Medial construction of energy landscapes in Germany

Energy Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

Medial construction of energy landscapes in Germany☆ Günther Weiss Institute for Geography and its Didactics, University of Cologne, Gronewaldstraße 2, Köln, Germany

A R T I C L E I N F O

A BS T RAC T

Keywords: Mass media Landscape Discourse

This paper reviews the German print media discussion of the relationship between “energy” and “landscape appearance” in general and”energy-landscapes” in particular, after the revision of German energy policy in 2011. When the landscape appearance is referred to within the scope of energy topics (without a firm conceptual link to an “energy landscape”), the debate tends to be dominated by statements proclaiming the destruction of landscape, primarily by wind turbines and wind parks. In the case of concrete energy landscapes referring to geographical units, these are frequently trade marks, in other words, proper nouns used for the purpose of establishing an image. It has become apparent that the term “energy landscape” is used, above all, as a metaphor for a complex organisational-technical-legal structure and for the transformation thereof. The overall conclusion is that the term “energy landscape” as a metaphor is more likely to be linked to the meaning of opportunity rather than threat, while in terms of defining a location within the landscape for new energy production plants, the notion of a threat clearly outweighs that of an opportunity.

1. Introduction As forms of renewable energy increase in significance, the cultural landscape is also transforming. Alongside the established supply structure, consisting of a small number of large-scale power plants based on fossil fuel sources, on the one hand there is an emergence of new, decentralised energy supply plants using technologies such as wind turbines, photovoltaic systems, biomass, hydroelectric power, and geothermal energy, while on the other hand, the agricultural cultivation of energy sources such as corn or rapeseed, and new power distribution lines are also entering the scene. Elements, which have been shaped by aspects of the energy industry, are increasingly occurring in the landscape, and have led to a flourishing of the term “energy landscape”. An energy landscape, in the broadest sense, means a section of the Earth's surface, noticeable influenced by facilities related to the production or transport of energy, mainly electricity. Due to this decentralisation of energy production, questions regarding the acceptance of these changes by citizens are playing an increasingly important role, as more and more people find themselves in the immediate vicinity of energy production and distribution sites. Consequently, it is of interest to explore which associations the citizens connect to the emergence of an “energy landscape” in their surroundings. However, the purpose here is not to examine the population's point of view, but rather to take a closer look at the perspective of the media as a carrier of perceptions. Transformations of the landscape can be observed in many places, yet their significance is not only assessed individually, but

is socially pre-constructed by the media. Thus, those aiming to untangle the issue of the acceptance of those newly emerging landscapes, shaped by forms of renewable energy, must also ask themselves which connotations are provided in the media, and hence are transported into the public domain. The first research question deals with the semantics of “energy landscape” in the media, understood here as a landscape generally influenced by energy production or distribution: Is it seen as threat or as an opportunity for a better future? The second question is, whether specific actors refer to a specific semantics of the relationship between landscape and energy. The third question is, if any development of these semantics can be observed during the recent years. This paper focuses on articles that appeared in the German print media during the period 2010–2016. The concept of landscape and its meanings are relatively complicated. In his seminal study of the semantics of the concept of landscape – a concept which plays a significant part, particularly in German Geography – Hard (1970), worked on the basis of more than 200 interviews mainly with students who were asked for example to characterize landscape in a semantic differential, pick related words and define minimum elements of a (beautiful) landscape. Additionally he carried out a semantic analysis of literature and travel brochures. He identified three central meanings: Landscape as “paysage” (strong aesthetic and emotional components), as “région” (every part of the Earth's surface, characterised by morphology, vegetation and traces of human activity), and as artistic portrayal (reproduction with artistic

☆

This article is part of a Virtual Special Issue entitled 'The collaborative “making” of Energy Landscapes'. E-mail address: [email protected].

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.031 Received 5 October 2016; Received in revised form 30 May 2017; Accepted 12 June 2017 0301-4215/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Weiss, G., Energy Policy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.031

Energy Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

G. Weiss

means). Dominant among these is the meaning of “paysage”, combined with the attributes view, overview, beauty, closeness to nature, culture, diversity, uniformity, values, and experience. Complementing this, Gailing and Leibenath (2012), semantically analyzing scientific literature on landscape, identified a series of contexts of use with dichotomous meanings, which contain at their core the landscape as a segment of the Earth's surface endowed with a specific character and a uniform structure. Though the appearance of decentralised renewable energy plants can be seen in many parts of the world, there is a specific discussion on that topic in Germany, due to the planned shutdown of all nuclear power plants and changes in energy policy at the national level as well as at the level of the German federal states (Bundesländer) (Nordensvärd and Urban, 2015). In Germany, the discussion of landscape with regard to the system of production and distribution of energy has developed, intensified and become increasingly differentiated since the late 1990s, driven primarily by the expansion of wind turbines. In the scientific sphere, it is possible to identify divergent approaches to addressing the relationship between landscape and plants for the production of (regenerative) forms of energy:

Despite the intensified examination of energy in relation to landscape (cf. Anon, 2015), no firm concept of an “energy landscape” has crystallized in the realm of geographic research in Germany. The term is used sporadically and refers, in part, not to the real-life landscape, but rather to the organisational structure of energy supply and demand (cf. Becker et al., 2012: “Neue Energielandschaften - neue Akteure”). One exception is presented by Brühne and Tempel (2013). They define “energy landscape” as concentrated, landscape-shaping utilisation by one or more typically combined energy sources (p. 29) and endeavour to deliver a classification of “energy landscapes”. Ideas range from objectively beautiful landscapes which have to be protected against energy infrastructure, a scientifically identifiable balanced proportion of energy infrastructure for every type of landscape to the constructivist view that the acceptance of changes in the landscape is affected mainly by habituation and social discourse. When Hard, 62, 79) (1970) considered compound words involving the term landscape, the notion of “energy landscape” does not arise in any of the sources he investigated and is not mentioned by any of the study participants. However, he points out that compound words including landscape are fixed neither in number nor in meaning. According to Hard, 74, 75) (1970), mankind's capacity to view a specific phenomenon as landscape, up and beyond the rules of use of the word landscape, is a feat of education brought about by art and literature, and thus by the media. In other words, media are able to generate and disseminate new “forms” and meanings of landscape, with the creative generation more likely to occur through artistic media (fictional books and paintings), and the circulation of these new forms more likely to be carried by mass media. His article attempts to explore the semantics of the relatively young discussion of landscape influenced by energy production and distribution in general and the concept of an “energy landscape” in particular. It explores these semantics beyond the scientific sphere in everyday use, focusing in particular on the contexts in which it is used by whom. In view of the media function as portrait and motor of everyday use at the same time, the article draws upon the use of the concept in the German print media. The paper is structured as follows: The first part looks at the impact of the media on the dissemination of collective concepts within the context of the theory of discourse. Next, the methodology applied to the study is introduced, followed by a report describing the results.

– Attempts to measure the degree of landscape change (e.g. Nohl, 2002), respectively to determine criteria for a socially acceptable design as a basis for planning (e.g. Meyerhoff et al., 2008). Landscape here was differentiated according to types, such as coastal areas, lowland, or mountain areas. – Attempts to establish an landscape unaltered by renewable energies as belonging to the homeland and to denounce massive changes to the landscape, especially those caused by wind turbines, as a loss of homeland with harmful psychological consequences (e.g. Hasse, 1999). This landscape as part of people's perceived homeland is the everyday landscape with its normal proportions tranqility, small elements and balanced relations between nature and patterns of human use. – Opinion research investigating the acceptance of plants for the production of renewable energy (e.g. Weise et al., 2005, Agentur für Erneuerbare Energien 2015). Opinion research is only concerned with the acceptance of renewable energy phenomena in the “neigbourhood”, neglecting their landscape appearance. – Research on the reasons for the rejection or acceptance of energy production sites in the neighbourhood in Germany (e.g. Musall and Kuik, 2011, Rau et al., 2011) and international studies (e.g. Wüstenhagen et al., 2007, Devine-Wright, 2008, Van der Horst, 2008). The resulting significant determinants of acceptance identified are transparency of advantages and disadvantages, genuine opportunity of participation and co-determination for those affected, individual benefit, as well as the issue of procedural and distributive justice. Researchers investigated acceptance in different types of landscape (e.g. regions dominated by agriculture, industry, tourism), but economic patterns or the scenic appearance of the surroundings did not affect acceptance to a significant extent. – Social-constructionist analysis of “landscape” as the result of individual perception, which is moulded by societal patterns of interpretation (e.g. Gailing and Leibenath, 2012; Leibenath and Otto, 2012; Micheel, 2012; Kühne, 2013). The results here revealed that there are heterogeneous concepts with regard to landscape in everyday life. The core concept of everyday practice is an Arcadian ideal of landscape; furthermore, landscape is linked to order, wellbeing and recreation (primary homeland landscape, similar to the “paysage” as defined by Hard, 1970). In addition, there are specific landscapes of experts, which might follow either a primarily ecological or a primarily aesthetic orientation (Kühne, 2013, 250– 259). Within the social-constructivist understanding, the perception of a change to the landscape as “disfigurement” or “destruction” is not objective or invariantly given, but is historically contingent, dependent on habit, meaning, benefit and power.

2. The discourse surrounding the “Energy Landscape” and the role of the media In the spirit of Michel Foucault's (2002) theory of discourse, the concept of “energy landscape” can be understood as part of a societal discourse. This means that certain narrator positions may or may not use the term in certain concepts and in a certain way. Consequently, the term can be conceived as part of a discursive formation, which determines, which object can be regarded as “energy landscape” and which statements about it are permissible. Within this theory “discourse” is not the same as “debate” but means a customary set of rules which determine what can be said about what subject or what event by whom at what occasion. According to the view of Hubbard et al. (2002), discourses are groups of statements, which pre-structure how people think about a topic, and how this way of thinking influences how they act. Individual statements can be perceived as interpretation patterns. These are stereotypical interpretations of reality, valid within social subgroups, including the normative aspect that defines who may or may not do what, under which circumstances (Honer, 1993, 103). A set of interpretation patterns is referred to as a frame, which contains definitions of typical events or objects. Gamson und Modigliani (1989, 2) label such sets of statements interpretative packages, the core of which is a central idea that endows the object or event with meaning. Because the purpose of public discussions as a struggle for the definition of truth is to gain a broad following for one interpretation 2

Energy Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

G. Weiss

which dealt primarily with sites of energy production and distribution. The daily newspapers with a regional scope covered nearly all urban agglomerations and bigger cities in Germany: Hamburg (Axel Springer publishers with "Hamburger Abendblatt"), Berlin (Berlin Publishers with "Berliner Kurier", Berliner Zeitung" and “taz”), Rhein-Main (Rhein Main publishing group with numerous newspapers and the “Frankfurter Rundschau”), Köln (M. DuMont Schauberg Publishers with "Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger" and "Kölnische Rundschau"), Aachen (Zeitungsgruppe Aachen with "Aachener Nachrichten" and "Aachener Zeitung"), Bonn (Bonner Zeitungsdruckerei and Verlagsanstalt H. Neusser with "Bonner General-Anzeiger"), Düsseldorf (Rheinische Post Publishers with "Rheinische Post Düsseldorf"), Stuttgart (“Stuttgarter Nachrichten"), Leipzig (Mitteldeutsches Druck- und Verlagshaus with the "Mitteldeutsche Zeitung "). Others regions covered by the newspapers analysed were northern Bavaria by the Frankenpost Publishers, Thuringia by the Südthüringer Publishers (”Südthüringer Zeitung "), VPV Meiningen Publishers ("Meininger Tagblatt") as well as the Suhler Publishing group ("Freies Wort") and Saxony ("Sächsische Zeitung"). Not covered by the Lexis Nexis database were smaller newspapers but also the Ruhr area, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Schleswig-Holstein and Lower Saxony. Weekly newspapers with a national scope found in the database were "Die Zeit" (Zeitverlag Gerd Bucerius), the "Spiegel", the "Focus" (Focus Magazin Publishers) and "Die Welt" (Axel Springer Publishers). Additionally some specialist magazines were considered: “Energy and Management” as a magazine dealing with energy topics, the German stock market magazine (“Börsenzeitung”) as a magazine dealing with the economy in general and the newspaper of the society of German engineers (“vdi-Nachrichten”), dealing with aspects of technological change. The period investigated was the period from 2010 to August 2016. The number of available print media and articles dated prior to 2010 is too low and does not permit the continuous observation of an identical corpus of newspapers and journals. In total, 623 articles were included in the analysis, 354 articles with the key term “energy landscape” and (for 2011 and 2015 only) 269 articles with the key terms “energy” and “landscape appearance”. 2011 was the year of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, when the German policy of energy transition started, 2015 was the last year completely available for analysis. The analysis of the texts deals with the study of linguistic use (Wetherell et al., 2001) in the sense of a discourse analysis, and combines the identification of semantics with a quantitative content analysis, with the objective of demonstrating focal areas in the use of the term (Hardy et al., 2004). Every article that contained the term “energy landscape” or respectively the combination of “energy” plus “landscape appearance”, was subjected to inductive coding and classified into various forms of meaning or context for the use of the term. In this way, it was hoped to determine interpretative master frames, which control the mental representations of an “energy landscape” or a “landscapes’ appearance” influenced by “energy” as part of reality (Scheufele, 1999). Linked to this semantic focus, attention was paid to whether any value was attributed to the term, and to which specific landscape the relation was established. In other words, the aim was to establish, which connotations are transmitted to the reader in relation to the term “energy landscape” or “energy” plus “landscape appearance”. To identify the semantics of “energy landscape”, attention was paid to three aspects: Adjectives directly connected with the term landscape (like “industrial”), processes or a status associated with landscape (like “damage”) and the message of the whole article (like the idea that landscape is sold for the profit of foreign investors). Whenever a specific energy project was discussed in the article, the focus was set only on the semantics directly associated with “landscape”. A first aspect of semantic analysis was the geographical scope of the landscape: Did the article refer to a general geographic landscape, a regionally specific landscape or a non-geographic, metaphorical landscape? The second aspect was the message associated with landscape:

of reality, frames must be chosen and designed in such a way as to appear comprehensible and plausible to the recipients (Keller, 2005). In this context it is interesting to consider whether a term is endowed with divergent meanings in different discourses, indicated by the type of actors applying specific semantics, and whether the semantics of the term may consequently change the surrounding discourse constellation over the course of time, indicated by changing semantics or the adoption of specific semantics of a term by new actor groups. The socially relevant struggle for followers of certain views of reality primarily takes place in the public media sphere. Though individual pieces of information may soon be forgotten, people store information, which repeatedly appears in the media, in the long term (Maurer, 2010, 65). Through their representations, the media can exert a strong influence on the recipients’ perceptions of facts. In particular when dealing with new, complex topics, the media act as a key for large portions of the population, who do not have their own direct access to these subjects. Similarly, the public attention directed at a topic is clearly influenced by its presence in the media. The media serve the purpose of agenda setting, which means that they determine which stories, topics and views are even permitted to enter the public debate, and which shape they adopt when doing so (Shrum, 2002; Romanach et al., 2015; Maurer, 2010, 65). A study by Weiss (2013) revealed that the argumentation used in local conflicts about sites of pumped-storage power plants and ground-mounted photovoltaic systems is shaped to a significant extent by national debates about the general energy policy. Here, to give an example, debates about the purpose and the costs of subsidies for renewable forms of energy or alternative power production technologies function as frames, which the population can use to interpret local projects as either sensible or pointless. Despite the significance of media there are relatively few studies which address social constructions relating to the topic of renewable forms of energy and energy transition in the mass media. No studies yet exist that specifically address the impact of media on the perception of landscape change through energy supply and consumption. Studies to mention are Romanach et al. (2015), who investigated the representation of geothermal energy in the Australian media, particularly in the print media. Sengers et al. (2010) analysed major daily newspapers in the Netherlands to identify semantic clusters linked to the concept of bioenergy. A national comparison of the media representation of carbon capture and storage is of central concern to Buhr and Hansson (2011), while Swiatkiewicz-Mosny and Wagner (2012) reconstruct the narratives on energy crises in the Polish press. In these studies, the media presentation of the effects of technology upon the environment, including the landscape, is, at best, one of several aspects. Consequently, the relationship of energy production or distribution and the landscape, as disseminated by the media, shall form the key focus of the present paper. This somewhat quantitative study may not deliver a typical comprehensive discourse analysis (Pollak, 2002), but can be conceived as a preliminary study, in which discursive formations and their transformation can, at least, begin to take shape. 3. Research design The analysis focuses on selected print media, as these are welldocumented and retrievable in their digital form, and furthermore, regional daily newspapers, in particular, deal with both supra-regional and local events, while television and radio broadcasts tend to concentrate on events of supra-regional significance. The media database “NexisLexis” was used to perform a keyword search for the key term “energy landscape” in the German print media. The analysis of articles, which contained both the keyword “energy” and the keyword “landscape”, turned out to be feasible only with great effort, due to the very high number of hits, especially as the search term “energy” frequently was not used in combination with the production of electricity. However, a combination of the search terms “energy” and “landscape appearance” did produce suitable results listing articles, 3

Energy Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

G. Weiss

What reportedly happened to the landscape and why was this related to “energy”? The third aspect was the inherent valuation of the landscape influenced by “energy”. This was determined on the basis of the common meaning of adjectives, processes or general messages. So adjectives like “spoiled” or “industrialised”, processes like increasing costs or risks and general messages related to things to be avoided were defined as negative. Positive semantics, such as a landscape becoming “secured” or “enriched” were defined as positive valuation. All other semantic associations were defined as neutral (like “limited effects” on or just a change of landscape appearance). In line with the research questions observation records also listed the respective user of the term. The categorisation applied included politicians, entrepreneurs / managers, scientists, editors and lay persons. If it was not possible to discern the user from the article, authorship was assigned to the editorial team. Furthermore, a record was made of the type of print medium, differentiated according to regional daily newspapers (23), supra-regional weekly newspapers (4), and professional journals (3). The results of all those classification provided the basis for statistical analysis (frequencies). The basis of the quantitative analysis was formed by articles in which the term “energy landscape” or “landscape appearance” combined with “energy” occurs at least once. Identical articles published in distinct regional editions of a newspaper were only counted once. If the term is used in an identical context, e.g. as a quote by a politician, and is subsequently reproduced by various papers and journals, each of these articles was counted separately, in order to appropriately represent the broader dissemination.

neutral

positive

negative

Other

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Fig. 1. Valuation associated with "energy landscape" as a concrete segment of the Earth's surface in selected German print media 2010–2015 (n = 110 articles).

some agricultural cultivation, which has been “ruined” or “heavily wired”, primarily due to wind farms. Following this meaning, landscape is resorted to as an aesthetic-homeland category, which is subjected to a form of industrialisation through plants dedicated to the production and transportation of energy, ultimately emerging as “techno-landscape”. Almost without exception, the deployment of this meaning of “energy landscape” occurred in conflicts about the construction of plants for the production of regenerative forms of energy (wind farms, pump storage plants). This interpretation is confirmed in the articles, which deal with “landscape appearance” in the context of energy topics. These predominantly involve discussions about the planned or imminent construction of wind power plants (Fig. 2). In these instances, actors tend to assume the destruction of the landscape's appearance as a matter of principle, even including those individuals who express support for the installation of wind turbines. A prime minister from the Green party is quoted here: “In order to advance renewable forms of energy, there is no way of avoiding the disfigurement of the landscape's appearance” (“Rheinische Post” 06.07.2016). In this sense a classification as neutral means that the author of an article considers the landscape affected, but not in a dramatic way, or that this change in landscape appearance had to be a accepted due to sustainable, environmentally sound energy production. This neutral perspective dominated in the year of the atomic disaster in Fukushima. In 2015 the negative perspective prevailed in public debates. That the underlying notion here is a traditional concept of landscape, can be discerned not only by the use of the term “landscape appearance”, but also by the landscape characteristics applied (beautiful, valuable, historic, forest, mountains, legally protected good), which are “industrially reshaped”, but also by the vast number of lay persons who usually join the discussion via citizens’ initiatives, followed by local politicians and editors. As can be seen in Fig. 3, “landscape appear-

4. Results 4.1. “Energy Landscape” as geographical segment of space Instances where the term “energy landscape” is used to relate to landscape in the physio-geographical or cultural-spatial sense, i.e. as geographical segment of the Earth's surface, are significantly uncommon (110 of 354 articles, this is 31%). It is rare that the term is used to refer to space in the general sense, without specifying a location, e.g. when the topic of discussion is the development of “energy landscapes” (such as the conference topic “Energy Landscapes 3.0″), when the “energy landscape” is being explored by bicycle, or when schoolchildren are encouraged to create an “energy landscape” using arts and crafts as part of a competition. A reason for this could be that there is no common idea which phenomena of energy production and distribution or which combination of those can be definitely labelled as an “energy landscape”. In most cases, there is a discernible link to concrete regions. The number of concrete regions referred to as “energy landscapes” in the print media analysed was surprisingly low. Of the 110 articles overall, 31% yielded a positive, 15.5% a rather negative, and 48.5% a rather neutral attitude towards these landscapes (Fig. 1). A positive value was attributed to the phenomenon in the regions Erft / Grevenbroich / Eschweiler (North Rhine-Westphalia) plus Burgenlandkreis (Saxony-Anhalt) as former lignite mining regions, as well as Alsdorf and Dinslaken as towns in former black coal mining regions. Here, the term “energy landscape” is used in the spirit of establishing continuity between the old mining tradition, which focused on the production of energy, and new forms of generating energy. As such, the Aachen newspaper praises a vantage point in Alsdorf, which offers a view of a lignite power plant, heaps of black coal, wind turbines, and solar roofs. The “Energy Landscape Morbach” (Rhineland-Palatinate) presents an exception to the mining tradition, as do plans for Eudenbach (North Rhine-Westphalia), which involve military conversion areas without an energy-related history. Negative connotations of the term “energy landscape” were somewhat rarer; here, the term stood for a landscape that was close to nature, served the purpose of leisure and relaxation, and also allowed

Wind 2011 Wind 2015 PV 2011 PV 2015 Biomass 2011 Biomass 2015 high tension lines 2011 high tension lines 2015 Other 2011 Other 2015 0

20

40 positive

60 neutral

80

100

negative

Fig. 2. Valuation associated with the effects of (renewable) energy projects on "landscape appearance" in selected German print media 2011 (n = 150 articles).

4

Energy Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

G. Weiss

non specific

2010

tourism / leisure

2011

already polluted protected

2012

specific charakter

2013

untouched forest

2014

nature

2015

other 0

10

20

30

40 2011

50

60

70

0

80

5

10 Morbach

2015

Anna

15 Erft

specific other

20

25

non-specific

Fig. 3. Specification of the appearance of a landscape affected by (renewable) energy projects in selected German print media 2011 (n = 146 articles) and 2015 (n = 136 articles) in percent.

Fig. 4. Temporal development of articles in selected German print media mentioning specific "energy landscapes" as trade-mark projects between 2010 and 2015, differentiated according to project name (absolute number of articles, 110 articles in total).

ance” was not elaborated on or justified in most of the cases. There are two reasons for that: Normally, the worth of a distinct landscape does not need to be justified and is something as obviously positive as “nature” itself. Furthermore especially in 2011 the medial discussion concerned landscape in general and not a certain region. In 2015 most of the medial discussion focussed on concrete siting areas for energy production and distribution facilities. Possibly the increase of the number of landscape features mentioned indicates an increasing necessity to give reasons for the significance of a landscape considered under threat. This significance was proven by functional aspects (tourism, leisure), the expression of naturalness (nature, forest, animals, untouched), a specific character, a legal status of protection (e.g. natural reserve, historic monument) or the fact that a region is already dominated by factories, motorways, high voltage power lines, mining and the like. The status of protection and the image of a village closely surrounded by wind turbines (a part of “other aspects” in Fig. 3) appeared to a greater scale in 2015, Though rarely touched upon in articles, biomass and buried cables are given a positive association with “landscape appearance”. In the case of biomass, this applies to new energy crops (e.g. Silphium perfoliatum), which deliver colourful diversity. The installation of underground cables, in turn, signifies the dismantling of electricity pylons and is therefore welcomed. Nearly all articles dealing with “energy” and “landscape appearance” were found in daily newspapers. There, the terms appeared with regard to current discussions on energy policy or local siting struggles. Among the spatial types of landscape in daily language use, the “energy landscape”, occurring in 110 articles in the period of observation, only plays a secondary role compared to the number of articles mentioning other types: During the same period, the terms natural landscape, urban landscape, or agricultural landscape occur with a significantly greater frequency, albeit a direct comparison of the figures is inadmissible, due to the multiple counts in the database system of regional editions. This result corresponds to the insight gained by Hard, 71, 79) (1970), namely that combinations of terms such as industrial landscape and urban landscape are part of established language use with a partly pejorative, but party aesthetic-positive connotation. While the term “energy landscape” clearly did not yet belong to the general vocabulary at the end of the 1960s, there are indications that it is now becoming a bit more common but is still not a part of regular established language.

trendsetter for this type of use is the “Energy Landscape Morbach” in Rhineland-Palatinate, which gained broad attention beyond regional borders. The “Energy Landscape Anna”, and the “Energy Landscape Erft” are examples of representatives of this type of use, which continue to be discussed in the regional print media of the space surrounding the respective location. Frequency and development of mentions are depicted in Fig. 4. These branded projects are explained in a little more detail below as they represent an all-round positive view of a new type of landscape defined by renewable energy production. - “Energy Landscape Morbach” (Rhineland-Palatinate). The landscape concerned is a former ammunitions depot of the US Air Force, spread across an area of 145 ha, which was vacated in 1995. In 2001, Morbach's local authority developed the idea of installing an energy park in the conversion area. The “energy landscape” was officially opened in 2002; in 2007, a wood pellet factory opened for business there. The “energy landscape” comprises 15 wind turbines, two large ground-mounted photovoltaic plants, one PV roof installation, and a biogas facility for electricity and local heat; the total capacity amounts to 30.7 MW. Morbach drew the largest share of all mentions of the term “energy landscape” in the German print media, referring to a specific place. This is due, not least, to the intensive public relations campaign that was conducted jointly by the project developer Juwi with Morbach as reference project and the local authority in Morbach. Furthermore, the “Energy Landscape Morbach” was entered into competitions and, to give some examples, received an award as climate protection community in 2006, the German Solar Prize in 2007, and emerged as the 2009 winner of the nationwide community climate protection competition (“Lauterbacher Anzeiger” 06.09.2013, “Allgemeine Zeitung” 23.06.2012). Reporting about Morbach in the print media tends to be accompanied by positive assessments, including “exemplary and pioneering”, “showcase project”, “prime example”, not solely as a combination of various forms of producing renewable energy, but also as an example of the successful follow-on utilisation of a military conversion area. The intensive PR effort of the operators of “Energy Landscape Morbach” resulted in numerous visits by out-of-town delegations (energy professionals, local politicians, associations), and in lectures by representatives of Morbach at other locations. In this way, the expression also found its way into the daily newspapers of other regions and supra-regional print media. Other towns also facing the follow-on utilisation of a conversion area (Königswinter-Eudenbach, Nierstein, Weilrod, Buseck) were particularly interested. Nevertheless, examining the media, it is not possible to prove if the adoption of the term “energy landscape” really spreaded from the Morbach prototype, and none of the other reference projects of the company Juwi bear the name “energy landscape” -“Energy Landscape Anna” (North Rhine-Westphalia): In order to preserve and document the history of hard coal mining in Alsdorf, and to create a site where it is possible to address the issues of energy today

4.2. “Energy Landscape” as a “Brand“ “Brand” is used here to refer to the use of the term “energy landscape” as proper noun, describing a concrete segment of space. This proper noun was deliberately chosen by actors, who saw this type of use as beneficial, and it served for marketing purposes. The 5

Energy Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

G. Weiss

-“Energy Landscape Bergwerk Ost” (North Rhine-Westphalia): According to a feasibility study for subsequent use dated 2012/13, once closed, the former hard coal mine Bergwerk Ost (translation: Eastern Colliery), with an area of 70 ha in Hamm, was to be turned into a centre for renewable energies, equipped with a photovoltaic system, a biomass/biogas plant, and other installations dedicated to energy generation (Urban Catalyst Studio et al., 2012). As a conclusion it can be stated that the term “energy landscape” as a brand arises in three forms: Firstly, it occurs as a concept for a largescale brownfield site, which is due to be put to subsequent use, e.g. a conversion area. The idea is to provide a conflict-free location for the generation of renewable forms of energy and, consequently, economic prospects for the future (Morbach). Secondly, we can identify the attempt to establish continuity in terms of energy resources in former mining regions. Following the mining tradition, sites here are to serve the production of renewable forms of energy, offering the perspective of an economic future (Anna, Erft, Welzow, Sedlitz Meuro, Bergwerk Ost). Thirdly, the concept facilitates the coordination of an existing conglomeration of sites in relation to diverse renewable forms of energy (biomass for biogas, wind parks, ground-mounted photovoltaic systems) in a region defined by rural structures. The conceptual coordination and the labelling as “energy landscape” aim to increase its acceptance and improve its impact. One further objective is to create future economic opportunities through the generation of renewable forms of energy (Prignitz, Münsterland). While the use of the term “energy landscape” rarely occurred in relation to specific spaces in the analysed German print media, there are two other terms, which are reserved far more stringently for concrete geographical spaces: “energy garden” and “energy park”. An “energy park” is defined similarly to the concrete “energy landscape”, as a combination of diverse plants, generally dedicated to generating renewable forms of energy, and arranged to form a spatial and organisational unit (similar to an industrial park). The term can be found as early as 1995 in the print media examined, and is used relatively frequently. The term “energy garden”, encountered from 2006 onwards, tends to be limited to the generation of energy from biomass. However, there is a second meaning, referring rather esoterically to green spaces, in which humans can draw spiritual strength (in other words, gather energy) due to certain characteristics of the installation. Additional project terms associated with projects relating to renewable forms of energy include “energy village”, “energy mountain”, and “energy avenue”. The number of mentions (since 2000) in relation to “energy mountain” mainly refers to a project of the International Construction Exhibition and International Garden Show (IBA and IGS) in 2013, in Wilhelmsburg near Hamburg (Energy Mountain Georgswerder). The term “energy avenue” was predominantly used from 2009 onwards in relation to the project “Energy Avenue A7″. Overall, what can be determined is that projects involving renewable forms of energy have led to numerous new word combinations with the prefix “energy”. Particularly among regional planners, it is a popular practice to combine concrete geographical spaces with the word “energy”, and this is enthusiastically taken up by politicians associated with the project region. The fact that these projects are, for the most part, characterised as creative, innovative, attractive, sustainable, and future-oriented in their public portrayal, leads to the assumption that these “new” energy spaces should have mostly positive connotations among the general public, based solely on the media reception. In contrast to the “energy park”, the terms “energy landscape”, “energy mountain”, “energy avenue”, and “energy garden” are understood more as brands, i.e. as unique feature, each marking a very specific project. Thus, one cannot assume that these neologisms will spread to a significant degree, as other planners, for their part, endeavour to establish the originality of their chosen project labels. In accordance with the process described by Hard (1970), project developers, planners and landscape architects prove to be the creative

and tomorrow, the shaft of the former pit Anna II was to be the location of an information and documentation centre. This project, starting in 2006, was comprised of five elements, grouped around relics of the former hard coal mine in Alsdorf: the competence and information centre “Energeticon”, a slag heap park, an educational trail focusing on energy, a documentation centre, and a lakeside leisure centre. The intention of the project is to provide a high-quality range of leisure and information offers, and simultaneously position the town of Alsdorf as a knowledge and technology location. Meanwhile, the supplementary project “Energy Landscapes 1:1″ was launched. This is an excursion route leading to installations, intended to model the transition from traditional to modern “energy landscapes” (“Aachener Zeitung” 27.07.2012, 16.03.2012). -“Energy Landscape Erft” (North Rhine-Westphalia). This project is coupled to the tradition of lignite extraction for the purpose of producing electricity in the Erft region. The basic idea involved a regional cycle route, which links stations related to various forms of regenerative energy and different types of utilisation of landscapes following on from open-cast mining. 2016 saw the creation of the model project “edible energy landscapes in Erftaue”, which is set to combine the ecological cultivation of food products for local restaurants with the energy-related utilisation of biomass residues (“Kölner StadtAnzeiger” 12.07.2016, 19.06.2014, “Aachener Zeitung” 27.08.2011). Consideration of the temporal development (Fig. 4) reveals that the use of “energy landscapes” as a “brand” suffered a gradual loss of public attention in the print media from 2011 onwards; what is more, no new “energy landscapes” moved into the limelight of media coverage. It appears that, so far, existing projects have lacked notable occasions able to draw further media interest (anniversaries, new openings, competition victories). To find out if there are further concrete spaces, which label themselves as “energy landscapes” in the spirit of a proper noun, and which nonetheless escaped mention in the print media, an additional internet research was carried out using the search term “energy landscape”: -“Energy Landscape Welzow” (Brandenburg): This project, formally opened 2005 is a part of the recultivation of the former Welzow opencast mine. It embraces a combination of renewable resources, wind turbines and photovoltaic systems. The project involved a study of different cultivation systems for rapidly growing energy plants. In the long term, the aim was to run this project as a landscape laboratory for innovative land use systems (Internationale Bauausstellung FürstPückler-Land, 2010). -“Energy Landscape Prignitz” (Brandenburg): The objective of the project is to address the question of the design of cultural landscapes under the banner of climate change and energy revolution and to test innovate concepts. The project discussed in 2014 envisaged marketing the agricultural district of Prignitz, which was characterised by groundmounted photovoltaic systems, wind parks, and biogas installations, as “energy landscape”, thus defining an action sphere, which linked the historic identity of Prignitz with a modern use, in keeping with its character. (Leibnitz Institut für Regionalentwicklung und Strukturplanung und Büro für Landschaftskommunikation, 2014; Land Brandenburg, 2014). -“Energy Landscape Münsterland” (North Rhine-Westphalia): The endeavour here is to shape a clear profile for the Münsterland as attractive business location and cultural landscape, using a combination of energy revolution and livable landscape. The Livable Landscape Trust was initiated by in 2011, in order, especially, to promote the preservation of the characteristic regional cultural landscape. -“Energy Landscape Sedlitz” (Brandenburg): This project idea began life in 2002, and pursued the aim to transform a post-mine landscape into an economically and socially stable region, balancing ecological and infrastructural deficits by creating regional value creation chains. In this specific case, the “energy landscape” should produce biomass (robinia, populus, willows) for a heat and power station (Schmitz et al., 2010). 6

Energy Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

G. Weiss

metaphor for structure of supply

2010

metaphor for energy sources

2011

metaphor for complete energy system

2012

metaphor for technological changes

2013 2014

metaphor for legal frames

2015 metaphor for geopolitical constellation

0 0

10

20

30

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

40 daily newspaper

Fig. 5. Areas of focus associated with the metaphoric use of the term "energy landscape" in selected German print media 2010–2015 in percent (n = 244 articles).

weekly magazines

special magazines

Fig. 6. Temporal development of a metaphorical use of the term "energy landscape" in selected German print media 2010–2015, differentiated according to type of media (absolute number of articles).

inventors of a new concept of the landscape, charged with positive meanings, which strives to establish the harmonious union of the traditional cultural landscape with new forms of energy generation. This concept, in turn, is seized upon by the media and widely disseminated.

has the character of a challenge, which, however, is regarded as an opportunity rather than a risk. Of course, changes in the energy sector produce not just winners, but also, in part, losers. Of note here are the major utilities, which implement restructuring measures in response to dwindling profits and market shares. However, in general, the changes very rarely receive explicitly negative connotations in the text, for example when mention is made of lack of clarity, required subsidies, increasing costs for consumers and suppliers, uncertainty and paradoxes, usually with reference to the energy market and the danger of grid overload. Meanwhile, explicitly positive connotations are also scarce, and relate to the meaningful coexistence of different forms of energy, sustainability, climate protection, improved participation of citizens, and the safeguarding of Germany as economic location. The chronological development of the use of the term (see Fig. 6) reveals peak use in the year 2011, which is linked to the Federal Government's departure from the production of nuclear energy following the Fukushima incident, the so-called “energy transition” (Energiewende). Since then, use of the term in the analysed print media has been declining, without losing significance altogether. A comparison of the actors who used the term in 2011 and again in 2015 shows us that, unaltered by time, the term remains most popular among representatives of industry in order to emphasise structural changes. For example, quite a few newspapers picked up on the quote by the chairman of the board of British Petroleum who spoke of a “shifting of the tectonic plates that make up the global energy landscape” (e.g. “Die Welt” 11.06.2015) This comparison, made on the occasion of the presentation of the Statistical Review of World Energy, referred to the marked decline in global energy consumption. Other frequent users also include editors and politicians. The small number of scientists and lay persons who emerge as users of the term may also be connected to the fact that these groups of actors are generally less visible in the media than representatives of industry and politicians. When considering the type of media (see Fig. 6), it can be observed that the incidence of the metaphorical use of the term in professional journals has been falling since 2011, while daily newspapers reveal fluctuations, but no discernible decline. Among the professional journals, there was a noticeable concentration of the term in the journal “Energy and Management”, where it was primarily employed by representatives of the association of communal businesses, when referring to the changing role of municipal utilities within the reorganisation of the “energy landscape”. Some of the changes mentioned in relation to the organisational, legal, or technical “energy landscape” also entail spatial aspects. The phenomenon of decentralisation, for instance, generally refers to the technical-organisational aspect of the shift from large-scale power plants under the control of major energy suppliers to small power plants owned by citizens, cooperatives, or medium-sized businesses. However, in principle, this organisational shift also affects the spatial

4.3. “Energy Landscape” as a metaphor In the investigated print media covering the period from 2010 to August 2016, the term “energy landscape” did not refer to a geographical segment in 69% of 354 articles, but was instead used as a metaphor for not directly space-related aspects of the energy sector. Here, landscape stands for a complicated structure, like “political landscape” or “media landscape”. The use of the term “energy landscape” as a metaphor latches on to the traditional understanding of landscape as a delimitable unit, which is internally diverse. It is possible to determine certain areas of focus, to which the metaphor refers (see Fig. 5): – legal-organisational structure of the supply or of the suppliers (ranging from private sector companies to communal suppliers, from large-scale energy suppliers to small cooperatives and households as energy producers, etc.). – the type of energy source (from fossil to renewable energy sources, from nuclear to non-nuclear power generation). – technical aspects of energy production (new technologies, e.g. extraction of shale gas, use of cogeneration plants, power-to-gas, smart grids, etc.) – energy policy or government guidelines and their steering effect on the energy supply (e.g. Renewable Energy Law EEG). – entire structure of energy production, distribution and consumption, comprising organisational, technical, and political aspects. – for geopolitical or geostrategic constellations (e.g. in relation to countries as energy exporters/ importers). The central context here was that the metaphorically grasped “energy landscape” is transforming itself. Frequently used terms in this context are generally “change”, “transition”, “reconstruction”, “upheaval”, or “transformation”. Transition as renewal is emphasised in terms such as “realignment”, “repositioning”, “reshaping”, and “restructuring”. Specifically, the “energy landscape” is transformed by decentralisation, flexibilization, and diversification. In addition to these summarising process labels, there is also mention of a range of individual changes, such as, for instance, the increasing significance of digitalisation, reserve power plants, natural gas pipelines, energy storage systems, smart grids, or the diminishing significance of thermal heat, large-scale power plants, major utilities, coal. The metaphorical use of the term “energy landscape” usually occurs in an unbiased context, in which certain changes are reported in a unemotional manner. Frequently, the change of the “energy landscape” 7

Energy Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

G. Weiss

particularly regarding the approval of wind turbines. The great significance of originality and of the project name as unique feature may also explain why the term “energy landscape” as a brand has not prevailed to a greater extent. It remains to be seen whether the use of the term as a trade mark will lead to a more positive view of “energy landscapes” in the long term. To investigate this, other methods would have to be applied (e.g. test of association with compound words involving the term “landscape” or with pictures of landscapes influenced by energy production in a different way). With regard to the theory of societal discourse, it is possible to cautiously delineate three discursive formations with divergent meanings: The “energy landscape” of the lay person as a ruined, formerly beautiful geographical segment of space, the “energy landscape” of the planners as a brand for a regional development project, and the “energy landscape” of entrepreneurs, managers and politicians as a metaphor for radical changes in the energy system. Of course this is a generalized impression obtained from media analysis. Different views of individual persons (e,.g. planners taking a lay perspective) cannot be excluded. The third question was, whether any development of these semantics can be observed during the period from 2010/11 to 2016. From 2011–2015 an increasing part of the medial discussion concerning landscape as a geographical segment of space focussed on concrete sites for energy production and distribution facilities, possibly indicating an increasing necessity to give reasons for the significance of a landscape considered under threat. The number of articles dealing with “energy landscape” as a brand decreases in the same period, which gives rise to the assumption that this notion is losing its attractiveness for new, original renewable energy projects. No trend could be found in the use of “energy landscape” as a metaphor. Due to the relatively short period of analysis measuring merely six years, no significant temporal shift in the utilisation of the terms could be determined. Over all this study revealed that landscape as a geographical segment of space is of great importance with regard to energy-related siting struggles and energy policy at the local and regional scale. But instead of treating landscape as a self-evident region of beauty, nature and recreation, it seems that the specific worth of it has to be justified and must be discussed individually. An understanding of (renewable)”energy landscape” as a widely accepted, sustainable, environmentally sound geographical landscape with its own beauty does not stand out yet, beyond a limited number of showpiece projects.

location distribution of power plants, power lines, and, of course, companies. None of the analysed articles contained both a metaphorical and geographical meaning of the term “energy landscape”, so no direct relationship between the two could be identified. We can assume that the fundamental framing of the change of energy sector structures as a metaphorical “energy landscape” influences the general acceptance of the energy transition as a transformation, which is also reflected in the geographical landscape. Seen from this point of view, the representation, which tends to be neutral in terms of value and which emphasises challenges as opportunities, should encourage acceptance, or, at the very least, should not diminish it. 5. Conclusions and policy implications The first two research questions, dealing with the semantics of “energy landscape” or a landscape influenced by energy production and distribution, and the occurrence of certain actors who refer to a specific semantics (idea of discourse) could be answered as follows: In the German print media, the term “energy landscape” occurs rarely as a geographic description of a concrete segment of the Earth's surface. In the print media, the negative utilisation of the term in conflicts describing the disfigurement of a formerly beautiful and natural landscape, is relatively insignificant. The geographic type of use is quite clearly dominant in the scope of the term “landscape appearance”, in relation to local debates about planning and construction of energy plants, with a focus on wind energy, and for the most part it is articulated by lay persons acting as members of civil initiatives and by local politicians. On the other hand, emphasising the positive connotations, the term often refers to concrete projects associated with the combination of renewable forms of energy or with the revitalisation of old sites of energy production or other forms of former use. In this context it should be noted that the term, which is used as a signifier of a “brand” in numerous cases, is emphasised particularly in the parlance of planners and in order to label innovative projects. Virtually all proper nouns using the term “energy landscape” have emerged from broader regional development projects (Regionale in NRW, International Construction Exhibition, REKULA). The concept aims to suggest innovativeness and the compatible combination of an existing and a transformed future landscape, as well as of landscape and energy production in general. Thus, the “energy landscape” term deliberately counters the notion that energy production must necessarily harm the landscape. Not least, this represents a certain linguistic game of the planners, in which energy and nature should be harmoniously united (see also the valued term of the “energy garden” or the “energy park”). This mirrors the specific comprehension of the landscape as held by planners and architects, which diverges from the every-day notion held by lay persons (cf. Kühne, 2013). In the German print media, the term “energy landscape” is primarily understood metaphorically, as a symbol for the complex system of energy supply (generation, distribution, and consumption, from the technical, economic and political point of view). The metaphor of the “energy landscape” is linked, in most cases, to the context of transformation. This transformation is seen as risky in part, but as it is attributed with greater sustainability, decentralisation, diversity, and democracy, it is regarded predominantly as opportunity. In the course of this study it was not possible to reveal whether the use and valuation of "energy landscapes" as metaphor and trade mark influences the acceptance of "energy landscapes" as concrete geographical segments of space. In the articles considered no references were made to relationships between a metaphorically and a geographically changing “energy landscape”. Even in the context of the brand projects no one mentioned any explicit effects on the geographical landscape. Through the public relations efforts in the context of these projects it can be assumed that a positive connotation of the term will proliferate in contrast to the negative interpretation of a ruined, industrialised landscape, even if this is not evident in the local discussions,

References Agentur für erneuerbare Energien (Ed.), 2015. Akzeptanz für erneuerbare Energien weiterhin hoch. Renews kompakt 27. 〈http://www.unendlich-viel-energie.de/ media/file/416.AEE_renewskompakt_Akzeptanzumfrage2015.pdf〉 (Accessed 30 September 2016). Becker, S., Gailing, L., Naumann, M., 2012. Neue Energielandschaften – neue Akteure. Eine Bestandsaufnahme im Land Brandenburg. Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung, Berlin. Brühne, T., Tempel, M., 2013. Postmoderne Energielandschaften in Rheinland-Pfalz. Geogr. Rundsch. 1, 28–35. Buhr, K., Hansson, A., 2011. Capturing the stories of corporations: a comparison of media debates on carbon capture and storage in Norway and Sweden. Glob. Environ. Change 21, 336–345. Devine-Wright, P., 2008. Reconsidering public acceptance of renewable energy technologies: a critical review. In: Jamasb, T., Grubb, M., Pollitt, M.G. (Eds.), Delivering a Low Carbon Electricity System: Technologies, Economics and Policy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 443–461. Foucault, M., 2002. Archaeology of Knowledge. Routledge, London. Gailing, L., Leibenath, M., 2012. Von der Schwierigkeit, „Landschaft“ oder „Kulturlandschaft“ allgemeingültig zu definieren. Raumforsch. und Raumordn. 70, 95–106. Gamson, W.A., Modigliani, A., 1989. Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power. A constuctionist approach. Am. J. Sociol. 95 (1), 1–37. Hard, G., 1970. Die “Landschaft“ der Sprache und die “Landschaft“ der Geographen. Ferdinand Dümmlers, Bonn. Hasse, J., 1999. Bildstörung. Windenergie und Landschaftsästhetik. Wahrnehmungsgeographische Studien zur Regionalentwicklung, Oldenburg, (18). Hardy, C., Harley, B., Philips, N., 2004. Discourse Analysis and Content Analysis: Two Solitudes?. Qualitative Methods Newsletter Spring, 10–22. Honer, A., 1993. Lebensweltliche Ethnographie. Ein explorativ-interpretativer Forschungsansatz am Beispiel von Heimwerker-Wissen. Deutscher UniversitätsVerlag, Wiesbaden.

8

Energy Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

G. Weiss

von Linguistik und Ideologiekritik. Z. für Angew. Linguist. 36 (8), 33–48. Rau, I., Walter, G., Zoellner, J., 2011. Wahrnehmung von Bürgerprotesten im Bereich erneuerbarer Energien: Von NIMBY-opposition zu kommunaler Emanzipation. Umweltpsychologie 15 (2), 37–51. Romanach, L., Carr-Cornish, S., Muriuki, G., 2015. Social acceptance of an energy technology: how is geothermal energy portrayed in Australian media? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 42, 1143–1150. Scheufele, D.A., 1999. Framing as a theory of media effects. J. Commun. 49 (1), 103–122. Schmitz, S., Hoogen, H., Friedrich, H.-.J., Bens, O., Hüttl, R.F., 2010. Entwicklung einer Energielandschaft am Standort Sedlitz-Meuro. Kurzfassung. Machbarkeitsstudie im Rahmen des Projekts REKULA der IBA Fürst-Pückler-Land. 〈http://www.yumpu. com/de/document/view/22433513/entwicklung-einer-energielandschgaft-amstandort-sedlitz-meuro-/5〉. Sengers, F., Raven, R.P.J.M., Van Venrooij, A., 2010. From riches to rags: biofuels, media discourses and resistance to sustainable energy technologies. Energy Policy 38, 5013–5027. Shrum, L.J., 2002. Media consumption and perceptions of social reality: effects and underlying processes. In: Bryant., J., Zillmann, D. (Eds.), Media effects. Advances in theory and research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Malawah N.J., London, 69–95. Swiatkiewicz-Mosny, M., Wagner, A., 2012. How much energy in energy policy? The media on energy problems in developing countries (with the example of Poland). Energy Policy 50, 383–390. Urban Catalyst Studio, 2012. Davids Terfrüchte und Partner, Prof. Spars, De Zwarte Hond (Eds.). Machbarkeitsstudie zur Folgenutzung des Bergwerks Ost, Hamm. 〈http://www.hamm.de/fileadmin/user_upload/medienarchiv/planen_bauen_ verkehr/dokumente/stadtentwickung/2013-02-07_machbarkeitsstudieteil1.pdf〉 (Accessed 23 July 2016). Van, der Horst, D., 2008. NIMBY or not? Exploring the relavance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting contoversies. Energy Policy 35, 2705–2714. Weise, R., Allendorf, M., Koch, S., 2005. Windenergieanlagen im Landschaftsbild. analyse einer Bevölkerungsumfrage in Thüringen. Nat. und Landsch. 34 (8), 242–246. Weiss, G., 2013. Das Klima retten – aber nicht vor der eigenen Tür? Konflikte um Anlagen zur regenerativen Energieerzeugung in Deutschland. Geogr. Rundsch. 65 (1), 44–49. Wetherell, M., Taylor, S., Yates, J., 2001. Discourse as Data. A Guide for analysis. Sage, London. Wüstenhagen, R., Wolsink, M., Bürer, M.J., 2007. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 35, 2683–2691.

Hubbard, P., Kitchin, R., Bartley, B., Fuller, D., 2002. Thinking Geographically: Space, Theory and Contemporary Human Geography. Continuum, London, New York. Internationale Bauausstellung Fürst-Pückler-Land, 2010. (Ed.). Project 14 Welzow energy landscape. Sun, Wind and Biomaass. 〈http://www.iba-see2010.de/en/ projekte/projekt9〉. energeticon.de (Accessed 22 July 2016). Keller, R., 2005. Wissenssoziologische Diskursanalyse als interpretative Analytik. In: Keller, R., Hirseland, A., Schneider, W., Viehöver, W. (Eds.), Die diskursive Konstruktion von Wirklichkeit. UVK, Konstanz, 49–75. Kühne, O., 2013. Macht und Landschaft: annäherungen an die Konstruktionen von Experten und Laien. In: Leibenath, M., Heiland, S., Kilper, H., Tschaschel, S. (Eds.), Wie werden Landschaften gemacht? Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf die Konstituierung von Kulturlandschaften. Transcript, Bielefeld, 237–271. Land Brandenburg, 2014. (Ed.). Energielandschaft Prignitz. 〈http://www.gl. brandenburg.de/energie/gsk-teil3-energielandschaft-prignitz.html〉 (Accessed 22 July 2016). Leibenath, M., Lintz, G., Wirth, P., Zegada, M.E., (Eds.) 2015. Abstracts. Energy landscapes: perception, planning, participation and power. In: Proceedings of the European Conference of the Landscape Research Group. Leibnitz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development. 16–18 September. lrg2015.ioer.info. Leibenath, M., Otto, A., 2012. Diskursive Konstituierung von Kulturlandschaft am Beispiel politischer Windenergiediskurse in Deutschland. Raumforsch. und Raumordn. 2, 119–131. Leibnitz Institut für Regionalentwicklung und Strukturplanung und Büro für Landschaftskommunikation, 2014. (Eds.). Kulturlandschaft als Handlungsraum – ein Beitrag zur Lösung von Energiewende und Klimawandel. 〈http://www.mdb-bbgl-energie-grk-grk3_endbericht.pdf〉 (Accessed 30 September 2016). Maurer, M., 2010. Wirkungen der Medien aus Sicht der Gesellschaft. Inf. Zur. Polit. Bild. 309, 65–66. Micheel, M., 2012. Alltagsweltliche Konstruktionen der Kulturlandschaft. Raumforsch. und Raumordn. 70, 107–117. Meyerhoff, J., Ohl, C., Hartje, V., 2008. Präferenzen für die Ausgestaltung der Windkraft in der Landschaft – Ergebnisse einer Online-Umfrage in Deutschland, Working Papers on Management in Environmental Planning 024/2008, Technische Universität, Berlin. Musall, F.D., Kuik, O., 2011. Local acceptance of renewable energy – a case study from southeast Germany. Energy Policy 39 (6), 3252–3260. Nohl, W., 2002. Landschaftsästhetische Wirkungen von Windkraftanlagen. Schöne Heim. Erbe und Auftr. 99 (1), 3–12. Nordensvärd, J., Urban, F., 2015. The stuttering energy transition in Germany: wind energy policy and feed-in tariff lock-in. Energy Policy 82, 156–165. Pollak, A., 2002. Kritische Diskursanalyse – ein Forschungsansatz an der Schnittstelle

9