Home
Issue 61 – January 2026
Social Acceptance of Wind Turbines:

Social Acceptance of Wind Turbines:

How Citizens’ Subjective and Public Acceptance Influence Behavior

By Lilly Kiesbauer

If we are looking for sustainable living, we need to address energy supply as one big factor of our environmental impact. To reduce one’s energy consumption is a first step but, in this modern world, a huge impact can be made by transforming energy production to more renewable technologies that do not harm the environment. However, the application of such sustainable energy technologies will continue to require overcoming both technical and social barriers.

This article is based on my bachelor’s thesis in the study program “human and the environment” at RPTU Kaiserslautern-Landau. In Germany, there are strong debates about wind energy and opposition groups have formed – even in and near my hometown. My thesis further investigated the underlying social, psychological, and communication-related aspects and processes regarding wind energy. I will briefly introduce what an analysis of previous literature revealed and how this led to the construction of the study design.

Indeed, social acceptance of renewable energy technologies is seen as one of the most important limiting factors that regularly delay the installation and operation of renewable energy plants (Segreto et al., 2020). Especially acceptance on the local level, particularly concerning wind turbines in close proximity to residential areas, can diverge significantly from the positive general attitude towards wind energy (Walter, 2014; Walter & Gutscher, 2013). In consequence, emerging oppositional factions can wield considerable influence, potentially hindering or blocking wind energy projects (Bell et al., 2013).

There are a lot of different factors influencing individual and public acceptance of energy technology (see the Technology Acceptance Framework of Huijts et. al., 2012). Interestingly, several studies observed that many people do agree to environmental measures individually while they perceive the majority of citizens to oppose them (Sokoloski et al., 2018; Bell et al., 2005; Sparkman et al., 2022). This is known as pluralistic ignorance: “a group-level phenomenon, wherein individuals belonging to a group mistakenly believe that others’ cognitions and/or behaviors differ systematically from their own, regardless of how the misperception arises” (Sargent & Newman, 2021, p. 4). In the case of wind energy, this would mean that whereas subjective acceptance for wind energy in a community is high, individuals perceive others to be opposed to the technology resulting in the perception of low public acceptance. This gap, resulting in shared misperceptions about social reality, can significantly influence one’s attitudes and behaviors (Snyder & Swann, 1978).

The bachelor’s thesis investigated this discrepancy of acceptance levels called pluralistic ignorance related to the implementation of wind turbines in rural areas. As there is a lack of research on the behavioral influence of pluralistic ignorance, the study aimed to also explore how various combinations of subjective and public acceptance are related to information seeking and oppositional behavior towards local wind energy projects.

In a survey of three exemplary communities in the South of Germany, about 300 participants were recruited for an online questionnaire and additional door-step interviews. The local government had already started the designation of “wind energy areas” but specific projects in the communities were not planned yet. In the questionnaire, citizens were asked to imagine the construction of two wind turbines near their community and were shown the designated area. Afterwards, they filled out a survey about their subjective acceptance and how they perceive public acceptance, as well as a rating of their information seeking and (potential) oppositional behaviour.

The results showed that subjective acceptance was significantly higher than perceived public acceptance, supporting the framework of pluralistic ignorance. This means that throughout the surveyed participants, there was a clear majority in favor of a wind energy project.

However, citizens were unaware of the level of public support. Others were mistakenly perceived as either having no opinion on the matter or equally divided between opposition and support. Citizens may not have communicated on the topic with each other yet, or may have believed that residents in their community were not interested in this topic. Therefore, it seems important for local authorities to present public acceptance as supportive and encourage citizens to take part in local wind energy developments, for example through building energy cooperatives or direct supply of the energy produced. In this way, citizens may be more aware about the positive opinion environment and more cooperative towards the implementation of the new energy source.

For the analysis of behavioral outcomes, different effects of subjective and perceived public acceptance on information seeking and oppositional behavior were demonstrated, respectively: Public acceptance has a greater impact on information seeking behavior while subjective acceptance plays a larger role in the prediction of oppositional behavior.

Information seeking was highest either when public acceptance was high irrespective of the score of subjective acceptance or when there was a great discrepancy between (high) subjective and (low) public acceptance. In summary, citizens indulge in information seeking more the higher they perceive public acceptance. Subjective acceptance has only an indirect impact on information seeking. These findings suggest that information-seeking behavior regarding wind energy projects is based on a complex and socially influenced set of motives.

Oppositional behavior was mainly influenced by subjective acceptance rather than perceived public acceptance. Citizens clearly intended to perform oppositional acts when their attitude towards the proposed wind turbine was oppositional, and they did not do so when they had a supportive attitude. Either way, the perception of public acceptance did not influence the behavioral outcome to a great extent.

When aiming to prevent oppositional behavior, subjective acceptance can be an indicator to work on. Participation formats could be designed to address opposing individuals particularly.

The current study focused on the social aspect of wind energy acceptance. However, there are different environmental questions to respond to, for example the materials used, the aesthetic sense of energy technologies, the disposal of disfunctioning turbines or the impact on animal life. Further research is needed to find the best solution for sustainably using wind energy. Sustainable living is, however, also a question of community and integrating philosophy into practice. Living in smaller collective communities, such as master units, could solve many problems that were found in the study. When information is sought and shared, decisions are discussed collectively, and solutions are executed on a small scale benefiting the citizens directly, social acceptance may no longer be the target of imagination, misperceptions or opposition. If we come together, think together and share together, the most important limiting factor of renewable energy implementation – social acceptance issues – could be overcome together.

If governments and bigger communities want to find ways to implement renewable energies they need to include citizens as mentioned earlier in means of communication and building a congenial environment for individuals and the collective. Cooperative ways to involve people living near wind turbines, economically and during the decision process, indeed show positive outcomes (Walker et al., 2014) which is in line with the theory of Prout.

Research, on the one hand, can investigate the ways of and hindrances to renewable energy implementation. On the other hand, education can further foster neohumanist feelings of love and concern for our natural environment, including knowledge about and interest in alternative energy sources such as wind turbines and solar energy.

References

  • Bell, D., Gray, T., & Haggett, C. (2005). The ‘Social Gap’ in Wind Farm Siting Decisions: Explanations and Policy Responses. Environmental Politics, 14(4), 460–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010500175833
  • Bell, D., Gray, T., Haggett, C., & Swaffield, J. (2013). Re-visiting the ‘social gap’: Public opinion and relations of power in the local politics of wind energy. Environmental Politics, 22(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2013.755793
  • Geiger, N., & Swim, J. K. (2016). Climate of silence: Pluralistic ignorance as a barrier to climate change discussion. Journal of Environmental https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.002
  • Huijts, N. M. A., Molin, E. J. E., & Steg, L. (2012). Psychological factors influencing sustainable energy technology acceptance: A review-based comprehensive framework. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(1), 525–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.08.018
  • Sargent, R. H., & Newman, L. S. (2021). Pluralistic Ignorance Research in Psychology: A Scoping Review of Topic and Method Variation and Directions for Future Research. Review of General Psychology, 25(2), 163184. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268021995168
  • Segreto, M., Principe, L., Desormeaux, A., Torre, M., Tomassetti, L., Tratzi, P., Paolini, V., & Petracchini, F. (2020). Trends in Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Across Europe—A Literature Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(24), 9161–9180. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17249161
  • Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B. (1978). Behavioral confirmation in social interaction: From social perception to social reality. Journal of Experimental https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(78)90021-5 Social Psychology, 14(2), 148–162.
  • Sokoloski, R., Markowitz, E. M., & Bidwell, D. (2018). Public estimates of support for offshore wind energy: False consensus, pluralistic ignorance, and partisan effects. Energy Policy, 112, 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.005
  • Sparkman, G., Geiger, N., & Weber, E. U. (2022). Americans experience a false social reality by underestimating popular climate policy support by nearly half. Nature Communications, 13(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32412-y
  • Walker, B. J. A., Wiersma, B., & Bailey, E. (2014). Community benefits, framing and the social acceptance of offshore wind farms: An experimental study in England. Energy Research & Social Science, 3, 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.07.003
  • Walter, G. (2014). Determining the local acceptance of wind energy projects in Switzerland: The importance of general attitudes and project characteristics. Energy Research & Social Science, 4, 78–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.09.003
  • Walter, G., & Gutscher, H. (2013). Generelle Befürwortung von Windkraftanlagen vor Ort vs. Befürwortung spezifischer Windkraftprojekte: Der Einfluss von Projekt- und Verfahrensparametern. Umweltpsychologie, 17(2), 124–144

Born and raised in Germany, I was always drawn towards South America where I got to know Shrii P. R. Sarkar’s philosophy and model of Master Units in 2019 while volunteering at Campo Divino in Argentina. After studying the bachelor’s program “human and the environment” I returned to Campo Divino in 2024 and decided to join the development of the project as a “permanent volunteer”.