Views provided by UsageCounts
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>Abstract Discussions on the energy transition preceded the question of how to solve conflicts on the construction of the corresponding infrastructure. These conflicts regularly turn into wicked problems. To see how such conflicts might be solved in a participatory, democratic and sustainable fashion, we analysed six cases on wind power projects in the region of Lower Austria for their participatory qualities. Most of them turned out not to have met criteria of contemporary democratic theory. Our conclusion is that in order to live up to these demands, discussion processes have to be much more open, inclusive and discursive than they are.
decision-finding processes, infrastructure policy, Austria, participation, renewable energy, Institutional Change & Policy Instruments
decision-finding processes, infrastructure policy, Austria, participation, renewable energy, Institutional Change & Policy Instruments
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 11 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
| views | 4 |

Views provided by UsageCounts