Presentations from: Professor Patrick Devine-Wright Dr Christina Demski Dr Claire Haggett

1. Placing people at the
heart of energy
transitions
Prof Patrick Devine-Wright
SEAI 2022 National Research and Policy
Conference

2. Making an introduction
• Climate mitigation and energy transitions
• Interdisciplinary insights from across the social
sciences and collaboration with stakeholders
• Empirical approach: case studies, mixed
methods
• Leadership in Environmental Social Science
(ACCESS)
Lead author,
IPCC Working
Group 3
Advisor,
Governments of
UK and Ireland
Chair, Devon
Net Zero Task
Force
Board member,
Exeter
Community
Energy
Adjust
Professor,
Trinity College
Dublin

3. Summary – Key Themes
• UK energy transitions and the politics of Net Zero
• Place, net zero and industrial decarbonisation -
IDRIC
• The role of the social sciences in addressing
environmental challenges - ACCESS

4. Net Zero, politics and public
discourse

5. Place and People
• Three pillars of a place-based
approach:
• Ontology – what we understand by
‘reality’ and what this means for
energy transitions
• Place attachment – how we feel
about and connect with particular
places in the world that are
important to us
• Place-making – how we transform
places – practices of un-making
and re-making localities

7. Objectives
• To champion environmental social science through positive
leadership guided by principles of co-production, equality,
diversity and inclusion, and sustainability
• To develop and coordinate a network of interdisciplinary
environmental social scientists across career stages and sectors
• To empower social scientists to flourish in interdisciplinary
contexts alongside other forms of expertise
• To work collaboratively and responsively with decision/policy
makers to turn social science evidence into actionable insights
• To reflexively produce learning outputs (e.g. new tools,
frameworks) shared in multiple formats for visibility, impact
and legacy

8. Thank you
• Project website:
• https://greenfutures.exeter.ac.uk/access/
• Devine-Wright, P. et al. (2022). Placing People at
the Heart of Climate Action. PLOS Climate,
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000035
• Devine-Wright, P. (2022) Decarbonisation of
industrial clusters: A place-based research agenda.
Energy Research and Social Science
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102725

9. Public perceptions and attitudes
towards the energy transition
Dr Christina Demski
Reader, Psychology, University of Bath
Deputy Director of Centre for Climate Change and
Social Transformations (CAST)
SEAI National Energy Research and Policy Conference, September 2022

10. £5 million ESRC investment; Phase 1: 2019-2024;
Director: Prof. L Whitmarsh, MBE
How can we as a society live differently and better to
achieve systemic, deep and rapid emission reductions?
Food/Diet Material consumption
Mobility Heating & cooling
www.cast.ac.uk

11. www.cast.ac.uk

12. • world-class, interdisciplinary research into sustainable future energy
systems.
• Established in 2004; now 20+ institutions
www.ukerc.ac.uk

13. Public engagement with
climate and energy
Deep and rapid emission reductions require
societal wide transformations:
• People are at the heart of those changes
• Importance of early and meaningful public
engagement
DELIVERY DECISION-MAKING
Demski, C. (2021). Net Zero Public Engagement
and Participation. UK Department for Business,
Energy and Industrial Strategy.

14. Rationales for engagement
1. Develop technologies, interventions,
communication and policies that take account of
public values and experiences
2. Foster legitimacy, trust and a sense of collective
action
= strong social mandate & support for radical changes
= successful delivery of carbon reduction targets
Demski, C. (2021). Net Zero Public Engagement
and Participation. Department for Business,
Energy and Industrial Strategy.

15. Public preferences for energy transitions
• Energy transitions are complex and so are public perceptions and
acceptability
• Preferences may shift and change, and evolve over time
• What informs a preference? -> Values and experiences
• Especially important for topics of low-salience, new and emergent
issues, and views that are not yet fully formed
• Formulation of a preference or perception occurs through connecting
new information with existing values and experiences
Demski et al. (2015). Public values for energy system change. Global Environmental Change 34, pp. 59-69.

16. Heating example
Demski et al. (2022). Public preferences for low-carbon lifestyles. CAST briefing 14; www.cast.ac.uk

17. Perceived fairness as important
Distributive justice: Who bears the costs? Who
benefits?
Procedural justice: Transparency; having a voice in
decision-making
Demski et al. (2018). National context is a key determinant of energy security concerns across
Europe. Nature Energy, 3, 882-888
Demski et al. (2015). Public values for energy system change. Global Environmental Change, 34, 59-69.
Importance of justice values and beliefs

18. “It’s called having a good
accountant, isn’t it?”
“They could have 50% profit if
I could afford my bill…And I
know people that are
elderly….[…]and he is sitting
there struggling to get heat”
Importance of justice values and beliefs
Acceptance of costs (on energy bills)
associated with low-carbon energy policies:
Personal financial circumstances
- Income
- Energy bill/costs
- Concerns about cost
Fairness and justice beliefs
- Distributive justice
- Procedural justice
- Trust indicators
Distrust in energy companies (and their profits):
n=3150, nationally representative UK
survey; Evensen et al. (2018)
5 focus group in Wales, Scotland and
England; Becker et al. (2019)

19. Energy security and affordability
% very/extremely worried
European Social Survey 2018

20. Important research areas and policy enablers to support societal
transformation for delivery of Ireland’s energy revolution
1. Understanding public values and experiences and how these relate
to new technologies, policies and innovations; how they evolve over
time
2. Public engagement at multiple levels (and continuous) as key –
including people in decision-making and improving delivery; e.g.
creating policies that are responsive to social values and experiences
Conclusion

21. Thank you
Dr Christina Demski
cd2076@bath.ac.uk
www.cast.ac.uk

22. www.seai.ie
National Energy
Research and Policy
Conference 2022
Societal Transformation

23. www.seai.ie
Dr Claire Haggett
University of Edinburgh
Engaging communities in
offshore wind projects

24. Offshore energy not
‘out of sight, out of mind’
• Siting issues not necessarily removed
offshore
• Structure-less backdrop
• Populations near or using coasts
• Attachment to beaches and coastline
• Cumulative impact
• Onshore substations and cabling

25. Need to work alongside
communities:
• The right thing to do, to achieve
mutually beneficial outcomes
• Forcing things through – creates wider
objections, cynicism, and distrust
• Development done badly affects all
projects; done well has the potential to
benefit all
• Opportunity for better decisions and
outcomes incorporating local
knowledge
Aitken, Haggett, and Rudolph (2016)

26. A Just Transition towards
clean energy…
Aitken, Haggett, and Rudolph (2016)
• Engaging communities
as part of a ‘just
transition’ towards
clean energy
• Striving to achieve
‘energy justice’ in the
development of new
projects
1. Recognising those
affected
2. Fair processes and
procedures
3. Distributing benefits

27. 1) Recognising the
communities for
offshore energy projects
Rudolph, Haggett, and Aitken (2017)

28. Rudolph, Haggett, and Aitken (2017)
Definition of community:
Wide area/region
Understanding of benefit:
Sharing the benefits from
a nation’s natural
resources
Perception of impact:
Positive impact

29. Rudolph, Haggett, and Aitken (2017)
Definition of community:
Narrow and specific
communities of locality
Understanding of benefit:
Good neighhour, CSR,
acknowledging hosting
Perception of impact:
Disammenity or negative
impact; fairness

30. Different community benefit
schemes
Hornsea and Race Bank wind farms Greater Gabbard Offshore Wind Farm Dudgeon Offshore Wind Farm

31. Identifying communities through their
relationship to impact and benefit

32. Principles: Are these (perceived to be) pre-determined? Important to be
clear about what can/’t be achieved
Timing: Should be early and ongoing; upstream or ‘front-loading’ the
engagement processes
Approach: Not top down, but co-production of the knowledge base on
which any plans are built
Access: Widely available, not just reinforcing existing power
relations/objectives – proactively identifying and offering opportunities
Methods: Facilitating engagement and deliberation; also about enabling
inclusivity; and making sure that engagement is appropriate and tailored
to particular groups
Feedback: Ensuring that outcomes and results are clearly communicated –
and how and why they are based on the contributions and deliberations
2) Engaging communities effectively: procedural justice
Haggett, ten Brink, Russell, Roach, Firestone, Dalton, and McCay (2020)

33. Key aspect of process: the importance of feeding back – and making changes
Aim of community engagement:
“provide an opportunity for the relevant local communities to put forward their ideas and
have a role in developing proposals where they can have an influence”
Haggett et al, 2020

34. • Distributional justice and the ‘just transition’
• Often perceptions of a disparity between the global benefits
of wind power and the effect on the local vicinity
3) Distributing benefits fairly

35. Fair distribution of costs and benefits: address existing economic and social inequality
by sharing the benefits of climate action widely, while ensuring that the costs are
distributed on the basis of ability to pay

36. Delivery of benefits: not ‘buying’ support
“…sharing the benefits of climate action widely…”
• Sometimes assumed that benefits will generate greater social
acceptance
• Research is very clear that this is not the case
• This assumes that any changes can be mitigated through monetary
payments, and that there is a ‘price’ for landscape or visual change
• Research very strongly finds that benefits are appropriate when
they are part of a bigger and ongoing commitment from developers
to local communities in an open and ongoing process of discussion
and deliberation
• Fair process that is most important
• Issues of trust, legitimacy and fairness are likely to be paramount in
determining community perceptions of benefit proposals and
governance

37. Range of different sorts of benefits:
• Community funds
• Apprenticeships
• Educational programmes
• Direct investments and funding local facilities
and projects
• Shared ownership
Will vary depending on the scale, siting, and
nature of the project and the location
Rudolph, Haggett, and Aitken (2016)

38. If it’s the right thing to do – and the practical thing to
do – to work alongside communities…
If they’re often in support but turn against an
application because of aspects of it or because of the
processes of developing it...
What can learnt from two decades of academic
research from around the world...?
So where to go from here…?

39. 1) Identify the communities and the
people who matter
Proactive work in local areas
Demonstrate an understanding of
local issues
Capitalise on the heritage of an area –
addressing issues that arise there
Work and effort involved worthwhile
2) Open and ongoing communication
and engagement
Using methods that are appropriate
Utilise local knowledge and experience
Working to develop good relationships

40. 3) Exploring and creating local, direct, tangible, immediate benefits
• As part of ongoing consultation and engagement
• As part of a fair and open and transparent process
• Involving people to create something new
• Finding related activities or projects that require support
• Funding a project with stakeholders who matter
• Building ‘energy communities’...

41. www.seai.ie
For more information please contact:
Dr Claire Haggett
School of Social and Political Science
University of Edinburgh
claire.haggett@ed.ac.uk
Thank You