Ownership claims, valuation practices and the unpacking of energy-landcsape conflicts

Dan van der Horst, Saskia Vermeylen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

There is now a substantive body of academic literature which focuses on protests against local infrastructural developments. This literature is often characterised by the key words ‘NIMBY’ or (facility-) ‘siting controversies’. The rapid development of renewable energy technologies – which are largely sited in rural areas – has created a new version of this controversy; energy-landscape conflicts. In many countries, large infrastructural developments are regulated through spatial planning legislation, often causing various tensions between new technologies, an evolving policy agenda, and a legislative framework which was largely conceived in a different era and which is slow to adapt. Alternatively, and in line with neo-liberal thinking, the logic of development can be subjected to cost-benefit analysis, whereby the value of the wind farm can be compared with the value of the ‘unspoiled’ landscape. This paper takes a more holistic approach to energy-landscape conflicts, by examining claims of ownership and notions and measures of value inherent in different claims and value systems which (seek to) influence decision-making. We examine both the logic of monetary valuation and the implicit value statements in various policy intervention options to point at the need for a more heterogeneous and multidisciplinary approach to policy evaluation. We then look at notions of ownership, rights and duties in relation to landscape and to our energy future, and we highlight the potential for using an analytical property rights framework which cuts across various levels of claims and value statements, from the national and ideological to the personal and practice-based.
LanguageEnglish
Pages429-445
Number of pages17
JournalInternational Review of Sociology
Volume22
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2012

Fingerprint

energy
Values
right of ownership
energy technology
value system
holistic approach
spatial planning
cost-benefit analysis
renewable energy
protest
new technology
farm
rural area
legislation
decision making
evaluation
literature

Keywords

  • environmental policies
  • renewable energy
  • energy-landscape conflicts

Cite this

@article{2650069d7b0348e5963e5d464b0ae2c9,
title = "Ownership claims, valuation practices and the unpacking of energy-landcsape conflicts",
abstract = "There is now a substantive body of academic literature which focuses on protests against local infrastructural developments. This literature is often characterised by the key words ‘NIMBY’ or (facility-) ‘siting controversies’. The rapid development of renewable energy technologies – which are largely sited in rural areas – has created a new version of this controversy; energy-landscape conflicts. In many countries, large infrastructural developments are regulated through spatial planning legislation, often causing various tensions between new technologies, an evolving policy agenda, and a legislative framework which was largely conceived in a different era and which is slow to adapt. Alternatively, and in line with neo-liberal thinking, the logic of development can be subjected to cost-benefit analysis, whereby the value of the wind farm can be compared with the value of the ‘unspoiled’ landscape. This paper takes a more holistic approach to energy-landscape conflicts, by examining claims of ownership and notions and measures of value inherent in different claims and value systems which (seek to) influence decision-making. We examine both the logic of monetary valuation and the implicit value statements in various policy intervention options to point at the need for a more heterogeneous and multidisciplinary approach to policy evaluation. We then look at notions of ownership, rights and duties in relation to landscape and to our energy future, and we highlight the potential for using an analytical property rights framework which cuts across various levels of claims and value statements, from the national and ideological to the personal and practice-based.",
keywords = "environmental policies, renewable energy, energy-landscape conflicts",
author = "{van der Horst}, Dan and Saskia Vermeylen",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1080/03906701.2012.730822",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "429--445",
journal = "International Review of Sociology",
issn = "0390-6701",
number = "3",

}

Ownership claims, valuation practices and the unpacking of energy-landcsape conflicts. / van der Horst, Dan; Vermeylen, Saskia.

In: International Review of Sociology, Vol. 22, No. 3, 2012, p. 429-445.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ownership claims, valuation practices and the unpacking of energy-landcsape conflicts

AU - van der Horst, Dan

AU - Vermeylen, Saskia

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - There is now a substantive body of academic literature which focuses on protests against local infrastructural developments. This literature is often characterised by the key words ‘NIMBY’ or (facility-) ‘siting controversies’. The rapid development of renewable energy technologies – which are largely sited in rural areas – has created a new version of this controversy; energy-landscape conflicts. In many countries, large infrastructural developments are regulated through spatial planning legislation, often causing various tensions between new technologies, an evolving policy agenda, and a legislative framework which was largely conceived in a different era and which is slow to adapt. Alternatively, and in line with neo-liberal thinking, the logic of development can be subjected to cost-benefit analysis, whereby the value of the wind farm can be compared with the value of the ‘unspoiled’ landscape. This paper takes a more holistic approach to energy-landscape conflicts, by examining claims of ownership and notions and measures of value inherent in different claims and value systems which (seek to) influence decision-making. We examine both the logic of monetary valuation and the implicit value statements in various policy intervention options to point at the need for a more heterogeneous and multidisciplinary approach to policy evaluation. We then look at notions of ownership, rights and duties in relation to landscape and to our energy future, and we highlight the potential for using an analytical property rights framework which cuts across various levels of claims and value statements, from the national and ideological to the personal and practice-based.

AB - There is now a substantive body of academic literature which focuses on protests against local infrastructural developments. This literature is often characterised by the key words ‘NIMBY’ or (facility-) ‘siting controversies’. The rapid development of renewable energy technologies – which are largely sited in rural areas – has created a new version of this controversy; energy-landscape conflicts. In many countries, large infrastructural developments are regulated through spatial planning legislation, often causing various tensions between new technologies, an evolving policy agenda, and a legislative framework which was largely conceived in a different era and which is slow to adapt. Alternatively, and in line with neo-liberal thinking, the logic of development can be subjected to cost-benefit analysis, whereby the value of the wind farm can be compared with the value of the ‘unspoiled’ landscape. This paper takes a more holistic approach to energy-landscape conflicts, by examining claims of ownership and notions and measures of value inherent in different claims and value systems which (seek to) influence decision-making. We examine both the logic of monetary valuation and the implicit value statements in various policy intervention options to point at the need for a more heterogeneous and multidisciplinary approach to policy evaluation. We then look at notions of ownership, rights and duties in relation to landscape and to our energy future, and we highlight the potential for using an analytical property rights framework which cuts across various levels of claims and value statements, from the national and ideological to the personal and practice-based.

KW - environmental policies

KW - renewable energy

KW - energy-landscape conflicts

U2 - 10.1080/03906701.2012.730822

DO - 10.1080/03906701.2012.730822

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 429

EP - 445

JO - International Review of Sociology

T2 - International Review of Sociology

JF - International Review of Sociology

SN - 0390-6701

IS - 3

ER -