Objectively best or most acceptable? Expert and lay knowledge in Swedish wind power permit processes

Abstract

This article analyses legal aspects of the Swedish wind power development, theoretically based on how different types of knowledge are represented in legal contexts, mainly in the courts. A sample of appealed wind power permits is analysed, a handful of relevant informants are interviewed – including two judges in the Land and Environment Court and the appeal court – and the legal setting is analysed. Of key interest here is the interplay between expert and lay statements in the court cases, which here is related to the concepts of calculating and communicative rationalities that are developed in the planning literature. The results indicate that the juridification – which takes place as a permit issue is appealed in the judiciary system – supports the calculating rationality more than the communicative, and that the plaintiffs often attempt to adapt in how they shape their argumentation.

Keywords:

• wind power
• spatial planning
• knowledge types
• expert/lay
• juridification

Acknowledgements

This research was partly supported by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, and we extend our thanks to the Centre for Work, Technology and Social Change at Lund University as well as the School of Planning at Blekinge Institute of Technology. We are especially grateful to the participants contributing to this study with their expertise and time.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. There are 290 municipalities and 21 county administrations/regions in Sweden.

2. “Det kan dessutom finnas en risk för att en omfattande användning av detaljplaneinstitutet medför att vindkraftsutbyggnaden i Sverige blir beroende av olika kommunala värderingar om vad som är lämpligt i just den egna kommunen och att vindkraftsutbyggnaden inte sker på de platser som objektivt sett är mest gynnsamma ur ett helhetsperspektiv.”

3. The Swedish term is “tekniskt råd”, which roughly translates to “technical judge”, meaning that they should have experience and knowledge of the specific issues the Court examines, such as of a technical or natural scientific character.

4. LEC in Växjö, that is, and the sample regards cases appealed from the area/region of Skåne.

5. Förordning (2007:160) om stöd till planeringsinsatser för vindkraft.

6. “en sammanhållen och harmonisk utformning. Att de inte har samma höjd eller utformning kommer därför inte medföra otillåtna störningar på landskapsbilden.”

“Landskapsbilden i området bedöms däri som visuellt tålig.”

7. “betydande olägenhet”.

8. “Det underlag som redovisats från bolaget beträffande vindkraftverkens påverkan på fågellivet förtjänar att ifrågasättas. När den av Bolaget anlitade experten Leif Nilsson uttalar sig om den tänkta verksamhetens inverkan på tolv arter av rovfåglar väljer han att underkänna det material som finns tillgängligt beträffande rovfåglar samtidigt som han åberopar studier av en art dykänder.”