Wind Power Deployment: The Role of Public Participation in the Decision-Making Process in Ontario, Canada

Abstract

Abstract:A wider use of renewable energy is emerging as a viable solution to meet the increasing demand for global energy while contributing to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. However, current literature on renewable energy, particularly on wind power, highlights the social barriers and public opposition to renewable energy investment. One solution to overcome the public opposition, which is recommended by scholars, is to deploy a collaborative approach. Relatively little research has specifically focused on the role of effective communication and the use of a knowledge-broker in collaborative decision-making. This study attempts to fill this gap through the proposition of a participatory framework that highlights the role of the knowledge-broker in a wind project decision-making process. In this paper, five illustrative wind projects in Ontario are used to highlight the current situation with public participation and to address how the proposed framework could have improved the process. Based on the recommended collaborative framework, perception must shift from the dominant view of the public as "a risk to be managed" towards "a resource that can be tapped". The developers need to improve sharing what they know and foster co-learning around questions and concerns.

What Do Potential Residents Really Want When Hosting a Nuclear Power Plant? An Empirical Study of Economic Incentives in South Korea

“…The fourth attribute is residents' participation. Recently, gaining the active participation of residents regarding the NPP project as well as other energy facility projects has emerged as a crucial factor for successful project implementation [30,31]. The DCE in this study identifies how the degree of residents' participation in the process of hosting a new NPP can affect the local acceptance of the NPP.…”

Participatory health research with migrants: Opportunities, challenges, and way forwards

“…The assumption that participants will have the necessary time available for contributions, the criteria used to economically compensate some contributors but not others, the amount of the economic rewards provided, the mismatch of expectations, accountability issues, different communication styles/ perceptions of time and the limitations posed on researchers’ autonomy are other of the challenges highlighted 78,80,81 . Ethical concerns may arise in relation to multiple (and at times conflicting) roles assumed by researchers and organizational stakeholders (eg as fundraisers and resource allocators) 82,83 . Finally, the uneasy confrontation of lay researchers with managerial procedures and fixed time lines may place additional strain over the smooth implementation of PHR 84 …”

The Social Ecology of Power in Participatory Health Research

“…This happens for example where participatory tools specifically designed to foster dialogue are employed in lengthy consensus building processes over matters of little relevance, while higher level decisions related to what is “really at stake”(e.g., resource allocation, policy decisions) remain secluded in less participatory spaces. In worst case scenarios, informal opaque decision-making processes that operate in parallel to formal governance structures are used to reward or penalize participants (Jami & Walsh, 2016; Long et al, 2016). As noted by Lukes, where power dynamics are less visible, they are also likely to be more effective (Lukes, 2004).…”