IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v132y2023ics0264837723002703.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Drawing the line: Opening up and closing down the siting of a high voltage transmission route in the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • Ruiten, Kyra
  • Pesch, Udo
  • Rodhouse, Toyah
  • Correljé, Aad
  • Spruit, Shannon
  • Tenhaaf, Antje
  • Dijkshoorn, Jochem
  • van den Berg, Susan

Abstract

This paper describes the decision-making process regarding the siting of a high voltage transmission line in the southern part of the Netherlands by TenneT, the Transmission System Operator responsible for the electricity infrastructure. TenneT started this siting process by deploying conventional decision-making procedures, which have the tendency centrally to pre-scope, and select the technical, spatial and societal characteristics of such projects. Following the resistance of activist groups and local authorities, a new siting process was set up based on community engagement (CE) and the upfront involvement of local stakeholders, so to include new frames and perspectives and by reconsidering the workings of standard procedures. With that, TenneT opened up decision-making processes. In our paper, we will identify the practical and institutional tensions and challenges that emerged from these attempts to ‘open up’. The work is based on an ‘inside out’ description of the case: one of the researchers undertook an ethnographic study of the siting process, while the employees of TenneT directly involved in the siting process have been invited as co-authors, so to add details and the reflections of practitioners.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruiten, Kyra & Pesch, Udo & Rodhouse, Toyah & Correljé, Aad & Spruit, Shannon & Tenhaaf, Antje & Dijkshoorn, Jochem & van den Berg, Susan, 2023. "Drawing the line: Opening up and closing down the siting of a high voltage transmission route in the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:132:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723002703
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106804
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723002703
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106804?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ceglarz, Andrzej & Beneking, Andreas & Ellenbeck, Saskia & Battaglini, Antonella, 2017. "Understanding the role of trust in power line development projects: Evidence from two case studies in Norway," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 570-580.
    2. David Ockwell, 2008. "‘Opening up’ policy to reflexive appraisal: a role for Q Methodology? A case study of fire management in Cape York, Australia," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 41(4), pages 263-292, December.
    3. Helen Pallett & Jason Chilvers, 2013. "A Decade of Learning about Publics, Participation, and Climate Change: Institutionalising Reflexivity?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(5), pages 1162-1183, May.
    4. Suškevičs, M. & Eiter, S. & Martinat, S. & Stober, D. & Vollmer, E. & de Boer, C.L. & Buchecker, M., 2019. "Regional variation in public acceptance of wind energy development in Europe: What are the roles of planning procedures and participation?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 311-323.
    5. Mueller, Christoph Emanuel, 2020. "Examining the inter-relationships between procedural fairness, trust in actors, risk expectations, perceived benefits, and attitudes towards power grid expansion projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    6. Ottinger, Gwen & Hargrave, Timothy J. & Hopson, Eric, 2014. "Procedural justice in wind facility siting: Recommendations for state-led siting processes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 662-669.
    7. Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, 2019. "Bad news is bad news: Information effects and citizens’ socio-political acceptance of new technologies of electricity transmission," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 531-545.
    8. Ely, Adrian & Van Zwanenberg, Patrick & Stirling, Andrew, 2014. "Broadening out and opening up technology assessment: Approaches to enhance international development, co-ordination and democratisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 505-518.
    9. Schweizer, Pia-Johanna & Renn, Ortwin & Köck, Wolfgang & Bovet, Jana & Benighaus, Christina & Scheel, Oliver & Schröter, Regina, 2016. "Public participation for infrastructure planning in the context of the German “Energiewende”," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(PB), pages 206-209.
    10. Hölscher, Katharina & Wittmayer, Julia M. & Avelino, Flor & Giezen, Mendel, 2019. "Opening up the transition arena: An analysis of (dis)empowerment of civil society actors in transition management in cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 176-185.
    11. Andrew Stirling, 2010. "From Enlightenment to Enablement: Opening Up Choices for Innovation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: The Innovation for Development Report 2009–2010, chapter 0, pages 199-210, Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Boyle, Evan & Galvin, Martin & Revez, Alexandra & Deane, Aoife & Ó Gallachóir, Brian & Mullally, Gerard, 2022. "Flexibility & structure: Community engagement on climate action & large infrastructure delivery," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Franziska Steinberger & Tobias Minder & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2020. "Efficiency versus Equity in Spatial Siting of Electricity Generation: Citizen Preferences in a Serious Board Game in Switzerland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Guanghui Hou & Tong Chen & Ke Ma & Zhiming Liao & Hongmei Xia & Tianzeng Yao, 2019. "Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-22, March.
    3. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    4. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    5. Schumacher, Kim & Yang, Zhuoxiang, 2018. "The determinants of wind energy growth in the United States: Drivers and barriers to state-level development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-13.
    6. Chris Tennant & Susan Howard & Sally Stares, 2021. "Building the UK vision of a driverless future: A Parliamentary Inquiry case study," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Shan Zhou & Douglas S. Noonan, 2019. "Justice Implications of Clean Energy Policies and Programs in the United States: A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, February.
    8. Frate, Cláudio Albuquerque & Brannstrom, Christian & de Morais, Marcus Vinícius Girão & Caldeira-Pires, Armando de Azevedo, 2019. "Procedural and distributive justice inform subjectivity regarding wind power: A case from Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 185-195.
    9. Xexakis, Georgios & Hansmann, Ralph & Volken, Sandra P. & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2020. "Models on the wrong track: Model-based electricity supply scenarios in Switzerland are not aligned with the perspectives of energy experts and the public," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    10. Mueller, Christoph Emanuel, 2020. "Why do residents participate in high-voltage transmission line planning procedures? Findings from two power grid expansion regions in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    11. Furmankiewicz, Marek & Hewitt, Richard J. & Kazak, Jan K., 2021. "Can rural stakeholders drive the low-carbon transition? Analysis of climate-related activities planned in local development strategies in Poland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    12. de Wildt, T.E. & Chappin, E.J.L. & van de Kaa, G. & Herder, P.M. & van de Poel, I.R., 2019. "Conflicting values in the smart electricity grid a comprehensive overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 184-196.
    13. Pemsl, Diemuth E. & Staver, Charles & Hareau, Guy & Alene, Arega D. & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Kleinwechter, Ulrich & Labarta, Ricardo & Thiele, Graham, 2022. "Prioritizing international agricultural research investments: lessons from a global multi-crop assessment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    14. Scherhaufer, Patrick & Klittich, Philipp & Buzogány, Aron, 2021. "Between illegal protests and legitimate resistance. Civil disobedience against energy infrastructures," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    15. Edoardo Alessio Piana & Fabio Bignucolo & Alberto Donini & Roberto Spezie, 2018. "Maintenance of a High-Voltage Overhead Transmission Line: Sustainability and Noise Impact Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
    16. Lite J. Nartey & Witold J. Henisz & Sinziana Dorobantu, 2023. "Reciprocity in Firm–Stakeholder Dialog: Timeliness, Valence, Richness, and Topicality," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(2), pages 429-451, March.
    17. Daphne Ngar-yin Mah & Darren Man-wai Cheung, 2020. "Conceptualizing Niche–Regime Dynamics of Energy Transitions from a Political Economic Perspective: Insights from Community-Led Urban Solar in Seoul," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-28, June.
    18. Sigurd Hilmo Lundheim & Giuseppe Pellegrini-Masini & Christian A. Klöckner & Stefan Geiss, 2022. "Developing a Theoretical Framework to Explain the Social Acceptability of Wind Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-24, July.
    19. Sonja Ayeb-Karlsson & Dominic Kniveton & Terry Cannon, 2020. "Trapped in the prison of the mind: Notions of climate-induced (im)mobility decision-making and wellbeing from an urban informal settlement in Bangladesh," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-15, December.
    20. Pedersen, Jaap & Weinand, Jann Michael & Syranidou, Chloi & Rehfeldt, Daniel, 2024. "An efficient solver for large-scale onshore wind farm siting including cable routing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(2), pages 616-630.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:132:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723002703. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.