Blowing against the wind—An exploratory application of actor network theory to the analysis of local controversies and participation processes in wind energy Eric Jolivet a , Eva Heiskanen b,n a CRM–CNRS Centre for Research in Management, University of Toulouse I Capitole, 2, rue du Doyen Marty, 31 042 Toulouse Cedex 09, France b National Consumer Research Centre and Helsinki School of Economics, P.O. Box, 00531 Helsinki, Finland article info Article history: Received 23 September 2009 Accepted 24 June 2010 Available online 22 July 2010 Keywords: Wind power Controversy Actor-network theory abstract This paper analyses the deployment of wind power and the related local controversies using actor- network theory (ANT). ANT provides conceptual instruments for a fine-tuned analysis of the contingencies that condition a project’s success or failure by focusing on the micro-decisions that intertwine the material aspects of the technology, the site where it is implemented, the participation process, and the social relations in which they are embedded. By considering controversies as alternative efforts of competing networks of actors to ‘frame’ the reality and enroll others, ANT sheds light on the complex and political nature of planning a wind farm project, insofar as it consist in aligning material and human behaviours into a predictable scenario. ‘Overflows’ occur when actors do not conform to expectations, adopt conflicting positions and develop their own interpretations of the project, thus obliging designers to adapt their frames and change their plans. To demonstrate this framework, we apply it to the case of a wind farm project in the South of France, near Albi. Our analysis suggests a new approach to examining wind power projects in terms of the interaction between globally circulating technologies, unique characteristics of the site, the participation process and the social dynamics that emerge when these are combined. & 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Wind energy and its development are of considerable political importance. Indeed, it has become the symbol of a transition towards a more environmentally friendly and more responsible society. As a vector of this transition, the wind energy case potentially conveys interesting lessons on the mechanisms involved in the upscaling from niche to mass markets (Geels, 2002). The epic development of modern large-scale wind technology involved a pre-competitive battle between Denmark and the United States, won by Denmark, which became a source of European pride (Garud and Karnøe, 2003). Political and economic commitment through instruments such as feed in tariffs of pioneering countries like Germany then conferred a crucial legitimacy and provided the first large industrial experience allowing for economies of scale and learning through standardi- sation. These voluntary policies have constituted favourable niches where wind energy matured. The model of large wind farm schemes that could generate significant revenues was demonstrated to be viable. At the eve of the 2000s, the future of wind energy looked bright. Public opinion in Europe loved it. European policy makers took important steps to set a favourable regulatory environment in order to comply with the Kyoto agreements. The industry was on its way to structure, venture capitalists and large energy groups were ready to invest. The most reluctant policy makers found it a useful instrument to comply with ambitious European energy policy and regulation, and a practical way to show their citizen how clean and green they are. Wind energy was on its way to gain ground at least in most European countries, and thus evolve from a niche experiment towards mass production. A number of academic studies have reflected on this favourable techno-political period (Reiche and Bechberger, 2004; Kamp et al., 2004; Van der Vleuten and Raven, 2006; Jacobsson and Lauber, 2006). In this wonderful scenario, it then came as a surprise to many wind project promoters and authorities that wind power implementation encountered what was entitled ‘local resistance’ (W¨ ustenhagen et al., 2007). Were the opposing ‘neighbours’ irrational enough to ignore their interests? Were they selfish enough to be favourable to wind energy development but not inclined to accept the side effects of wind farms in their neighbourhood? An intense academic debate has risen to explore Contents lists available at ScienceDirect journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol Energy Policy 0301-4215/$ - see front matter & 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.06.044 n Corresponding author. Tel.: + 358 106059005; fax: + 358 98764374. E-mail addresses: eric.jolivet@iae-toulouse.fr (E. Jolivet), eva.heiskanen@ncrc.fi (E. Heiskanen). Energy Policy 38 (2010) 6746–6754