Best Practice Guidelines - Offshore Wind Energy Development - BWEA - 2002

8/6/2019 Best Practice Guidelines - Offshore Wind Energy Development - BWEA - 2002

1/32


2/32

Supporting OrganisationsT H E B R I T I S H

dtiDepartment of Trade and Industry CROWNESTATE

W W F

THE

Celtic Offshore Wind Ltd.

POWERGE N

C P R E

WIND ENERGYA S 5 0 C I A T I 0 N

Your countrysideyour voice

nTOMEN0 Babtie

Friends ofthe Earth

CyngorC e h Cvlad CymrvBond Pearce NATIONAL WIND POWER Countryside Cou ncil farWalesI

,;@4,LaaAA4

ScottishPower

UnitedGlobal Renewable Energy PartnersEnergyUtilitiesOffshore EnergyEnron Wind Resources LimitedENERGY

JNAPC0 BWEA 2002If you wish to republish part or all of this document in any form, please contact th e Association.


3/32

Offshore win d farms are set t o become a m ajor part of ou r electricity supply in the UK. BWEA, theindustry's representative body has, since the earliest discussions of the poten tial, been com mitted toensuring that offshore wind farms are deve loped consistent w ith g ood environmental practice and thatthey win the support of local comm unities and o ther organisations.W e believe that these goals can best be achieved by ou r industry wo rking w ith comm unities, localauthorities, Governm ent agencies, N G O s, o ther stakeholder groups and all wi th an interest in theschemes.Th e Best Practice Guidelines: Consultation for Ofshore Wind Energy Developments pro vide a useful to ol forachieving these goals. We are particularly pleased that so many organisations have already agreed to pu ttheir names to this do cum ent. W e trust that the guidelines will be used by everyone wi th an interest in aproposal.W e are grateful to the dozens of organisations wh o have wo rked wi th us in preparing these guidelinesand we'll be pleased to hear from you w ith your thoughts on ho w w e can make this document evenm or e useful as the industry grows and we learn m or e.By wo rking together, we can ensure that offshore wind farms are developed wi th the highest level o fparticipation , consultation and satisfaction.

Nick GoodallChief Executive, BWEA

71


4/32

The Unite d Kingdom has the largest potential win d energy resource in Europe. The tapping of this potentialthrough offshore wind farms is essential to meeting the British government's comm itment t o produce 10% of ourenergy needs from renewable resources by 20 10.This, in turn , will help us to reduce the carbon dioxideemissions that are contribu ting to climate change.Th e purpose o f this docurnent is t o encourage good consultation around the development of offshore win denergy. It is aimed at developers, planners,Go vern men t departments, local organisations and communities.If offshore win d is to be farmed successfully, othe r users and enjoyers o f our coastline need to beproperly consulted abou t -the developments that will enable this. All 'stakeholders' - hose w ho have a stake,onshore or offshore - need to know what is proposed and the consequences, positive and negative, for them, theircommunities, and for the local environment and economy.These guidelines o n consultation highlight a n um ber o f needs:0 To identify all the relevant stakeholders0 To provide the m w ith th e information they need in language they can understand0 To be ope n and honest about wha t an individual project involves0 To engage with stakeholders in a variety of different ways, enabling everybody to have their opinions heard and

the ir ideas taken se riously.At the end of the docume nt are useful l ists o f organisations and publications for further in formation.

3


5/32

Preface Page ISummary Page 2Contents Page 3I . Process Description Page 42. Introduction Page 5

2. I These guidelines Page 52.2 Purposes of this document Page 62.3 Background to consultation on offshore wind energy Page 6

3. Effective Consultation Page 83. I Principles of effective consultation Page 83.2 Who are the stakeholders? Page 93.3 Stakeholder consultation on offshore wind energy Page I0

4. The Consultation Process Page I34. I Stage I : Starting the consultation process Page I 34.2 Stage 2: Listening and learning Page I 44.3 Stage 3: Monitoring of the consultation process, evaluating, and maintaining contacts Page I 54.4 Stakeholders and identifying offshore wind energy issues Page I5

5. Techniques for Stakeholder Consultation Page I 75.1 Information Page 175.2 Meetings Page 175.3 Workshops Page 185.4 Liaison groups Page I 95.5 Public exhibitions Page I95.6 The lnternet Page I95.7 How to choose which technique Page 20

Glossary Page 22AppendicesA: List of key organisations and contact details Page 23B: Locations of the potential sites release for offshore wind energy development Page 25C: Further reading Page 26D: Industry endorsed visualisation of a typical offshore wind farm 29


6/32

4

Th e British W ind Energy Association (BWEA ) initiated adialogue process in I999 betwe en developers,Go ver nm ent agencies and environmental groups anddifferent users o f the sea and coastline Th e purpose ofthis dialogue was to follo w th e early stages of the siteidentifica tion and leasing proce ss, identify any concernsearly, and respond to them The Environment Councilwas appointed as an independent thir d party toconvene and run these events Th e last wo rks hop heldin June 200 I made a recommendation that bestpractice guidelines o n consultation should bedeveloped to ensure sensitive site development

This document has been produced directly as a resulto f that recom mend ation. 'The stakeholder dialogueprocess has continued by pr oducing these guidelines inconjunction wi th a wide range of stakeholders, draw nfro m those involved ove r the last few years to identifyand describe a preferred process of consultation andencourage consistent behaviour throug hout th eindust ry.These guidelines we re developed using a consensusbuilding process. A co re group of twelve stakeholderswas identified by D ialogue by D esign, the independen tfacilitators. Th e stakeholders were draw n fro m anextensive l is t of contacts held by BWEA. This group o f

A

stakeholders m et to agree the scope and a detailedbrief for the guidelines. An independent editor w ro te afirst draft of the guidelines. This was reviewe d by thecore g rou p and changes made p rior to an lnternetreview process.Ov er a perio d of about three weeks participants had anopportunity to make comments on to a website. Thesewere collated and incorporated into the final draft andfinally participants wer e asked to support the docum entwith th e use of their logos.The organisations shown here support the need forgood quality consultation around all offshore win denergy developments in addition to the othe r technicaland statutory processes they have t o go thro ugh.Support for these guidelines does n ot me an theseorganisations support any individual site developm ent,but it does indicate support for a consultation processthat should be follow ed by all developers.While these guidelines cannot guarantee t o produce aconsensus in every case, they do at least provide acommon path to trying to reach it, and as they areused they should increase people's confidence that th eimportant issues are being identified and addressed asrigorously and as equitably as possible.

,/


7/32

---\///----. I Theshguideliner\

I/ /

/"

'/ Most commentators and governments n o w acceptclimate change asa reality, with all o f its attendant risksto our way of life and the environment. Mitigation ofit s effects depends on the co ntrol o f production o f'greenhouse gases'. Th e U K government, in order t omeet it s Kyoto commitments to reduce carbon dioxideemissions, has set targets to generate 10% of the UKsby 2003. A revie w of U K energy policy currently beingundertaken suggests expanding the role o f renewa bleenergy to 20% of total elec tricity supply by 2020. TheUK has the largest win d ene rgy resource in Europeand wind energy is a readily available technology whichcan be applied no w. Furtherm ore, a EU report ' thatassessed the impacts of different ways o f generatingelectricity found that the external costs of appropriatelysited wind farms are smaller than competingconventional fuels and that the majo r impacts aretemp orar y and reversible. Offshore wind energydevelopments therefore have the potential tocontribu te significantly tow ards these targets.

/ /

/'- - electricity fro m renewable sources by 20 I 0 with 5%

The first round o f options o n offshore wind energysites have n o w been let. Th ere has been no strategicenvironm ental assessment of these sites and it hasbeen left to individual developers to find sites that areeconom ically viable and environmentally and sociallyacceptable in the absence of an overall strategicplanning process. Locational issues may therefor earise. As long as offshore w in d en ergy propo sals aresited appropriately, thorough consultation will help fulfilthe industry's potential by reducing the likelihood o funnecessary conflict, so easing the development ofindividual projects.N e w developments o n land that require planningpermission have to go through a statutory consultationprocess, giving people an opp ortun ity to ask questionsor raise objections. Even thoug h such developm entsare set with in a frame wor k o f established national andstrategic planning guidance, many de velopers recognisethe additional benefits of encouraging mu ch earlier andwid er public participation than is required in thestatutory planning process.

for this reason that the o ffshore win d ind ustry hasrecognised the importance o f early, effective anditerative consultation with relevant stakeholders.('Stakeholder' is used in this docum ent to denoteindividuals o r organisations that perceive that they havea stake in some aspect o f offshore win d de velop men t.2)Consultation in this way will enable sites to bedeveloped sensitively, and enable changes to be madeto plans to help m eet the concerns and create theopportunities identified by local communities andoth er users of th e sea and coastline.In summary, these guidelines explain that:0 Transparent, comprehensive and well-preparedconsultation with a wide range of stakeholders is

essential to iden tifying generic and site specific issuesraised by offshore wind energy developments

o Interactive dialogue with stakeholders is the bestwa y to find lasting and widely acceptable solutionsto any concerns, to disseminate information, toidentify gaps in curren t understanding and furtherresearch requirements, and to explain ho wstakeholders' concerns may have already beenrecognised by developers. The end result should beto establish areas of co mm on agreem ent andunderstanding, and to prevent, as far as possible,future conflict betw een developers and localcommunities o r othe r interest groups

o Effective consultation can contrib ute to the successof developm ents by tapping the ideas and localknowledge o f stakeholders, and also give them asense of the positive benefits they can bring.

The guidelines set out th e importance of:0 Identifying he stakeholders, including those

immediately affected by developments, those withwide r strategic interests, and those involved byvirtue of their statutory roles or political positions

0 Early consultation with such stakeholders0 Following up after consultation finishes to give

feedback to stakeholders about the project in thefuture

0 Identifying all the issues perceived by s takeholders,including environmental, economic, and socialeffects, bo th po sitive and negative.

Th e guidelines also poin t readers to othe r importantources of information including websites hosted by thedustry and others containing further informationffshore wind energy isTh e process of offshore pl

making s thereforeless w about offshore wind energy developments.


8/32

2.2 Purposes of this documentThese guidelines are designed for use by deve lopers,planners, Go vern me nt departments, local organ-isations, non-g overn men tal organisations andcommunities to set a standard for go od co nsultation.They should help consultees understand the processand therefore w hat t o expect, and developers can usethem to guide their o w n consultation processes. Theyare no t prescriptive: each site, com mun ity anddevelopment plan will be different. They offer a set ofprinciples and suggest a range o f techn iques that can beused.Th e ind ustry has recognised the impo rtance and valueof stakeholder consultation beyond th e statutoryrequiremen ts. Any consultation process must beclosely linked to, but no t constrained by, the statutoryconsultations required in the consent processes, whichwill include an Environ mental Impact Assessment (EIA).The Dep artm ent of Trade and Industry (DT I) hasprepared guidance notes on th e Offshore WindfarmConsen ts Process (these wer e published in draft for mat the tim e o f going to pri nt, and are available fro m th eDTI: see Appendix C for details)Finally, the purpose of this doc ume nt is neither t oexplore the technical, environmental o r econom icissues around offshore wind energy development, norto explain in detail the licensing o r planning processesinvolved. These are referred to in brief Appendices,and there are references to useful organisations andwebsites whe re such things are explained. Dialoguebetw een developers and oth er marine industries isdealt with by the relevant industry associations.Guidance on siting and wildlife issues can be found inthe docum ent 'W ind farm developmen t and natureconservation' (See Appendix C).2.3 Background to consultation onoffshore wind energyThe UKswind resource at sea has been estimated asalmost 3 times current electricity consumption;3 manybelieve offshore wind p ow er is needed to help meetGov ernm ent targets for renewable generation.A number of compan ies and consortia have beenexploring the potential for offshore wind energy forsome years.

Th e C ro w n Estate, which manages the prop erty onthe seabed around the UK out to th e I 2 nautical mileterritorial limit, and the rights to the resources of thecontinental shelf, has been working with BWEA, DTIand other Govern ment departments to bring forwardearly and successful developm ent of offshore w indfarms. In Decem ber 2000 the Cr ow n Estate invitedapplications from developers for options on suitablesites, where, subject to consents procedures, offshorewind farms could be developed ove r the next 3 years.As a result of this pre-qualification round I 8 sites we reannounced in April 200 I (see map at Appendix B).Each site represents no m or e than I 0 squarekilometres o f seabed. Some o f these sites are adjacentto each other, so there are, in total, I 3 discrete areas.Before a lease can be granted by the C ro w n Estate,developers are required to obtain all the necessaryconsents for any offshore and ancillary onshoredevelopm ents fro m the relevant authorities. Full detailsof the leasing proce dure can be found atwww.crownestate.co.uk. T he DTI has established anOffshore Renewables Consent U nit (O RC U) t o act asthe focal point for the statutory consents procedure inEngland and Wales and will be issuing guidelines on t heconsents process for developers.W hy do offshore wind energy developers need bestpractice guidelines on consultation? It could be arguedthat they d o n ot need them any m ore than any otherdeveloper o r any proposed developmen t does.However :

Some onshore w ind energy developments haveattracted significant oppo sition fo r a range ofreasons, and inadeq uate consultation wi thstakeholders may have bee n a factor in som e cases.The industry is keen to ensure that this is not thecase when it comes to offshore developments.Thorough consultation will help fulfil the industry'spotential by reducing the likelihood of unnecessaryconflict, easing the d evelop men t o f individualprojects, and ensuring that deve lopm ent is donesympathetically and effectively. Early consultationmay also provide an opportunity for stakeholders toappreciate the oppo rtunities that the industry canbring.Th ere has been no ove rall strategic process t oagree wh ere offshore win d sites should be located,or ho w m any there should be in any one area. It 1


9/32

has been left to developers to find sites they believewill be economically viable, and environmentallyand socially acceptable. This was on e o f the keyconcerns of many stakeholders in the nationaldialogue process run by T he Environment Council.If there is mo re than one site being developed inany one area it will be impo rtant for all thestakeholders to consider any cumulativeconsequences of multiple developments.

0 Th e current provisions under Section 34 of theCoast Protection Act for thir d parties to participatein or make representations on policy, siting,assessment of proposals, or decision-making fo roffshore developments are perceived by some tobe limited and in need of strengthening.

ReferencesI . ExternE National Implementation, ETSU Contract JOS3-CT95-00 0 Final Repo rt - PART I June 1998.2. Section 3. 2 describes in detail different types of

stakeholders.3. ETSU W/35/00250/REP/ I ,

7


10/32

~

People need to be treated equally-\3. I Principles of effective consultation/ \ \1 Different stakeholders have different responsibilities in

relation to the issues (rem em be r again that the/

Th e fp/llowing principles help stakeholder consu ltationto be effective and fruitfulI < developers, the local council and Gov ernm ent\ departments are all stakeholders), bu t with in the

consultation process all stakeholders should be able toparticipate as equals (for example, d uring m eetings).their m erits, not on their source.

The $ p o s e ofstakeholder consultation is to enable allw -k e >o ld er s to make known the ir views and to work~ together t o ensure they are addressed.' stakeholders- developer and community,

campaigner and local gover nme nt - need anI This means, in particular, that ideas can be judged o n-- .--l

opportunity to share their views, and to w ork on waysto mee t each other's needs and concerns to the extentnecessary o r possible. This is where stakeholderconsultation differs most markedly from publicrelations: it is the joint pursuit of benefit for all.Th e issues and views discussed may encompass abroad range of subjects including the technical aspectsof the p roject and the nature of the long-termrelationships betwe en the developers and the localcommunity.Consultation needs to be inclusiveThere are lots of ways o f undertaking consultations.The important thing is t o use the most appropriatetechniques at different stages of a dev elopm entprocess. W he re existing structures for consultationexist they shou ld be used , 'such as region al coastalfora.The definition o f 'stakeholder' is 'someone wh o hasa stake in the outco me of the project' (see page 9for a breakdown of different types of stakeholders).Always veer toward s inclusivity, particularly duringthe early stages, even if it means involving largenumbers of people. If the process becomes unwieldybecause of large numbers, it is usually poss ible t owo rk out a system wh ere some stakeholdersrepresent others, and feedback importantinformation.It is wo rt h making particular efforts to include thosewhose interests and concerns might otherwise bemarginalized o r excluded, so techn iques such asparticipatory appraisal and com mun ity mapping can beuseful in the early stages of con sultation. (See Append ixC for further reading on these techniques.)

8

Responsibility for th e process and the feedback needsto be sharedMany consultation processes fail because the processdoes no t meet the needs of the stakeholders, orbecause participants d o n ot feel they have be en kep tfully informed of what has been done with their ideasand opinions.It is up t o those convening the process to ensurethat it meets everyone's needs - ncluding, of course,their own - and to take primary responsibility fordisseminating the results and inform ation abou t h o wthese link to de cision-making processes.The use of independent professional facilitators shouldbe consideredIf a stakeholder consu ltation process is going toinvolve public meetings o r workshop s, it may bewo rt h investing n th e services of professionalfacilitators:0 Stakeholders wi th doubts about participating are

more likely to accept that an independ ent facilitatorwill conduct the process impartially

0 Independent facilitators can also ensure (and beseen to ensu re) that m eetings are as ba lanced andeven-hande d as possible by, for example,preventing particular individualsor interest groupsdominating.

The process must be tra nspare nt, especially aboutuncertaintiesThis final principle is mo re important than it may seem.Stakeholders these days take everything w ith a pinch o fsalt: they are used to being bombarded by advertisingand public re lations exercises and be ing told differentthings by different peo ple, only to find out in due \fi/;


11/32

course that none o f the information they w ere givenwas whol ly reliable.W he re things are uncertain- about environmentalimpacts, or econom ic benefits, o r long-term prospects- t is much better to be open and honest about it.Indeed, there may be legal requirements to do so if theproposal affects an internationa lly important site fo rnature conservation . Stakeho lder consultationprocesses can often help to manage uncertainties by,for example, organising local research o r developingshared contingency plans.

Th e one thing that really upsets stakeholders is notbeing told the truth.3.2 Who are the stakeholders?For the purposes of these guidelines it is possible t osplit stakeholders in to three main groups.

Statutory consulteesThese are the easiest group to define, becausegenerally speaking they are pre-defined by regulation.Statutory consultees are bodies wit h wh ich developersare required t o consult; they include bodies such asGo vern me nt agencies and local authorities. W hiledevelopers will need to ensure they follow the correctstatutory processes fo r these organisations, they canalso be included in non-statutory consultation.Strategic stakeholders (non-statutory consultees)This group can be defined as people w h o representorganisations, wh ethe r at a na tional, regional o r locallevel whose support of o r opposition to a developmentwo uld be significant, o r w h o have particularinformation o r expertise t o offer. Examples include theRoyal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB),commercial fishermen and their representative bodies,the Ramblers Association, Friends of the Earth and theRoyal Yachting Association.

Table I: Examples of different types of stakeholders(this is not an exhaustive list and regional differences will apply)Statutory Consultees/Regulators

~~

CADW -Welsh Historic MonumentsCentre for Environment, Fisheries andCivil Aviation Authority ( CM )Countryside AgencyCountryside Council for WalesDepartment for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS)Department fo r the Environment, Food and RuralDepartment of Trade and Industry (DTI)Department o f Transport, Local Government andEnglish HeritageEnglish NatureEnvironment AgencyHealth and Safety ExecutiveHeritage Agency, Northern IrelandHistoric ScotlandLocal AuthoritiesMaritime Coastguard AgencyMinistry of DefenceNational Assembly for WalesNational Parks AuthoritiesRadio Communications AgencyRegional Development AgenciesScottish ExecutiveScottish Natural HeritageTrinity House Light House Services

Aquaculture (CEFAS)

Affairs (DEFRA)

the Regions (DTLR)

Strategic StakeholdersCouncil for the Protection of RuralCampaign for the Protection ofAssociation for the Protection ofFriends of the EarthGreenpeaceJoint Nautical Archaeology PolicyMarine Archaeological interestsMarine Conservation societyNational Fishermens OrganisationsNational TrustNautical Archaeology SocietyRamblers AssociationRegional coastal foraRoyal Society for the Protection ofRoyal Yachting AssociationSea Fishery CommitteesThe Wildlife TrustsTrade UnionsWWF

England (CPRE)Rural Wales (CPRW)Rural Scotland (APRS)

committee (JNAPC)

Birds

Community StakeholdersChurch groupsCommunity/Parish CouncilsEducational interestsIndividualsLocal companiesLocal FishermensOrganisationsRecreational groupsResidents AssociationsSailing ClubsWomens Institutes


12/32

Commun ity stakeholders has show n that o ne o f the mos t inclusive ways is t oadvertise in the local media.3.3 Stakeholder consultation and offshorewind energy

This group includes individuals o r organisations w h oare interested because they live in the c omm unity th edevelopment will affect, interested individuals,representatives of residents associations, clubs, churchgroups etc.There are two general points to make. The first is thatit is better to involve too many than to miss out somew ho are crucial. The second is that it is alwayspotentially dangerous to put pe ople in to boxes; forexample, some w ho appear to be 'community'stakeholders may feel their concerns are moreprope rly 'strategic', while others can be fitted in tomore than one box.

Each deve lopm ent will require the developer to obtainseveral different kinds of statutory con sent. Eachconsent process will require a developer to carry outand submit an Environm ental Impact Assessment (EIA)of the project before the consent for it can be given.Th e scope of the assessments will vary bu t overallthere will be a require men t t o assess socio-econo micimpacts as we ll as those o n the physical and naturalenvironment.

Finding the stakeholdersDeve lopers are usually we ll aware o f their statutoryconsultees. Community and strategic stakeholders,however, may sometimes be harder to identify (o rat least it is easier to miss one o r twoout!) . Thefollowin g questions usually help to find the rightp e o d e :

There is an established procedure in all consentsprocesses for consulting with a limited num ber o f keystakeholders (generally statutory consultees)- usuallyat national/regional level, and usually by means ofwr itte n inform ation, inc luding plans and diagrams, sentby post. The wi der 'voluntary' consultation processthese guide lines describe sho uld as far as possible mesh

W h o will be affected, positively or negatively, by t hedevelopment?W h o supports or opposes the changes thedevelopment will bring!W h o holds official positions in the area likely to beaffected by the development?W h o is influential in the local com mun ity?W h o runs local organiscations ith economic,environmental or social interests?W h o has been involved in any similar issues in thepast?W h o m ay not be affected by any immediatedevelopment, but may be if there are other similardevelopments in the area?

Reaching stakeholders

in with th e formal consultation processes for statutoryconsents, but should be wider, so that it includes localand non-statutory, as we ll as 's tatu tor y', stakeholders.The statutory consultees should be given theopportunity to participate in the wid er 'voluntary'consultation process as well as in the formal process .They will benefit from this, and will often have muc h t ooffer in discussion because of their previousexperience.Table 2 opposite shows, in outline form, ho w the EIAprocess links to that o f the stakeholder consultationprocess. Howeve r, it is important t o recognise that:I . It is unlike ly that these stages will happen exactly in

parallel as sho wn in the table; and2. Stakeholder con sultation Drocesses n eed to beWhat is the best way to make contact withstakeholders and ensure they are involved ? Th eeasiest way is to make a list of the obvious ones andthen ask "W h o else should be involved?" G raduallyth e l ist will grow until the same names are beingrepeated and no n ew ones added. Even so, asthe plans progress, more stakeholders may comeforward. so th e l is t should remain oD en. ExDerience

iterative: info rma tion gained in Stages 2 or 3 maymake it essential t o retur n t o Stage I .

10


13/32

Table 2: Summary of Statutory and Stakeholder Consultation processesSTAKEHOLDER

CONSULTATION PROCESSStage I: Identifying stakeholders, issues andprocesses

Create core team to advise on consultation (seeIdentify stakeholders and issues (see pages 5 and 9 )Establish key contactsDraw up detailed consultation process plan (seePrepare information for dissemination

Page 13)

page 13)~~ ~

Stage 2: Listening and learningClarify issues, expose assumptions, reduceuncertainties, build on common ground and exploreideas to resolve differencesCommission independent research and fact-finding toavoid the adversarial science problemImprove communication and relationshipsManage ongoing uncertaintiesTurn new ideas into solutionsAgree changes to existing plans whereDevelop continuing commitmentsEstablish monitoring and reporting procedures

Stage 3: Monitoring, evaluating and maintainingcontactsReporting back to stakeholders on results ofconsultationReporting back t o stakeholders on how results wereused as part of decision-making processes on thedevelopment

necessary/possible

Evaluation of consultation processOngoing contactsReturn to earlier stages if and when necessary

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ANDPLANNING PROCESSStage I: Site selection and Scoping

Undertake pre-feasibility studiesSite selectionScreening under the habitats directive, if appropriateOutline environmental profileConsideration of alternativesScoping exercise (identification of main environmentalProduction of scoping reporteffects)

Stage 2: Commission EIA and Scheme DesignDescription of the developmentDescription of existing environmentDescription of environmental impactsIdentify residual effectsInterpretation of scale and significance of impactsIdentificationof mitigation measuresDevelopment of management systems and controls toavoid, reduce and enable mitigationPropose possible monitoring and reporting measuresAdvertise application and lodge in public domain forreview and comment

Stage 3: Post Granting of ConsentsImplementation of mitigation or compensation andMonitoring and reportingContinual adjustment where monitoring revealscontrol measures

undesirable results

ReferencesI , A com mon situation when conflict arises is for people h olding opposite positions to use scientific findings to support their

argum ents. If the brief for research and the scientists who do it are agreed in advance, this problem can be avoided.


14/32

Figure I: The flow chart below i s an indicative route map illustrating how the various consultation stagescould feed into the overall EIA process.

Core consultation Site selection andteam established EIA process establishedConsultation plan

and communicationsstrategy established Scoping exercise1 I I

SCOPINGREPORT -v

Issues identificationData gatheringResearch withsta keho de r sMeetings, exhibitionsand other techniquesfor stakeholderconsultation

\Communicateand exchangeinformation,receivecomments

Commission EIADesktop studiesField surveys anddata collectionAssessment andinterpretationMitigation measuresMonitoring schemes

PUBLISH ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENTFOR REVIEW AND COMMENT

SUBMIT CONSENT APPLICATIONS WITH EIAI/ 4 L\IPRO]ECT DEVE LOPMENT, MON TORlNG M T1GAT10N REPORTING

12

-

30z70;az0DzUbD-I0z0In'IInrnv)v)

-


15/32

4 . i Stage I:Starting the consultationprocess

'Thedst task is t o identify those wh o w ill lead theconsu ltation process Usually this is the developer, andiii.i/sually there is one person devoted to this task whomaintains contacts w ith all the stakeholders throughout

, If possible, however, (and taking into accountconstraints on time and resources) it is much better tocreate a core grou p of key stakeholders (w ho w ill varyfrom place t o place but need to be able t o reflect localand regional opin ion) and proje ct managers to meetregularly throu ghout the consultation process andmake the key process decisions require dThe principles wou ld be the same if developers chooset o manage this process themselves o r a core group IScreated The tasks are to0 Identify stakeholders (see page 9 ) and do an initialscoping of the issues, prob ably also clarifying which

issues are importan t to which stakeholders0 Plan and design the consultation process, agreeing

objectives and ou tputs , techniques, key events,timing, resourc ing (including budgets) andco-ordination with other statutory or non-statutoryprocesses

0 If and when meetings are re quire d, draft invitationsand indicate an individual with wh om stakeholderscan Iiase. W ho sends the invitations and 'hosts'events may vary: it may be the develope r, the localcouncil, a local coastal pa rtnership, or sometimes anindependent body such as a local collegee Dec ide and prepare p resentations and documentsfor distribution before or during meetings, and

agree administrative and logistical preparation:efficient logistics helps bu ild confidence in theprocess.

This stage may take several meetings or it may bedone by teleph one and e-ma il. Invitations o meetingsneed to go out 3-6 weeks before events; notices ofpublic meetings need to be published about 3 weeksahead and then repeated a day or two before theevent. All stakeholders who respond to invitations ornotices of meetings need to be re-contacted beforemeetings.Preparation for consultationIn order to reduce potshould ideally take plac-

offshore wind d evelopm ent. Alternatively aconsultation plan should be dra wn up as so on as siteselection is com pleted , and the initial consultationactivity should begin as soon as possible. The processof identifying stakeholders will have enabled developersto decide which types of stakeholders will be targetedat this early stage: strategic, com munity or b oth. Thisin turn w ill de termine the consultation plan.Preparing the consultation plan is not only o f benefit t oexternal stakeholders, but also:0 It ensures that the develop ment team itself fullyunderstands wha t consultation is and why it isimportant and w ho they are trying to reach0 It makes explicit the links with statutoryorganisations, regulators , relevant NGOs and otherofficial and local bodies .Every consultation plan will be different, but all willhave some generic elements:0 The objectives and scope of the consultation

process are clarified0 The environm ental, econom ic and social issues

raised by the development are identified0 It should explain why the development is beingproposed0 The tim e-frame for consultation set out in parallelwith the tim ing of related activities0 The locations and logistics of consultation are

establishedCB Th e tools and techniques o f consu ltation ar e

establishedo The roles and responsibilities of those involved are

decidedo The resources for consultation are allocatede Feedback mechanisms are identified.As stakeholders often need inform ation o which torespond, the development team w ill also need t opro vide some basic facts and figures about the formand scale of the proje ct and the main possibleenvironm ental effects using experience gained fro msimilar projects elsewhere where helpful. It is also bestpractice for the developer to produce an e nviron-

,mental scoping report at this stage to facilitatediscussions of the terms of reference of the EIAitself.


16/32

Such an environmental scoping report should:

0 Set out information about the scope and detail ofthe EIA: what will be covered and in how muchdepth

0 Set out the consultation process and invitestakeholders to comment on the document andindicate what other information they would like tosee included within the EIA

0 Establish a timeline for ttle EIA and the consultationprocess

0 Establish the methodologies of the EIA and theconsultation process

0 Explain who is to be involved and how to contactthem.

Finally, it is absolutely essential that all information goingto stakeholders is as jargon-free as possible, and thatany essential jargon or technical information isexplained fully.4.2 Stage 2: Listening and learningThe main interactive work s,tartsaround the same timeas work on the HA s emerging. Whatevermethodology s used, this stage needs to:0 Clarify issues0 Expose assumptions0 Identify, manage or reduce uncertainties0 Build on common ground0 Explore ideas to solve problems and resolve

differences0 Establish what changes may need to be made0 Commission independent research and fact-finding0 Establish monitoring and reporting procedures, and

arrangements for responding o them0 T-y generally to improve communication and

relationships, and develop continuing commitments.If there are issues that requii-e more detaileddiscussion, working groups can be established and theirremits agreed by all the stakeholders. They will dotheir work and report back1:o the 'main' group. Thecore group, meanwhile, continues to be responsiblefor convening and designing meetings.Some consultation processes involve no more thanone or two meetings; others last much longer andinvolve sequences of large, main group meetings

on what the situation and the stakeholdersrequire.

Stakeholder input to the E IA processStakeholder input to the EIA process should:0 Identify strategic and local sources of information on

which the developers can draw, remembering hatlocals can have traditional but sound and valuableknowledge that may be unavailable from formalsources

0 Confirm or amend the environmental description ofthe development: stakeholders should be consultedabout what is being assessed and whether theyagree with the conclusions reached

0 Agree the baseline studies: local as well as strategicstakeholders should be invited, to ensure that issuesof local interest or importance,of which thedevelopers may not be aware (such as traditionalrights or historic sites), are included

0 Assist in the consideration of alternative locations orapproaches

0 All sorts of effects, including temporary constructioneffects, direct operational effects during the life ofthe project, effects of maintenance of plant andequipment, and the effects of eventual de-commissioning

0 Residual effects and how they will be monitored0 Possible mitigation and compensation measures-

whether they think the developers' proposals willbe effective in the local situation

0 Development of management systems and controlsto enable mitigation-whether the measuresproposed will work in practice

0 Monitoring and reporting measures-whether theproposed systems for keepinga check on thedevelopment will give the information needed tomonitor environmental effects thoroughly

0 Measures and arrangements for responding to theresults of monitoring.

The methods used at this stage should be as interactiveas possible, and developers will need to supplystakeholders with detailed information about proposals.The information must be presented in a way that isaccessible to non-technical people, but does notsacrifice accuracy for accessibility. Examples ofstakeholder input can be seen in Figure 2 oppositeand several working group processes: it all depends784


17/32

Gunfleet SandsWorking with local District Council, the route of theonshore grid connection cable was modified to take intoaccount an existing SSSl designation.North HoyleTaking on board comments from a number of local stake-holders who have vessels in the marine environment, thelayout of the turbine array was adjusted to provide fornavigation between the turbines, while still allowing forthe interests of the Countryside Council for Walesconcerning the visual amenity of the development fromland.The onshore cable to the electrical substation will now bea buried cable following consultation with the localauthority addressing their concerns about visual effects.Scroby SandsOver the course of a year an appropriate route for theexport cable from the wind farm back to shore was

agreed in consultation with the local harbourmaster, thePort Authority, fisherman and the local Borough Council.A tailored construction methodology to accommodatethe needs of pupping seals and the litt le tern colonybreeding season has been established in conjunction withthe Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the SeaMammal Research Unit at the University of S t Andrews.Kentish FlatsA local Nor th Kent resident was commissioned to surveythe fishing to determine any local hotspots, and con-sequently the entire wind farm site has been relocated toless sensitive grounds a kilometre further north, avoidingthe local oyster beds.Concerns over affecting migratory patterns of birds app-roaching local nature reserves has resulted in a baselinestudy of bird concentrations at the proposed wind farmsite, with the methodology being agreed in co-ordinationwith both statutory and non-statutory bodies.

1Figure 2: Examples of stakeholder input into the EIA process: indicative oft he recommended approach, but notillustrative ofthe whole process of comm unity and stakeholder involvement throug h all stages o f a development.4.3process, evaluating, and maintaining contactsAs the development process continues, heconsultation process should continue to check:0 Whether all appropriate stakeholders have beenconsulted0 Whether the stated objectives of the EIA andconsultation processes have been achieved0 What changes to the project have been made as aresult of the consultation process, and why0 Whether the consultation process has allowedsufficient time to consider social, economic andenvironmental impacts to the depth necessary0 Whether stakeholders feel that the consultation has

been conducted in a way that has enabled them tocontribute fully and freely to the EIA process.

Stage 3: Monitoring of the consultation

The consultation plan needs to identify techniques thatensure the consultation objectives have been met. Itmay be that some sort of core group or even a widergroup of stakeholders will continue to meet periodicallyduring the entire lifetime of the project, so that if anynew concerns or fresh opportunities should arise thereis immediately a forum in which to discuss them.Finally, the process may need to be reconvened when

and economic impacts as a result of employmentchanges.The final stage of the EIA process is to ensure thatmitigation and control measures identified by the EIAprocess are fully implemented, and then monitored toensure they are effective. At this stage there is someconvergence between the outputs of the EIA processand those of the consultation process. For example:0 Stakeholders' commitments included in the actionplans, monitoring and reporting procedures and

mitigation measures agreeddevelopment and i t s impacts.0 The need for ongoing evaluation of the

4.4 Stakeholders and identifying offshorewind energy issuesThere is always a question as to whether thestakeholders define the issues, or the issues define thestakeholders. The answer to this chicken-and-eggdilemma is 'both', which is why all consultationprocesses need to be cyclical and iterative rather thanlinear.Whatever the type of consultation, the methods beingused or the situation, it is best practice to start byasking stakeholders 'open' questions so that they candefine the issues as they choose. For example:he time comes to decommission the development,particularly if, for example, this will have


18/32

0 Wh at are the issues?0 W ha t economic, environmental, social or

recreational issues are invo lved?0 What is important to those wh o feel they may

be affected, directly o r indirectly, by thedevelopment?

0 Wh at d o people want in relation to thisdevelopment?

0 Wh at d o people like about this development?0 W hat d o people fear about this developmen t?Even if you think you know the answers to thesequestions, by asking th em you will give som eownership of the process t o stakeholders- and theanswers can be surprising and valuable!Checklist of potential issuesBecause the re te nd to be issues that a re n otimmediately identified it is useful to have a checklist of

t o start with fairly general headings and then mo ve o nt o m or e specific ones.The re are many different ways to grou p and structureissues. Figure 3 belo w provides a simple starting pointin the case of offshore win d. Itwill be important forany process to consider the implications o f these at thedesign, consents, operation and decom missioningstages o f a schem e.National energy policy needs to be taken intoconsideration. Equally, the concerns o f specific interes tsgroups, such as the fishing industry, the Ministry o fDefence o r the oil and gas indu stry, need t o beidentified and explored to ensure they are properlyunderstood.Whichever way the issues are divided up anddesignated, repetition helps ensure inclusion.Sometimes it may even be useful t o create some sortof m atrix to set ou t all the issues so that p eople can see

categories of issue wh en talking t o stakeh olders. Sucha checklist should b e deliberately repetitive to increasethe chances of people think ing of issues; it is also useful

the overall p icture and get a full sense of the positivesas well as the negatives: it is all too easy for publicconsultation to focus just on th e negatives.

0 ECONOMIC- effects on employment and the local economy- effects on leisure pursuits- effects on marine fisheries and other users of the sea.

0 ENVIRONMENTALQnshore Offshore- Coastal habitats and species - Marine habitats and benthic (seabed) communities- Sediment transport, longshore drift, - Bathyrnetry, sediment transport paths, bedforms, scouring,geomorphology. disturbance due to cable landfall mixing, turbidity. Changes in wave and tidal currentcharacteristics

- Water quality and pollution incidents during installation andmaintenance- Designated areas and proximity of protected areas - Designated areas and proximity of protected areas

- Fish resources, migration patterns, nursery areas- Birds- distribution, disturbance, displacement - Birds- distribution, disturbance, displacement, mortality- Archaeological heritage - Archaeological heritage- Visual impact , andscape and amenity value - Visual impact- Marine mammals- distribution, disturbance, displacement,impacts of noise and vibration- Noise, vibration, lighting - Noise, vibration, lighting and turbine installationSOCIAL ISSUES- effects on employment (other than the purely economic)- effects of environmental changes on local residents (including visual, noise and traffic)- health and safety of the workforce (both at sea and associated land areas), other users of the sea, and localcommunities and members of the public- sea and air navigation.Figure 3: Simple starting (pointfor grouping and structuring issues.l /1 0


19/32

-IA wide range of tools and techniques can be used for

stakeholder consultation, and the purpose here is tointroduce the most common, listed below, in no orderof preference,See Appendix C for further reading on1- different consultation and participation methodologiesThe main point to remember is that the consultationdesigned around the situation, rather than process andtechniques'being decided and applied whether or notthey are appropriate

II

\ \/--I /r- process and the techniques employed need to be//L

5. I InformationProviding informationThe most conventional way to involve stakeholders inany project is simply to give them information about itvia newsletters, exhibitions, site visits, briefing papers,presentations, through advertising on radio ortelevision or through personal letters.While it is essential for people to have timely, accurateand meaningful information about developments, thesemethods suffer from two inherent disadvantages. First,they are one-way: people may be invited to respondto them, but there is no formal structure for people toknow their comments have been heard or acted upon.Second, written information, particularly on technicalissues, assumes that people can and will read it, andwill understand it: moreover, not everyone readsnewspapers or can visit exhibitions.Because of this, information giving should only ever beused in conjunction with other forms of consultation.Where the information s written, it needs to becarefully designed and written with the audience'sexisting level of understanding n mind. All writteninformation should follow these basic rules:0 It should be as brief as possible0 The language should be simple, technical terms

should be explained and jargon avoided0 Graphics, diagrams and maps are more effective

than blocks of text0 Commitments should be spelt out and adhered to0 Include contact addresses and telephone numbers

for further information.A final method of informand a designated contact person.

It s great advantage is that it enables immediate,personal, two-way communication and specificresponses to specific queries. The disadvantage is that itcan be very time-consuming, and it has to be staffed bysomeone who can respond knowledgeably andsensitively to sometimes technically or emotionallycomplex questions.Gathering informationOpinion surveys, interviews, questionnaires and 'focusgroups' are all direct ways to gather information aboutstakeholders' views, and providing they obtain a cross-section of opinion and analyse it properly they can beuseful for collecting a wide range of views using fairlylimited resources of time and money. However, it hasto be said that the response rate to questionnaires andsurveys, and the quality of responses even in focusgroups, can be very disappointing and sometimesbiased.In particular, hese methods only gather information nresponse to the questions asked: they may missopinions or concerns that are not asked about, andgive no opportunity for people to develop their viewsin association with others. Equally, stakeholders may,intentionally or otherwise, give partial or misleadingresponses; they may resent the intrusion on theirprivacy, and they will receive no feedback on theirviews. These limitations mean that, once again, suchmethods should not be used in isolation from moreinteractive methods. It is important to recognise theresource constraints of some stakeholders and thisshould be reflected in the time frames for consultation,with sufficient time available before responses need tobe sent in.5.2 MeetingsMeetings come in all shapes and sizes, so somedifferentiation s needed here. One point to bear inmind when considering any type of meeting s that theycan consume considerable resourcesof time andmoney, particularly for private individuals and smallNGOs: so every meeting, of whatever sort, needs tobe carefully considered and made as productive aspossible.Face-to-face meetingsThese involve a representative of the organisation-doing the consulting, or an independent researcher or

1 7


20/32

sometime s an independ ent facilitator, meetingindividual stakeholders o r groups of stakeholders todiscuss the issues raised by the development.They require the consulter to be well briefed on everyaspect of the project, and to be able t o talk knowledge-ably about everything from i ts technical aspects to itslocal impacts.Th e advantage of such meetings is that they enablestakeholders issues and concerns to be addresseddirectly, and accurate inforrnation to be given in directresponse to specific questions: and in particular theyenable direct comm unication and personal links to beestablished. They are also easy to set up: a telepho necall is usually su fficient to establish the purpose o f themeeting, and wher e and when is most convenient forall involved.The disadvantage is that they consume large amountsof ime and stakeholders do no t get quite the samebenefit that comes from listening to and learning fro mmany different perspectives.Public meetingsPublic meetings can be effective in enabling a wid erange of views to be a ired, questions asked andanswers given, provided they are:0 Prepared thoughtfully, after due contact wi th some

of those likely to attend0 Well-chaired o r facilitated by someone w h o is

ideally independen t and respected0 Well-staffed by enough peop le available to meet

and talk t o participants individually andknowledgeably

0 He ld at a suitable venue at a suitable tim e and0 Not overwhelmed by unmanageable

numbers of people.How eve r, public meetings tend to:0 Inhibit many stakeholders, especially w he n

audiences are large, and for every person w h o goesaway satisfied that they have made their po int, thereare likely to be many others w ho leave frustratedthat they could no t

0 Encourage pre-determined, fixed statements ofposition (because people often only get one chanceto speak) and therefor e

0 Polarise further differences am ong stakeholders0 Discourage interaction am ong stakeh olders, and the

exploration of ideas and solutions to problems.The Kentish Flats development team heldtwo openpublic meetings, attracting audiences respectively of350 and 200. to introduce the project to the localcommunity. The team found this a valuable tool toinitiate dialogue, convey progress and inspire supportfor the project. Although useful for meetingsupporters and addressing specific concerns,opponents of the project did tend to dominatequestion and answer sessions and overall meetingstended to be a poor way to get specific feedback.

Having to prepare and structure the meetingsreally helps focus your approach during theEnvironmental Impact Assessment process. Themeetings themselves allow you t o collect detailsand weigh issues that may not show up in asurvey, commented project manager PeterClibbon.

The team identified leaflets distributed locally andmeetings wi th stakeholder groups such as fishermenand sailors as being more effective at targetinggroups with specific concerns. 700 questionnairesreturned from 35,000 circulated helped establish keyissues for the local community.

5.3 WorkshopsWorksh ops are described variously as pub licparticipation or stakeholder dialogue o r stakeholderengagem ent. Probably the mos t significantcharacteristic of such worksho ps is that the developersand the stakeholders decide together what needs to bediscussed and h o w to d o it.Th e following points need to be considered by thosegoing dow n the workshop route:0 Workshops can be one -off events lasting one o r

two days, o r they can be part of a sequencestretching ove r many months or years

0 In the latter case, worksho p-based processes can beslow, complicated and costly compared wit h ot herforms of consultation, bu t they can also achieveresults that o the r processes cann ot \


21/32

0 Workshops may need contributions from experts,for example on engineering or environmentalmatters, and this can also add to the costs

0 Likewise, industry seminars with technical or otherexperts explaining specific aspects of developmentscan help spread a deeper knowledge of the subjectscovered to a wider public

0 Developers need to be clear what aspects of theproject can change following stakeholderinvolvement. If there are very limited options tochange plans, workshop techniques are probablynot appropriate.

5.4 Liaison groupsThis term could include committees, core group andadvisory panels. Many organisations establish groups ofpeople, both lay and expert, to advise regularly on theissues their stakeholders face throughout the life-timeof the project, such as monitoring programmes. Thesepeople may be drawn, for example, from localcommunities, trade unions, non-governmentorganisations, and industry associations.The advantage of such groups is that ideas can betested and concerns identified before they ever reachthe public domain. These groups can also maintaincommunication with wider groups of stakeholders andoffer their recommendations on potentiallycontroversial issues in order to prevent unnecessaryproblems.Such groups can be extremely useful, and the onlyreason for being cautious about their use is that theytend to rely on a group of people who may, becausethey become insiders, become increasingly divorcedfrom the concerns of ordinary stakeholders. This canbe prevented by ensuring hat other means ofconsultation are also used.5.5 Public exhibitionsA public exhibition can be an extremely effective wayof explaining what a development involves. To makethe most of the opportunities it provides:0 The exhibition needs to be well advertised, easily

It should make available leaflets and informationpacks that visitors can take awayThe materials must be very clear, and in particularthey should show an understandingof prominentlocal landmarks both to help orientation anddemonstrate a real familiarity with the local areaIt must be staffed at all times by people who areavailable to answer every type of question, and whoare also ready to listen and note public concernsProviding opportunities for written feedback canencourage participation by people who would beinhibited by a public meetingTo enhance the effect of an exhibition it is veryuseful if it can be followed by a public meeting orworkshop.It is important to use well-trained staff to explainplans as well as appropriate venues and openingtimes.

A public exhibition held by the Scroby Sandsdevelopment team attracted between 350-400visitors over the two days. The most popularfeatures were the wind farm photomontages and thetwo large videos projectors that showed footage ofinstallation work at Blyth Offshore and the DanishTun0 Knob offshore wind farms. Many visitors tookthe opportunity to read the five-volumeEnvironmental Statement in full detail.

One of the best things about the exhibition wasbeing able to satisfy people who hadenvironmental concerns, particularly about theseals and little terns colony, commented projectmanager Anne-marie Coyle. It was really good tobe able to talk directly to people and put theirminds at rest.

The development team chose to hold a publicexhibition rather than a meeting principally becausethey wanted people to feel at ease and able to readmaterial at their leisure; the majority of visitorsstayed for 40-50 minutes. Another consideration isthat it is far easier to organise an exhibition and italso makes it easier for more people to attend than aone-off meeting.A survey carried out among visitors indicated thatthe majority found the exhibition to be helpful inmaking their minds up about the project.

5.6 The lnternetreached (including bover a number of d he lnternet has yet to come into it s own as aconsultation tool, but as increasing numbers of


22/32

stakeholders have access t o the lnternet either in the irofices or homes or in public places, it is likely that i t spotential will soon be recognised, and i ts use forconsultation will grow.For the mom ent, the most com mon use of thelnternet is through websites, wh ere stakeholders cangain access to much larger amounts o f inform ation thancan be distributed by conventional m eans. Th eproblem is , o f course, that n ot eve ryone has access tothe Internet, and not everyone understands ho w touse it.

Beyond we bsites, stakeholders can participate in on-line conferences, chatrooms and e-mail exchanges, o ra develo per can use specially designed consultationsoftware t o enable stakeholders to participate in 'virtualworkshops' or see their additions or amendmentswo rke d into draft plans and documents. These are n osubstitute for human co ntacts, bu t they have their uses.

In the I2 months following i t s creation in April 200 I ,subsequent to the Crown Estate's announcement ofthe release of I 8 potential seabed sites fordevelopment, the website for the UK offshore windenergy industry (www.offshorewindfarms.co.uk)received a total of almost 40,000 visits, averagingbetween 2.500 to 3,500 each month. All but one ofthe comments received in the online forum weresupportive of the principle of developing offshorewind farms.By far and away the most popular pages were thelocation map of the proposed sites and pictures ofoffshore wind energy developments. Many visitorsalso took the opportunity to ask specific questionsabout the nature of the offshore wind industry orhow t o locate particular pieces of information.Several of the individual projects now have their ownwebsites which catalogue relevant information, frombasic descriptions of the development to the resultsof studies conducted on various environmentalaspects. Many include online forums to ask thedevelopment team questions or generally indicatesupport for the project. Websites are an incrediblyuseful tool for providing a large amount ofinformation, both visual and written, to a largenumber of people; one such site recorded I200 visitsin the f i rs t 2 months following i ts go-live.

5.7 How to choose which techniquesW he n to use more interactive stakeholderconsultation processesThe mo re complicated or controversial the situation,the mo re participative and interactive stakeholderconsultation needs to be . For example, in suchsituations, a wor ksh op is much m ore likely to beproductive than a leaflet dro p. Wh ile doing a leafletdrop to provide information on a simple, uncon tro-versial issue may be fine, to d o it when an issue iscomplex and controversial is a recipe for disaster.It is always wo rt h considering a range of participationtechniques, since wha t may be considered unco ntro-versial by a deve loper may well b e very controversialfor som e stakeholders.As a rule of thumb, the more of the fol lowingcharacteristics any situation has, the further toward s t he'participative' end o f the stakeholder consultationspectrum the process should be :0 Many different stakeholders focusing o n m any

different issues0 Unclear boundaries betw een the issues0 Th e projec t evokes contrasting feelings, values and

perceptions0 Th e factual infor mation curren tly available from

different sources is contradictory o r contested0 Th e various stakeholders have different cultures,

styles, and approaches to the situation0 There is a high degree of public uncertainty around

several issues and h o w they will be resolved0 Relationships am ong stakeholders are non-existent,

poo r or deteriorating0 There is a likelihood of conflict in the future if the

current issues are not properly addressed.W h e n not to use th e more interactive processesThe mo re interactive forms of stakeholder consultationshould not be undertaken lightly. There are situationsin which a leaflet dr op may be less than ideal, but maybe preferable to a mo re participative process thatsubsequently goes w ro ng due to raised expectationsthat can not be m et at this stage of the project. Theseare the situations in which people should think tw iceabout launching a complicated consultation process:


23/32

0 Wh en there is no real com mitm ent to it .Stakeholder participation nvolvesa serious, heavyand sometimes long term commitment of time,energy and money. Starting a process then stoppingwhen time runs out, o r the results areuncomfortable, will cause more mistrust andcynicism than not doing it at all.

0 When all the key decisions have already been made.If all the important decisions have already beenmade and nothing can be changed, it is too late for agenuinely participative process. And trying to dressup a public relations exercise as stakeholderparticipation, or example, will frustratestakeholders, ead to antagonism and mistrust, anddamage the credibility of a proper participativeprocess in the future.

0 W he n there is not enough ti me or resources.Active stakeholder consultation processes requiretime to prepare and run. If people or factorsoutside the developer's control are setting tightdeadlines, it may be better not to start. If a processis rushed or cramped by time constraints, peopleare likely to feel their participation s undervaluedand their contributions not taken seriously.

Avoiding consultation fatigueWhen the stakeholders and the issues have beenidentified, it is worth asking whether stakeholders are

already talking about the issues, or have done so in thepast. It is a good way both of checking the right peopleare involved and all the issues have been noted, andavoiding duplicating past mistakesor current efforts byothers.People can be asked:0 Are people already talking about the issues, and, if

so, how are they doing it? What has happened todate?

0 How well do different stakeholders perceive anycurrent methods of consultation to be working?

0 Are there any other processes of consultationavailable or planned?0 How necessary is it to design a new process specific

to the situation?0 What types of processes have been used to address

similar issues in the past? Why have they worked ornot worked?

The answers here will not only prevent duplication ofexisting efforts, they will also provide some idea ofwhat sort of consultation is needed and how muchtime it will take. Is what is needed a one-off meetingto resolve a specific issue, or does it need a longerconsultation process that enables people to come upwith ideas for mitigating long-term effects?


24/32

The following terms used in th e tex t are defined, in this con text, as follows:Baseline studyBest practiceConsensus building processConsents process

Consultation

Environmental ImpactAssessment (EIA)Facilitated processes(facilitation, facilitator)Focus group

Iterative consultation

Offshore wind energyOnshore wind energySite developmentStakeholder

Stakeholder consultation

Stakeholder dialogueprocessStakeholder participationStatutory consulteesStrategic stakeholders

Community stakeholdersThird party

22

research to establish the basic environmental facts and figures of a particularsitedoing something as we ll as poss iblethe process of securing agreement on e step at a timethe process of seeking and gaining authorisation from the relevant authoritiesfor a developmentthe process of providing people wi th information and listening to theirresponsesthe systematic and transparent process of research and judgment describingthe likely effects of m an-mad e change o n a particular place or e co-systemusing p articular techniques to make meetings as pr odu ctive as possible; afacilitator is an independent person hired to chair or 'facilitate' meetingsa small group o f people convened to answer questions or discuss particularsubjects t o provide a sample o f wider opiniona consultation process that goes through a nu mb er of ofte n re petitive stages toensure a thoro ugh understanding of opinionswin d turbines placed off the coastlinewin d turbines placed on landthe process of turning a potential site for a wind farm into an actual wind farman individual or organisation wit h a stake in som ething, usually in the localeconomy o r environmentthe process of providing stakeholders with information and listening to theirresponsesfacilitated (see above) meetings be twe en stakeholders designed to establishclear communication and mutual understandingintensive involveme nt of stakeholders in every aspect of a projectorganisations w h o must by law be consulted about a developmentstakeholders whos e focus is on th e needs and interests of the region orcoun try as a wh olestakeholders whos e focus is o n the needs and interests of the local comm unityan independent and imp artial person or organisation hired to facilitate m eetingso r act as a neutral med iator b etw ee n stakeholders


25/32

Associated British PortsI50 HolbornLondonECIN 2LRTel: 020 7430 I I77www.abports.co.ukAssociation of Sea FisheriesCommittees24 Wykeham VillageScarboroughN YorksYO I3 9QPTel: 0 I723 863 I69www.nfsa.org.ukBritish Marine IndustriesFederationMeadlake PlaceThorpe Lea RoadEgham, SurreyTW20 8HETel: 0 I784 473 377www.solentforum.hants.org.ukBritish Ports AssociationAfrica House64-78 KingswayLondonWC2B 6AHTel: 020 7430 I I77www.britishports.org.ukBriti sh Sub Aqua ClubTelford's QuayEllesmere PortCheshireL65 4FVTel: 0 I 5 350 6200www.bsac.comBritish Trust for OrnithologyThe NunneryThetfordNorfolkIP24 2PUTel: 0 I842 750 050www.bto.orgBriti sh Wind Energy AssociationRenewable Energy HouseI Aztec RowBerners RoadLondonN I OPWwww.bwea.com andwww.offshorewindfarms.co.ukCentre for AlternativeTechnologyLlwyngwern QuarryMachynllethSY20 9AzTel: 0 I654 705 950Powys

Centre for Environment,Fisheries and AquacultureBurham LaboratoryBurham-on-CrouchEssexCMO 8HATel: 0 I62 I78 7200www.cefas.co ukCivil Aviation Author ityCAA House45-59 KingswayLondon WC2B 6TETel: 020 7453 6545www.caa.co.ukCountryside AgencyJohn Dower HouseCrescent PlaceCheltenhamGloucestershire GL50 3RATel: 01242 521381www.cou nt ryside gov.ukCountryside Council for WalesPlas PenrhosFfordd PenrhosBangorGwyneddLL57 2LQTel: 0 I248 385 500www.ccw.gov.u kDepartment for Environment,Food and Rural AffairsNobel HouseI7 Smith SquareLondon SW IP 3JRTel: 020 7238 6000Fax: 020 7238 659 Iwww.defra.gov.ukCouncil for the Protection ofRural Wales (CPRW)3 I High StreetWelshpool, PowysSY21 7YDTel: 0 I938 552525www.Cprw.0rg.ukDepartment of Trade andindustry Offshore RenewablesConsents Uni tI Victoria StreetLondon SW IH OETTel: 020 72 I5 6 I22www.dti.gov.u kCouncil for the Protection ofRural England (CPRE)Warwick House

TY Gwyn

Tel:

Electricity Association30 MillbankLondonSWI P 4RDTel: 020 7963 5700www.electricity.org.ukEnglish NatureMarit ime TeamNorthminster HousePeterboroughPE1 IUA01733455236Tel: 0 I539 792 800www.english-nature.0rg.ukMarine Consents andEnvironment MnitNobel HouseI7 Smith SquareLondonSWI 3JRTel: 020 7238 587 Iwww.defra.gov.u kFriends of the Earth26-28 Underwood StreetLondonN I 7JQTel: 020 7490 I555www.foe.co.ukGreenpeaceCanonbury VillasLondonN I 2PNTel: 020 7865 8 I0 0www.greenpeace.0rg.ukEnvironment Agency25th Floor, Millbank Tower22-24 MillbankLondonSWI P 4XLTel: 020 7863 8600www.environment-agency,gov.ukjoin t Natu re ConsemationCommitteeMonkstone HouseCity RoadPeterboroughPE1 IJYTel: 0 I733 562626www. ncc.gov.ukJoin t Nautical Archaeology PolicyCommitteeSilver BirchesBashurst HillltchingfieldHorsham,West SussexRH I3 ONYTel: 0 I403 79500 7 2


26/32

24

Health and Safety ExecutiveOffshore Safety DivisionLord Cullan HouseFraser PlaceAberdeen AB25 3UBTel: 0 I224 252500www.hse.gov.ukMarine Conservation Society9 Gloucester RoadRoss on WyeHerefordshireHR9 5BUTel: 0 I989 5660 I7www.mcsuk. orgMarine Life Information Network(MarLIN)The LaboratoryCitadel HillPlymouthPLI 2PBTel: 01752 633336www.marlin.ac.ukMinistry of DefenceDefence EstatesBlakemore DriveSutton ColdfieldWest MidlandsB75 7RLwww.mod. ukNational Association of BoatAngling Clubs6 Norwich PlaceBisbhanBlackpoolFY2 OBDTel: 0 I253 59 I063http://fp.nabac.f9.co.ukNational Federation ofFishermen's OrganisationsNFFO OfficesMarsden RoadFish DocksGrimsbyDN31 3SGTel: 01472 352 141www.nffo,org.ukNational Federationof SeaAnglersLevel 5, Hamlyn HouseMardle WayBuckfastleigh. DevonTel: 0 I364 644 643www.nfsa,org.ukNational Trust36 Queen Anne's GateLondonSWI W ORETel: 020 7222 925 Iwww.nationaltrust.org.uk

Nautical Archaeology SocietyFort Cumberland SlirnbridgeFort Cumberland Road GloucestershireEastney GL2 7BTPortsmouthPO4 9LP www.wwt.or-g.uk

The Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust

Tel: 0 I453 89 I900Royal Commission onEnvironmental PollutionSteel HouseI I Tothill StreetLondonSW IH 9RETel: 020 7273 6635www.rcep.ot-g.uk

UK Hydrographic OfficeAdrn alty WayTauntonSomersetTA1 2DNTel: 0 I823 337900www.hydro.g0V.ukWales Wildlife &Royal Yachting Association Countryside LinkRYA House 27 Pier Street

Romley Road AberystwythHants SY23 2LNSO50 9YA Tel: 0197061 I621Tel: 023 8062 7400 Contactwww.rya.0rg.uk marc.welsh@waleslin ,demon.co.ukRoyal Society for the Protectionof Birds (RSPB)The LodgeSandyBedfordshireSG I9 2DLTel: 0 I767 68055 Iwww.rspb,org.ukThe Crown EstateMarine EstatesI6 Carlton House TerraceLondonSW IY 5AHTel: 020 72 I0 4377www.crownestate.co.ukThe Cruising AssociationCruising Association HouseI Northey StreetLimehouse BasinLondonEl4 8BTTel: 020 7537 2828www.cruising,org.uk

Whale and Dolphin ConservationSociety (WDCS)Alexander Houselames Street WestBathBA1 26sTel: 0 I225 3345 I Iwww.wdcs.orgThe Wildlife TrustsThe KilnWatersideMather RoadNewarkNG24 I WTel 0 I636 6777 I Iwww.wildlifetrusts.orgW FPanda HouseWeyside ParkGodalmingSurreyGU7 IXRTel: 0 I483 426444www.ww .orgThe Environment Council2 I2 High HolbornLondonWCIV7BFTel: 020 7836 2626www.the-environment-council,org.uk

The Ramblers' Association2nd floorCamelford House89 Albert EmbankmentLondonSE1 71WTel: 0207 339 8500www.ramblers.org. uk


27/32

0 30Turbines (1 x developer)0 60 Turbines (2 x developers]

I L4 . /Solway Firth (

Southport4 0

90 Turbines (3x developers]7-3, 13 TeessidehInner Dow sina

d

Copyright Crown Estate, 5th April 200 I .


28/32

Planning and development processDTI Guidance Notes - Offshore Windfarm Consents Process: DT I Offshore Renwables Consents Unit, I Victoria Street,London, SW I H OET 020 72 I 5 6 I2 2Crown Estate procedures and leases. www.crownestate.co.uk/estates/marine/windfarms.shtmlCode of Practice for Seabed Developers. Joint Nautical Archaeology Policy Comm ittee. National Monu ments R ecord,Kemball Drive, Swindon SN2 2 G Z

00

Community consultation and participation

00

Community Planning Handbook: Nick Wates, Earth Scan 2000Citizen Involvement: t? E3eresford and S . Cro ft, Macmillan, London, I993Collaborative Planning: Prof. Patsy Hea ley, Macmillan, Basingstoke, I 997Community Involvement. n Planning and Development: BDO R Ltd., Department of the Environment, Her Majesty'sStationery Office, I994Making Better Decisions- Citizen's Juries:Clare Delap, IPPRParticipation Works! 2 I Techniques of community participation: N e w Economics Foundation (020 7089 2800)Planning for Real: Neighbo urhood Initiatives Foundation- pack, video 0 I952 590777Consensus Building Handbook: L Susskind (ed .) Sage I9 99Creating Involvement: L. Hart , Local Govern ment Management Board, Londo n, I99 4Future Search: M. Weisbord and S. anoff,Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, I99 5 ( or via the N e w Economics Foundation,London 020 7089 2800)Planning Under Pressure: J. Friend and A. Hickling, Heinemann, I9 97Scroby Sands Stakeholder Dialogue: Powergen Renewables

Further information and publications:Best Practice Guidelines for Wind Energy Development: British Wind Energy Association, I 994 (currently being revised).w.wea.comWind Farm Development and Nature Conservation: English Nature , RSPB,WWF, UK, BWEA, 200 I . www.bwea.comGuidelines for Health & Safety in the Wind Energy Industry: BWEA, 2002. www.b wea.co mGuide to the Preparation of Shoreline Management Plans: DEFRA (MAFF 1995) Shoreline M anagem ent Plans: A guide forCoastal Defence AuthoritiesGuide t o Best Practice in Seascape Assessment: Countryside Council for Wales, 200 I , ISBN I393 9025Interim Landscape Assessment Guidance:Scottish Natural Heritage and The Countryside Agency. Due for revisedpublication Spring 200 2Planning for Renewables: Friends of the Earth Scotland, July I 99 7

,/ ,/


29/32

jl !

I

0 ydro Sail Services/Enron Wind

Y

l 10 ME C Wind


30/32

Amec Wind, Bonus Energy bVS, Enron Wind, National Wind Power Ltd, Powergen Renewables Ltd, Renewable EnergySystems Ltd, ScottishPower, Shell International Renewables Ltd, TXU Europe, ABB Zantingh Ltd, AEA TechnologyEnvironment, Aegis Rubber Engineering, 59 Energy (OLM) btd, Babtie Group Lim ited, Bond Pearce Solicitors, Bri tishEnergy plc, Brodies W.S., Solicitors, Clarke Energy Ltd, Conoco Global Power U.K. Ltd, Corus, CUC Marine Projects,D.N.V.Consulting, Dowding L Mills Engineering Services, Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein, Econnect Ltd, EdisonMission Energy Limited, Edmund Nuttall Limited, ELSAM NS, Energiekontor (AG), ENERUMG UK Ltd, EntergyWholesale Operations, Ernst L Young, Force 9 energy Ltd, Fugro Limited, Garrad HassanL Partners Ltd, GREP NS,Walliburton KBW, Wyder Consulting Limited, Hydro Soil Services, Ongenco Ltd, john Brown Hydrocarbons Ltd, JohnMowlem L Company plc, Keeliston Engineering Ltd, Kier Construction Limited, London Power Company, M L H WindPower Ltd, Masons, Mayflower Corporation plc, Met Office, Miller Insurance Group, Morgan Cole, Nabarro Nathanson,Natural Power Consultants Ltd, N E 6 Micon U# Ltd, Nordex U # Ltd, N orther n Electric Generation Ltd, No rton Rose,Nsure Renewables, Offshore Energy Resources Limited, Pirelli Cables Ltd, QinetiQ Ltd, R.D.C. Ltd, RenewableSolutions Ltd, Repower Systems AG, RJ Mcheod (Contractors) Ltd, RoyalL SunAlliance, Schneider Electric, Scottish LSouthern Energy plc, Seacore Ltd, SLP Energy Ltd, SP Dataserve Ltd, Uomen Power Corporation UK Ltd, UriodosBank, Un ited Uti lit ies Green Energy, Vestas - Danish Wind Technology sa/S, Warwick Energy Limited, Wind ProspectLtd, Windelectric Ltd, Windforce Energy Development Ltd, Windjen Power Limited, Wragge L CO, YorkshireWindpower Ltd, Your Energy Ltd, AZSea N S , ABP mer, AEQ Cables Ltd, Agrilek Limited, A irtr ici ty Development Ltd,Allen L Overy, Ambient Energy Ltd, Andaray Engineering Ltd, Anglesey Wind L Energy Ltd, Baywind Energy Co-operative Ltd, Bendalls Engineering, Bomel Limited, Bosch Rexroth Ltd, Brooks Ltd, Compact Orbital Gears, BrownMcFarlane Ltd, Cable Onstallation Management Ltd, Casella Stanger Ltd ,Cambrian Engineering (Cymru) Ltd, CharlesW. Uaylor L Sons Ltd, Chris Blandford Associates, Colle tt Uransport btd, Cornwall Light and Power CO Ltd, CoupeFoundry Ltd, Cumbria Windfarms Ltd, Cwmni Gwynt Ueg Cyf, Dansteel Ltd, DM Energy, DP Energy Ltd, DSB OffshoreLimited, Dulas Ltd, E4environment Limited, Eclipse Energy, EcoGen Ltd, eeegr, East of England Energy Group. EMULtd, Energy for Sustainable Development, Enviros Aspinwall, ESB Power Generation, Renewables, Fairfield Mabey Ltd,Farm Energy Ltd, Global Marine Systems Ltd - Energy Services, GPA Partnership, GreenPower, Walcrow Group Ltd,Wammond Suddards Edge. Heath Lambert Group, Wedley Purvis, WR WallingFord, QmpaxCapital Corporation,lnframan Ltd, IT Power Ltd, Landscape Design Associates, Marlec Engineering CO Ltd, Martineau Johnson, MerseyDocks & Harbour Company, Metoc plc, Nicholas Grimshaw && Partners, Nor th Energy Associates Ltd, OceansEngineering Ltd, Oceantecs Limited, ODE, Offshore Design Engineering Ltd, Orga Suisse S.a.r.1, Osborne Clarke, PMSSLtd. PosFord Haskoning Ltd, Proven Engineering Products Ltd, Renew North, RenGen Ltd, ReSoft Ltd, RMBEngineering Services, RSK Environment Limited, Ruston Wheb, Seabed Scour Control Systems Ltd, StephensonHalliday, Strategic Alliance Services, Thales Geosolutions, The Stewart Group Limited, Theodore Goddard, TitanEnvironmental Surveys Ltd, Titan Maritime (UK) Ltd, TLT Solicitors, TMEnvironmental Power, Toby Manning Limited,unit[e], Vector Instruments, Wavegen, West Coast Energy Ltd, Western Windpower, Wichita Co. Ltd, W indGenerationLtd, WKN Offshore Tech. GmbH, Wrigleys Solicitors, Centre for Economic Renewable Power Delivery, Centre forSustainable Energy, CLRC, Rutherford Apple ton Laboratory, CREST, Herio t-Watt University, Na tional EnergyFoundation, Open University, UMIST, University of Durham, University of the West of England.

E&OE


31/32

,The se computer-generated graphics, produced using highly accurate specialist software , show a 30 turbine windfarm, consisting of three rows of I 0 I .5MW machines. The nearest turbine is 5km from the family on the beach,and the furthest turbine in the configuration is 9km away

This is approximately/3Ox4Okms, the total areaof seabed required tolocate sufficient turbinesto supply 10% of theUK's electricity power

I HORZON

'. . - - - - - - - - - :Aerial view of windfarm configurationshown in photo-montage. The electricily "....produced by this windfarm would besufficient for the a nnua l electricityneeds of 41.000 households.

...,,'..... ,. ,'". ..

'"..:

nWind turbine1.5MWmaximum heiohl

ferryheight:43m anoroxheight: Tower Crossing40-50111 heigh t: 170 m maxim um heigh t:137m aoorox


32/32

British Wind Energy AssociationRenewable Energy H&eI Aztec RowBerners RoadLondon NI OPWinfo@ bwea.com

Best Practice Guidelines - Offshore Wind Energy Development - BWEA - 2002

Documents

Transcript of Best Practice Guidelines - Offshore Wind Energy Development - BWEA - 2002