Rural versus urban preferences for renewable energy developments

276 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Valuation of environmental and societal trade-offs of renewable energy sources (2013, methodology): “Previous similar studies are especially Hanley and Nevin (1999), Bergmann et al. (2006, 2008), and Scarpa and Willis (2010).”
The institutional space of community initiatives for renewable energy: a comparative case study of the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark (2014, background): “Furthermore, the degree of urbanization influences the preferences for RE developments and the readiness to take local action [18].”
Valuing climate protection through willingness to pay for biomass ethanol (2009, background): “The other dummy variable was for rural vs. urban or suburban residence, with the hypothesis that rural residents would have a greater WTP because of the potential to profit off of rural resources and to increase employment opportunities (Bergmann et al., 2008, pp. 622–623).”
Spatial preference heterogeneity in forest recreation (2013, background): “Other environmental valuation studies have addressed spatial preference heterogeneity on a rather coarse scale by, for example, including regional dummies in the estimated choice model or estimating separate models for different locations (e.g., Bergmann et al., 2008; Brouwer et al., 2010).”