More than deliberation is needed: Potential for agonistic moments in community wind energy planning

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Stefanie Müller, Matthias Buchecker
{"title":"More than deliberation is needed: Potential for agonistic moments in community wind energy planning","authors":"Stefanie Müller, Matthias Buchecker","doi":"10.1177/23996544241278855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although community project planning is widely understood as crucial to equitable wind energy infrastructure planning, involved members of the public nevertheless perceive such participatory interventions as merely pseudo-participatory. Drawing on agonistic planning literature, we argue that this disposition towards tokenism can only be tackled with a (re)politization of community project planning practices. This includes an explicit (re)integration and cultivation of dissent and the potential overthrow of traditionally consensus-oriented formats that follow the deliberative paradigm. For radically political community energy project planning, however, public discourses must be fluid and participants must be open towards dissent, which largely contradicts the typical postures of a deliberative citizen who is supposed to argue in a rational and objective way, using the best arguments to convince others. To examine the feasibility of agonistic approaches for community wind energy planning, we conducted a quantitative discourse analysis on the data set of a large regional survey of an on-going wind energy planning project in Switzerland. We focused on estimating the degree of hegemony of public wind energy discourses and the willingness of residents to engage in participatory settings that can facilitate radically political community project planning (e.g., substantive participation settings). Our results show that for planning individual wind energy projects, the potential for agonistic planning approaches is low, not only because the discourses are already too hegemonic, but also because there is no real willingness to engage in radically political community wind energy project planning. In the context of early, comprehensive, and integrated community planning, however, agonistic approaches could provide the ground for open and innovative participatory planning of renewable energies.","PeriodicalId":48108,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning C-Politics and Space","volume":"389 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Planning C-Politics and Space","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23996544241278855","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although community project planning is widely understood as crucial to equitable wind energy infrastructure planning, involved members of the public nevertheless perceive such participatory interventions as merely pseudo-participatory. Drawing on agonistic planning literature, we argue that this disposition towards tokenism can only be tackled with a (re)politization of community project planning practices. This includes an explicit (re)integration and cultivation of dissent and the potential overthrow of traditionally consensus-oriented formats that follow the deliberative paradigm. For radically political community energy project planning, however, public discourses must be fluid and participants must be open towards dissent, which largely contradicts the typical postures of a deliberative citizen who is supposed to argue in a rational and objective way, using the best arguments to convince others. To examine the feasibility of agonistic approaches for community wind energy planning, we conducted a quantitative discourse analysis on the data set of a large regional survey of an on-going wind energy planning project in Switzerland. We focused on estimating the degree of hegemony of public wind energy discourses and the willingness of residents to engage in participatory settings that can facilitate radically political community project planning (e.g., substantive participation settings). Our results show that for planning individual wind energy projects, the potential for agonistic planning approaches is low, not only because the discourses are already too hegemonic, but also because there is no real willingness to engage in radically political community wind energy project planning. In the context of early, comprehensive, and integrated community planning, however, agonistic approaches could provide the ground for open and innovative participatory planning of renewable energies.
需要的不仅仅是审议:社区风能规划中激动人心时刻的潜力
尽管人们普遍认为社区项目规划对于公平的风能基础设施规划至关重要,但参与其中的公众却认为这种参与性干预措施只是伪参与。根据激动式规划文献,我们认为只有将社区项目规划实践(重新)政治化,才能解决这种象征性倾向。这包括明确(重新)整合和培养不同意见,并有可能推翻遵循审议范式的传统共识导向模式。然而,对于具有根本政治性的社区能源项目规划而言,公共话语必须是流动的,参与者必须对不同意见持开放态度,这在很大程度上与商议式公民的典型姿态相矛盾,商议式公民应该以理性和客观的方式进行论证,用最好的论据说服他人。为了研究社区风能规划中辩论式方法的可行性,我们对瑞士一个正在进行的风能规划项目的大型区域调查数据集进行了定量话语分析。我们重点估算了公共风能话语的霸权程度,以及居民在参与性环境中的意愿,这些环境可以促进激进的政治性社区项目规划(如实质性参与环境)。我们的研究结果表明,就单个风能项目的规划而言,采用激进主义规划方法的可能性很低,这不仅是因为这些话语已经过于霸道,而且还因为居民并不真正愿意参与激进的政治性社区风能项目规划。然而,在早期、全面和综合社区规划的背景下,激辩式方法可以为可再生能源的开放和创新参与式规划提供基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
78
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信