable Energy Projects in South Korea. Energies 2020, 13, 2384. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13092384
Tanujaya RR, Lee C-Y, Woo J, Huh S-Y, Lee M-K. Quantifying Public Preferences for Community-Based Renewable Energy Projects in South Korea. Energies. 2020; 13(9):2384. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13092384
Chicago/Turabian StyleTanujaya, Rahel Renata, Chul-Yong Lee, JongRoul Woo, Sung-Yoon Huh, and Min-Kyu Lee. 2020. "Quantifying Public Preferences for Community-Based Renewable Energy Projects in South Korea" Energies 13, no. 9: 2384. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13092384
APA StyleTanujaya, R. R., Lee, C.-Y., Woo, J., Huh, S.-Y., & Lee, M.-K. (2020). Quantifying Public Preferences for Community-Based Renewable Energy Projects in South Korea. Energies, 13(9), 2384. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13092384