The power of place: The role of place attachment in the offshore wind debate in the Gulf of Maine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The momentum to develop offshore wind has built across the globe in recent years. In the United States, previous federal climate goals prioritized decreasing dependence on fossil fuels, and offshore wind was identified as a key technology in the clean energy transition. The state of Maine has proposed two projects to test floating turbine technology and research the ecological, economic, and social impacts of offshore wind development. Commercial lobstermen are one stakeholder group that has been outspoken about these projects. Here, we examine the role of place attachment—or the elements of a place that evolve to have meaning among individuals and communities—in the perspectives of commercial lobstermen regarding the development of offshore wind in the Gulf of Maine. We analyzed 55 written public testimonies and conducted 16 semi-structured phone interviews with randomly selected lobstermen. Written public testimony showed higher rates of opposition than randomized interviews. A qualitative analysis of these data indicated the presence of place attachment among commercial lobstermen and highlighted four prominent themes that encapsulated both positive and negative attitudes towards offshore wind: 1) community reliance on lobstering; 2) communal ties; 3) stewardship of the ocean; and 4) costs for local communities. These findings suggest that contextualizing offshore wind management among other place-based challenges and grounding engagement efforts at the local scale could better address the specific priorities and concerns of communities. Additionally, these findings raise considerations about compensation strategies for the negative impacts of offshore wind development to account for both economic and social impacts. • Place attachment informs how Maine lobstermen view offshore wind development. • Written public testimony showed higher rates of opposition than randomized interviews. • The social impacts of offshore wind should be addressed in compensation strategies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".