Where would you site an offshore wind farm? Comparing an objective, constraints analysis approach with a subjective, all-stakeholder perspective approach using a multi-criteria decision support tool for offshore NW Ireland

Wheeler, A.J.; McFadden, J.; Butschek, F.; Coughlan, M. (2026). Where would you site an offshore wind farm? Comparing an objective, constraints analysis approach with a subjective, all-stakeholder perspective approach using a multi-criteria decision support tool for offshore NW Ireland. Geoenergy, 4, geoenergy2025-019. https://doi.org/10.1144/geoenergy2025-019

@article{Wheeler-2026-,
author = {Wheeler, AJ and McFadden, J and Butschek, F and Coughlan, M},
title = {Where would you site an offshore wind farm? Comparing an objective, constraints analysis approach with a subjective, all-stakeholder perspective approach using a multi-criteria decision support tool for offshore NW Ireland},
journal = {Geoenergy},
year = {2026},
month = {jan},
publisher = {Geological Society of London},
volume = {4},
pages = {2025--019},
doi = {10.1144/geoenergy2025-019},
url = {https://www.earthdoc.org/content/journals/10.1144/geoenergy2025-019},
keywords = {Wind Energy, Floating Offshore Wind, Collision, Displacement, Birds, Seabirds, Human Dimensions, Fisheries, Marine Spatial Planning, Stakeholder Engagement, Visual Impacts},
}

TY - JOUR
TI - Where would you site an offshore wind farm? Comparing an objective, constraints analysis approach with a subjective, all-stakeholder perspective approach using a multi-criteria decision support tool for offshore NW Ireland
AU - Wheeler, AJ
AU - McFadden, J
AU - Butschek, F
AU - Coughlan, M
T2 - Geoenergy
AB - Detailed methodologies for a geographic information system (GIS)-based multi-criteria decision support tool based on 186 spatial datasets spanning geological, oceanographic, meteorological, biological, social and economic parameters for an offshore floating wind farm developed in NW Ireland are presented. These are aggregated into six Combined Data Layers weighted by expert input. Two modelling approaches were applied: (1) a soft constraint analysis, which is an objective approach with the 50% suitability threshold replicating the Irish government's Designated Maritime Area Plan for Offshore Renewable Energy (DMAP) methodology; and (2) a stakeholder-weighted GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Both approaches produced broadly consistent spatial outputs, with increasing suitability further offshore. Stakeholders rated some areas as more suitable than the objective model, indicating greater tolerance than is strictly necessary. The highest levels of stakeholder disagreement occurred in areas with the lowest suitability, highlighting that the least suitable sites are more controversial among stakeholder groups, signifying zones of potential conflict. Conversely, areas with high suitability showed strong cross-group consensus, suggesting widespread support. This methodology provides a replicable framework for integrating technical constraints and stakeholder values in marine spatial planning. By identifying zones of alignment and contention, it offers a powerful tool to improve site selection, reduce conflict and accelerate offshore wind development through enhanced social acceptance.
DA - 2026/01//
PY - 2026
PB - Geological Society of London
VL - 4
SP - geoenergy2025
EP - 019
UR - https://www.earthdoc.org/content/journals/10.1144/geoenergy2025-019
DO - 10.1144/geoenergy2025-019
LA - English
KW - Wind Energy
KW - Floating Offshore Wind
KW - Collision
KW - Displacement
KW - Birds
KW - Seabirds
KW - Human Dimensions
KW - Fisheries
KW - Marine Spatial Planning
KW - Stakeholder Engagement
KW - Visual Impacts
ER -