![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
UK and Scottish planning policies include commitments to reflect the views of the public. However, this case study of one planning application for a wind farm in rural Scotland highlights the limited role played by lay knowledge within planning processes. The planning application process had two separate stages which structured the roles of lay and expert knowledge differently. Local objectors were able to influence the early planning application stage. However, this resulted in an appeals process (public inquiry) which was beyond the influence of lay people, and within which lay knowledge played only a marginal role. The early planning application stage enabled a wider range of knowledges to be relevant, perhaps even allowing lay knowledge to sideline expert knowledge. Within the inquiry such roles were reversed. Witnesses who could not back up their evidence with ‘reliable’ data or scientific reasoning were discredited as illegitimate and as having little to contribute to the inquiry process. Thus the inquiry constructed boundaries between expert and lay knowledge, in ways which diminished the role that lay knowledge might play. Whilst the construction of expert knowledge at the public inquiry played a central role in marginalising lay knowledge, it was central to all sides of the argument; the role of expert knowledge was reinforced by both the opposition group and the developers. Therefore, it is not only policy-makers and planning officials, but also lay people who act as though expert and lay knowledge can be clearly distinguished from one another.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to express thanks to Professor Andrew Webster and Professor Steve Yearley as well as two anonymous referees for their comments on an earlier draft. The author is grateful to the ESRC for funding this research (ESRC CASE Award PTA-033-2005-00002).