Landscape Disruption and Perceived Urban Bias: Sources of Opposition to Renewable Energy in South Korea

Abstract

Since 2012, South Korea has joined a group of countries with a rapid increase in solar energy facilities and an unprecedented level of local opposition to renewable energy. This is puzzling because in 2021, a survey showed that over 80% of South Korean citizens support the rapid transition from carbon-intensive energy sources to low-carbon renewable energy ones. This dissertation comprises three empirical studies that show landscape disruption from solar farms and perceived urban bias therein are two major sources of opposition to renewable energy facilities and policies in South Korea. Chapter 1 conceptually refines these two sources and overviews how the following chapters empirically analyze them. Chapter 2 explains a recent case of the diffusion of setback restrictions on solar energy facilities across 129 counties in South Korea from 2012 to 2020. It shows that rural opposition to landscape change from solar farms was a key driver for South Korean county governments to adopt the restriction. The event history analysis across 225 counties from 2012 to 2020 shows that rural counties with a higher chance of landscape change from solar farms, measured with solar farm density, faced a higher risk of adopting the restriction. Interview research further suggests that rural opposition to landscape change has motivated government officials to adopt the setback restriction on solar farms. This finding suggests that landscape disruption represents the negative impact of solar energy facilities on local communities, which shapes local opposition and local policy barriers against such facilities. Chapter 3 shows that landscape disruption from solar energy facilities also matters for a renewable energy policy in general, not only for the siting of solar energy facilities. It examines a case of renewable energy surcharge, a representative renewable energy subsidy policy of South Korea introduced in 2012. Drawing on evidence from an original online survey (N=1043), it shows that survey respondents who believe solar farms disrupt the surrounding landscapes are less likely to support the surcharge increase. Chapter 4 looks at another source of opposition to renewable energy: a perceived urban bias in solar energy facilities. Rural areas bear a growing burden of domestic renewable energy transition by hosting most of the renewable energy facilities in the society. Yet, rural areas consume less electricity than urban areas. This geographical mismatch of energy production and consumption sites may motivate rural residents to perceive urban bias in renewable energy facilities, a notion that those facilities in rural areas are in fact predominantly beneficial for urban areas. The chapter employs a field survey experiment with randomized vignette treatments to explore whether such perceived urban bias reduces support for solar energy among rural residents in South Korea. The results suggest that groups of rural residents exposed to framed messages highlighting that solar farms benefit urban residents are less likely to support government investment in solar energy development than those in a reference group. However, such a framing effect was not found among suburban residents. Chapter 5 concludes by providing policy implications and suggests an area of future research. First, rural residents' concern over local negative impacts of renewable energy facilities is not just a potential source of barriers to local renewable energy projects: It may undermine the effectiveness of a national-level renewable energy policy as well. Therefore, both the national and subnational governments must coordinate to address their concerns and incorporate measures to mitigate such negative impacts into the existing renewable energy policies and siting regulations. Second, perceived urban bias in solar energy facilities may also be exhibited in wind energy facilities, as long as the society places more burden of the renewable energy transition on rural communities. To make renewable energy facilities more politically acceptable for rural communities, policymakers should ensure that renewable energy expansion goes hand in hand with (1) enhancing energy efficiency in urban areas and (2) channeling the benefits of renewable energy facilities into rural communities.