Wind turbines: Vacated/abandoned homes – Exploring participants’ descriptions of their personal views, effects on safety, security, trust, and social justice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Some neighbors living in proximity to industrial wind turbines (IWTs) have described adverse health effects and contemplated vacating their homes. While the decision to vacate a home is reported by sources such as judicial proceedings, the scientific literature, media outlets, social media, and Internet websites, research on its extent and outcomes is limited. Methodology: This ethics-reviewed study used the qualitative Grounded Theory methodology. Sixty-seven consenting participants, 18 years or older, who had previously lived or were currently living within 10 km of IWTs were interviewed. Audio files were transcribed to text and the data were coded and analyzed using NVivo Pro (v. 12.6) software. Objectives: The objective is to explore participants’ descriptions of their personal views on wind turbines and their effects on safety, security, trust, and social justice, and generate a theory of influences contributing to these decisions. Results: Data analysis revealed primary and subthemes associated with environmental interference and altered living conditions. Descriptions of participants’ personal views associated with the use of wind energy and effects on safety, security, trust, and social justice are provided. Discussion: It is recommended that members of the public, government authorities, policymakers, researchers, health practitioners, and social scientists with an interest in health policy acknowledge these effects and seek resolution for those who are negatively affected when living or working near IWTs. Conclusion: We conclude that using a systematic methodology, data analysis lends support that the Grounded Theory was applicable to this study as it assisted with the development of a coherent theory which explained participants’ housing decisions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".