Available online at www.sciencedirect.
com
ScienceDirect
Barriers to social acceptance of renewable energy
systems in Colombia
Ana Mara Rosso-Ceron and Viatcheslav Kafarov
This work presents the results of a survey conducted to several
stakeholders involved with renewable energy systems (RES) in
Colombia. It focuses on identifying and analysing three social
dimensions (socio-political acceptance, market acceptance,
and community acceptance) that affect the penetration of solar,
wind, biomass, mini and micro hydraulic, geothermal, tidal, and
wave energy systems in the market. The analysis of the survey
outcomes shows that a significant percentage of interviewees
notice that the development of RES in Colombia has a lot of
barriers. Therefore, this contrasts sharply with the existing local
capacity and renewable resources. Barriers related to market
acceptance dimension would be the most important issue for
implementing RES, followed by socio-political acceptance and
community acceptance, respectively.
Address
Department of Chemical Engineering, Universidad Industrial de
Santander, Bucaramanga, Colombia
Corresponding author: Kafarov, Viatcheslav (kafarov@uis.edu.co)
Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2015, 10:103110
This review comes from a themed issue on Process systems
engineering
Edited by Mahmoud El-Halwagi and Ka Ming Ng
For a complete overview see the Issue and the Editorial
Available online 18th November 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.coche.2015.08.003
2211-3398/# 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction
Nowadays, energy dependence on fossil fuels (in terms of
primary energy consumption representing an average of
35% oil, 27% coal, 23% natural gas, and the rest from
alternative energies) triggers significant concerns as they
are not renewable energy sources [1]. Furthermore, fossil
fuels cause serious environmental impacts such as climate
change (particularly loss of the Arctic sea ice cap), air
pollution, and acid rain [2]. All of the above problems
have produced several political and economic conflicts
that have increased the world investment in research,
development and application of alternative technologies
for energy generation.
Additionally, energy production is necessary for a country
development since it is essential for everyday activities
www.sciencedirect.com
such as lighting, using electrical appliances, transport,
livelihoods, and education by increasing employment
opportunities that lead to economic and social benefits [3].
However, most existing projects of energy generation in
Colombia are not sustainable in the long term and com-
pete with the energetic monopoly of large oil companies,
despite this, there are a wide variety of natural resources
(water, solar, wind, geothermal and biomass) that can be
exploited for the production of clean energy, referred to
as RES, since they take into account population growth,
industry, the availability of energy resources, environ-
mental disturbance, and the amount of financial
resources for technological, social welfare and cultural
development.
In democratic societies, social welfare is essential to
successfully introduce low carbon technologies as a sus-
tainable alternative to decrease traditional means of en-
ergy provision. It becomes a challenge to educate the
target population in order to counteract any negative
preconceptions or scepticism in using these technologies
which can have adverse effect upon their viability and
long term success. Thus, it is important to know the
attitudes of energy consumers since their attitudes are
the foundations of their resulting behaviour [4]. To be
sure, numerous parties appear to be involved in RES
projects, inputs to the planning and decision making
process include expert opinions as well as public feelings
and perceptions [3,5].
In this regard, studies on social acceptance of renewable
energies (RE) were conducted in both large scale grid-
connected projects and small scale stand-alone projects
[7,8]. Rogers et al. [9] investigated the small scale RES
developments in communities of United Kingdom. Their
studies found that majority of residents have a certain level
of awareness of RES and are supportive of the implemen-
tation. However, only a small number of residents are
willing to participate into a community based on RES.
Although these actors have different attitudes and con-
flicting interests, they must find ways to cooperate [6].
Requirements for cooperation include cohesion, elimina-
tion of personal interest, complete and correct informa-
tion, and representation, that is, the participation of all
stakeholders in the decision making process [6,7]. Private
and public entities that participate are invited to develop
sustainable technologies that are economically vital and
socially acceptable.
Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2015, 10:103110
104 Process systems engineering
Furthermore, Assefa and Frostell [3] put it nicely by
writing, that social effects shape society as a whole and
each member individually, and are accompanied by social
acceptance that is an important component of sustain-
ability.
Then, this paper focuses on identifying and analysing
barriers related to three social dimensions of social accep-
tance (socio-political acceptance, market acceptance, and
community acceptance), proposed by [10], that affect the
penetration of solar, wind, biomass, mini and micro hy-
draulic, geothermal, tidal, and wave energy systems in the
Colombian market.
Social acceptance dimensions
The concept of social acceptance is often used by policy
analysts but few researchers have offered clear and use-
able definitions. In 2007, [10] identify three dimensions to
define the concept of social acceptance:
Socio-political acceptance: refers to the acceptance of a
technology by politics, policy makers, key stakeholders
and the public. According to [10], political actors must
build effective policies to enhance the community and
market acceptance of RES. Thus, making socio-political
acceptance the first element required in achieving general
social acceptance.
Market acceptance: refers to the process of market an
adoption of an innovation or the acceptance of a technol-
ogy by consumers, investors and intra-firm.
Community acceptance: refers to the acceptance of the local
stakeholders, the communities that are directly affected
by the installation of RES. Yet opposition is not uncom-
mon: resistance to a project that is unwanted by the local
community is called the NIMBY (Not in My Back Yard)
phenomenon [2,7,11], and may result in social conflict and
economic losses [5]. The opposite phenomenon is called
PIMBY (Please in My Back Yard), and is considered to
occur when a project is regarded as beneficial (e.g., it may
be a source of income) and viewed positively by neigh-
bouring communities [5].
Barriers to RES
To gain further insight into the attitudes and accepta-
tion of the public towards RES projects, it is fruitful to
search for potential barriers to a RES project, as well as,
measures that may be used to lift such barriers and
improve the outlook of RES projects [12]. The research
literature lists a wide variety of potential barriers that
relate to how the public perceives RES projects and how
it is impacted by them [5,11,1315]. Market and socio
political factors include economic conditions in the
region, problems with (public or private) ownership,
unfavourable electricity prices, technology character-
ized by high initial cost, trade technologies taxes, fossil
Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2015, 10:103110
fuels subsidies, lack of access to credit and financing,
emerging market, lack of regulatory framework and
government standards.
Also, factors related to the perceptions of the public
include a lack of information or knowledge on the new
technologies, mistrust, lack of impartiality, lack of ac-
ceptance by consumers of RES, and suspicion towards
investors.
As well as the barriers, it is worth considering the main
consequences of a RES investment project [2,3,5,11,13,
14,1620]. Again, these include economic effects such as
monetary benefits for nearby communities, for example,
the sharing of project profits, new employment opportu-
nities, benefits (or costs) in terms of tourism, and a
broader economic boost to the entire region [6]. There
are also environmental and quality-of-life impacts that
include possible disruption to the balance of nearby
ecosystems, visual impacts such as landscape deteriora-
tion, noise pollution and vibrations, and other improve-
ments or deteriorations in the quality of life in the area.
According to [21] identify and analyze barriers part from
the literature survey and study of the existing projects,
and also interaction with various stakeholders is required.
Broadly, the barriers can be identified using the following
approaches: literature on similar projects, barriers, case
studies (local, regional, national and international level);
site visits should be made to study the projects closely;
and finally do interaction with stakeholders (RE target
industry, consumers, NGOs, experts, policy makers, and
professional associations). The interaction can be through
structured interviews and/or questionnaires. This ap-
proach is very crucial to identification of the barriers as
the perception of stakeholders on barriers may reveal the
lacunae in existing policies and help in identification of
measures to overcome the barriers.
Description of barriers
Understanding the size and nature of the barriers is
essential if policies to increase the penetration and social
acceptance of RES are to be successful. The validity of
these ideas is to be tested through the dialogue with
stakeholders in a number of specific, but representative
[22]. Then an overview of each of the barriers is shown in
Table 1 [2123].
Method
Survey and sample description
A questionnaire survey was conducted to 210 stakeholders
involved with RE in Colombia, who were selected at
random but also relied upon a respondents willingness to
participate. These responders are a very large and diverse
group that includes government officials, researchers,
financial institutions, educators, and the population in
general (marketers, suppliers, and consumers).
www.sciencedirect.com
 Barriers to social acceptance of RES in Colombia Rosso-Ceron and Kafarov 105

Table 1

Barriers and their description

Dimension Barriers Description

Socio-political acceptance
Market acceptance
Community acceptance
Regulatory framework
Government standards
Unfavourable electricity prices
High initial capital cost
Trade taxes
Fossil fuels subsidies
Lack of access to credit
and financing
Emerging markets
Cultural rejection to changes
involving the use of RES
Lack of acceptance
by consumers
Missing or ineffective regulatory frame, regulations inadequate to
promote RES, unfavourable regulations for RES, lack of
implementation of regulations, and unwieldy regulations.
The government may restrict or keep out RES through licensing,
minimum capital requirements, limiting access to raw materials,
pollution control standards, safety and efficacy, among others.
Conventional electricity is subsidized, consumers pay below marginal
conventional energy cost, average cost pricing is done, and low taxes
compared to RES.
High interest rates, lack of capital, governmental policies on cost of
capital, lack of access to cheap capital, risk perception by financial
institutions, inflation, demand for credit, among others.
RES production is taxed unfavourably, high import duties on
equipment, other direct/indirect taxes on RES.
Fossil fuel energy is subsidized, consumers pay below marginal
conventional energy cost, average cost pricing is done, and low taxes
compared to RES.
Undeveloped credit market, lack of financing instruments/institutions,
poor credit worthiness, poor consumers recovery regulations.
Undeveloped supply channels, lack of product visibility and
availability, difficult procurement (by consumers), unwieldy
requirements for entry, monopoly, and barriers creates by existing
suppliers.
Resistance to change, cultural reasons, unknown technologies,
aesthetic issues, high discount rates of consumers, and inadequate
information.
Lack of social acceptance for some RES, technology seen as
unfamiliar and of no use, lack of local participation, and preference for
traditional energy.

The survey was carried out during August 2013, in
27 departmental capital cities of Colombia (were not
visited Putumayo, Caqueta, Vichada, Vaupes, and Guai-
na departments for their difficulty of access or public
order problems); the questionnaire was developed based
on literature review and has been followed by a pilot
testing. No major changes were made as a result of
satisfactory pilot testing. Answers were translated and
recorded on a separate sheet.
The main aim of the survey was collection of information
and knowledge of RES related to projects and determines
the barriers for their adoption by the community. Then a
comprising of quantitative and qualitative questions was
employed to build a comprehensive picture of local
energy requirements and attitudes towards RE technolo-
gies for sustainable energy provision.
The questionnaire mixed open and closed questions and
included information on:
1. Name/organization, activity performed
2. Projects (RE source and current energy use)
3. Views on renewable energy (assessed by questions
about implementation barriers and local acceptability
of systems in a scale of low, medium and high
acceptance)
Ranking of barriers
In the present study, each respondent was given a de-
tailed examination of the context of the issues, which are
involved together with the list of barriers. They were
asked to indicate the importance of the each barrier to
them on a five-point scale. The 5 on the scale indicated
Very high to them (indicating maximum impact of
removing a barrier on adoption of technology) and 1
Very low (least impact of removing a barrier on adoption
of technology). Generally, the ability to make qualitative
distinction is represented by attributes, viz., equal, weak
and strong or to put it differently, rejection, indifference
and acceptance. Each of these can be subdivided into low,
medium and high indicating nine scales of distinction.
However, [24] indicated that one would need only five-
point scale to distinguish between rejection and accep-
tance barriers. Since, this method is simple and appropriate
and was used to provide weights to various preferences.
Data analysis
All data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and vari-
ability among various groups of data (levels of acceptance)

www.sciencedirect.com Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2015, 10:103110

106 Process systems engineering

was scored for p 2 0.05 significant. The significance of Table 3

the interaction between levels for continuous variables was Market acceptance barriers.
tested by the Tukeys Honest Significant Difference test.
Barrier level % Responders
All the analyses were performed with the R package [25].
Very low Low Medium High Very high
Results and discussion Unfavourable electricity 15.6 12.2 29.4 25.6 17.2
The following are the results of the survey, a total of prices
High initial investment 3.3 3.8 17.5 33.9 41.5
200 valid responses were collected and stakeholders cost
participation was distributed in 21.33% government offi- Trade taxes 13.7 14.3 17.6 24.2 30.2
cials, 15.28% researchers, 12.51% marketers, 19.69% sup- Fossil fuels subsidies 15.0 12.2 17.8 30.0 25.0
pliers, 4.62% financial institutions, 8.51% educators, and Lack of access to 8.2 10.4 23.6 22.0 35.7
credit and financing
18.05% consumers.
Emerging markets 10.6 16.5 21.3 28.2 23.4

Socio-political acceptance
To measure the degree of socio-political acceptance two
barriers were evaluated as shown in Table 2. The contrast
between the levels of barriers give statistical significance
(0.003 = p < 0.05); since there is a very high level of lack
of regulatory legal framework (39.1%), and government
standards (36.3%), which causes the dependence of the
different energy sectors (transportation, industrial, resi-
dential) count on almost entirely of conventional energy
sources (large hydropower generation and fossil fuel).
The stakeholders discern about the political difficulties
and structural limitations of government agencies respon-
sible for setting energy policies to meet social, environ-
mental, and financial goals.
This since are not enough laws in Colombia that encour-
age the introduction of large plants driven by RES (which
are limited to plants up to 20 MW, specifically for wind
farms), laws governing that lead to studies, and environ-
mental licenses. However through time, government
have made a few specific laws aimed at encouraging
the use of RE, for example, the Colombian Law 697
(2001), which states the rational and efficient use of
energy and interest in the promotion of non-conventional
sources; the Colombian Decree No. 3783 (December 19,
2003), establishes mechanisms and incentives for research
and funding for renewable and alternative energy sources;
and the Fiscal Reform (November 2002), provides tax
exemptions for fifteen years for projects under the clean
development mechanism.
According the above, it requires dissemination strategies
on the benefits that RES may contribute to regional
Table 2
Socio-political acceptance barriers.
Barrier level % Responders
Very low Low Medium High Very high
Regulatory legal 13.6 14.1 9.8 23.4 39.1
framework
Government standards 6.7 10.6 15.6 30.7 36.3
development. Proper assessment of the environmental
and social benefits in order to these technologies contrib-
utes to the social environment can be an attractive strat-
egy at government level.
Market acceptance
Regarding to the dimension of market acceptance six
barriers were evaluated as shown in Table 3. The contrast
between their levels of barrier give statistical significance
( p < 0.05), therefore high initial investment cost has the
highest level of barrier with 41.5%, followed by lack of
access to credit, 35.7%, and financing trade taxes, 30.2%,
respectively.
High initial capital cost barrier is due to no industry
manufacturing technologies RE in Colombia and impor-
tation of these technologies brings high input costs for
solar and wind energy. On the other hand, there is
uncertainty in generation capacity and reliability of such
technology; this increases the perception of risk to the
financial sector. Additionally, RES face relatively higher
costs than conventional fossil fuel development. This is
mainly due to the characteristics of territorial occupa-
tion; little experience dealing with RE type of evalua-
tion and high discretion in terms of evaluation; projects
of small scale RES must meet the same set of proce-
dures that larger scale projects and environmental im-
pact assessments are more complex than those of fossil
fuel projects.
As previously mentioned, there is a very high lack of
access to credit and financing barrier, because the financ-
ing options available in the country from commercial
banks just preparing to offer within their products and
are few lines of credit and technical assistance for RES.
Besides, public and private credit institutions lack special
regulations and experience to manage RES, special
incentives that include social and strategic importance
from the point of view of the credit amounts, payment
deadlines, high interest rates, and loan requirements.

Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2015, 10:103110 www.sciencedirect.com

 Barriers to social acceptance of RES in Colombia Rosso-Ceron and Kafarov 107
With regard to financial market regulations seems to be
deficient in support and stability, and the stakeholders
agree to emphasize the need for strong state intervention
to generate cost-cutting technologies and addressing
enough resources to the initial investment.
Likewise, trade taxes has a very high level due to the
need to broaden the tax base has led to tax marketing and
importation of equipment for RES are established; what
makes it a disadvantage to RES projects with capital
intensive, relative to conventional projects involving less
investment per unit of installed capacity.
On the other hand, barriers with high level appear in the
following order: fossil fuels subsidies with, 30.0%; and
emerging markets, 28.2%. Finally unfavourable electricity
price, 29.4%, is a barrier with medium level (see Table 3).
According to stakeholders, fuels subsidies barrier has a
high level, due to the projects of power generation from
RE for national grid whose main barrier is weak regulation
does not take into account the factors for development
(compulsory purchase, fixed price, fixed term power pur-
chase) of these technologies and the absence of economic
incentives (tax, tariff, subsidies, and so on). In addition,
these projects compete with abundant resources and low
costs such as large-scale hydropower and conventional
fossil fuel. Also, the regulatory framework does not have
specific rules for the generation of electricity from solar,
wind, biomass, geothermal energy, and among others.
Moreover, emerging markets barrier has a high level
because the development of RES is very recent, except
for some projects like wind farm Jepirachi place in La
Guajira (North of Colombia), cogeneration plants of sugar
industries in Valle del Cauca (West of Colombia), and
isolated projects related to small hydro and solar energy
that have been abandoned over time. Additionally, in
Colombia there are no relevant projects related to geo-
thermal or ocean resources.
Finally, unfavourable electricity prices barrier have tra-
ditionally been a bottleneck for economic growth. Pro-
longed electrical and ineffective remedies crisis have led
to a vicious cycle of regular blackouts, high operating
costs of the distribution companies, major losses (includ-
ing electricity theft through illegal connections), high
retail rates to cover these inefficiencies, low bill collection
rates, a significant fiscal burden for the government
through direct and indirect subsidies and very high costs
for consumers, since many depend on a very expensive
self-generated electricity.
Community acceptance
With regard to the dimension of community acceptance,
two barriers were evaluated to determine the degree of
acceptance of local actors to the RES: cultural rejection to
www.sciencedirect.com
Table 4
Community acceptance barriers
Barrier level % Responders
Very Low Medium High Very
low high
Cultural rejection to changes 19.3 15.5 21.9 26.2 17.1
involving the use of RES
Lack of acceptance 13.8 19.6 24.9 22.2 19.6
by consumers
changes involving the use of RE and lack of acceptance
by consumers. As seen in Table 4, lack of acceptance of
the RE has a medium level (24.9%) and cultural rejection
to changes involving the use of RE is classified as medium
and high level barriers, with 21.9% and 26.2%, respec-
tively. Even though, the RES have lower environmental
impacts compared to the energy mega-projects, are facing
a growing local opposition. In recent years, the rejection
of thermoelectric water projects and dams, have sug-
gested that there is consensus among citizens to advance
the construction of projects related to RE. But, there are
projects which show only energy from renewable sources
is not synonymous with instant approval of the commu-
nities living near the project site.
This phenomenon attend the increased sensitivity of the
public to: (i) relatively large developments in the local
level, (ii) the lack of information and knowledge on
energy projects in general and RE in particular, and
(iii) the perception of harm and risk that the community
sees in a particular initiative near its environment.
Cultural factors relate to historically shaped traditions and
beliefs that the project needs to deal with. These include
the level of trust in different institutions involved in the
project. Moreover, different local traditions influence the
ability of projects. Overall attitudes to new technologies can
also influence the acceptability of a project: novelty can be
a bonus in some regions, but a cause for concern in others.
Then, it is highly recommended to therefore involve the
community, informing and making part. For this, it is
suggested: create local, regional or national education
campaigns about RE, provide and disseminate relevant
information on RE, increase dialogue and participation in
decision-making and finally is required a good coordina-
tion between state, regional and local policies such as the
various projects developed for a region.
With the aim of assessing what kind of RES are more
accepted by local communities, it was evaluate the num-
ber of projects related to RES and their grade of accepta-
tion by local community (stakeholders who work directly
with these projects). A total of 1187 RES projects were
identified with the survey, which the largest proportion is
by using solar with 36%, followed by biomass with 20%,
Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2015, 10:103110
108 Process systems engineering

Figure 1 Table 5

Acceptability of RES
Hydrogen Tidal and
wave RES %High %Medium %Low
5% acceptance acceptance acceptance
Geothermal 4% Biomass
6% 20% Solar 65.7 24.2 10.1
Wind 49.5 40.1 10.1
Biomass 74.5 25.6
Mini and micro 81.3 16.5 2.2
Wind hydraulic
14% Geothermal 8.5 58.5 33.0
Solar
36%
Mini and
micro of 69%, 69%, and 77%, respectively. About geothermal
hydraulic
energy is destined to heating uses with 53%.
15%
Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering
According to the experience in RES projects, respondents
were asked their attitudes towards the adoption of RES at
Percentage of RES projects by source of energy.
home (solar, wind, biomass, mini and micro hydraulic).
This question is in particular designed to investigate the
level of acceptance of local residents to the adoption of
RES in my backyard. Multiple comparisons of means
mini and micro hydraulic with 15% and in the last place of (Tukeys test) give statistical significance for the contrast
tidal and wave energy systems (see Figure 1). between acceptance levels of RES (0.017 = p < 0.05). As
shown in Table 5, mini and micro hydraulic systems
It is noteworthy the lack of maturity and technological remains by far the most important of the RES for power
knowledge in the area of hydrogen, geothermal, wave, production in Colombia, so around 81.3% of respondents
and tidal energy systems projects with a stake in only 2%, agreed widely with a high acceptance this technology.
9% and 4%, respectively.
It is also worth noting, the high degree of acceptance of
In order to distinguish the end uses of the different RE biomass systems 74.5%. It is widely accepted since is
resources, were assessed three categories: heat, power and alternative fuel sources, the elimination of greenhouse
chemical uses. As shown in Figure 2, it was found that gases, and the low cost.
energy from biomass have mainly chemical (biofuels) use,
48%; regarding energy from wind, sun and, mini and The same holds true for solar energy with 65.7% of high
micro hydraulic, are used for power purposes with values acceptance; respondents highlighted the reasons for

Figure 2

90
80 77
69 69
70
% Projects of RES

60 53
48 48 Heat
50
47 52
40 44 34
31 31
33
30 23 33 Electricity
20
8
10
Chemical
0

as
s
ind uli
c lar al en ve
So m og wa
om W dra her r
B i
hy ot yd nd
o Ge
H la
icr da
m Ti
d
an
ini
M
Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering

Percentage of RES projects by type of energy transformed and use.

Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2015, 10:103110 www.sciencedirect.com

 Barriers to social acceptance of RES in Colombia Rosso-Ceron and Kafarov 109
choosing solar systems as energy conservation and envi-
ronment protection. It is well recognized by those
respondents having solar systems installed at home is a
proper supplementary of coal and large hydroelectric.
However, the respondents that did not install solar sys-
tems were asked to identify the major reason, it is high
capital cost.
It is seen that people are open to suggest the wind power
developments and the promise of some incentive would
easily make local wind turbine developments acceptable.
It is 49.5% high acceptably and only 10.1% low accept-
able, due to several issues as noise pollution, visual
intrusion, and effect on wildlife.
The attitude of respondents is generally positive towards
all RES, whereas geothermal, remains the least supported
RES, because this technology is large and needs to be
built near the site where it is to be used, since transmis-
sion lines for transport can be really expensive.
With respect to energy from hydrogen, waves, and tidal,
respondents declined to give information since there
is no significant progress in this technology in the
country.
Conclusion
This paper has sought to determine social acceptance of
RES in Colombia through three dimensions (socio-politi-
cal acceptance, market acceptance, and community ac-
ceptance) proposed by [10]; this was done through testing
barriers and opinions of specific stakeholders.
Socio-political issues such as the lack of both, specific
supportive and restrictive policies, as well as their stability
had an influence on public confidence in the new RES
projects. It was also pointed out that joint learning and the
development of know-how within a system of compre-
hensive stakeholders working groups, including local
politicians; create a high level of confidence.
With regard to market acceptance, the key issue for
Colombia is not the lack of resources in the financial
market, but a lack of knowledge by financial institutions
involved in the business of RES.
Therefore, it is paramount to consider policies abolishing
barriers and benefiting RES investments. These policies
include mandatory constraints such as more efficient
processes, emissions reduction targets, a connection be-
tween the local and national energy policies, which pro-
vide motivation due to financial incentives and the
simplification of licensing procedures. On one hand,
new types of RES are far away from being competitive
with the countrys traditionally cheap main source of
energy (large hydro) and therefore need some sort of
public support or subsidies in order to be released.
www.sciencedirect.com
It is also worth noting, that the lack of acceptance is
linked to unfamiliarity of the RES, which causes are not
well regarded by the large community. Therefore, it is
necessary to foster programmes, early deployment pro-
jects, disseminating information, training and knowledge
about these technologies.
On the other hand, stakeholders interaction should not
be seen merely as a way to solve local problems of societal
acceptance, but also as a way to find new innovative
solutions, which promote the socio-technical evolution
of new and sustainable RES.
Thus depending on the different physical characteristics
of RES, their typical modes of application and level of
maturity, different issues are relevant. In this way, the
public policy and perception issues are currently domi-
nant for incipient RES such as geothermal, hydrogen and
oceanic. On the contrary, other issues such as sitting and
local impacts are likely to emerge as they move from
demonstration to deployment.
In addition, some RES require extensive involvement,
adaptation, and acceptance by the community, such as
solar and geothermal investments. They struggle more
with issues of costs and consumers perceptions of quality.
Other technologies, like wind and biomass need to deal
with their relations with local residents and integration
into the local economy and social structure. However, it is
important to note, that critical issues are not only depen-
dent on generic RES, moreover on project designs.
Finally, there are also some limitations of this study, for
example, relatively small number of usable samples was
collected for statistical analysis. Future studies shall pursue
to close these gaps by expanding the survey scope in rural
areas of Colombia, and it is also essential assessing techni-
cal and economic issues, which allow the knowledge,
adaptation, and integration of RES by the community.
Acknowledgements
The work presented in this paper is a part of result of the research activities
in the project: Collection of information and knowledge of stakeholders,
potential, projects and activities in renewable energy in Colombia executed
with the collaboration of Mining and Energy Planning Unit. We especially
wish to thank all our students from Universidad Industrial de Santander
who help with the execution of surveys.
References
1. Mark ZJ, Delucchi A: Providing all global energy with wind,
water, and solar power, Part I: technologies, energy
resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and
materials. Energy Policy 2011, 39:1154-1169.
2. Economou A: Renewable energy resources and sustainable
development in Mykonos (Greece). Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2010, 14:1496-1501.
3. Assefa G, Frostell B: Social sustainability and social
acceptance in technology assessment: a case study of energy
technologies. Technol Soc 2007, 29:63-78.
Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2015, 10:103110
110 Process systems engineering
4. Ek K: Public and private attitudes towards green electricity:
the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy 2005,
33:1677-1689.
5. Jobert A, Laborgne P, Mimler S: Local acceptance of wind
energy: factors of success identified in French and German
case studies. Energy Policy 2007, 35:2751-2760.
6. Del Rio P, Burguillo M: An empirical analysis of the impact
of renewable energy deployment on local sustainability.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009, 13:1314-1325.
7. Zoellner J, Schweizer-Ries P, Wemheuer C: Public acceptance of
renewable energies: results from case studies in Germany.
Energy Policy 2008, 36:4136-4141.
8. Maruyama Y, Nishikido M, Iida T: The rise of community wind
power in Japan: enhanced acceptance through social
innovation. Energy Policy 2007, 35:2761-2769.
9. Rogers JC, Simmons EA, Convery I, Weatherall A: Public
perceptions of opportunities for community-based renewable
energy projects. Energy Policy 2008, 36:4217-4226.
10. Wustenhagen R, Maarten W, Burer MJ: Social acceptance of
renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept.
Energy Policy 2007, 35:2683-2691.
11. Kaldellis JK: Social attitude towards wind energy applications
in Greece. Energy Policy 2005, 33:595-602.
12. Eleni K, Stigka JA, Paravantis, Mihalakakou Giouli K: Social
acceptance of renewable energy sources: a review of
contingent valuation applications. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2014, 32:100-106.
13. Mourelatos D, Assimacopoulos L, Papagiannakis A, Zervos A:
Large-scale integration of renewable energy sources an
action plan for Crete. Energy Policy 1998, 26:751-763.
14. Bakos G: Distributed power generation: a case study of small
scale PV power plant in Greece. Apply Energy 2008, 86:1757-1766.
15. Oikonomou EK, Kilias V, Goumas A, Rigopoulos A, Karakatsani E,
Damasiotis M et al.: Renewable energy sources (RES) projects
Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 2015, 10:103110
and their barriers on a regional scale: the case study of wind
parks in the Dodecanese islands Greece. Energy Policy 2009,
37:4874-4883.
16. Varun SK, Singal: Review of augmentation of energy needs
using renewable energy sources in India. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2007, 11:1607-1615.
17. Dimitropoulos A, Kontoleon A: Assessing the determinants of
local acceptability of wind farm investment: a choice
experiment in the Greek Aegean islands. Energy Policy 2009,
37:1842-1854.
18. Baker KJ, Rylatt RM: Improving the prediction of UK domestic
energy-demand using annual consumption-data. Apply Energy
2008, 85:475-482.
19. Hanley N, Nevin C: Appraising renewable energy developments
in remote communities: the case of the North Assynt Estate
Scotland. Energy Policy 1999, 27:527-547.
20. Sovacool BK, Dhakal S, Gippner O, Bambawale MJ: Halting
hydro: a review of the socio-technical barriers to hydroelectric
power plants in Nepal. Energy 2011, 36:3468-3476.
21. Painuly JP: Barriers to renewable energy penetration;
a framework for analysis. Renew Energy 2001, 24:73-89.
22. Reddy S, Painuly JP: Diffusion of renewable energy
technologies barriers and stakeholders perspectives.
Renew Energy 2004, 29:1431-1447.
23. Beck F, Martinot E: Renewable energy policies and barriers.
Encyclopedia Energy 2004, 5:365-383 Last accessed 08.29.14 at:
http://www.martinot.info/Beck_Martinot_AP.pdf.
24. Green PE, Carmone FJ, Smith SM: Multidimensional Scaling and
related Techniques in Marketing Analysis. Allyn and Boston Press;
1970.
25. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for
Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing;
2008:. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, Last accessed 08.29.14 at: http://
www.R-project.org.
www.sciencedirect.com