Click here to download

Rural communities and wind farms: a contingent valuation investigation
Author/s: Simone Cerroni, Lorenzo Venzi 
Year:  2013 Issue: Language: English 
Pages:  18 Pg. 23-40 FullText PDF:  1249 KB
DOI:  10.3280/REA2013-001002
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

Using the contingent valuation method, this study investigates the preferences of local people for a wind farm that is planned in the Province of Rome. We estimate the reductions over a period of time in bimonthly electricity bills that respondents would be willing to accept as compensation for the installation of the wind farm. Our results suggest that respondents who perceive that the wind farm generates substantial negative impacts on the beauty of the landscape ask higher reductions than others, while respondents who believe that the wind farm produces economic benefits for local communities ask lower reductions. Finally, we find that the demand for compensatory measures is influenced particularly by socio-economic factors such as age and education.
Keywords: Renewable energy, wind farm, rural communities, stated-preference, contingent valuation, willingness to accept
Jel Code: C83, Q20, Q40, Q51

  1. Alvarez-Farizo B., Hanley N. (2002). Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain. Energy Policy, 30: 107-116,, DOI: 10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00063-5
  2. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Leamer E.E., Radner E., Schuman H. (1993). Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation. Washington D.C.
  3. Barra L., Pirazzi L., Arena A. (2000). Energia eolica. Aspetti tecnici, ambientali e socio-economici. Roma: Unità Comunicazione e Informazione, Servizio Edizioni e Documentazione dell’ENEA.
  4. Bergmann A., Colombo S., Hanley N. (2008). Rural versus urban preferences for renewable energy developments. Ecological Economic, 65: 616-625,, DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.08.011
  5. Casini L., Tempesta T. (2001). Potenzialità e limiti dei metodi di valutazione: proposta di alcune linee guida per la redazione delle ricerche sulla valutazione dei beni danni ambientali. In: Marangon F., Tempesta T., a cura di. La valutazione dei beni ambientali come supporto alle decisioni pubbliche. Una riflessione alla luce delle normativa comunitaria e nazionale. Udine: FORUM.
  6. Catino F., Berlen L. (2011). Le cifre dell’energia eolica. (Accessed January 25th, 2013).
  7. Champ P.A., Boyle K.J., Brown T.C. (2003). A primer on nonmarket valuation. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers,, DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-0826-6
  8. Dimitropoulos A., Kontoleon A. (2009). Assessing the Determinants of Local Acceptability of Wind Farm Investment: a Choice Experiment in the Greek Aegean Islands. Energy Policy, 37: 1842-1854,, DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.01.002
  9. Ek K. (2005). Public and private attitudes towards “green” electricity: the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy, 33: 1677-1689,, DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2004.02.005
  10. Ellis J. (1998). Energie rinnovabili. Equilibri, 2: 231-240.
  11. ENEA (2011). Quaderno Energia Eolica. (Accessed January 25th 2013).
  12. EU Council (2007). European Union Council 8/9 March. Presidency Conclusions. (Accessed September 11st, 2009).
  13. Garrod G.D., Willis K.G. (1999). Economic Valuation of the Environment. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar.
  14. Groothuis P.A., Groothuis J.D., Whitehead J.C. (2008). Green vs. green: Measuring the compensation required to site electricity generation windmills in a viewshed. Energy Policy, 36(4): 1545-1550.
  15. Gisotti G., Fabbri M., Quoiani M. (1998). Valutare un’alterazione paesaggistica: applicazione di un metodo. Genio rurale, 9: 17-29.
  16. Hanley N., Nevin C. (1999). Appraising renewable energy developments in remote communities: the case of the North Assynt Estate, Scotland. Energy Policy, 27: 527-547.
  17. Koundouri P., Kountouris Y., Remoundou K. (2009). Valuing a wind farm construction: a contingent valuation study in Greece. Energy Policy, 37: 1939-1944.
  18. Krueger A.D. (2007). Valuing Public Preferences for Offshore Wind Power: a Choice Experiment Approach. Doctoral Dissertation in Marine Studies. University of Delaware.
  19. Ladenburg J., Dubgaard A. (2007). Willingness to Pay for Reduced Visual Disamenities from Off-Shore Wind Farms in Denmark. Energy Policy, 35: 4059-4071,, DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.01.023
  20. Lusk J.L., Shogren J.F. (2007). Experimental Auctions. Methods and Applications in Economic and Marketing Research. Cambridge University Press,, DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511611261
  21. Marangon F., Tempesta T. (2001). L’impatto paesaggistico della viticoltura collinare. Una valutazione economica nella zona DOC dei “Colli Orientali” del Friuli. In: Marangon F., Tempesta T., a cura di. La valutazione dei beni ambientali come supporto alle decisioni pubbliche. Una riflessione alla luce delle normativa comunitaria e nazionale. Udine: FORUM.
  22. Marazzi M., Tempesta T. (2001). Disponibilità a pagare e disponibilità ad accettare per la riduzione dell’impatto paesaggistico delle linee elettriche dell’alta tensione. Aestimum, 46: 65-95.
  23. Meyerhoff J., Ohl C., Hartje V. (2010). Landscape externalities from onshore wind power. Energy Policy, 38: 82-92,, DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.08.055
  24. Rosenthal E. (2010). Ancient Italian Town Has Wind at Its Back. New York Times. (Accessed January 25th, 2013).
  25. Wooldridge J.M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Simone Cerroni, Lorenzo Venzi, in "RIVISTA DI ECONOMIA AGRARIA" 1/2013, pp. 23-40, DOI:10.3280/REA2013-001002


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content