Taking on the NIMBYs. Beating the blockers. The end goal is commendable, but is this how UK voters would like to be described?
Since July, the UK has seen a fresh new government come into power that, recent polling suggests, is greener than ever when it comes to supporting ambitious climate action. At the same time, public support for net zero is at a two year high.
The new Labour government has announced big plans to make the UK a “clean energy superpower”, and is now under pressure to deliver on their promises to roll out renewable energy across the UK, and to do so at speed.
And while on the face of it, signs look positive, rumblings of concern about the rapid expansion of pylons and onshore energy may only grow if the government does not take steps to ensure that legitimate concerns are heard. Public support for net zero is critical, but it is not a blank cheque: rolling this out in practice requires a two-way process to address concerns and questions.
A rapid clean energy rollout is necessary to achieving the UK’s net zero targets. And, equally, people are – rightly – invested in and attached to the place where they live, and want to feel like they have a say in what happens to it. This means we need to stop trying to ‘take on the NIMBYs’ and start talking with people who are genuinely trying to have a say in what happens to the places they care about.
Labels such as ‘NIMBY’ are sticky. The term has been decried as being insulting, dismissive and inaccurate – as opposition is often not related to geographic location, and some polling on housing projects suggests most Britons are neither NIMBY nor YIMBY.
It’s also counterproductive. Name-calling over concerns about local power projects not only dismisses and shuts down legitimate worries, but can lead to people doubling down on their initial reactions, further cementing divisions. And despite the many calls for its retirement, the term emerges with a vengeance every time an issue of local initiatives arises. Can this Labour government be the one to move beyond NIMBYism once and for all?
Crucially, local support for renewables is actually very high among the British public, although this is routinely underestimated by both the public and politicians. Public opinion is more skewed towards the positive with eight in ten Britons supporting the construction of offshore wind farms, and large majorities of the public consistently viewing the prospect of renewable energy projects in their local area (including pylons) favourably.
Given that support for new local infrastructure among the public is so high, stoking division unnecessarily is not a wise move. By over-emphasising the number of people who genuinely object to clean energy infrastructure, as opposed to people who want and expect to be properly consulted about where and how these new technologies are developed, there’s a risk of fanning the flames of misperception.
Media headlines declaring ‘a war on nimby’s’ pushes an us vs. them agenda, whereas proper consideration and public engagement is a major part in legitimising, as well as determining the success of new infrastructure projects. If Labour is genuinely committed to turning its green energy ambitions into reality, then they need to put community engagement at the centre of energy policy not as an adjunct to planning reform.
So, what does actively involving the community in decision-making processes around renewable energy projects actually mean?
True public participation of stakeholders and the community is not lip service, or rolled out once all decisions have been made. These traditional approaches to community engagement, which ‘inform’ the public without guaranteeing that public voice will hold any sway in decision-making, can worsen the issue. More inclusive forms of public participation engage early, incorporate community input throughout the project planning and design process, build trust in the long term, and involve locally embedded staff members.
Through these processes, local energy infrastructure can be constructed with an understanding of the significance of the local context, or ‘place’ in which new infrastructure is being proposed (e.g. unique rural identity) and can ensure that what is valued is not disrupted.
A big part of this is not treating the ‘community’ as a monolith, and ensuring that public participation initiatives reach diverse groups, for instance by engaging pre-existing local networks and establishing community consultation committees. Research shows that social identities and networks are far more important in determining whether someone will support or oppose new energy infrastructure than physical proximity.
This is not an easy task, as new energy infrastructure needs to be rolled out across many local areas across the UK. But it is a crucial one. The time taken to do it properly will not be wasted – and may even prove to be a shortcut in the end.
If the government does not take local consultation seriously, then they leave the door open for the politicians who will see an opportunity to weaponise community concerns into a harder sense of opposition. Name calling will ultimately backfire – whether that’s in a bumpier road to delivering on the government’s renewable energy promises, greater polarisation around energy and climate initiatives, or in public concerns finding the ears of their opponents instead.
Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.
The post If Labour wants to move fast and build things, it’s time to stop the name calling appeared first on Politics.co.uk.
