An Analysis of Permission Processes for Wind Power in Sweden

  • Stig Blomskog


The expanding use ofwind power—an important sustainable and renewable energy resource—has given rise to value and interest conflicts, resulting in a complex and protracted permission process for establishing wind power stations. Existing academic analyses of these permission processes is performed in an informal everyday language, which may hamper the correct interpretation of various fundamental conceptual problems. This chapter reconstructs a typical permission process performed by Swedish authorities, following guidelines of the Swedish Environmental Code. It concludes that weighing decisions in permission processes seem to be based on conceptual mistakes due to the use of the notion of importance. These should be corrected by implementing a conceptual framework developed and applied in Multi-Criteria Decision Making.


Legal permission process Wind power 


  1. Bakker, R. H., Pedersen, E., van den Berg, G. P., Stewart, R. E., Lok, W., & Bouna, J. (2012). Impact of wind turbine sound on annoyance, self-reported sleep disturbance and psychological distress. Science of the Total Environment, 425, 42–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Belton, V., & Stewart, T. J. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: An integrated approach. Boston, Dordrecht and London: Kluwer Academic Publisher.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergek, A. (2010). Levelling the playing field? The influence of national wind power planning instruments on conflicts of interests in a Swedish county. Energy Policy, 38(5), 2357–2369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Canter, L. W. (1996). Environmental impact assessment. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill.Google Scholar
  5. European Commission. 2016. The Habitats Directive. Accessed 3 October 2016.
  6. Figueira, J., Greco, S., & Ehrgott, M. (2005). Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Global Offshore Wind Farms Data Base. Accessed 3 October 2016.
  8. Keeney, R. L. (2002). Common mistakes in making value trade-offs. Operations Research, 50(6), 935–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decision with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mendoza, G. A., Hartanto, H., Prabhu, R., & Villanueva, T. (2002). Multicriteria and critical threshold value analyses in assessing sustainable forestry. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 15(2), 25–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pettersson, M. (2008). Renewable energy development and the function of law: A comparative study of legal rules related to the planning, installation and operation of windmills. PhD dissertation, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden.Google Scholar
  12. Swedish Ministry of the Environment and Energy. (2000). The Swedish Environmental Code, Ministry publication series, Ds 2000:61. Accessed 19 October 2016.
  13. Weber, M., & Borcherding, K. (1993). Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 67(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stig Blomskog
    • 1
  1. 1.Södertörn UniversityHuddingeSweden

Personalised recommendations