What shapes municipalities’ perceptions of fairness in windpower developments?

Abstract

Siting controversies have become familiar in windpower development. Process and outcome fairness in the form of economic benefits to local communities and inclusion in decision-making processes are recognised as important elements in local acceptance of windpower installations. To these, we add the concept of "relative fairness" influencing perceptions of overall fairness. In this article, we examine why Norwegian municipalities agree to host windpower, and the role of process, outcome and relative fairness in this decision. Municipalities are central in providing welfare services, and in ensuring a viable local economy and local workplaces. Process fairness is important, as is evident when municipalities have little influence in the detailed planning of the plants. Also, outcome fairness, in the form of economic compensationparticularly through property taxis decisive for positive attitudes towards windfarms, as municipalities can strengthen their role as welfare providers and boost local economic activities. Less emphasised are the effects on global climate and national climate goals. However, effects on local landscape and nature are also important for municipalities, as became clear when the national government proposed withdrawing the municipalities' possibilities of levying property taxes. The municipalities argue that it is only fair to receive something in return for hosting windmills, and relative fairness is important to their argument for equal treatment regarding hydro-and wind-power electricity production in the form of a natural resource tax.

To facilitate a fair bioeconomy transition, stronger regional‐level linkages are needed

“…From the wind energy experience, it is well known that the deployment of turbines in rural areas by distant investors meets with local resistance, as the local communities that must sustain the noise and amenity nuisances raise the ‘what's‐in‐it‐for‐us’ question 39 . Despite a legal scheme with compensation for real‐estate owners in the immediate proximity of turbines and royalties from the wind power‐generated revenues to local communities, local resentment against the siting of wind turbines continues to surface 40 . While there are some regional employment impacts of wind power during construction, they are modest in the subsequent production phase, reflecting the staple trap dynamics at play 41 .…”

Den nye oljen

“…Med andre ord er myndighetene stort sett opptatt av at konsesjonene tildeles på en rettferdig, trygg og «samfunnsmessig rasjonell» måte, i samsvar med lokale lover og regler, for der gjennom å minske faren for interessekonflikter (Saglie et al, 2020). For å klare dette har myndighetene subsidiert vindkraftutbygging via et sertifikatsystem.…”

What influences windpower decisions? A statistical analysis of licensing in Norway

“…As for the latter, previous qualitative studies have highlighted the importance of local democratic authorities in windpower processes (Inderberg et al, 2019;Pettersson et al, 2010). As for the former, the role of a project's environmental impact has been much less scrutinized (though some studies have stressed the distinction between windpower's positive impacts on emissions reductions (often considered a 'global good'), and its negative impact on local environmental (usually considered a 'local cost') (Rygg, 2012;Saglie et al, 2020)). With growing concern and sometimes heated conflicts surrounding windpower developments, this factor, too, warrants further examination.…”

“…This development, while promising in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, has significant spatial and environmental impacts. Increased windpower development has occasionally been followed by heated local and national debates (Batel and Devine-Wright, 2015;Saglie et al, 2020;Toke, 2005). These debates often reflect the underlying 'nature vs. climate' dilemma, demonstrating that climatechange policies and the proliferation of renewables come at a price, not least with regard nature conservation (Warren et al, 2005).…”