Practices and rationales of community engagement with wind farms: awareness raising, consultation, empowerment

References

• Agrawal, A., & Gibson, C. C. (1999). Enchantment and disenchantment: The role of community in natural resource conservation. World Development, 27, 629–649. 10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00161-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aitken, M. (2009). Wind power planning controversies and the construction of ‘Expert’ and ‘Lay’ knowledges. Science as Culture, 18, 47–64. 10.1080/09505430802385682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aitken, M. (2010a). 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. 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.11.060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aitken, M. (2010b). Wind power and community benefits: Challenges and opportunities. Energy Policy, 38, 6066–6075. 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aitken, M. (2014). E-Planning and public participation: Addressing or aggravating the challenges of public participation in planning? International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), 3, 38–53. 10.4018/IJEPR
   Google Scholar
• Aitken, M., Haggett, C., & Rudolph, D. (2014). Wind farms community engagement good practice review. Retrieved from www.climatexchange.org.uk
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, C. (2013). The networked minority: How a small group prevailed in a local windfarm conflict. Energy Policy, 58, 97–108. 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.02.048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, 216–224. 10.1080/01944366908977225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett, J., Burningham, K., Walker, G., & Cass, N. (2012). Imagined publics and engagement around renewable energy technologies in the UK. Public Understanding of Science, 21, 36–50. 10.1177/0963662510365663
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batel, S., Devine-Wright, P., & Tangeland, T. (2013). Social acceptance of low carbon energy and associated infrastructures: A critical discussion. Energy Policy, 58, 1–5. 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, D., Gray, T., & Haggett, C. (2005). Policy, participation and the social gap in wind farm siting decisions. Environmental Politics, 14, 460–477. 10.1080/09644010500175833
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, D., Gray, T., Haggett, C., & Swaffield, J. (2013). Re-visiting the ‘social gap’: Public opinion and relations of power in the local politics of wind energy. Environmental Politics, 22, 115–135.10.1080/09644016.2013.755793
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brabham, D. C. (2012). Motivations for participation in a crowdsourcing application to improve public engagement in transit planning. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 40, 307–328. 10.1080/00909882.2012.693940
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brownill, S., & Parker, G. (2010). Why bother with good works? The relevance of public participation (s) in planning in a post-collaborative era. Planning, Practice & Research, 25, 275–282.
   Google Scholar
• Buchy, M., & Hoverman, S. (2000). Understanding public participation in forest planning: A review. Forest Policy and Economics, 1, 15–25.10.1016/S1389-9341(00)00006-X
   Google Scholar
• Chilvers, J. (2008). Deliberating competence: Theoretical and practitioner perspectives on effective participatory appraisal practice. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 33, 155–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, S., & Gotze, J. (2010). Bowling together: Online public engagement in policy deliberation. Retrieved from www.hansardsociety.org.uk
   Google Scholar
• Creamer, E. (2014). The double-edged sword of grant funding: A study of community-led climate change initiatives in remote rural Scotland. Local Environment, 20, 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centre for Sustainable Energy. (2007). The protocol for public engagement with proposed wind energy developments in Wales, A report for the Renewables Advisory Board and DTI, May 2007. Retrieved from http://www.cse.org.uk/pdf/pub1080.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, S., McLeanC., Treanor, S., Aitken, M., Cunningham-Burley, S., Laurie, G., ... Sethi, N. (2013). Public acceptability of data sharing between the public, private and third sectors for research purposes. ( Social Research series). Edinburgh: Scottish Government
   Google Scholar
• Department for Communities and Local Government. (2013). Planning act 2008. Guidance on the pre-application process. January 2013. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/49468/Planning_Act_2008_pre-applications.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Devine-Wright, P. (2005). Beyond NIMBYism: Towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy, 8, 125–139. 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1824
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dialogue by Design. (2008). Dialogue by design: A handbook of public and stakeholder engagement (Version 2). Retrieved from www.dialoguebydesign.net
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, G., Cowell, R., Warren, C., Strachan, P., Szarka, J., Hadwin, R., & Nadaï, A. (2009). Wind power: Is there a “planning problem”? Planning Theory & Practice, 10, 521–547.
   Google Scholar
• Gross, C. (2007). Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance. Energy Policy, 35, 2727–2736. 10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haggett, C. (2008). Over the sea and far away? A consideration of the planning, politics, and public perceptions of offshore wind farms. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 10, 289–306. 10.1080/15239080802242787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haggett, C. (2009). Public engagement in planning for renewable energy. In S. Davoudi & J. Crawford (Eds.), Planning for climate change: Strategies for mitigation and adaptation for spatial planners (pp. 297–307). London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Haggett, C. (2010a). Why not Nimby? A response, reviewing the empirical evidence. Ethics, Place, and Environment, 13, 313–316.10.1080/1366879X.2010.528625
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haggett, C. (2010b). The principles, procedures, and pitfalls of public engagement in decision-making about renewable energy. In P. Devine-Wright (Ed.), Renewable energy and the public (pp. 15–28). London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Haggett, C., & Aitken, M. (2015). Grassroots energy innovations: The role of community ownership and investment. Current Sustainable Renewable Energy Reports, 2, 98–104.10.1007/s40518-015-0035-8
   Google Scholar
• Haggett, C., & Toke, D. (2005). Crossing the great divide – Using multi-method analysis to understand opposition to wind farms. Public Administration, 84, 103–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, R. (2012, November 8). Wind farm developer calls for clear policy. South Wales Evening Post. Retrieved from http://www.southwales-eveningpost.co.uk/wind-farm-developer-calls-clear-policy/story-17266004-detail/story.html
   Google Scholar
• Hall, N., Ashworth, P., & Devine-Wright, P. (2013). Social acceptance of wind farms: Analysis of four common themes across Australian case studies. Energy Policy, 58, 200–208. 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2003). Collaborative planning in perspective. Planning Theory, 2, 101–123. 10.1177/14730952030022002
   Google Scholar
• Hillier, J. (2000). Going round the back? Complex networks and informal action in local planning processes. Environment and Planning A, 32, 33–54. 10.1068/a321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes, T., & Scoones, I. (2000). Participatory environmental policy processes: Experiences from North and South. Institute of Development Studies, Working Paper 113, University of Sussex.
   Google Scholar
• INVOLVE. (2004). Involving the public in NHS, public health, and social care research: Briefing notes for researchers. Retrieved from www.invo.org.uk
   Google Scholar
• INVOLVE. (2005). People and participation: How to put citizens at the heart of decision-making. Retrieved from www.involving.org
   Google Scholar
• Kaza, N. (2006). Tyranny of the median and costly consent: A reflection on the justification for participatory urban planning processes. Planning Theory, 5, 255–270. 10.1177/1473095206068630
   Google Scholar
• Kepe, T. (1999). The problem of defining ‘community’: Challenges for the land reform programme in rural South Africa. Development Southern Africa, 16, 415–433. 10.1080/03768359908440089
   Google Scholar
• Kubicek, H. (2010). The potential of e-participation in urban planning: A European perspective. In Nunes Silva, C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on e-planning: ICTs for urban development and monitoring (pp. 168–194). Hershey: IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Landscape Design Associates. (2000). Cumulative effects of wind turbines: Report on the preparation of a planning tool by means of consensus building. London: ETSU and the Department of Trade and Industry.
   Google Scholar
• March, A. (2004). Democratic dilemmas, planning and Ebenezer Howard's garden city. Planning Perspectives, 19, 409–433. 10.1080/0266543042000268804
   Google Scholar
• Markantoni, M., & Aitken, M. (2015). Getting low-carbon governance right: Learning from actors involved in community benefits. Local Environment, 1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. (2001). Citizens as partners: Information, consultation and public participation in policy-making. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from www.oecd-ilibrary.org
   Google Scholar
• Pepermans, Y., & Loots, I. (2013). Wind farm struggles in flanders fields: A sociological perspective. Energy Policy, 59, 321–328. 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pieczka, M., & Escobar, O. (2013). Dialogue and science: Innovation in policy-making and the discourse of public engagement in the UK. Science and Public Policy, 40, 113–126.10.1093/scipol/scs073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2005). A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Science Technology and Human Values, 30, 251–290.10.1177/0162243904271724
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudolph, D. (2014). ‘The resurgent conflict between offshore wind farms and tourism: Underlying storylines’. Scottish Geographical Journal, 130, 168–187. 10.1080/14702541.2014.914239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudolph, D., Haggett, C., & Aitken, M. (2015). Community benefits from offshore renewables: Good practice review. Retrieved from www.climatexchange.org.uk
   Google Scholar
• Rydin, Y. (2007). Re-examining the role of knowledge within planning theory. Planning Theory, 6, 52–68.
   Google Scholar
• Rydin, Y., & Pennington, M. (2000). Public participation and the local environmental planning: The collective action problem and the potential of social capital. Local Environment, 5, 153–169.10.1080/13549830050009328
   Google Scholar
• Scottish Government. (2013a). Scottish planning policy 2013, Consultation draft. Retrieved from http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0042/00421076.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Scottish Government. (2013b). Scottish planning series, planning circular 3/2013, development management procedures. Retrieved from http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0044/00441568.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Toke, D., Breukers, S., & Wolsink, M. (2008). Wind power deployment outcomes: How can we account for the differences?. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12, 1129–1147.10.1016/j.rser.2006.10.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UK Government. (2015). Briefing paper. Standard Note SN/SC/4370. Planning for onshore wind farms. Retrieved from www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn04370.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Welsh Assembly Government. (2005). ‘Technical advice note 8: Planning for renewable energy’ planning policy wales. July 2005. Retrieved from http://wales.gov.uk/docs/desh/publications/050701techical-advice-note-8-en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Welsh Assembly Government. (2011). Planning implications of renewable and low carbon energy. Practice guidance. February 2011. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225689/Planning_Practice_Guidance_for_Renewable_and_Low_Carbon_Energy.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Waldo, A. (2012). Offshore wind power in Sweden - A qualitative analysis attitudes with particular focus on opponents. Energy Policy, 41, 692–702.10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, G. (2011). ‘The role for ‘community’ in carbon governance. WIREs Climate Change, 2, 777–782.10.1002/wcc.137
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilcox, D. (1994). The guide to effective participation. Retrieved from www.partnerships.org.uk
   Google Scholar
• Wilsdon, J., & Willis, R. (2004). See-through science: Why public engagement needs to move upstream. Retrieved from www.demos.co.uk
   Google Scholar
• Wolsink, M. (2000). ’Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: Institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support’. Renewable Energy, 21, 49–64.10.1016/S0960-1481(99)00130-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolsink, M. (2007). Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation. Energy Policy, 35, 2692–2704.10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. (2006). Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science–hitting the notes, but missing the music? Public Health Genomics, 9, 211–220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar