The good process or the great illusion? A spatial perspective on public participation in Danish municipal wind turbine planning

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(4), 1834–1841. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.11.060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aitken, M., Haggett, C., & Rudolph, D. (2016). Practices and rationalities of community engagement with wind farms: Awareness raising, consultation, empowerment. Planning Theory & Practice, 17(4), 557–576. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2016.1218919
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armeni, C., & Tegner Anker, H. (2019). Public participation and appeal rights in the decision-making on wind energy infrastructure: A comparative analysis of the Danish and English legal framework. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 63(5), 842–861. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1614436
   Google Scholar
• Arnstein, S. (1969). Ladder of participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/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(1), 36–50. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510365663
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barry, J., & Ellis, G. (2011). Beyond consensus? Agonism, republicanism and a low carbon future. In P. Devine-Wright (Ed.), Renewable energy and the public. From NIMBY to participation (pp. 29–42). Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Batel, S. (2020). Research on the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies: Past, present and future. Energy Research & Social Science, 68, Article 101544, 1-5. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101544
   Google Scholar
• Bell, D., Gray, T., & Haggett, C. (2005). The ‘social gap’ in wind farm siting decisions: Explanations and policy responses. Environmental Politics, 14(4), 460–477. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010500175833
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry, L. H., Koski, J., Verkuijl, C., Strambo, C., & Piggot, G. (2019). Making space: How public participation shapes environmental decision-making. SEI discussion brief. Stockholm Environment Institute. (pp. 1–8).
   Google Scholar
• Bidwell, D. (2016). Thinking through participation in renewable energy decisions. Nature Energy, 1(5), 1–4. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2016.51
   Google Scholar
• Bora, A., & Hausendorf, H. (2006). Participatory science governance revisited: Normative expectations versus empirical evidence. Science and Public Policy, 33(7), 478–488. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3152/147154306781778740
   Google Scholar
• Borch, K., Munk, A., & Dahlgaard, V. (2020). Mapping wind-power controversies on social media: Facebook as a powerful mobilizer of local resistance. Energy Policy, 138, 111223–111223. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111223
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borch, K., Nyborg, S., Clausen, L. T., & Jørgensen, M. S. (2017). Wind2050 – a transdisciplinary research partnership about wind energy. In L. Holstenkamp, & J. Radtke (Eds.), Handbook on energy transition and participation (pp. 873–892). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Cass, N. (2006). Participatory-deliberative engagement: A literature review. The School of Environment and Development, Manchester University.
   Google Scholar
• Chilvers, J., Damery, S., Evans, J., van den Horst, D., & Petts, J. (2005). Public engagement in energy mapping exercise. A desk-based report for the research councils UK energy research public dialogue project. Birmingham University.
   Google Scholar
• Chilvers, J., Pallett, H., & Hargreaves, T. (2018). Ecologies of participation in socio-technical change: The case of energy system transitions. Energy Research & Social Science, 42, 199–210. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.03.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clausen, L. T. (2017). No personal motivation? Democracy, sustainability and the art of non-participation. Landscape Research, 42(4), 412–423. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2016.1206870
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clausen, L. T., & Nyborg, S. (2016). Borgeres og kommuners erfaringer med borgerdeltagelse i dansk vindmølleplanlægning. IFRO Udredning 2016/29. https://static-curis.ku.dk/portal/files/178695608/IFRO_Udredning_2016_29.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Clausen, L. T., & Rudolph, D. (2019). (Dis)embedding the wind – on people-climate reconciliation in Danish wind power planning. Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies, 17(1), 5–21. ISSN 1602-2297
   Google Scholar
• Clay, E., & Schaffer, B. (eds.). (1984). Room for manoeuvre: An exploration of public policy planning in agricultural and rural development. Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (eds.). (2001). Participation: The new Tyranny? London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Cornwall, A. (2004a). Introduction: New democratic spaces? The politics and dynamics of institutionalized participation. IDS Bulletin, 35(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1759-5436.2004.tb00115.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornwall, A. (2004b). Spaces for transformation? Reflections on issues of power and difference in participation in development. In S. Hickey, & G. Mohan (Eds.), Participation. From tyranny to transformation? Exploring new approaches to participation in development (pp. 75–107). Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Cowell, R. (2007). Wind power and ‘the planning problem': the experience of Wales. Environmental Policy and Governance, 17(5), 291–306. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.464
   Google Scholar
• Cornwall, A. (2008). Unpacking ‘participation’: Models, meanings and practices. Community Development Journal, 43(3), 269–283. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsn010
   Google Scholar
• Cowell, R., & Owens, S. (2006). Governing space: Planning reform and the politics of sustainability. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 24(3), 403–421. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1068/c0416j
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cruikshank, B. (1999). The will to empower. Democratic citizens and other subjects. Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cupers, K., & Miessen, M. (2002). Spaces of uncertainty. Berlin revisited. Birkhaüser.
   Google Scholar
• Cuppen, E. (2018). The value of social conflicts. Critiquing invited participation in energy projects. Energy Research & Social Science, 38, 28–32. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.01.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlberg, L. (2016). Spacing Law and politics: The constitution and representation of the juridical (space, materiality and the normative). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Danish Nature Agency. (2014b). Vindmøller – åbenhed, dialog og inddragelse. https://naturstyrelsen.dk/media/nst/8761577/nst_vindmoellefolder_maj2014_digital_ny.pdf
   Google Scholar
• DBA (Danish Business Authority]. (2015). Netværksbaseret planlægning med deltagelse af borgere og andre aktører. https://planinfo.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk/sites/default/files/media/publikation/netvaerksbaseret_planlaegning.pdf
   Google Scholar
• DEA [Danish Energy Agency]. (2009). Wind turbines in Denmark. Danish Ministry of Climate and Energy. http://www.ens.dk/sites/ens.dk/files/dokumenter/publikationer/downloads/wind_turbines_in_denmark.pdf
   Google Scholar
• DEA [Danish Energy Agency]. (2015). Energy policy toolkit on physical planning of wind power. Experiences from Denmark. Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy and Building. http://www.ens.dk/en/toolkits
   Google Scholar
• DeCerteau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• DE [Danish Energy]. (2019). VE Outlook 2019 Perspectives for renewable energy towards 2035. https://www.danskenergi.dk/sites/danskenergi.dk/files/media/dokumenter/2019-02/VE_Outlook_2019_0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• DEM [Danish Environmental Ministry]. (2013). Borgerinddragelse i vindmølleplanlægning. Statslig information om vindmøller. http://naturstyrelsen.dk/publikationer/2013/sep/videnblad-borgerinddragelse-i-vindmoelleplanlaegning/
   Google Scholar
• DNA [Danish Nature Agency]. (2014a). Lovgivningsmæssige begrænsninger for opstilling af vindmøller, en oversigt.. http://naturstyrelsen.dk/planlaegning/planlaegning-i-det-aabne-land/vindmoeller/vindmoellerejseholdet/faq/placeringshensyn/lovgivningsmaessige-begraensninger-for-opstilling-af vindmoeller-en-oversigt
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, G., Cowell, R., Warren, C., Strachan, P., Szarka, J., Hadwin, R., Miner, P., Wolsink, M., & Nadai, A. (2009). Wind power: Is there a “planning problem”? Expanding wind power: A problem of planning, or of perception? Planning Theory & Practice, 10(4), 521–547. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14649350903441555
   Google Scholar
• Fiorino, D. J. (1990). Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanisms. Science Technology & Human Values, 15(2), 226–243. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399001500204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaventa, J. (2006). Finding the spaces for change: A power analysis. IDS Bulletin, 37(6), 23–33. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1759-5436.2006.tb00320.x
   Google Scholar
• Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Sociology Press.
   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(5), 2727–2736. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the evolution of society. Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haggett, C. (2011). Planning and persuasion: Public engagement in renewable energy decision-making. In P. Devine-Wright (Ed.), Renewable energy and the public. From NIMBY to participation (pp. 15–27). Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Hickey, S., & Mohan, G. (Eds.). (2004). Participation. From tyranny to transformation? Exploring new approaches to participation in development. Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hildyard, N., Hedge, P., Wolvecamp, P., & Reddy, S. (2001). Pluralism, participation and power: Joint forest management in India. In B. Cook, & U. Kothari (Eds.), Participation: The new tyranny? (pp. 56–71). Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hjerpe, M., Glaas, E., & Storbjörk, S. (2018). Scrutinizing virtual citizen involvement in planning: Ten applications of an online participatory tool. Politics and Governance, 6(3), 159–169. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v6i3.1481
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacquet, J. B. (2015). The rise of “private participation” in the planning of energy projects in the rural United States. Society & Natural Resources, 28(3), 231–245. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2014.945056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpowitz, C., & Mansbridge, J. (2006). Disagreement and consensus: The need for dynamic updating in public deliberation. Journal of Public Deliberation, 1(1), 348–364. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.25
   Google Scholar
• Kirkegaard, J., & Nyborg, S. (2020, July 2-4). The Frankenstein story of Denmark's wind power market: The socio-material (re)birth of a social movement for and against wind power. The 36th EGOS Colloquium, Organizing for a Sustainable Future: Responsibility, Renewal & Resistance. University of Hamburg.
   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(3), 255–270. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095206068630
   Google Scholar
• Kersting. (2013). Online participation: From ‘invited’ to ‘invented’ spaces. International Journal of Electronic Governance, 6(4), 270–280. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEG.2013.060650
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, S. V., Hansen, A. M., & Nielsen, H. N. (2018). The role of EIA and weak assessments of social impacts in conflicts over implementation of renewable energy policies. Energy Policy, 115, 43–53. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.01.002
   Google Scholar
• Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Leibenath, M., Wirth, P., & Lintz, G. (2016). Just a talking shop? Informal participatory spatial planning for implementing state wind energy targets in Germany. Utilities Policy, 41(C), 206–213. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2016.02.008
   Google Scholar
• Local Government Denmark, Danish Wind Turbine Association, Danish Wind Industry Association & The Danish Society for Nature Conservation. (2009). Den gode proces. Hvordan fremmes lokal forankring og borgerinddragelse i forbindelse med vindmølleplanlægning? http://naturstyrelsen.dk/media/nst/Attachments/VindDengodeproces110609.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Mouffe, C. (1999). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? Social Research, 66(4), 745–758.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Natarajan, L., Rydin, Y., & Lock, S. J. (2018). Navigating the participatory processes of renewable energy infrastructure regulation. Energy Policy, 114, 201–210. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.12.006
   Google Scholar
• Nyborg, S., Cronin, T., Kirkegaard, J. K., & Jørgensen, M. (2015). Åbenhed, dialog og inddragelse. Afrapportering af deltema 3 i SEP/WIND2050-miniprojekt DTU, Internal report.
   Google Scholar
• Ottinger, G., Hargrave, T. J., & Hopson, E. (2014). Procedural justice in wind facility siting: Recommendations for state-led siting processes. Energy Policy, 65, 662–669. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.09.066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. (2005). A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Science, Technology and Human Values, 30(2), 251–290. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243904271724
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sennett, R. (1976). The fall of public man. W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Seyfang, G., & Haxeltine, A. (2012). Growing grassroot innovations: Exploring the role of community-based initiatives in governing sustainable energy transitions. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 30(3), 381–400. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1068/c10222
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simcock, N. (2016). Procedural justice and the implementation of community wind energy projects. A case study from South Yorkshire, UK. Land Use Policy, 59, 467–477. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.08.034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smart, D. E., Stojanovic, T. A., & Warren, C. R. (2014). Is EIA part of the wind power planning problem? Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 49, 13–23. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2014.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szarka, J. (2006). Wind power, policy learning and paradigm change. Energy Policy, 34(17), 3041–3048. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2005.05.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tegner Anker, H., & Jørgensen, M. L. (2015). Mapping of the legal framework for siting of wind turbines – Denmark (IFRO Report 239). Department of Food and Resource Economics. Copenhagen University.
   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(4), 1129–1147. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2006.10.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verloo, N. (2017). Learning from informality? Rethinking the mismatch between formal policy strategies and informal tactics of citizenship. Current Sociology, 65(2), 167–181. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392116657287
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, C., & Baxter, J. (2017). Procedural justice in Canadian wind energy development: A comparison of community-based and technocratic siting processes. Energy Research & Social Science, 29, 160–169. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.05.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, B. C. (2012). Communication and the public hearing process: A critiques of the land-use public hearing communication process. Admin 598 – management report. University of Victoria.
   Google Scholar
• Wolsink, M. (2000). Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renewable Energy, 21(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/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(5), 2692–2704. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. (2007). Public participation in science and technology: Performing and obscuring a political-conceptual category mistake. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal, 1(1), 99–110. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1215/s12280-007-9004-7
   Google Scholar