Hot air ablowin! ‘Media-speak’, social conflict, and the Australian ‘decoupled’ wind farm controversy

Abstract

In work in science, technology, and society social conflict around wind farms has a growing profile, not least because it draws our attention to two key interrelated themes: 'science, technology and governance' and 'socio-technological systems'. In this article on Australian wind farm development and siting, these themes are highlighted in contexts of sustainability, legitimacy, and competency for policy effectiveness. There is enduring social conflict around wind farms at the local community level, but little government understanding of this conflict or willingness to respond adequately to resolve it. This article examines the conflict through the lens of print media analysis. A key finding of the five identified is that people seeing wind farms as spoiling a sense of place is a primary cause of enduring social conflict at the local community level around wind farms, alongside significant environmental issues and inadequate community engagement; this finding also indicates a central reason for the highly problematic state of Australian wind energy transitions. In turn, by identifying this problematic situation as one of a significantly 'decoupled' and 'dysfunctional' condition of the Australian socio-technological wind farm development and siting system, I suggest remedies including those of a deliberative nature that also respond to the Habermas-Mouffe debate. These inform a socio-technical siting approach or pathway to better respect and navigate contested landscapes for enhanced renewable energy transitions at the local level.

Community acceptability and the energy transition: a citizens’ perspective

“…While such opposition is often attributed to NIMBYism through oversimplified and perhaps lazy analyses the reality is usually more complicated [49][50][51][52][53]. Relationships between energy, justice, and social inclusion are important factors for communities when supporting or opposing RES projects in their area.…”

Explaining the Media's Framing of Renewable Energies: An International Comparison

“…Existing media research has revealed that the media coverage on renewable energies is dominated by economic and technological aspects (Haigh, 2010;Sengers et al, 2010;Heras-Saizarbitoria et al, 2011;Wright and Reid, 2011;Skjølsvold, 2012; e.g., Eklöf and Mager, 2013;Hindmarsh, 2014;Romanach et al, 2015;Stauffacher et al, 2015). However, environmental aspects of renewable energies, including problems and benefits, also play a major role in media coverage (Thompson, 2005;Hindmarsh, 2014;Kim et al, 2014;Djerf-Pierre et al, 2015). Scholars have also observed that social aspects, such as highlighting social conflicts in the context of the implementation of energy infrastructure projects, have recently gained more attention in the news (Devine- Wright, 2011;Einsiedel et al, 2015).…”

“…Despite this global relevance, the political decisions to deploy these technologies are only considered on national or regional scales. Previous media content research on renewable energy has shown that in many countries, the general provision of energy supply and the development of renewable energy sources in particular are politically controversial with regard to infrastructural, economic, societal and ecological aspects (Haigh, 2010;Devine-Wright, 2011;Hindmarsh, 2014;Kim et al, 2014). These controversies have led to country-specific public debates on energy policy.…”

One style to build them all: Corporate culture and innovation in the offshore wind industry

“…Wind resources are stronger, more predictable, and less turbulent at sea, with fewer obstacles or changes in land topography to alter or slow wind speeds (Bo . In principle, most offshore sites are located far from communities, generally limiting concerns about potential negative externalities such as visual impact, noise, and social opposition (Sovacool and Hirsh, 2008;Hindmarsh, 2014). Lower wind-shear enables the use of shorter towers and fewer physical restrictions (such as passage under bridges) exist to impede transport and construction from harbor to site (Bilgili et al, 2011).…”