Wind Power: Is There A “Planning Problem”?
Expanding Wind Power: A Problem of Planning, or of Perception?
The Problems Of Planning—A Developer's Perspective
Wind Farms: More Respectful and Open Debate Needed, Not Less
Planning: Problem “Carrier” or Problem “Source”?
“Innovative” Wind Power Planning

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

1. Ministère de l'Economie, des Finances et de l'Industrie (2002). Programmation pluriannuelle des investissements de production électrique. Période 2000-2010, 8 p.

2. Ministère de l'Ecologie, de l'Energie, du Développement Durable et de l'Aménagement du Territoire (2007). « Lutter contre le changement climatique et maitriser l'énergie »: rapport de synthèse du Groupe 1.

3. A survey undertaken by the author of the 22 regional environmental administrations (in late 2006), showed that only one of them willingly agreed to meetings with anti-wind groups during the process of project development. One major argument for this distance was ‘administrative objectivity’. For a detailed analysis of permitting procedures and the construction of ‘administrative objectivity’ in relation to wind power, see Nadaï & Labussière, 2008.

4. About 8 mGW according to RTE, 2007.

1. See the “Beyond Nimbyism” study of ten renewable energy projects by Manchester University (May 2009). This found that “When opposition [to a proposed development] occurred this was characterised in particular by developers as emotionally based and outside of what they saw as ‘rational’ planning concerns”. Accessed from www.sed.manchester.ac.uk/research/beyond_nimbyism/deliverables/reports_Project_summary_Final.pdf on 16 June 2009.

2. See the British Wind Energy Association figures quoted on Planning Portal News, “Major wind farms win go-ahead”, 6 March 2008, accessed from www.planningportal.gov.uk/england/professionals/en/1115315518905.html on 29 June 2009.

3. The figure on the time taken by Ministers to make decisions after an inspector's report is taken from analysis of information presented by the Planning Inspectorate to the CBI Major Infrastructure Projects Conference, London 30 October 2007, relating to 74 inquiries since 1999 into nationally significant infrastructure projects.

4. Based on the author's notes of Susan Owens' speech to the plenary session ‘Planning: a Changing Environmental Climate’, RTPI Planning Convention Thursday 18 June 2009.

1. This includes larger schemes consented through the Electricity Acts of the UK.

2. For example, NIMBYs are blamed for delays in the planning process by Scottish Power in their response to the Barker review (http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/scottish_power.pdf), while the Final Report of the review (Barker, 2006, Table 3), reproduces evidence from the annual ‘NIMBY survey’ carried out by Saints Consulting (see http://tscg.co.uk/survey/summary.html).

3. See http://www.rtpi.org.uk/item/1931/23/5/3

1. This seminar series has been coordinated by the editors of this Interface and the authors of the lead paper, representing researchers from planning, geography, business management and international studies. The seminar series, “Where Next for Wind?” was primarily funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) (RES-451-26-0386), with contributions from other organisations, including Scottish and Southern Energy and the authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided.