Recommendations on Transparency and Public Participation in the Context of Electricity Transmission Lines

Transcription

1 POLITICS & SOCIETY POSITION PAPER Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin in the Cntext f Electricity Transmissin Lines Katja Rttmann

2 2 Germanwatch Brief Summary This psitin paper by Germanwatch develps specific recmmendatins t the issue f public participatin in the cntext f electricity transmissin pwer lines. Public participatin has becme mre and mre imprtant in plicy making during the past years. Plicy makers have reacted t the urgent need t enhance public participatin in the field f pwer grids. New laws in this cntext, fr example in Germany r at the Eurpean level, demnstrate this apprach. Our recmmendatins n public participatin in the cntext f pwer grids are addressed t plicy makers, transmissin system peratrs, public authrities and stakehlders alike. We prpse a five-step apprach t public participatin that helps t develp tailr-made slutins fr public participatin at different levels. This paper mrever prvides an insight int grid planning and permitting in Germany fllwing the legal refrms f summer 2011 in the cntext f the energy transitin. It describes hw public participatin is implemented in the different phases f the permit granting prcedure, ffering specific recmmendatins n hw t further imprve it. This refers t bth an adjustment f existing laws as well as infrmal means f public participatin, which shuld be implemented in additin t legal requirements. Imprint Authr: Katja Rttmann with the supprt f Oldag Caspar and Tbias Pfrte-vn Randw Editing: Birgit Klbske, Lindy Devarti, Daniela Baum Publisher: Germanwatch e.v. Office Bnn Office Berlin Dr. Werner-Schuster-Haus Schiffbauerdamm 15 Kaiserstr. 201 D Berlin D Bnn Phne +49 (0) , Fax -1 Phne +49 (0) , Fax -19 Internet: inf@germanwatch.rg December 2013 Purchase rder number: e This publicatin can be dwnladed at:

3 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin 3 Cntents 1 Intrductin What is Public Participatin? Opprtunities and Challenges f Public Participatin Opprtunities Mre Efficient, Creative and Feasible Slutins Slutins That Are Better Accepted Slutins That Respect Citizens Rights Challenges Lack f Trust and Transparency Lack f Rm t Maneuvre Lack f Supprt by Internal/External Decisin-Makers Peple D Nt Get Invlved Lack f Preparatin and Resurces Lack f Time Success Factrs and Practical Recmmendatins Transparency Rm t Maneuvre and Early Invlvement Publicity Fairness and Inclusiveness Cntinuus Dialgue and Feedback t Create Mutual Trust Prfessinal Organizatin f Public Participatin New Pwer Grid fr the Future Five General Steps n Hw t Implement Public Participatin Case Study: Public Participatin and Grid Planning in Germany Legal Framewrk Preliminary Cnclusins frm an NGO Perspective Cnclusins Acrnyms and Glssary References and Further Reading Initiatives and Infrmatin n Public Participatin Links fr Grid Develpment in Germany Checklists and Practical Guidelines Literature...42

4 4 Germanwatch 1 Intrductin The transfrmatin twards much higher shares f renewable energy requires an alternative pwer grid t an energy system with a high share f centralized fssil fuel pwer plants. Newly installed renewable energy pwer plants are ften lcated in different places and need t be cnnected t the pwer grid. Furthermre, the pwer grid is an imprtant surce f flexibility, which helps t balance variable renewable energies such as wind and slar pwer. The better different regins are cnnected at the lcal, reginal, natinal r even Eurpean level the better the variable renewable energy can be transprted t where it is actually needed and the better variability in energy cnsumptin and prductin can be balanced. Other flexibility ptins t balance variable renewable energies are available such as demand-side-management r strage. All f these flexibility ptins shuld be taken int accunt t develp an ptimal and cst-efficient mdel fr renewable energy integratin. As grids are a relatively cheap flexibility ptin, their enhanced deplyment is an imprtant precnditin fr the transitin twards high shares f renewable energies. Even thugh the energy transitin in Germany is supprted by the brad majrity f German citizens, lcal ppsitin t new pwer lines has ften been vcal in past years. Varius initiatives have been created at the natinal level (e.g. Frum Netzintegratin) r at the Eurpean level (e.g. Renewables Grid Initiative) t discuss amng a variety f stakehlders the challenge f pwer grids in the cntext f the transitin twards higher shares f renewable energies and pssible trade-ffs. Many actrs have cme t the cnclusin that the public needs t becme mre clsely invlved at an earlier stage in the planning f new pwer grids. Furthermre, it has been acknwledged that envirnmental standards must nt be undermined when building new pwer lines. Such cnclusins can be fund in the Eurpean Grid Declaratin 1, signed by NGOs and Transmissin System Operatrs (TSOs), and in Plan N 2 signed by a brad range f stakehlders in Germany. These cnclusins are at least t a certain extent als reflected in plitical decisins at the natinal and Eurpean level. In the cntext f the 2011 energy transitin in Germany, the parliament passed a law t accelerate permit granting prcedures while enhancing public participatin at all planning stages. These stages range frm the determinatin f hw many new pwer lines are needed t the plan apprval prcedure (Netzausbaubeschleunigungsgesetz Acceleratin Act). 3 Similar ideas have been implemented in the EU regulatin n trans-eurpean energy infrastructures which cntains prvisins n enhanced transparency and bligatry cnsultatins befre the start f frmal planning prcedures. 4 Bth legal prvisins share the assumptin that better and earlier invlvement f the public may help t speed up permit granting prcedures. Experiences made in ther infrastructure prjects have shwn that a lack f public participatin may lead t a cnsiderable delay in these prcedures. Even thugh it is generally acknwledged that a well designed public participatin may help t increase the acceptability f new pwer lines, there is still little clarity amng the stakehlders cncerning the implementatin f earlier and better invlvement. Different 1 Eurpean Grid Declaratin: 2 Plan N: A fllw-up versin f this dcument shall be published by the end f the year. 3 Netzausbaubeschleunigungsgesetz: 4 Regulatin n guidelines fr trans-eurpean energy infrastructures:

5 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin 5 actrs have a different understanding f hw this can be put int practice and what cnstitutes a gd participatry prcess. Hwever, since the 1960s, many experiences have already been made in ther sectrs and in the cntext f different infrastructure prjects. Many scientific articles and practical guidelines, manuals r recmmendatins reflect these experiences. The tw discurses n the extensin f pwer grids and n public participatin in general have nt been brught tgether systematically in scientific research with the exceptin f nly a few publicatins. Sme research prjects have been started t bridge this gap, but n final cnclusins have been drawn s far. 5 This publicatin cntributes t the discussin n public participatin in the cntext f pwer grids and makes sme practical recmmendatins frm an NGO perspective. It is based n scientific literature and manuals n public participatin that have been written in a brader sense r abut ther specific sectrs (e.g. transprt). It als refers t the experiences made by Germanwatch in the grid debate at the natinal and EU level during the past tw years. In 2012, Germanwatch published a study n the case f a specific pwer line in Thuringia, undertaken with Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung Thüringen and DAKT e.v. 6 During the past tw years, Germanwatch has als cnducted three wrkshps with a variety f stakehlders (i.e. citizen actin grups, NGOs, public authrities, TSOs, researchers) t get a better understanding f the different psitins and views n the subject. 7 As a member f the Renewables Grid Initiative (RGI), Germanwatch was als invlved in discussins with ther RGI members (TSOs and NGOs) n public participatin, and in the preparatin f the Eurpean Grid Declaratin n Transparency and Public Participatin and the Eurpean Grid Reprt. 8 This psitin paper starts with a definitin f public participatin (chapter 2) and the pprtunities and challenges f public participatin in the cntext f pwer grids (chapter 3). It nly refers t prcedural public participatin (i.e. hw the public and stakehlders are invlved in decisin-making prcedures) and nt t any mdels f financial participatin. The next sectins develp sme general practical recmmendatins frm an NGO perspective n hw t address the challenges that have been mentined (chapter 4) and a prpsal fr an apprach t the preparatin and implementatin f public participatin at different stages f the permit granting prcedures f pwer grids (chapter 5). The last sectin deals with the example f grid planning and permit-granting prcedures in Germany and develps sme specific recmmendatins fr the German cntext. Sme experiences made in the cntext f this debate might be interesting fr ther cuntries as well. Germanwatch lks frward t discussing these recmmendatins with ther actrs in rder t develp a cmmn understanding and t refine its prpsals. Any cmments n ur psitin paper are very welcme. 9 5 Prject Demenergie by KWI and IASS: and prject Akzeptanz Netzausbau (Acceptance f pwer grid expansin) by IZES 6 Study by DAKT e.v., Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung Thüringen and Germanwatch e.v.: 7 Tw f these wrkshps were cnducted in cperatin with IZES. 8 Secnd part f the Eurpean Grid Declaratin: and Eurpean Grid Reprt: 9 I wuld like t thank Theresa Schneider and Ivan Scrase fr their thughtful and valuable cmments n an earlier draft f this paper.

6 6 Germanwatch 2 What is Public Participatin? Befre explaining what is meant by public participatin, it makes sense t address the questin f why this tpic has becme increasingly significant in the plitical debate. During the past years, plitical decisins cncerning large infrastructure prjects, amng ther subjects, have been ever mre cntested by the brader public (Walter 2013). Tpdwn decisins are n lnger necessarily accepted by citizens. In Germany, this is exemplified by the prtests against the prject t rebuild the central train statin in Stuttgart (knwn as Stuttgart 21 ). This debate can be seen in the brader cntext f the transfrmatin f representative demcracy that started in the 1950s and 1960s when new frms f citizen prtest entered the plitical arena and added a new element t demcratic gvernance (Nlte 2011). Mre ften than in the past, the legitimacy f plitical decisins is put int questin. On the ne hand, the public criticizes the prcesses thrugh which decisins are made. This is what is meant when talking abut a lack f input legitimacy. On the ther hand, the results f such prcesses are als put int questin, which is then a lack f utput legitimacy. Public participatin may help t vercme sme f this criticism by helping t increase the legitimacy f plitical decisins bth at the prcedural and at the substantive level. If the prcess has been cnducted in a transparent manner and if the public has had a chance t raise their cncerns in a way which is relevant fr the prcess, they may cnclude that the prcess has been fair. A substantive reasn fr public participatin is the fact the final decisin may be imprved by taking public cncerns r knwledge int accunt, r pssibly undermined by disregarding their input. There is als an instrumental argument fr public participatin that is ften fund in the plitical discurse: mre transparent prcesses and better plitical decisins may als help t increase the acceptability f these decisins and facilitate their implementatin. Imprtant in this regard is the early participatin. It is much less likely that participatin increases legitimacy if peple have the impressin that they are cnsulted after the relevant decisins are made. It is als imprtant t recall the ethical reasns fr transparency and public participatin. Citizens have a right t vice their cncerns n decisins that will affect their envirnment and quality f life. This is the principle behind the Aarhus Cnventin, which was signed in 1998 and ratified by the EU and its member states. 10 It establishes a number f citizens rights n access t infrmatin, public participatin and access t justice with regard t the envirnment. Last but nt least, public participatin may have psitive impacts beynd single issues. It may help t build up public trust in decisin-makers such as lcal pliticians r cmpany representatives, create a better understanding fr different pinins and enable different stakehlders r the unaligned public t becme invlved in plitical decisin-making prcesses. One has t keep in mind, hwever, that new participatry elements very ften favur the influence f better educated and higher incme citizens. It has been shwn that lwer incme and scially disadvantaged peple are less invlved (Böhnke 2011), s the influence f these grups cnsequently remains limited. The legitimacy f a participatry prcess may be undermined if it des nt reflect the interests f all actrs in sciety. 10 Cnventin n Access t Infrmatin, Public Participatin in Decisin-Making and Access t Justice in Envirnmental Matters,

7 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin 7 Hence, it is all the mre imprtant t address this issue by develping appraches t invlve thse wh are difficult t reach. There are varius definitins f public participatin. These definitins refer t the fllwing questins: Wh participates? Fr what kind f decisin des participatin take place? What is the influence f thse wh participate? Cncerning the questin f wh participates, ne can distinguish mainly between thse wh refer t the participatin f citizens and hence the unaligned public, and thse wh refer t specific stakehlders such as envirnmental assciatins, unins, and s n (i.e. the rganized public ). In this psitin paper, we wuld like t refer t bth grups: individual citizens and rganized stakehlder grups. Cncerning the cntent f public participatin, the majrity f definitins refer t plitical decisin-making prcesses and t (lcal, reginal) planning decisins. We may differentiate between frmal and infrmal participatin. The frmer refers t thse participatry prcesses that are legally required, whereas the latter refers t public participatin that is nt required by law and hence cnducted n a vluntary basis. Bth frms f public participatin are ften cmbined and clsely linked. It is imprtant, hwever, t link frmal and infrmal methds s they may cmplement each ther in a meaningful way. In ur definitin, the term infrmal participatin refers nly t thse prcesses that aim t invlve the brader public in an rganized and transparent prcess. It des nt include all ther kinds f influence that are inherent in plitical decisin-making, such as lbbying by different stakehlders. This cntributin t plitical decisin-making can be characterized as infrmal as well. Hwever, this frm f plitical influence, which is very ften mre influential than brad participatry prcesses, ges beynd the scpe f this paper and the discurse n public participatin. Many f these definitins differentiate between the level f influence by stakehlders r the unaligned public. One f the mst famus classificatins is Sherry Arnstein s ladder f participatin (Arnstein 1969). Accrding t Arnstein, the relevant criterin is the level f influence she identifies eight different steps f the ladder ranging frm nn-participatin t citizen cntrl. On the basis f this apprach, ther mdels have been develped, amng them the ne by Lüttringhaus (2003) and Rau et al. (2012), which differentiates between fur levels f participatin, frm infrmatin t cnsultatin, cperatin and independent actin r self-gvernance. Self-gvernance in this cntext means that the framewrk cnditins may be set (e.g. by setting plitical targets), but that thse wh act in this cntext are free t implement measures t reach thse targets. The mdel takes int cnsideratin thse actrs wh participate and thse actrs wh enable participatin.

8 8 Germanwatch Figure 1: Fur levels f participatin Surce: Rau et al (2012) Many ther authrs differentiate between nly three levels f participatin ranging frm infrmatin t cnsultatin and cperatin (Bundeskanzleramt Österreich et al. 2011; Arbter 2005, Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung 2012). The tw frms f infrmatin and cnsultatin can ften be fund in legal requirements n public participatin with regards t the extensin f the pwer grid (frmal participatin), fr example, by certain transparency requirements r frmal public cnsultatins. It can be decided t g beynd frmal legal requirements in terms f infrmatin and cnsultatin (e.g. via additinal infrmatin events, additinal nline infrmatin, additinal cnsultatins etc.) hence reaching the sphere f infrmal participatin. The level f cperatin in cntrast mstly ges beynd the legal requirements f permit granting prcedures fr new transmissin lines and hence refers mstly t infrmal participatin. Many authrs state that participatin nly makes sense where there is a certain degree fr rm t maneuvre (Nanz/Fritsche 2012). It is imprtant that the cncerns r suggestins f stakehlders are taken int accunt and addressed either by changing the riginal decisins r certain details r by explaining why these cncerns cannt be addressed. If there is n willingness t pssibly change the utcme after a thrugh analysis, it wuld make mre sense t cmmunicate the results f internal decisins. T cnduct a participatin prcess withut any rm fr maneuvre may create public ppsitin as peple will give input and subsequently realize that their input had n added value r influence. It sends a clear signal that public ppsitin is nt taken seriusly. This easily leads t frustratin and mistrust in thse wh cnducted the prcess.

9 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin 9 3 Opprtunities and Challenges f Public Participatin The pprtunities and challenges f public participatin have been described in many scientific articles and practical guidelines (e.g. Strategiegruppe Partizipatin 2012, Nanz/Fritsche 2012). The general pprtunities and challenges f public participatin are similar fr a variety f infrastructure prjects, ranging frm lcal prjects, such as building a small windpark, t larger infrastructure prjects such as new highways r grid infrastructures. At the same time, sme specificities can be identified in the field f pwer grids which will be mentined in this sectin. 3.1 Opprtunities What are the general pprtunities and benefits f invlving citizens r rganized stakehlders at an early stage f prject develpment? One may distinguish between substantive, instrumental and nrmative mtivatins fr public participatin (Stirling 2008: 268) Mre Efficient, Creative and Feasible Slutins Public participatin may help decisin-makers t increase their knwledge base and learn mre abut the lcal situatin. Lcal stakehlders may have a better understanding f lcal circumstances and thus cntribute new and innvative ideas. This may help t develp better slutins. Bth the Transmissin System Operatrs (TSOs) and public authrities wh take the decisin abut an applicatin fr a new transmissin line may be prvided with lcal and specific infrmatin n pssible impacts f a new prject. Lcal envirnmental NGOs very ften have a gd knwledge abut the flra and fauna in the regin. This knwledge can be invaluable in preparing the applicatin file and the envirnmental impact assessment (EIA) fr a prject. Citizens frm the regin may als have innvative ideas abut finding the ptimal rute fr a new pwer line. Hence, public participatin may help t generate mre knwledge, especially at the lcal level, which culd nt be generated therwise (e.g. by studying maps, etc.) Slutins That Are Better Accepted By using the varius tls f public participatin, decisin-makers are prvided with additinal infrmatin abut the values and preferences f the lcal stakehlders affected by a prject. This may help t identify slutins that fit better t lcal preferences. Furthermre, bstacles fr the implementatin f a decisin (e.g. building a new pwer line) may be identified befrehand and subsequently remved. If lcal citizens r NGOs have the chance t raise their cncerns befre a final decisin has been taken and if their perspective is reflected, the chance f them accepting the final decisin is much higher. At the same time, permit granting prcedures may becme faster and fewer cmplaints may be expected Slutins That Respect Citizens Rights Public participatin may help t strengthen lcal demcracy and the public s interest t becme invlved and play an active rle instead f simply ppsing new plitical prjects.

10 10 Germanwatch A ttally different situatin arises when peple have the pprtunity t influence decisins that impact their living cnditins. Public participatin, mrever, is a gal in itself. Peple have the right t infrmatin and t be invlved in decisins that cncern their envirnment. This rights-based apprach is reflected in the Aarhus Cnventin and leads t specific requirements fr invlving the public in permit-granting prcedures, strategic envirnmental assessments (SEA) r envirnmental impact assessments (EIA). 3.2 Challenges There are als many challenges t be faced when implementing public participatin. When these challenges are ignred, transparency and public participatin may even raise the level f cnflict instead f cntributing t the identificatin f slutins that are mre acceptable t the citizens cncerned. This chapter names sme f the challenges that may ccur with regards t transmissin grid prjects. In rder t minimize the challenges in the cntext f public participatin, sme success factrs and practical recmmendatins t address these challenges are develped in chapter fur Lack f Trust and Transparency In many earlier grid develpment prjects, citizen actin grups, lcal NGOs, public authrities and TSOs have stated that trustful wrking relatins with each ther were quite difficult. Once citizen actin grups have the impressin they cannt trust infrmatin given by the TSOs r public authrity, further public participatin is hindered. In the past, many decisins abut new electricity lines have been taken behind clsed drs in discussins between TSOs and public authrities. This has led t a high level f mistrust, which in many cases presents an bstacle t a meaningful prcess f public participatin Lack f Rm t Maneuvre The frustratin and ppsitin f lcal citizens may als be increased by a lack f flexibility in the results f a participatry prcess. If all decisins have been made already befre public participatin has started, this prcess will have n impact n the results. This leads necessarily t frustratin. Hence, in this case it wuld be better t be transparent abut this fact and t cmmunicate the decisins and results that have been taken elsewhere t the lcal citizens and brader public. It wuld raise false expectatins t set up a participative prcess and ask citizens fr their pinin if decisins have already been made. Members f the public wh have participated and invested their time t give input will nt feel themselves taken seriusly. Furthermre, it is quite prbable that they will have n interest in participating again Lack f Supprt by Internal/External Decisin- Makers Anther fact that is relevant fr the success f public participatin is the supprt f decisin-makers in this prcess. This des nt just refer t public authrities r pliticians, but rather t thse wh are making the decisins that are relevant t the participatry prcess. If this cncerns an applicatin by a TSO t a public authrity, the relevant decisinmakers wuld be the tp-level managers f this TSO. If this cncerns the decisin abut an applicatin that has been handed in, then the relevant decisin-makers wuld be the tp-level fficials f the authrity that makes the final decisin n the applicatin. If the decisin-makers d nt supprt the participative prcess and have nt shwn interest r

11 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin 11 willingness t take the results int accunt when making their decisins, then public participatin will have n impact Peple D Nt Get Invlved A general prblem is that many peple nly becme interested in a prject nce it has reached a high level f maturity and has becme relatively cncrete. At this stage, it is ften mre difficult t input and pssibly change the plans as many decisins have already been made. When slutins have nt been develped and planning prcedures have nt yet started, there is much mre rm t influence the utcme. At the same time, it is mre difficult t mtivate citizens t engage at a highly abstract stage. This has been described as the paradx f public participatin (Universität Leipzig 2013). Figure 2: The paradx f public participatin Surce: Universtität Leipzig (2013; 60). This paradx can be identified in the field f grid planning. When the general need fr grids is determined r during the spatial planning phase, lcal cmmunities may nt be directly affected by the grid plans. It is mre difficult t reach ut t the public and get feedback n these early plans. This issue has becme relevant bth in German grid planning and at the Eurpean level when a cnsultatin abut future prjects f cmmn interest (PCI) has been carried ut. 11 Many citizens find it extremely difficult t cntribute t this highly cmplex and abstract discussin. Furthermre, they d nt understand what kind f infrmatin they can cntribute and what exactly their influence culd be. If they have the impressin that their cntributin has n influence r makes n difference, they will nt be mtivated t participate in a cnsultatin. 11 These prjects f Cmmn Interest (PCI) are indentified in the framewrk f the EU regulatin n Trans-Eurpean energy infrastructures, which was adpted in It aims at better cnnecting the electricity markets f EU member states by giving high pririty t selected prjects f Eurpean interest.

12 12 Germanwatch Lack f Preparatin and Resurces This challenge needs specific cnsideratin. One idea culd be t fllw a tw-way apprach. On the ne hand, planners culd wrk with specialized stakehlder grups such as envirnmental NGOs r lcal authrities wh are interested in becming invlved at a very early stage. These grups may als functin as multipliers and prvide links t the brader public. On the ther hand, the brader public and simple citizens culd als be addressed actively. It may be useful t fcus n their specific knwledge and t elabrate the (nn- technical) questins that they are able t answer. In sme cases, a prcess f public participatin is undertaken because it is either required by law r because smene frm the management f an rganizatin sees this is a new trend t be tested. It may be unclear what t d with the results f such a prcess. It may als turn ut that insufficient persnnel has been allcated, r that the persnnel is nt experienced in public participatin. An inadequately prepared prcess may lead t high levels f frustratin, bth in thse wh carry it ut and thse wh participate. The use f pwer grids is a highly technical issue. Fr this reasn, many lcal citizens, NGOs and lcal authrities d nt have the necessary knwledge t prvide meaningful input when they are cnfrnted with the tpic. Very ften, they lack the necessary resurces (time, knwledge) t becme invlved. It is als clear that the public is nt able t fully understand every detail f this highly cmplex matter, unlike the engineers wh are experienced and have a very specific backgrund. Thse respnsible fr executing the cnsultatins need t find ways t address this cmplex issue in a nn-technical way and shuld attempt t learn frm the target grup. In this way, they culd identify underlying key questins r parameters that define the utcme f grid planning. There are ways f ding this that can lead t new and valuable insights. The public are the experts when it cmes t knwing what is imprtant t them and t their cmmunities, knwing abut their lcal envirnments, knwing wh has lcal influence, and s n. The very technical aspects f grid planning, hwever, are less apprpriate fr public participatin Lack f Time Bth in Germany and at the EU level, plicy-makers have restructured permit-granting prcedures fr the transmissin grid. The aim f plicy-makers was t speed up the decisin-making prcess and at the same time t enhance public participatin. It is assumed that if the public s cncerns and pinins have been taken int accunt at an early stage, then this will help t speed up the later stages f the decisin-making prcess. At the same time, this demand als presents a challenge because public participatin requires additinal resurces, time being ne f them. The literature ften stresses, hwever, that additinal time invested in public participatin in the early phases f a prject may well save lengthy discussins and delays during the implementatin phase.

13 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin 13 4 Success Factrs and Practical Recmmendatins The literature n public participatin in different cntexts has identified several precnditins that need t be in place in rder t establish a successful prcess. Many practical cases have shwn that disregarding these precnditins very ften leads t a failure f public participatin. Decisins taken may then create even mre resistance. Frustratin amng decisin-makers and citizens may grw. This chapter prvides a shrt verview abut the mst imprtant success factrs and applies these t the cntext f grid prjects. Furthermre, it develps sme practical recmmendatins fr TSOs and public authrities. 4.1 Transparency As shwn in figure 1, transparency is a basic precnditin fr all frms f public participatin. In the cntext f transmissin grid prjects, sme challenges arise in terms f transparency: frmal permit granting prcedures d nt always fulfil the infrmatin needs f citizens and ther stakehlders. It is smetimes difficult t identify what kind f (additinal) infrmatin is needed when and by whm t enable rganized stakehlders t better understand the prcess and t participate in a meaningful way. Furthermre, bth the permit granting prcedures and the matter at hand the transmissin grid are highly cmplex matters. Many citizens and lcal initiatives d nt have the resurces and time t read and understand cmplex and cmprehensive material abut grid prjects. Thus, cmprehensive, understandable and accessible infrmatin is needed t enable a high level f transparency. If a high level f transparency is implemented, the public, stakehlders and independent experts are expected t be better facilitated t understand wh makes key decisins and n what basis, and thus have access t the infrmatin and pprtunities they need t make infrmed and effectively input and challenge thse decisins. Furthermre, transparency helps t create trust and t establish a fair decisin-making prcess. Recmmendatins: Make infrmatin easily accessible, whenever pssible n the Internet, and identify ther suitable cmmunicatin channels. Spread infrmatin practively, fr example, in newspapers, scial media, and s n. Make the prcess transparent: prvide an verview, annunce cnsultatins, events and s n well in advance (at least fur t six weeks prir t the event). Prvide transparency abut the matter at hand: status f the prject, csts (t whm), benefits (t whm), design chices, invlved actrs, and envirnmental, ecnmic and health impacts. Prvide full infrmatin n grid prjects (full applicatin with maps and tables, backgrund studies, etc.) as well as understandable and cmprehensive summaries, including maps and pictures.

14 14 Germanwatch Prvide differentiated infrmatin: different stakehlder grups have different infrmatin needs which shuld be addressed using different frmats (shrt summaries but als full dcumentatin fr thse wh are interested). Prvide full infrmatin abut public participatin in the cntext f the prject: what kind f participatin is freseen, when can stakehlders becme invlved, what are the results f participatin, what difference will participating make, why shuld ne participate and what can be achieved by it? 4.2 Rm t Maneuvre and Early Invlvement As mentined abve, it is very imprtant that there is a certain level f rm t maneuvre and that the relevant decisins have nt already been taken. In many cases, there is still sme rm fr flexibility. It is imprtant t state clearly what issues can still be discussed and what issues have already been decided. Stakehlders and the brader public smetimes have very high expectatins cncerning the level f their engagement that d nt reflect the pssibilities f participatin. This culd create frustratin amng thse actrs wh have cntributed t a participatry prcess and might als make a trustful and cntinuus cperatin difficult. As mentined in the previus chapter, it is difficult t mtivate the public t give its input at an early stage when fewer issues are at stake because many peple are nt yet affected by these. The mre cncrete the planning fr a new pwer line becmes, the mre lcal ppulatins are affected and interested in becming invlved. At the same time, sme decisins may already have been taken befrehand that can n lnger be changed at this stage. It is imprtant therefre t think abut hw t get peple invlved at an early stage. An imprtant mtivatin fr citizens is t be able t vice their arguments and have them taken int accunt. Very ften at the brader level, it is nt clear t citizens if and hw their input influences the high-level decisins. This lwers their willingness t becme invlved. Recmmendatins: Invlve stakehlders and the brader public at the earliest stage pssible when their arguments can still be taken int accunt. Cmmunicate clearly the rm fr maneuvre. In which aspects can cntributins be taken int accunt? Where exactly is there still rm fr flexibility? Which decisins have already been taken and by whm? Cmmunicate clearly what can n lnger be influenced s as t avid raising false expectatins. Develp strategies n hw t gather feedback frm the public n general questins where public utreach may be difficult. 4.3 Publicity Publicity is clsely linked t transparency. Hwever, this refers mre t the participatin prcess than t the prject r permit-granting prcedures. It is imprtant t make sure that the brader public is able t retrace what has been discussed with selected stakehlders and t understand the results f the prcess. This is especially imprtant if public participatin takes place in smaller wrking grups, but als applies t larger infrmatin events, where it is imprtant that thse wh were unable t participate in such meetings are prvided with an insight int what has been discussed r decided.

15 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin 15 Recmmendatins: Make sure that the results f meetings f permanent wrking grups r expert meetings are made available t the brader public, fr example, by putting presentatins and minutes n the Internet and prviding infrmatin abut wh tk part in these discussins. Make sure that meetings held t address the brader public are annunced well in advance and cnsider pprtunities t bradcast these events via web stream. 4.4 Fairness and Inclusiveness Mutual trust is an imprtant precnditin fr public participatin and this trust has t be built up thrugh cntinuus dialgue and cperatin. An pen-minded attitude f all participants is the mst imprtant factr. The principle f participatin and fairness needs t be taken seriusly. Once cnflicts have already arisen, it may help t engage a prfessinal facilitatr r mediatr wh is able t ensure the prcess is managed in a fair and prfessinal way. Fairness als means that everyne wh is affected by a decisin has the chance t raise his/her cncerns. Fr this reasn, it is imprtant t identify all relevant stakehlder grups and grups f the sciety wh are usually less invlved (hard-t-reach grups such as yung families, migrants, etc.). Cncepts shuld be develped n hw t actively invlve these grups and t enable their participatin. Recmmendatins: Make sure that all actrs participate with an pen mind and are willing t take the prcess and all partners invlved seriusly. Cnsult an independent mderatr/facilitatr if cnflicts have already arisen. Stakehlder mapping. Enable the participatin f all actrs cncerned, fr example, by using a dedicated cncept. 4.5 Cntinuus Dialgue and Feedback t Create Mutual Trust In many cases, stakehlders r the affected lcal ppulatin may still have the impressin that their views and psitins have nt been taken int accunt, despite the fact that they have participated in a public cnsultatin r similar measure. In the same way, TSOs may nt understand why the public d nt agree t their plans, even when sme f their suggestins have been taken int accunt. The different actrs cncerned may nt fully understand each ther s attitudes and mtives. Withut the pprtunity fr pen and cntinuus dialgue, there is little chance f establishing mutual trust. Hence, it is necessary t start a real dialgue between the different actrs cncerned and t create pprtunities fr their arguments and reasning t be exchanged and discussed. Participants f public events (TSOs, authrities, stakehlders) wuld benefit greatly frm pprtunities t verify the infrmatin they receive and t attend fllw-up meetings t cntinue discussins and eventually develp cmmn slutins. Anther idea t enable a cntinuus dialgue wuld be t create smaller expert grups wh discuss specific tpics in mre detail and wh later present the results t the brader public.

16 16 Germanwatch It is crucial t give feedback t thse wh prvided an active input. Feedback can be given in many different frms, fr example, in the cntext f public events, written statements r reprts. Recmmendatins: Set up additinal meetings r hearings beynd the legal framewrk, which ften des nt fresee a dialgue between the actrs cncerned. Make use f different tls and frmats that enable a cntinuus dialgue between different stakehlders. Cnsider setting up permanent wrking grups r similar structures (e.g. a series f stakehlder wrkshps) that enable a depended exchange f different views. Give feedback t stakehlders t shw that all arguments and cmments have been cnsidered carefully befre taking the final decisin. Explain which pints have been addressed and hw, and which have nt been addressed, and why. When rganizing frmal hearings r events, cnsider hlding fllw-up events where discussins can be cntinued and feedback given t participants, whether their arguments have been taken int accunt r nt. 4.6 Prfessinal Organizatin f Public Participatin There is n ne-size-fits-all apprach t public participatin. Each case is individual and therefre needs a tailred apprach. There is a big difference between invlving the brader public in a specific prject, fr example, planning a 50 km pwer line, and the general need fr new natinal r even Eurpean pwer lines (e.g. the Eurpe-wide Ten-Years- Netwrk Develpment Plan develped by Eurpean TSOs every tw years). T set up this kind f tailred prcess f public participatin, thrugh and early planning and the use f prfessinal prject management tls is required. This includes a radmap abut the timing f public participatin in relatin t the frmal decisin-making prcedures. A carefully planned prcess shuld facilitate a smth implementatin f public participatin and may help t reduce frustratin levels, bth fr thse wh rganize the prcess and fr thse wh participate. A cncrete prpsal n hw t implement public participatin is develped in the next chapter. It is clear that dedicated resurces are needed t plan and implement public participatin prcesses. Public authrities and TSOs need staff wh are experienced in public participatin. It is challenging t accelerate decisin-making prcedures and at the same time have sufficient time fr public participatin. Hwever, it is assumed that such an investment will be beneficial at the end f the prcess. Recmmendatins: Plan sufficient resurces (persnnel, time) fr public participatin. Develp a cncept f public participatin that specifies the aim, prcedure, tls and timeline f the envisaged public participatin and make this infrmatin accessible.

17 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin New Pwer Grid fr the Future It has turned ut that the questin f the need fr grids is crucial in the cntext f many grid prjects. Lcal citizens wuld like t knw why new pwer lines are being planned and smetimes questin the need fr a new pwer line. Many lcal citizen grups r NGOs are nly willing t supprt new pwer lines that enable the transfrmatin twards mre renewable energies. New pwer lines fr cnventinal pwer plants that pse a risk t sciety are very ften rejected (e.g. due t the climate change risks f new cal pwer plants r the nuclear risks f nuclear pwer plants). In general, the extensin f the pwer grid shuld enable the integratin f renewable energies. At the same time, due t eclgical, envirnmental (e.g. impacts n landscapes) and ecnmic reasns, extensin f the grid shuld be limited t thse lines that are abslutely necessary fr balancing electricity prductin and cnsumptin, especially with regards t variable renewable energies. In any case, transparency is needed cncerning the purpse f new pwer lines. Recmmendatins: Prvide transparency abut the reasns fr new pwer lines (e.g. infrmatin abut underlying energy scenaris, actual lad flw data and frecasts, assumptins abut the market design). Cnsult and invlve the public during the prcess f determining the need fr grids (e.g. cnsultatin f underlying energy scenaris and grid develpment plans).

18 18 Germanwatch 5 Five General Steps n Hw t Implement Public Participatin Many scientific articles and practitiners in public participatin have stressed the fact that each case is unique. There is n ne-size-fits-all slutin. Sme methds f public participatin may help t increase the acceptability f a prject in ne case, but create ppsitin in anther. TSOs r public authrities aiming t invlve the public must develp a tailred slutin and chse frm a brad range f different methds. In rder t find the right methds and prcedures, it helps t apply t fllwing five steps. One additinal tl that might help t find adequate slutins and implement these five steps is a steering grup. This grup represents a micrcsm f all relevant actrs and helps t analyze the starting pint, t develp a tailred cncept f participatin and may give guidance during the implementatin f the measures chsen. Furthermre, this grup already represents a frm f participatin in itself many slutins that are develped within this steering grup may be the basis fr slutins supprted by the brader range f stakehlders. Step 1: Analyze the starting situatin The first step cnsists f a thrugh analysis f the situatin at hand. It frms the basis fr defining the next steps and helps t find an adequate methd f public participatin. It is very imprtant t have clarity n the rm fr maneuvre and purpse f participatin. This shuld be knwn by TSOs, authrities and the public/ stakehlders in rder t prevent unrealistic expectatins. False expectatins culd lead t frustratin and endanger the whle prcess. It may be useful t present the preliminary results t the Steering Grup mentined abve and ask fr feedback in rder t have additinal input and carry ut a reality check. The fllwing questins shuld be taken int accunt when analyzing the situatin. Aim f public participatin What are the results f the prcess? Hw can they be taken int accunt? What is a valuable cntributin by the public/ stakehlders? What is the rm fr maneuvre? Which facts and figures are nn-negtiable? Is there any flexibility, and if s, t which degree? Hw can the public/ stakehlders influence the prcess? T what degree are the results f the participatin binding fr decisin-makers? Wh will make the final decisin? And n what basis? Framewrk cnditins f the prject and public participatin linked t it What are the legal requirements in terms f transparency and public participatin? Is there rm fr maneuvre cncerning additinal (infrmal) participatin? What is the status f the prject?

19 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin 19 What is the schedule? What are the deadlines fr decisins? Hw and when culd the results f participatin be fed int the frmal prcess? Hw much time is available fr public participatin? What kinds f resurces are available: Time? Mney? Persnnel? Technical equipment, e.g. internet? Stakehlders wh need t be addressed/ included in the prcess Wh are the relevant decisin-makers? Wh has influence n the prject? Wh can fster r hinder a decisin if he/she has nt been cnsulted? Wh has been invlved in similar prcesses in the past? Wh has nt been invlved, but shuld be this time? Wh are the relevant experts/stakehlders (e.g. NGOs, scientists, authrities etc.) Wh has knwledge f the prject/issue? Wh are the peple affected by a prject? Are there grups f peple wh are difficult t reach? Step 2: Develp a tailred cncept fr transparency and public participatin The next step cnsists f preparing a cncept fr public participatin that answers the questins mentined in step ne and details hw the aims f participatin can be reached. This cncept has different aims. As it specifies the purpse f participatin, it is already a tl t cmmunicate this purpse t plicy-makers, stakehlders and the public. Hence, it shuld be cnsidered whether t make this cncept, r a summary f it, publicly available. Withut the supprt f decisin-makers (i.e. hierarchy within TSOs, but als lcal, reginal and natinal authrities), a participatry prcess might easily fail. It is very imprtant t discuss the cncept with decisin-makers and t gain their supprt and cmmitment t taking the results f the participatin int accunt. These tpics shuld be included in the cncept fr public participatin: Which stakehlders shuld be addressed? The public? Key stakehlders? Specific target grups? Or a cmbinatin f sme r all f these? Aim, framewrk cnditins and resurces (see step 1)? Intensity f participatin: infrmatin, cnsultatin, cperatin? Or a cmbinatin f different frms f participatin? Methds f public participatin. Timing. What is the link between frmal and infrmal frms f public participatin and hw can these be brught tgether? The cncept f public participatin shuld prvide all the infrmatin necessary fr a prfessinal prject management and prcess design, including resurces, wrk packages, milestnes and timing. As mentined, there are many different methds t invlve the public. Many f them have been applied in different circumstances. This psitin paper prvides a selectin f sme f these methds. There is an verlap between the different levels f participatin and the

20 20 Germanwatch methds applied. Fr example, a Citizen Assembly can be a pure infrmatin event, but it culd als be used t cllect feedback and infrmatin frm the audience and hence wuld be classified as cnsultatin event. These methds can be differentiated accrding t different criteria: hw many peple are invlved (small r large grups f peple?); hw are the participants chsen and/r addressed (participatin by chance r selected participants, brader public r specific stakehlder grups?), what resurces are needed and what frm f cmmunicatin is taking place (listening, articulatin f interests, negtiatin, exchange f arguments, etc.)? The methd can als be differentiated accrding t the functin it has and hw much influence the results f participatin have n the utcme f the decisins that need t be taken. Sme tls fr public participatin are mentined belw, classified accrding t their functin fr infrmatin, cnsultatin r cperatin. The annex prvides links t useful websites with mre infrmatin n these methds and hw t implement them. The tlbx f the internatinal assciatin n public participatin prvides a gd summary f these methds. 12 Infrmatin Psting / Annuncement Mailing Exhibitin Rad-shw Citizens assembly Press cnference Newspaper advertisement Questin time fr lcal residents Field ffice Expert panel Htline Cnsultatin Written cnsultatin (pssibly nline) In-persn surveys, persnal interviews Questin time fr lcal residents Citizens assembly, Twn Hall meeting Fcus grups Cnsensus cnferences Wrld café Cperatin Permanent wrking grups/ nging advisry grups Citizens jury Wisdm-cuncil 12 Tlbx n public participatin by the Internatinal Assciatin fr Public Participatin:

21 Recmmendatins n Transparency and Public Participatin 21 Cnsensus cnference Planning cell, citizens reprt Rund table Fcus grups Step3: Implement the identified measures The next step is the implementatin f the cncept f public participatin. This is best carried ut by prfessinal prject and prcess management. It is imprtant t make sure that the resurces needed are made available. When it cmes t highly cntrversial prjects, but als when new methds and tls are tested, it might be helpful t engage a prfessinal prcess facilitatr. This persn may guarantee a neutral apprach and help t cnduct difficult discussins. In general, it is mre difficult t carry ut infrmal public participatin because the rules f prcedures, aims, and s n, are nt defined by legal prvisins. In this case, it is very imprtant t agree n the mde f decisin-making and n the rights and respnsibilities f all participants. When implementing new tls and infrmal frms f public participatin, a prfessinal mderatr familiar with these tls may prve helpful as well. When wrking with smaller grups, the brader public needs t be infrmed abut the prcedures and results. Step 4: Cmmunicate results After public participatin has been carried ut, the results need t be cmmunicated t the brader public. Feedback t all participants is very imprtant. The results f a public participatin culd be cmmunicated at a final cnference r public event. Furthermre, they shuld be published n the Internet and cmmunicated using ther means (e.g. mailings). When explaining the final decisin, it is cnstructive t als cmmunicate hw public input has influenced this decisin. In this way, the brader public and thse wh participated are better able t understand the utcme. Step 5: Mnitr and evaluate the prcess An evaluatin f the prcess is beneficial in that it enables future prcesses t be built n the experiences made. There are different frms f dcumentatin: internal dcumentatin, dcumentatin by independent experts r dcumentatin by participants f the prcess. Invlving the participants f the prcess may help t create jint learning, and the lessns learned may be taken int accunt by all actrs during the next public participatin. Additinal tl: permanent steering grup As mentined abve, it may be useful t create a steering grup that accmpanies the participatry prcess frm start t. This may help t establish the cncept fr participatin as well as t mnitr and evaluate the prcess afterwards. The steering grup shuld cnsist f all relevant stakehlders. Fr grid develpment prjects, this means representatives frm TSOs, public authrities, NGOs, lcal actin grups, nn-rganised representatives f the lcal cmmunities affected by a prject, scientists and/r dedicated experts, and pssibly energy prducers and cnsumers.