Getting low-carbon governance right: learning from actors involved in Community Benefits

M Markantoni, M Aitken

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

4 Citations (Scopus)
2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Interest in Community Benefits has increased over the past decade mainly due to the growing number of wind farms and related criticism. Because Community Benefits are a voluntary gesture by the developer, there is no standard practice or institutionalised approach for good governance of the benefits; every community has a different approach, tailored to local needs and depending on the stakeholders involved. Additionally, since Community Benefits are a rapidly emerging practice, little is known about their governance, what actors are involved and how affected communities participate in decision-making on renewable projects. Using the Farr wind farm in Scotland, one of the first to introduce Community Benefits, as a case study, this paper sheds light on the governance structures surrounding the set up, management and allocation of funds. It also contributes to the emerging body of work regarding transparency and community participation in Community Benefits, and the extent to which these might facilitate a transition to a low carbon future.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)969 - 990
Number of pages22
JournalLocal Environment
Volume21
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusFirst published - 19 Jun 2015

Fingerprint

wind farm
learning
local participation
carbon
transparency
stakeholder
decision making
need
allocation
project

Bibliographical note

1023392

Keywords

  • Community Benefit policy
  • Community engagement
  • Low carbon governance

Cite this

Markantoni, M ; Aitken, M. / Getting low-carbon governance right: learning from actors involved in Community Benefits. In: Local Environment. 2015 ; Vol. 21, No. 8. pp. 969 - 990.
@article{d65322a67d594666ae06f1c61210537e,
title = "Getting low-carbon governance right: learning from actors involved in Community Benefits",
abstract = "Interest in Community Benefits has increased over the past decade mainly due to the growing number of wind farms and related criticism. Because Community Benefits are a voluntary gesture by the developer, there is no standard practice or institutionalised approach for good governance of the benefits; every community has a different approach, tailored to local needs and depending on the stakeholders involved. Additionally, since Community Benefits are a rapidly emerging practice, little is known about their governance, what actors are involved and how affected communities participate in decision-making on renewable projects. Using the Farr wind farm in Scotland, one of the first to introduce Community Benefits, as a case study, this paper sheds light on the governance structures surrounding the set up, management and allocation of funds. It also contributes to the emerging body of work regarding transparency and community participation in Community Benefits, and the extent to which these might facilitate a transition to a low carbon future.",
keywords = "Community Benefit policy, Community engagement, Low carbon governance",
author = "M Markantoni and M Aitken",
note = "1023392",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1080/13549839.2015.1058769",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "969 -- 990",
journal = "Local Environment",
issn = "1354-9839",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "8",

}

Getting low-carbon governance right: learning from actors involved in Community Benefits. / Markantoni, M; Aitken, M.

In: Local Environment, Vol. 21, No. 8, 19.06.2015, p. 969 - 990.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Getting low-carbon governance right: learning from actors involved in Community Benefits

AU - Markantoni, M

AU - Aitken, M

N1 - 1023392

PY - 2015/6/19

Y1 - 2015/6/19

N2 - Interest in Community Benefits has increased over the past decade mainly due to the growing number of wind farms and related criticism. Because Community Benefits are a voluntary gesture by the developer, there is no standard practice or institutionalised approach for good governance of the benefits; every community has a different approach, tailored to local needs and depending on the stakeholders involved. Additionally, since Community Benefits are a rapidly emerging practice, little is known about their governance, what actors are involved and how affected communities participate in decision-making on renewable projects. Using the Farr wind farm in Scotland, one of the first to introduce Community Benefits, as a case study, this paper sheds light on the governance structures surrounding the set up, management and allocation of funds. It also contributes to the emerging body of work regarding transparency and community participation in Community Benefits, and the extent to which these might facilitate a transition to a low carbon future.

AB - Interest in Community Benefits has increased over the past decade mainly due to the growing number of wind farms and related criticism. Because Community Benefits are a voluntary gesture by the developer, there is no standard practice or institutionalised approach for good governance of the benefits; every community has a different approach, tailored to local needs and depending on the stakeholders involved. Additionally, since Community Benefits are a rapidly emerging practice, little is known about their governance, what actors are involved and how affected communities participate in decision-making on renewable projects. Using the Farr wind farm in Scotland, one of the first to introduce Community Benefits, as a case study, this paper sheds light on the governance structures surrounding the set up, management and allocation of funds. It also contributes to the emerging body of work regarding transparency and community participation in Community Benefits, and the extent to which these might facilitate a transition to a low carbon future.

KW - Community Benefit policy

KW - Community engagement

KW - Low carbon governance

U2 - 10.1080/13549839.2015.1058769

DO - 10.1080/13549839.2015.1058769

M3 - Review article

VL - 21

SP - 969

EP - 990

JO - Local Environment

JF - Local Environment

SN - 1354-9839

IS - 8

ER -