Myths and Participation Gaps of Renewable Energy Project Resistance in Latvia
L. Zemite, L. Jansons, D. Kronkalns, O. Slutins, Z. Jankovska, S. Plota
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
ラトビアにおける再生可能エネルギープロジェクトへの地域抵抗の原因を混合手法で調査。抵抗は気候目標否定ではなく、制度不信・手続き的正義の欠如・誤情報に起因する。構造化された対話手法が紛争緩和に有効であることを実証。
English
This mixed-methods study investigates local resistance to renewable energy projects in Latvia, finding that opposition stems from low institutional trust, weak procedural justice, and misinformation rather than climate goal rejection. Structured engagement formats reduced conflict intensity and improved information clarity.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本でも風力発電などのNIMBY問題が顕在化しており、手続きの公正性や信頼構築の重要性を示す知見は示唆に富む。日本の地域協議会制度との比較も有用。
In the global GX context
This paper provides empirical evidence on governance-driven resistance to renewables, highlighting procedural fairness and trust-building as critical for energy transitions—relevant globally as countries face deployment bottlenecks.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a framework analyzing renewable energy resistance through governance lenses; useful for comparative social acceptance studies.
🏢実務担当者:Offers concrete engagement formats (e.g., myth-busting tools, local benefit assessment) to reduce project conflicts and improve acceptance.
🏛政策担当者:Emphasizes that improving procedural justice in planning processes is more effective than technological fixes for overcoming local opposition.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Abstract This study examines why renewable energy projects in Latvia face local resistance despite generally high public support for decarbonisation. A mixed-methods approach was applied, combining regulatory and planning system analysis, comparative review of selected EU countries, a national survey (n > 1000), and qualitative stakeholder and focus group insights. The results show clear differences in technology acceptance: solar energy demonstrates high approval across all cases, while energy storage and cogeneration show medium-to-high acceptance. In contrast, wind energy exhibits the lowest and most polarized acceptance levels. Survey and qualitative findings indicate that resistance is not driven by rejection of climate goals, but by three main factors: low trust in institutions, weak procedural justice in planning processes, and widespread misinformation. Empirical evidence reveals that public consultations are often ineffective, characterised by one-directional communication, a lack of facilitation, and a lack of feedback loops. Pilot interventions reveal that structured engagement formats can reduce conflict intensity (from high to medium), improve information clarity (from low to medium–high), and slightly increase trust levels. The study concludes that renewable energy conflicts in Latvia are primarily governance‑ related rather than technological. Improving procedural fairness, transparency, and communication through “myths versus facts” tools and local benefit assessment can significantly enhance public acceptance and support a more socially sustainable energy transition.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.2478/lpts-2026-0020first seen 2026-06-16 04:43:09
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。