Implementation of wind energy in the Netherlands: the importance of the social–institutional setting
Introduction
Once a pioneer in the area of wind energy, the Netherlands is now lagging behind compared to the countries that make up the current main markets in Western Europe, namely Germany, Spain and Denmark. This is not because of lack of aspirations or ambitions. Like most European countries, the Netherlands has set clear targets with regard to the minimum share of renewables in the total energy supply in future. The Ministry of Economic Affairs (1995) stated its goal of 10% renewable energy by 2020. For wind energy, an ambitious goal of 1000 MW by the year 2000 had already been formulated in 1985—this goal was maintained as the official basis for wind energy policy until 2000 (Wolsink, 2000; Verbong, 2001). Implementation, however, turned out to be a laborious process.
Various studies have been carried out on this topic, both to explain current implementation rates and to predict future implementation rates. Studies on wind energy potential and future implementation rates commonly stress economic and technical conditions—meteorological conditions, grid connection, and energy prices for competing resources—as crucial factors for implementation (Hilten et al., 1996; Ybema, 1999; Cleijne et al., 1999; Voogt et al., 2001). Although these studies mention and sometimes even stress the importance of other characteristics like government policy and the attitudes and behaviour of relevant policymakers, government authorities and private players, they are not incorporated into the models used to calculate future potentials and penetration rates. The effects of government policies are only taken into account insofar as they have an effect on quantifiable economic feasibility (Junginger and Agterbosch, 2003).
Studies on implementation rates that have actually been achieved cite different conditions to explain lagging implementation. Often, resistance to wind turbine siting has been explained by the NIMBY argument (Berenschot and Paardekooper, 2000; Krohn and Damborg, 1999) or by local public resistance (Blom et al., 2002; Verheij and Hoeve, 2002). Wolsink (1996), Wolsink (2000) on the other hand, states that institutional constraints play a more important role in this than the lack of public acceptance. Another study (Enzensberger et al., 2002) focuses on the neglect of the interests and requirements of important stakeholder groups as criteria for policy instrument selection for wind energy stimulation. In addition, numerous policy reports stress things like lengthy and complex planning processes and approval procedures, lack of financial incentives and a lack of administrative capacity as reasons for disappointing implementation results (de Jong, 1999; Ministry of Economic Affairs (1997), Ministry of Economic Affairs (2002); Blom and Klimbie et al., 2002; Verheij and Hoeve, 2002).
A variety of valid but partial explanations for current and future implementation rates have clearly been put forward.
Identifying and promoting a reliable and continuous wind power supply market is a crucial step in the implementation process: after all, without entrepreneurs and continually taking initiatives and risks, implementation will not take place. The development of this market can be explained by many systemic conditions, namely technical, economic, institutional and social conditions. In this paper, the coincidence between changes in the configuration of these conditions and the emergence and performance of different categories of wind power entrepreneurs on the Dutch wind power supply market in the 1990s is analysed. We differentiate between different categories of entrepreneurs with different entrepreneurial features—a new approach to analysing the Dutch wind power supply market. With this approach, we aim to improve the understanding of the development and heterogeneity of the market. In particular, the analysis emphasises changes in institutional and social conditions. We attempt to answer the following principal question: What is the relative importance of the dynamic configuration of institutional and social conditions for the emergence and performance of important entrepreneurial groups on the wind power supply market in the Netherlands? This question will be answered using the implementation capacity concept.
The paper is organised as follows. In the next section, Section 2, we introduce the concept of implementation capacity. After that, in Section 3, the results of a quantitative analysis of the development of the wind power supply market in terms of the main entrepreneurial groups in 1990s are presented. This quantitative analysis leads to a division of the period 1989–2002 into three successive but distinct market periods, which are described in Section 4. This is followed, in 5 Energy distributors, 6 Small private investors and farmers, 7 Cooperatives, 8 New commercial independent wind power producers, by an analysis of the implementation capacity for the main categories of wind entrepreneurs in order to explain their emergence and performance during the three different market periods. Finally, in Section 9, we conclude with a reflection on the main findings with regard to important shifts on the wind power supply market.
The analysis is based on interviews with key stakeholders on the Dutch wind power market, including senior policymakers at different ministries, civil servants at both provincial and municipal levels, different wind power entrepreneurs and renewable energy consultants. The analysis is accompanied by an extensive literature and document study. Data on the number of projects, turbines, and total capacity installed are based on the KEMA wind monitor, and are complemented with data from Wind Service Holland.1
Section snippets
Implementation capacity
The process by which projects diffuse and are implemented in society can be studied from different perspectives. In the case of wind energy, an integrative perspective is needed, in which different systemic conditions affecting implementation are seen as one societal system. Such a systemic approach is fruitful because of its focus on the relative importance of these different conditions for the origination and composition of the market. By studying the characteristics of this system, along
Main types of wind power entrepreneurs in the 1990s
In this paper, we illustrate the importance of analysing wind power implementation from the perspective of varying entrepreneurial groups under changing systemic conditions. One thing should be said about this distinction in different entrepreneurial groups. During the period 1989–2002, 26 projects, 50 turbines and 42.2 MW were realised in joint ownership, which amounted to 3.2% of all turbines and 5.9% of the total capacity installed during those years. More projects were realised with the help
Three successive market periods
From the above we can deduce three successive market periods (Fig. 3.). This division in market periods is based on implementation patterns shown by the four categories of entrepreneurs active on this market. We will show that the performance of the different categories of entrepreneurs during the three periods can be explained by the dynamic configuration of conditions and important entrepreneurial features.
Monopoly powers (1989–1995), the first period, started with the implementation of the
Energy distributors
In showing the correlation between the configuration of conditions and the performance of the four different groups of entrepreneurs, we will need to discuss the specific configuration during the periods mentioned above. We will do this first for energy distributors.
Small private investors and farmers
Let us now examine the second group of entrepreneurs. In fact, the first actual investors in wind power in the Netherlands were small private investors, who were mainly farmers. Until 1988, about 250 turbines (just over 22 MW) were installed, mostly by these types of entrepreneurs. Small private investors were good for about 170 turbines, or 68%. Only 67 of these turbines, or 27%, were installed by the electricity sector, 54 of them in the years 1987 and 1988. In this section, we will illustrate
Cooperatives
The third group of entrepreneurs in our analysis are the cooperatives. They have been of minor importance as far as the statistics on the number of projects, turbines, and total capacity installed are concerned (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 3). The highest market share—20% in 1994—was in fact a clear exception, and in most years, their market share was less than 10%. All 28 Dutch wind cooperatives were founded during a relatively short period, from 1986 to 1992. In the meantime, 14 of these have been
New commercial independent wind power producers
The possibility of commercially attractive exploitation of wind turbines is a prerequisite for the emergence of new investors (mainly distinguished by an economic rationality) on the wind power project and green electricity market. In this, free access to these markets is an important precondition.
Looking at the development of the Dutch wind power supply market, one can see new independent wind power producers emerging at different points in time. A number of new investors started developing
Main findings
Several conclusions can be drawn from this analysis. First, the analysis shows that a change in the configuration of existing conditions can cause a chain of both foreseen and unforeseen effects, eventuating in the end in an improvement or worsening of the implementation capacity for different types of wind power entrepreneurs. The change in implementation capacity for energy distributors (deterioration) as compared to that for small private investors and new wind power producers (improvement)
Acknowledgements
Susanne Agterbosch is a Ph.D. researcher in environmental policy at the Copernicus Institute for Sustainable Development and Innovation at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. Dr. Walter J.V. Vermeulen and Prof. Dr. Pieter Glasbergen are associated with the Copernicus Institute.
The authors would like to thank G.J. van Mulekom of KEMA Nederland BV for putting the KEMA wind monitor data at our disposal for the research.
This research was carried out within the framework of the
References (59)
- et al.
Innovation systemsanalytical and methodological issues
Research Policy
(2002) - et al.
Policy instruments fostering wind energy projects—a multiperspective approach
Energy Policy
(2002) - et al.
The diffusion of renewable energy technologyan analytical framework and key-issues for research
Energy Policy
(2000) - et al.
On public attitudes towards wind power
Renewable Energy
(1999) Imports as a major complicationliberalisation of the green electricity market in the Netherlands
Energy Policy
(2002)Dutch wind power policy. Stagnating implementation of renewables
Energy Policy
(1996)Wind power and the Nimby-mythinstitutional capacity and the limited significance of public support
Renewable Energy
(2000)- et al.
Windenergiebeleid; De wil is er, nu nog de weg
WindNieuws
(2000) - Beurskens, H.J.M., Jansen, L.G.J., 1998. Windenergie. In: Handboek energie en milieu. Samson bedrijfsinformatie, Alphen...
- et al.
Besluiten over energieprojecten. Knelpunten bij realisatie van gaswinnings—en windprojecten
(2002)
On the nature, function and composition of technological systems
Systems of innovation approaches—their emergence and characteristics
Wind Energy Comes of Age
De ECN-Bijdrage aan de derde Energienota, Uitgebreide Energieschetsen 2020
The Emergence of a Swedish Growth IndustryA Comparative Analysis of the Wind Turbine Industry in Sweden, Germany and The Netherlands
Cited by (65)
Impacts, procedural processes, and local context: Rethinking the social acceptance of wind energy projects in the Netherlands
2023, Energy Research and Social SciencePath dependence and path break-out in the electricity sector
2022, Environmental Innovation and Societal TransitionsConceptualising institutional complexity in the upscaling of community enterprises: Lessons from renewable energy and carsharing
2022, Environmental Innovation and Societal TransitionsThe co-evolution of innovation systems and context: Offshore wind in Norway and the Netherlands
2021, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews