While the existing literature on the acceptability of renewable energy focuses primarily on stated preferences of individual acceptance, this study focuses on a socio-political dimension of acceptance by examining revealed preferences as evidenced by stakeholder interactions with in a regulatory process. Specifically, we examine the acceptability of technology designed to mitigate harm to wildlife: a Shutdown On Demand (SOD) technology. Taking a longitudinal approach, we review planning protocols covering four years of negotiations over this new mitigating technology in the case of a proposed wind farm to be located along a major international corridor for migrating birds. We develop three separate indicators of institutional acceptance and demonstrate how exposure to different types of uncertainties influenced acceptance of the technology over time. We also show how various responses to these uncertainties can resolve gridlocks around institutional acceptance. The study offers insights into the development of negotiations strategies for different stakeholders over time. It also offers recommendations for policy designed to resolve issues inhibiting institutional acceptance, including data gathering and exchange, issue linkage strategies, and incremental regime building.