This study outlines strategies for enhancing stakeholders’ social acceptance of wind farm projects. We analyze social acceptance at the project level in a typical multinational project in Finland, which consists of nine wind turbines and has a budget of €100 million. The main challenges analyzed in the project include communication and public relations, early involvement, and compensating for inconveniences. Overcoming these challenges requires obtaining a social license to operate. Our study shows that there should be a clear strategy in project management whether they intentionally aim for a specific level of standard license to operate: legitimacy, credibility, or trust.
AaltonenK.KujalaJ. (2016). Towards an improved understanding of project stakeholder landscapes. International Journal of Project Management, 34(8), 1537–1552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.08.009
2.
AapaojaA.HaapasaloH. (2014). A framework for stakeholder identification and classification in construction projects. Open Journal of Business and Management, (1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2014.21007
AgarwalT.VermaS. (2016). Issues and challenges of wind energy. International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, and Optimization Techniques (ICEEOT), 3–5 March 2016, Chennai, India (pp. 67–72).
AliF.HaapasaloH. (2024). Analysing the stakeholder networks in project alliancing using network theory: Implications for coordination and control. International Journal of Project Organisation and Management, 16(1), 46–74. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPOM.2024.136265
7.
AliF.HaapasaloH. (2023). Development levels of stakeholder relationships in collaborative projects: Challenges and preconditions. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 16(8), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-03-2022-0066
8.
AliF.HaapasaloH.TampioK. P. (2024). Managing opportunism in stakeholder relationships: Case of a hospital construction project alliancing. International Journal of Project Organisation and Management, 16(3), 342–368. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPOM.2024.140410
9.
ArshadM.O’KellyB. (2019). Global status of wind power generation: Theory, practice, and challenges. International Journal of Green Energy, 16(14), 1073–1090. https://doi.org/10.1080/15435075.2019.1597369
10.
BourneL.WalkerD. H. T. (2006). Using a visualising tool to study stakeholder influence-two Australian examples. Project Management Journal,37(1), 5–21.
ChowV.LeiringerR. (2020). The practice of public engagement on projects: From managing external stakeholders to facilitating active contributors. Project Management Journal, 51(1), 24–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972819878346
13.
ChowV.LeiringerR. (2021). Public engagement events and the management of external stakeholders: Artifacts as boundary objects or tools of discipline and control?Project Management Journal, 52(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728209404
14.
CliffordN.CopeM.GillespieT.FrenchS. (2016). Key methods in geography. SAGE Publications.
15.
CovaB.SalleR. (2005). Six key points to merge project marketing into project marketing. International Journal of Project Management,23(5), 354–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.01.006
16.
CreswellJ.W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publication.
17.
CourpassonD.DanyF.CleggS. (2012). Resisters at work: Generating productive resistance in the workplace. Organization Science, 23(3), 801–819. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0657
FeddersenJ.KollH.GeraldiJ. (2024). The temporality of project success: Vindeby, the world’s first offshore wind farm. Project Management Journal, 55(2), 167–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728231217231
22.
GaedeJ.RowlandsI.H. (2018). Visualizing social acceptance research: A bibliometric review of the social acceptance literature for energy technology and fuels. Energy Research & Social Science, 40, 142–158, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.12.006.
23.
GeelsF. W. (2005). The dynamics of transitions in socio-technical systems: A multi-level analysis of the transition pathway from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles (1860–1930). Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 17(4), 445–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320500357319
24.
HaikolaS.AnshelmJ.NiskanenJ. (2024). Beyond the backyard: Scaling up of resistance to wind power in Sweden. Environmental Challenges, 16, 100987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2024.100987
25.
HallN.LaceyJ.Carr-CornishS.DowdA. M. (2015). Social licence to operate: understanding how a concept has been translated into practice in energy industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 86, 301–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.020
26.
HsiehH. F.ShannonS. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687.
27.
KirkegaardJ. K.RudolphD. P.NyborgS.SolmanH.GillE.GroninT.HalliseyM. (2023). Tackling grand challenges in wind energy through a socio-technical perspective. Nature Energy8, 655–664 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-023-01266-z
28.
KlickH.SmithE. R. A. N. (2010). Public understanding of and support for wind power in the United States. Renewable Energy, 35(7), 1585–1591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.11.028.
29.
KrippendorffK. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage Publications.
30.
KönigJ.SuwalaL.DelargyC. (2021). Helix models of innovation and sustainable development goals. In Leal FilhoW.AzulA. M.BrandliL.Lange SalviaA.WallT. (Eds.), Industry, innovation and infrastructure. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (pp. 1–15). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95873-6_91
31.
Mercer-MapstoneL.RifkinW.LouisW.MoffatK. (2017). Meaningful dialogue outcomes contribute to laying a foundation for social licence to operate. Resources Policy, 53, 347–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2017.07.004.
32.
MitchellR. K.AgleB. R.WoodD. J. (1997). Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105
33.
MokM. K. Y.ShenG. Q. (2016). A network-theory based model for stakeholder analysis in major construction projects. Procedia Engineering, 164, 292–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.622
34.
NaderifarM.GoliH.GhaljaieF. (2017). Snowball sampling: A purposeful method of sampling in qualitative research. Strides in development of medical education, 14(3), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5812/sdme.67670
NinanJ.CleggS.MahalingamA.SankaranS. (2024). Governance through trust: Community engagement in an Australian city rebuilding precinct. Project Management Journal, 55(1), 16–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972823118204
37.
NinanJ.SergeevaN. (2022). Mobilizing megaproject narratives for external stakeholders: A study of narrative instruments and processes. Project Management Journal, 53(5), 520–540. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728221102719
38.
NuortimoK. (2020). Public acceptance in energy technology development and deployment: Opinion mining case study. University of Oulu Graduate School; University of Oulu, Faculty of Technology. Acta Univ. Oul. C 740.
39.
OlanderS.LandinA. (2005). Evaluation of stakeholder influence in the implementation of construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 23(4), 321–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.02.002
40.
SarhadiM.HasanzadehS.HoseiniS. H. (2021). Stakeholder analysis in the feasibility process of projects: A structural evaluation of the power-oriented relationship. Project Management Journal, 52(4), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972821999499
41.
SternP.C. (2017). How can social science research become more influential in energy transitions?Energy Research & Social Science, 26, 91–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.01.010.
TampioK-P.HaapasaloH. (2024). Organising methods enabling integration for value creation in complex projects. Construction Innovation, 24(7), 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-11-2021-0223
44.
TampioK-P.HaapasaloH.AliF. (2022). Stakeholder analysis and landscape in a hospital project—Elements and implications for value creation. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business,15(8), 48–76. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-07-2021-0179
45.
TampioK-P.HaapasaloH.LehtinenJ. (2023). The client’s essential stakeholder collaboration activities at the front-end phase of a hospital construction project. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 16(8), 182–207. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-12-2022-0278
46.
TerwelB.W.HarinckF.EllemersN.DaamenD.D.L. (2011). Going beyond the properties of CO2 capture and storage (CCS) technology: How trust in stakeholders affects public acceptance of CCS. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 5(2), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2010.10.001.
47.
ThomsonI.BoutilierR. G. (2011). Social license to operate. SME Mining Engineering Handbook, 1, 1779–1796.
48.
UphamP.OltraC.BosoÀ. (2015). Towards a cross-paradigmatic framework of the social acceptance of energy systems. Energy Research & Social Science, 8, 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.05.003
49.
WolsinkM. (2018). Social acceptance revisited: Gaps, questionable trends, and an auspicious perspective. Energy Research & Social Science, 46, 287–295, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.07.034.
50.
YipW. S.ZhouH.ToS. (2023). A critical analysis on the triple bottom line of sustainable manufacturing: Key findings and implications. Environmental Science and Pollution Research30, 41388–41404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-25122-x
