The role of dialogue in fostering acceptance of transmission lines: the case of a France–Spain interconnection project

It is a recognized fact that the lack of public and political support is one of the main sources of delay in building new transmission lines. In an energy era where there is an increasing lag between transmission grid development and the rapid generation growth, it is essential to streamline the related transmission line approval procedures. There is a strong relationship between stakeholder engagement on one side, and acceptance and support on the other side. The aim of the paper is to investigate ways of fostering acceptance of transmission lines through participation by analyzing in detail the case of a disputed France–Spain interconnection project. We argue that participatory processes should embrace not only an instrumental rationale, but also normative and substantive rationales. Based on literature and the case study, we analyze this important condition for effective participation in transmission planning procedures.

[1]  R. Gregory,et al.  Decision Aiding, Not Dispute Resolution: Creating Insights through Structured Environmental Decisions , 2001 .

[2]  Matthijs Hisschemöller,et al.  Coping with intractable controversies: The case for problem structuring in policy design and analysis , 1995 .

[3]  Al Anneloes Meijnders,et al.  Social acceptance of carbon dioxide storage , 2007 .

[4]  Sylvia Breukers,et al.  Changing institutional landscapes for implementing wind power : a geographical comparison of institutional capacity building: The Netherlands, England and North Rhine-Westphalia , 2006 .

[5]  Claire Haggett,et al.  Understanding public responses to offshore wind power , 2011 .

[6]  S. Arnstein,et al.  Ladder of Citizen Participation , 2020 .

[7]  Kate Theobald,et al.  Urban wind power and the private sector: community benefits, social acceptance and public engagement , 2011 .

[8]  J. Bohman.  Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy , 1996 .

[9]  Richard Bull,et al.  The importance of context for effective public engagement: learning from the governance of waste , 2010 .

[10]  Pier Vellinga,et al.  The Relevance of Participatory Approaches in Integrated Environmental Assessment , 2001 .

[11]  M. Kerkhof,et al.  Making a difference: On the constraints of consensus building and the relevance of deliberation in stakeholder dialogues , 2006 .

[12]  Madeleine Gibescu,et al.  Approval procedures and consensus for building transmission lines: Obstacles and solutions , 2011, 2011 8th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM).

[13]  Eefje Cuppen,et al.  Putting Perspectives into Participation : Constructive Conflict Methodology for Problem Structuring in Stakeholder Dialogues , 2010 .

[14]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation , 2007 .

[15]  P. Devine‐Wright,et al.  Visible technologies, invisible organisations: An empirical study of public beliefs about electricity supply networks , 2010 .

[16]  W. N. Dunn,et al.  Knowledge, power and participation in environmental policy. Policy studies review annual volume 12 , 2001 .

[17]  Jerome R Ravetz,et al.  Risk Management as a Postnormal Science2. , 1992, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[18]  Thomas Webler,et al.  “Right” Discourse in Citizen Participation: An Evaluative Yardstick , 1995 .

[19]  J. Edelenbos,et al.  Managing Stakeholder Involvement in Decision Making: A Comparative Analysis of Six Interactive Processes in the Netherlands , 2006 .

[20]  Bart W. Terwel,et al.  Competence‐Based and Integrity‐Based Trust as Predictors of Acceptance of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS) , 2009, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[21]  R. Lawrence,et al.  Procedural Justice and Public Involvement in Natural Resource Decision Making , 1997 .

[22]  J. Eyles,et al.  Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. , 2003, Social science & medicine.

[23]  Cees J. H. Midden,et al.  Technological Risk, Policy Theories and Public Perception in Connection with the Siting of Hazardous Facilities , 1989 .

[24]  C. Prell,et al.  Unpacking “Participation” in the Adaptive Management of Social–ecological Systems: a Critical Review , 2006 .

[25]  P. Vergragt,et al.  Past and future of backcasting: The shift to stakeholder participation and a proposal for a methodological framework , 2006 .

[26]  Brian Wynne,et al.  Public uptake of science: a case for institutional reflexivity , 1993 .

[27]  J. Besley.  Imagining public engagement , 2012, Public understanding of science.

[28]  Audun Ruud,et al.  ”Case Hardanger” En analyse av den formelle konsesjonsprosessen og mediedekningen knyttet til den omsøkte luftledningen Sima-Samnanger , 2011 .

[29]  Marko P. Hekkert,et al.  Societal acceptance of carbon capture and storage technologies , 2007 .

[30]  Silvio Funtowicz,et al.  Combining participative and institutional approaches with multicriteria evaluation. An empirical study for water issues in Troina, Sicily , 2000 .

[31]  Kate Burningham,et al.  The limitations of the NIMBY concept for understanding public engagement with renewable energy technologies: a literature review , 2006 .

[32]  P. L. Francos,et al.  INELFE — Europe's first integrated onshore HVDC interconnection , 2012, 2012 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting.

[33]  Sherry R. Amstein.  “A Ladder of Citizen Participation” , 1969 .

[34]  N. Bronfman,et al.  Understanding social acceptance of electricity generation sources , 2012 .

[35]  G. Rowe,et al.  A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms , 2005 .

[36]  Frank N. Laird,et al.  Participatory Analysis, Democracy, and Technological Decision Making , 1993 .

[37]  D. Bell,et al.  The ‘Social Gap’ in Wind Farm Siting Decisions: Explanations and Policy Responses , 2005 .

[38]  Jill Jäger,et al.  Citizen participation in sustainability assessments , 2003 .

[39]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Invalid theory impedes our understanding: A critique on the persistence of the language of NIMBY , 2006 .

[40]  Eefje Cuppen,et al.  Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods , 2012 .

[41]  Rolf Wüstenhagen,et al.  Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept , 2007 .

[42]  John Grin,et al.  Technology Assessment as Learning , 1996 .

[43]  S. Eden.  Public participation in environmental policy: considering scientific, counter-scientific and non-scientific contributions , 1996 .

[44]  Matthijs Hisschemöller,et al.  Knowledge, Power, and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis : An Introduction , 2001 .

[45]  L. Vaccarezza.  The new production of knowledge. The dinamics of science and research in contemporary societies, Michael Gibbons, Camille Limoges, Hega Nowotny, Simon Schwartzman, Peter Scott y Martin Trow, Londres, SAGE Publications, 1994, 179 páginas. , 1995 .

[46]  Patrick Devine-Wright,et al.  Renewable Energy and the Public : From NIMBY to Participation , 2011 .

[47]  Andrew Stirling,et al.  A Novel Approach to the Appraisal of Technological Risk: A Multicriteria Mapping Study of a Genetically Modified Crop , 2001 .

[48]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support , 2000 .

[49]  S. Schwartzman,et al.  The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1994 .

[50]  B. Wynne,et al.  Creating Public Alienation: Expert Cultures of Risk and Ethics on GMOs , 2001, Science as culture.

[51]  R. Belmans,et al.  Transmission investment problems in Europe: Going beyond standard solutions , 2011 .

[52]  Patrick Devine-Wright,et al.  Discourses of Energy Infrastructure Development: A Q-Method Study of Electricity Transmission Line Siting in the UK , 2011 .

[53]  H. Kastenholz,et al.  Public acceptance of nanotechnology foods and food packaging: The influence of affect and trust , 2007, Appetite.

[54]  A. Green.  Public Participation and Environmental Policy Outcomes , 1997 .

[55]  G. Ellis,et al.  Many ways to say ‘no’, different ways to say ‘yes’: Applying Q-Methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals , 2007 .

[56]  Daniel J. Fiorino.  Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional Mechanisms , 1990 .

[57]  M. Wolsink,et al.  The motives for accepting or rejecting waste infrastructure facilities. Shifting the focus from the planners' perspective to fairness and community commitment , 2009 .

[58]  J. Abelson.  Deliberations about deliberative methods , 2001 .

[59]  Louise Gallagher,et al.  Host community attitudes towards solid waste landfill infrastructure: comprehension before compensation , 2008 .

[60]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  Frame Reflection: Toward The Resolution Of Intractable Policy Controversies , 1994 .

[61]  Kristen Purcell,et al.  Public Participation and the Environment: Do We Know What Works? , 1999 .

[62]  David Infield,et al.  Symmetries, expectations, dynamics and contexts: a framework for understanding public engagement with renewable energy projects , 2010 .

[63]  David H. Guston,et al.  Evaluating the First U.S. Consensus Conference: The Impact of the Citizens’ Panel on Telecommunications and the Future of Democracy , 1999 .

[64]  Frank Fischer,et al.  The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning , 1993 .

[65]  B. Wynne,et al.  Misunderstanding science? : the public reconstruction of science and technology , 1996 .

[66]  Petra Schweizer-Ries,et al.  Public acceptance of renewable energies: Results from case studies in Germany , 2008 .

[67]  David M. Konisky,et al.  Values, Conflict, and Trust in Participatory Environmental Planning , 2000 .

[68]  William C. Clark,et al.  Public Participation in Sustainability Science: Frontmatter , 2003 .

[69]  Carlo Jaeger,et al.  Public Participation in Sustainability Science. , 2003 .

[70]  Urs Wiesmann,et al.  Moving from sustainable management to sustainable governance of natural resources: The role of social learning processes in rural India, Bolivia and Mali , 2007 .