YENİLENEBİLİR ENERJİ YATIRIMLARININ SOSYAL KABUL BOYUTU

Yıl 2017, Sayı: 51, 95 - 116, 22.01.2017

Ferhat Arslan Alper Uzun

Öz

Enerji
kaynakları ile ilgili çalışmalar ağırlıklı olarak enerji teknolojileri ve
politikaları ile ilgili olurken, son yıllarda enerji ve toplum ilişkisi ile
ilgili çalışmalarda da bir artış olmuştur. Bu çalışmalar, çoğunlukla enerji
yatırımlarının, özellikle de nükleer enerjinin sosyal kabulü ve toplumsal
algısı ile ilişkilidir. Yenilenebilir enerji kaynaklarına yapılan yatırımlar
temiz enerji kaynağı olarak görülüp desteklenmekle birlikte, bu yatırımlara
yönelik toplumsal tepkiler de söz konusudur. Yenilenebilir enerji yatırımları
ile ilgili sosyal kabulün sosyo - politik, yerel ve piyasa kabulü olarak üç
yönü vardır. Bu çalışma, literatür taraması kapsamında sürdürülebilirliğin
sağlanmasında; kalkınmanın sosyal boyutunu, sosyal kabulün boyutlarını ve yenilenebilir
enerji yatırımlarının artırılmasında toplumsal kabulün önemini incelemeyi
amaçlamaktadır. Böylece, mevcut yatırım paradigmalarının toplumsal kabulün de
göz önüne alınarak değiştirilmesi gerektiği ortaya çıkartılmaktadır. Bu ise
ancak, bilinçli ve katılımcı bireylerin uygun programlarla sürece dâhil olması
ile mümkündür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Yenilenebilir Enerji, Sosyal Kabul, Yatırım, Enerji

The Aspect of Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Investments

Öz

The
studies about the energy sources are mainly related to energy technologies and
policies and also in recent years, there has been an increase in the number of
studies related to energy and society. These studies are mostly associated with
social perception and social acceptance of energy investments, especially
nuclear energy. Supported investments made in renewable energy sources are
regarded as a clean energy source.On the other hand, societal responses to
these investments have been observed. This study aims to review the social
dimension of sustainability development, dimensions of social acceptance and
the importance of social acceptance of increasing on renewable energy
investments. Thus, it’s revealed the current paradigm of the investment must be
changed in consideration of the social acceptance. This is only possible if the
conscious and motivated individuals are involve in
process of the appropriate programs.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Renewable Energy, Social Acceptance, Investment, Energy

Kaynakça

• Camagni, R., Capella, R. ve Nijkamp, P. (1998). Towards Sustainable City Policy: An Economy- Environment Technology Nexus. Ecological Economics (24), 103-118.
• Çevik, M. (2010). Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Yaklaşımının Toplumsal-Mekansal Boyutları: Türkiye Uygulamaları Üzerine Bir Tartışma. TÜCAUM VI. Ulusal Coğrafya Sempozyumu (3 - 5 Kasım), (s. 367-377). Ankara.
• Devine - Wright, P. (2005). Beyond NIMBYism: Towards an Integrated framework for Understanding Public Perceptions of Wind Energy. Wind Energy (8), 125-124.
• Dincer, İ. (2000). Renewable Energy and Sustainable Development: A Crucial Review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 4(2), 157-175.
• Erdogdu, E. (2009). On The Wind Energy in Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews(13), 1361-1371.
• Heiskanen, E., Hodson, M., Mourik, R., Raven, R., Feenstra, C., Alcantud, A. (2008). Factors Influencing The Societal Acceptance of New Energy Technologies: Meta-analysis of Recent European Projects. http://www.createacceptance.net/ fileadmin/create-acceptance/user/ docs/E07058.pdf (E. T. 05. 18. 2016)
• Hofman, E. ve Gaast, W. (2014). Acceleration of Clean Technology Deployment within The EU:The Role of Social Acceptance. http://www.polimp.eu/ images/1st%20Policy%20 Brief/POLIMP_1st_Policy_Brief_final-_Public_Acceptance_-_June_2014.pdf (E.T. 04. 12. 2016)
• Hung, C. (2010). Environmental Impacts of Renewable Energy: A Overview of Life-Cycle Results . Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
• IPSOS. (2010). Ipsos Global Energy Barometer:Attitudes Towards Energy Sources. http://www.ipsos.com/public-affairs/sites/www.ipsos.com.public-affairs/files/documents/Ipsos EnergyBarometer.pdf (E.T. 05. 18. 2016)
• IPSOS. (2012). After Fukushima: Global Opinion on Energy Policy. Ipsos Public Affairs: http://www.ipsos.com/public-affairs/sites/www.ipsos.com.public-affairs/files/Energy%20Article. pdf (E.T. 05.23.2016)
• IRENA. (2016). Data and Statistic. http://resourceirena.irena.org/ gateway/dashboard/ (E.T. 04. 12. 2016)
• Kaldellis, J. (2005). Social Attitude Towards Wind Energy Applications in Greece. Energy Policy (33), 595-602.
• Krohn, S. ve Damborg, S. (1999). On Public Attitudes Towards Wind Power. Renewable Energy, 16, 954-960.
• Leung, D.Y.C., Yang, Y. (2012), Wind Energy Development and its Environmental Impact: A review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16, 1031-1039.
• Moula, M. E., Maula, J., Hamdy, M., Fang, T., Jung, N., & Lahdelma, R. (2013). Researching Social Acceptability of Renewable Energy Technologies in Finland. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 2, 89-98.
• Palabıyık, H., Yavaş, H. ve Aydın, M. (2010). Nükleer Enerji ve Sosyal Kabul Sorunu: NIMBY Sendromu Üzerine Kritik Bir Literatür İncelemesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), 45-66.
• Peker, Z. (2013). Yenilenebilir Enerji Gelişmelerinin Sosyal Boyutu. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15(4), 663-691.
• Pierpont, N. (2009), Rüzgâr Türbini Sendromu: Doğal Bir Deney Raporu (Çev. Demirkol, S. E.), http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/img/Turkish-final.pdf, E. T. 04. 10. 2016.
• REN21 (2016). Renewable Energy Global Status Report 2016. http://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/GSR_2016_Full_Report.pdf. (E. T. 10.10.2016)
• Sathaye, J., Bouille, D., Biswas, D., Crabbe, P., Geng, L., Hall, D., et al. (2001). Barriers, Opportunities, and Market Potential of Technologies and Practices. Climate Change 2001: Mitigation, Contribution of Working Group III to The Third Assessment Report of The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (s. 345-398). Cambridge:United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
• Sovacool, B. K., & Ratan, P. L. (2012). Conceptualizing The Acceptance of Wind and Solar Electricity. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16, 5268-5279.
• Szarka, J. (2004). Wind Power, Discourse Coalitions and Climate Change: Breaking The Stalemate? European Environment, 14(6), 317-330.
• Şahin, Ü. (2012). Yeşil Düşünceden Yeşil Ekonomiye. Ahmet Atıl Aşıcı ve Ümit Şahin (ed.) Yeşil Ekonomi içinde. (s. 22 - 34). İstanbul: Yeni İnsan Yayınevi.
• The Harris Poll. (2010). Monthly Opinions of Adults from Five European Countries and the United States. http://client.harrisinteractive.co.uk/Vault/Files/HI-UK-FT-Fact-Sheet-2010-10-11.pdf (E.T. 05 18, 2015)
• Tümertekin, E., & Özgüç, N. (1997). Ekonomik Coğrafya. İstanbul: Çantay Kitabevi.
• UNEP. (2015). Global Trends in Reneable Energy Investment. http://fs-unep-centre.org/sites/default/files/attachments/unep_fs_globaltrends2015_chartpack.pdf#overlay-context=publications/global-trends-renewable-energy-investment-2015 (E.T. 03 08, 2016)
• UNEP. (2016). Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2016. Frankfurt School – UNEP Collaborating Centre for Climate & Sustainable Energy Finance.
• Warren, C. R., Lumsden, C., O'Dowd, S., & Birnie, R. V. (2005). ‘Green On Green’: Public Perceptions of Wind Power in Scotland and Ireland. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 48(6), 853-875.
• Wolsink, M. (2000). Wind Power and The NIMBY-myth: Institutional Capacity and The Limited Significance of Public Support. Renewable Energy (21), 49-64.
• Wolsink, M. (2007). Planning of Renewables Schemes: Deliberative and Fair Decision-making on Landscape Issues Instead of Reproachful Accusations of Non-cooperation. Energy Policy, 35, 2692–2704.
• Wolsink, M. (2012). Wind Power: Basic Challenge Concerning Social Acceptance. R. A. (Editör) içinde, Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology (s. 1785-1821). Springer-Verlag New York.
• Wüstenhagen, R., Wolsink, M., & Bürer, M. J. (2007). Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Innovation:An Introduction to The Concept. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2683-2691