Abstract
Wind energy development brings a new set of natural resource management challenges to land managers and policy-makers. This paper assesses the use of so-called community liaison committees as a public participation mechanism to reduce social friction during wind energy development in Ontario, Canada. Establishing these committees has become a condition of regulatory approval for wind projects, but little is known about the scope, purpose, composition and effectiveness of these committees. This paper finds that the committees are marginally effective, but they are limited by the tight control exerted by project proponents on representation and scope of the committee. None of the theoretical benefits expected from public participation in terms of improved decision-making or increased democratic capacity appear to be achieved by the community committees. The paper offers contributions to the environmental study literature in two areas: improved understanding of the mechanisms of renewable energy governance and a multi-case study critique of a public participation tool used in environmental and land use decision-making processes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aitken M (2010) Why we still don’t understand the social aspects of wind power: a critique of key assumptions within the literature. Energy Policy 38:1834–1841
Arnstein S (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Plann 35(4):216–224
Barry J, Ellis G (2010) Beyond consensus? Agonism, republicanism and a low carbon future. In: Devine-Wright P (ed) Renewable energy and the public: from NIMBY to participation. Earthscan, London
Baxter J, Morzaria R, Hirsch J (2013) A case-control study of support/opposition to wind turbines: perceptions of health risk, economic benefits, and community conflict. Energy Policy 61:931–943
Bell D, Gray T, Hagget C, Swaffield J (2013) Revisiting the ‘social gap’: public opinion and relations of power in the local politics of wind energy. Environmental Politics 22(1):115–135
Bell B (2016) No turbines at Ostrander. Kingston Whig Standard. July 16, 2016 http://www.thewhig.com/2016/06/06/no-turbines-at-ostrander-ert
Devine-Wright P (ed) (2011) Renewable energy and the public: from NIMBY to participation. Earthscan, London
Dryzek J (2005) The politics of the earth: environmental discourses, 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Ellis G, Cowell R, Warren C, Strachan P, Szarka J (2009) Wind power: is there a planning "problem"? Planning Theory and Practice 10(4):521–547
Fast S, Mabee W, Baxter J, Christidis T, Driver L, Hill S, McMurtry JJ, Tomkow M (2016) Lessons learned from Ontario wind energy disputes. Nature Energy 1:15028
Fast S, Mabee W (2015) Trust-building and place-making: the influence of policy on host community responses to wind farms. Energy Policy 81:27–37
Fidler C, Hitch M (2007) Impact and benefit agreements: a contentious issue for environmental and aboriginal justice. Environments Journal 35(2):49–69
Fischer F (2000) Democratic prospects in an age of expertise. In: Citizens, experts and environment. Duke University Press, Durham, NC
Freudenburg W, Pastor S (1992) NIMBYs and LULUs: stalking the syndromes. J Soc Issues 48(4):39–61
Funtowicz S, Ravetz J (1993) Science for the post-normal age. Futures:739–755
Glucker A, Driessen P, Kolhoff A, Runhaar H (2014) Public participation in environmental impact assessment: why, who and how? Environ Impact Assess Rev 43:104–111
Government of Ontario (2013) News release: Ontario working with communities to secure clean energy future province increasing local control in renewable energy development. Edited by Ministry of Energy. May 30
Hill S, Knott J (2010) Too close for comfort: social controversies surrounding wind farm noise setback policies in Ontario. Renewable Energy Law and Policy 2:153–168
Innes JE (2004) Consensus building: clarifications for the critics. Planning theory 3(1):5–20
Innes J, Booher D (2004) Reframing public participation: strategies for the 21st century. Planning Theory and Practice 5(4):419–436
Karl HA, Susskind LE, Wallace KH (2007) A dialogue, not a diatribe: effective integration of science and policy through joint fact finding. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 49(1):20–34
Mills S, Borick C, Gore C, and B Rabe (2014) Wind energy development in the Great Lakes Region: current issues and public opinion. Ann Arbor, MI: The Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, University of Michigan. Retrieved from http://closup.umich.edu/issues-in-energy-and-environmental-policy/8/
Mitchell B (2002) Resource and environmental management. 2nd ed. Pearson, Harlow
MoE (2012) Renewable energy approval number 2871-8UKGPC for South Kent Wind Farm L.P. edited by Ontario Ministry of the Environment. Toronto: Queen’s Park
O’Faircheallaigh C (2010) Public participation and environmental impact assessment: purposes, implications, and lessons for public policy making. Environ Impact Assess Rev 30:19–27
Parkins J (2006) De-centering environmental governance: a short history and analysis of democratic processes in the forest sector of Alberta, Canada. Policy Science 39:183–203
Parkins J, Mitchell R (2005) Public participation as public debate: a deliberative turn in natural resource management. Soc Nat Resour 18(6):529–540
Rowe G, Frewer L (2005) Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Sci Technol Hum Values 25(3)
Schattschneider EE (1960) The semisovereign people: a realist’s view of democracy in America. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York
Stokes LC (2015) Electoral backlash against climate policy: a natural experiment on retrospective voting and local resistance to public policy. American Journal of Political Science
Stokes LC (2013) The politics of renewable energy policies: the case of feed-in tariffs in Ontario, Canada. Energy Policy 56:490–500
Walker C, Baxter J, Oulette D (2014) Beyond rhetoric to understanding determinants of wind turbine support and conflict in two Ontario, Canada communities. Environment and Planning A 43(5):730–745
Winfield M, Dolter B (2014) Energy, economic and environmental discourses and their policy impact: the case of Ontario’s Green Energy and Green Economy Act. Energy Policy 68:423–435
Wolsink M (2010) Contested environmental policy infrastructure: socio-political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities. Environ Impact Assess Rev 30(5):302–311
Acknowledgements
Financial support provided by the Robert Gilbert Postdoctoral Fellowship. Thanks to interview participants and to anonymous reviewers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fast, S. Assessing public participation tools during wind energy siting. J Environ Stud Sci 7, 386–393 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-016-0419-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-016-0419-0