Climate Change and Planning on the Coast – 13 th Biennial of Towns and Town Planners 2019

1. MortasCiné and the Consultation Problem: a review of social acceptance at the An Spideál Marine and Renewable Energy Demonstration Site Climate Change and Planning on the Coast – 13th Biennial of Towns and Town Planners 2019 Presentation by Sybil Berne, BSc, MRUP, MSc, MIPI, MIEnvSc

2. A Few Words about Me • Planning Consultant – MacCabe Durney Barnes, Dublin, Ireland (@MDBPlanners) • National, International and EU Legal Instruments Relevant to the Development of a Marine Spatial Planning Framework in Ireland – Marine Institute, 2014 • Recommendations for preparing maritime spatial plans in Ireland – EPA, 2016 • Spatial Data and Evidence projects for Marine Spatial Planning – Marine Institute, ongoing

3. Climate Action Plan 2019 2030 decarbonisation ambition including measures for electricity: • Phasing out fossil fuels • Harnessing renewable energy • ‘Target at least 3.5GW of offshore renewable energy of mainly offshore wind […] . This will be delivered […] with a renewed focus on community and citizen participation.’ • Refers to the development of offshore renewables as being plan-led i.e through the National Marine Planning Framework • And to the need for a new planning and consenting system for offshore wind • Three actions relating to offshore renewables

4. Marine Spatial Planning in Ireland Policy • National Marine Planning Framework • Marine Planning Policy Statement 2019 Legislation • Foreshore Acts 1933 • Marine Planning and Development Bill 2019

5. Why go offshore? • Higher wattage production. • Less tangible sense of ownership / property rights (State is the owner). • Theoretically less public opposition. IS THIS TRUE?

6. Case Study Presentation • 2016 application for foreshore lease in An Spideál, Co. Galway. • The applicants: Marine Institute and Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland. • Location: An Spideál, Co. Galway (West coast of Ireland). • Subject of application: • Upgrade of existing facilities at a non-commercial demonstration site (in situ since 2006). • Testing of scaled down MRE prototypes. • One floating turbine (up to 35m high at blade tip) and a wave energy converter rising at max. 5m above sea level.

8. Why An Spideál? • Substantial public backlash. • Concerns regarding ‘lack of transparency’ and ‘impacts on the landscape’.

9. Research Rationale • Qualitative case study approach • Study limitations • Live application (problematic for interviews) • No judgement made on possible outcomes • Research question: why do people object to MRE development? • Objective: identify how forward planning i.e MSP could promote transparency in decision-making

10. What does the Legislation Say? • The Foreshore Acts 1933 • ‘in the public interest’ • Planning and Development Act 2000 • ‘proper planning and sustainable development’ • ‘the interests of the common good’ • Subsidiarity vs. Ministerial prerogative • When a decision is made at the highest possible level: • How can issues of social acceptance and place ownership be addressed, • When the regulatory process does not include provisions for considering them; and • Is not perceived as transparent and fair?

11. Not In My Marine Backyard? • Social acceptance is a key concern for MRE. • Is it NIMBYism? • Perceived precedence of a sector over another • Territoriality • Sense of place • EIA (objectivity and rationality) vs. sense of place (subjectivity and emotion)

12. Local Victimisation and the Greater Good • Public opposition is a public display of attachment to a place (Devine-Wright, 2009) • Landscape: how do you assess it? • Sense of place: what does it mean? • Perception that residents are bullied into accepting something which is beneficial for the ‘common good’ but not for them. • Fairness and equity in decision-making (is the decision fair?) • Procedural and distributional justice (who should win or lose and how?) • Tension between the centre and the periphery (An Spideál vs. Dublin / Ireland; Irish language vs. English / the Community vs. the Nation)

13. The Democracy of Landscape • Role of the Planning and Development Act 2000 as amended • ‘The voter has the last say’ (Plasman, 2008)

14. Should sharing space result in sharing gain? • Community gain programmes • Give opportunities • Clarify the meaning of ‘stakeholder’ • Local pride • Forefront of technological progress • Fitting in with the group

15. What happened in An Spideál? • Public consultation: all statutory requirements and beyond were met. BUT…

16. What happened in An Spideál? • Problem with Blue Growth and Climate Adaptation: Conflict of scales and interests • Who is benefitting? ‘Who is making the money?’, ‘We don’t believe this is a test site. This is a step to bigger things.’ • What is in it for me? ‘MI never offered anything’. • Perceived precedence of a sector of another: ‘The government never talks to people other than developers.’ ‘Ireland Inc. wants to export.’ • Natural justice: ‘There is no transparency.’ ‘Honesty or lack thereof’ ‘Nemo judex in causa sua’. • Information is education BUT BE CAREFUL • ‘The more you talk, the more they understand.’ • ‘Cannot really understand what is being proposed. It is not easy to read, this 300+ pages of multiple reports and appendices and try to assess the impact to the local area.’ • Complexity of the information provided: ‘this is what we are doing’. • Mistake on the height of the turbine: ‘don’t create worries’, ‘no incorrect statements’, ‘don’t scare people’.

17. What happened in An Spideál? • Poorly perceived consultation • Public meetings: ‘the big boys sat at the top table’ ‘big boys talk to the plebs’, ‘they see the community as protestors’, • Delayed documentation in Irish: ‘we speak Irish at home’ • Bearing the cost of transition twice: ‘Why do I pay the PSO levy and also get the turbine?’ • Lack of forward planning: ‘We need to ensure that other projects won’t be prejudiced because they came first.’ • Considerations for land use planning system: • ‘Can’t look at the sea without looking at the land’ • ‘They need to recognise the planning system is a democratic system’

18. Landscape and the understanding of MortasCiné • The natural landscape and the industrial device • ‘Visually intrusive.’ • ‘People don’t go to An Spideál to see turbines’. • A rational disguise to an emotional argument: • ‘People can relate to the landscape the most’. • Sense of place and MortasCiné: ‘Excluding the landscape is side-lining the community’ • Identity: ‘the seascape is the backdrop to life’. • Belonging to the place/group: • ‘We are the community’ • ‘Meitheal (togetherness) should be the principle’ • ‘Developers should seek for the community to get to know them.’

19. Why do people object then? • No forward planning system (yet) • Decision-making is currently perceived as a by-product of conflict of interests • Consultation is perceived as a tick-box exercise • MRE is not perceived as being beneficial locally but rather as an imposition • Better consideration for land use planning system needed • Local identity is not properly considered as part of the process

20. Toward a more inclusive process • Legislative considerations • Community gain programmes • Information IS education: Educate the population and their representatives • Understanding local identity • Community meet developer, developer meet community. • Forget the procedure and concentrate on the process • Work from the bottom-up

22. Thank You / Merci If you want to read the research, please get in touch: sberne@mdb.ie