Advocacy coalitions and wind power development: Insights from Quebec. Jegen, M. & Audet, G. Energy Policy, 39(11):7439--7447, November, 2011. ![Advocacy coalitions and wind power development: Insights from Quebec [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex This article addresses the issue of wind energy acceptance in the Canadian province of Quebec and, in particular, the impact of different models of wind power development on the degree of social acceptance. We show that the dominant advocacy coalition, which favors a hard path energy development in general, enforces a large-scale development of wind energy. Two other coalitions – a soft path coalition and a nationalist coalition – oppose this development, but not wind energy per se. We argue that difference in belief systems explains their opposition rather than planning issues or NIMBY concerns. We also contend that, despite its predominance over (wind) energy policy, the hard path coalition is willing to learn and make concessions towards the soft path coalition, but not towards the nationalist coalition.
@article{jegen_advocacy_2011,
title = {Advocacy coalitions and wind power development: {Insights} from {Quebec}},
volume = {39},
issn = {0301-4215},
shorttitle = {Advocacy coalitions and wind power development},
url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511007014},
doi = {10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.012},
abstract = {This article addresses the issue of wind energy acceptance in the Canadian province of Quebec and, in particular, the impact of different models of wind power development on the degree of social acceptance. We show that the dominant advocacy coalition, which favors a hard path energy development in general, enforces a large-scale development of wind energy. Two other coalitions – a soft path coalition and a nationalist coalition – oppose this development, but not wind energy per se. We argue that difference in belief systems explains their opposition rather than planning issues or NIMBY concerns. We also contend that, despite its predominance over (wind) energy policy, the hard path coalition is willing to learn and make concessions towards the soft path coalition, but not towards the nationalist coalition.},
number = {11},
urldate = {2011-10-20},
journal = {Energy Policy},
author = {Jegen, Maya and Audet, Gabriel},
month = nov,
year = {2011},
keywords = {Advocacy coalitions, belief systems, Social acceptance of wind energy},
pages = {7439--7447},
file = {ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/34638/S0301421511007014.html:text/html;science.pdf:files/34629/science.pdf:application/pdf}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"tkQjquKiKKxpXoYaC","bibbaseid":"jegen-audet-advocacycoalitionsandwindpowerdevelopmentinsightsfromquebec-2011","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2016-09-09T06:27:28.850Z","title":"Advocacy coalitions and wind power development: Insights from Quebec","author_short":["Jegen, M.","Audet, G."],"year":2011,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://www.sfu.ca/~howlett/howlett16.bib","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Advocacy coalitions and wind power development: Insights from Quebec","volume":"39","issn":"0301-4215","shorttitle":"Advocacy coalitions and wind power development","url":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511007014","doi":"10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.012","abstract":"This article addresses the issue of wind energy acceptance in the Canadian province of Quebec and, in particular, the impact of different models of wind power development on the degree of social acceptance. We show that the dominant advocacy coalition, which favors a hard path energy development in general, enforces a large-scale development of wind energy. Two other coalitions – a soft path coalition and a nationalist coalition – oppose this development, but not wind energy per se. We argue that difference in belief systems explains their opposition rather than planning issues or NIMBY concerns. We also contend that, despite its predominance over (wind) energy policy, the hard path coalition is willing to learn and make concessions towards the soft path coalition, but not towards the nationalist coalition.","number":"11","urldate":"2011-10-20","journal":"Energy Policy","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Jegen"],"firstnames":["Maya"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Audet"],"firstnames":["Gabriel"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"November","year":"2011","keywords":"Advocacy coalitions, belief systems, Social acceptance of wind energy","pages":"7439--7447","file":"ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/34638/S0301421511007014.html:text/html;science.pdf:files/34629/science.pdf:application/pdf","bibtex":"@article{jegen_advocacy_2011,\n\ttitle = {Advocacy coalitions and wind power development: {Insights} from {Quebec}},\n\tvolume = {39},\n\tissn = {0301-4215},\n\tshorttitle = {Advocacy coalitions and wind power development},\n\turl = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511007014},\n\tdoi = {10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.012},\n\tabstract = {This article addresses the issue of wind energy acceptance in the Canadian province of Quebec and, in particular, the impact of different models of wind power development on the degree of social acceptance. We show that the dominant advocacy coalition, which favors a hard path energy development in general, enforces a large-scale development of wind energy. Two other coalitions – a soft path coalition and a nationalist coalition – oppose this development, but not wind energy per se. We argue that difference in belief systems explains their opposition rather than planning issues or NIMBY concerns. We also contend that, despite its predominance over (wind) energy policy, the hard path coalition is willing to learn and make concessions towards the soft path coalition, but not towards the nationalist coalition.},\n\tnumber = {11},\n\turldate = {2011-10-20},\n\tjournal = {Energy Policy},\n\tauthor = {Jegen, Maya and Audet, Gabriel},\n\tmonth = nov,\n\tyear = {2011},\n\tkeywords = {Advocacy coalitions, belief systems, Social acceptance of wind energy},\n\tpages = {7439--7447},\n\tfile = {ScienceDirect Snapshot:files/34638/S0301421511007014.html:text/html;science.pdf:files/34629/science.pdf:application/pdf}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Jegen, M.","Audet, G."],"key":"jegen_advocacy_2011","id":"jegen_advocacy_2011","bibbaseid":"jegen-audet-advocacycoalitionsandwindpowerdevelopmentinsightsfromquebec-2011","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511007014"},"keyword":["Advocacy coalitions","belief systems","Social acceptance of wind energy"],"downloads":0},"search_terms":["advocacy","coalitions","wind","power","development","insights","quebec","jegen","audet"],"keywords":["advocacy coalitions","belief systems","social acceptance of wind energy"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["Bn7xRaKMY43f7hFwh"]}