A game theory perspective on Environmental Assessment: what games are played and what does this tell us about decision making rationality and legitimacy?

Game theory provides a useful theoretical framework to examine the decision process operating in the context of environmental assessment, and to examine the rationality and legitimacy of decision-making subject to Environmental Assessment (EA). The research uses a case study of the Environmental Impact Assessment and Sustainability Appraisal processes undertaken in England. To these are applied an analytical framework, based on the concept of decision windows to identify the decisions to be assessed. The conditions for legitimacy are defined, based on game theory, in relation to the timing of decision information, the behaviour type (competitive, reciprocal, equity) exhibited by the decision maker, and the level of public engagement; as, together, these control the type of rationality which can be brought to bear on the decision. Instrumental rationality is based on self-interest of individuals, whereas deliberative rationality seeks broader consensus and is more likely to underpin legitimate decisions. The results indicate that the Sustainability Appraisal process, conducted at plan level, is better than EIA, conducted at project level, but still fails to provide conditions that facilitate legitimacy. Game theory also suggests that Sustainability Appraisal is likely to deliver ‘least worst’ outcomes rather than best outcomes when the goals of the assessment process are considered; this may explain the propensity of such ‘least worst’ decisions in practice. On the basis of what can be learned from applying this game theory perspective, it is suggested that environmental assessment processes need to be redesigned and better integrated into decision making in order to guarantee the legitimacy of the decisions made

Empowering wind power; On social and institutional conditions affecting the performance of entrepreneurs in the wind power supply market in the Netherlands

This dissertation focuses on wind energy for electricity generation, analysing the evolution of the wind power supply market in the Netherlands. We analysed different kind of wind power entrepreneurs (energy distributors, small private investors, wind cooperatives and new independent wind power producers), their capacity to implement wind energy and the social and institutional conditions that affected their investments over the period 1989-2004. Central in the analyses are the institutional regulatory dimension and the social context as explanatory variables for the emergence and performance of these wind power entrepreneurs. Special attention is given to the liberalisation of the electricity market. The primary social actors for the implementation of wind energy projects in a liberalised market are entrepreneurs willing to invest. Understanding conditions that trigger entrepreneurs to invest in these projects, and understanding conditions that determine the chance of success for entrepreneurs to implement and exploit their projects, is vital for setting up effective policies to stimulate wind electricity generation. The analytical perspective that we used to study investment behaviour of wind power entrepreneurs and their capacity to implement wind energy can be referred to as the ‘new institutional perspective’. Based on this new institutional perspective the concept of implementation capacity has been developed. Implementation capacity indicates the feasibility for wind power entrepreneurs to adopt wind turbines, and enables to explain, comparatively, changing possibilities in time for different types of entrepreneurs. The development of the wind power supply market is divided into three successive market periods: Monopoly powers (1989-1995), Interbellum (1996-1997) and Free market (1998-2002). We conducted case studies on the implementation capacity of the four entrepreneurial groups in each of the three market periods. The case studies led to conclusions about the way in which social and institutional conditions affected the implementation capacity of different types of entrepreneurs in each of these periods. From the analysis it was concluded that no overall implementation capacity exists, and implementation capacities differ for entrepreneurial groups with different entrepreneurial features. The dynamic configuration of institutional and social conditions on different levels of government facilitates some and hinders other types of wind power entrepreneurs, and as a result determines the development and composition of the market. Various parties are dependent on each other in the production of wind energy. At the start of the 1990s the energy distribution companies dominated the market. Later agrarians led the pack and new independent wind power project developers emerged on the scene. According to Agterbosch, in the 1990s government policy focused far too long on large-scale applications by energy companies and ignored the limited motivation of this business group to invest in decentralised and fluctuating assets. The national wind policy also failed to take into account the societal and procedural problems of this business group at the subnational level. The fact that other entrepreneurial groups such as agrarians encountered far fewer problems in realising their projects, did not receive attention at a national level

Socio-political embedding of onshore wind power in the Netherlands and North Rhine-Westphalia

This paper compares the historical socio-political innovation journeys of onshore wind power in North Rhine-Westphalia and the Netherlands, concentrating on the implementation (realisation) of wind energy projects and the market of project development. Attention is drawn to the level of implementation (where struggles between multiple interests and meanings become manifest) and to the ability of entrepreneurs to succesfully plan and develop projects. A historical new-institutionalist approach is adopted, in which actors, networks and their institutional environment are understood as mutually constitutive. We investigate how socio-political embedding has come about - the process through, which a new technology becomes embedded in existing and changing rules and routines of society. A conclusion is that socio-political embedding is crucial to the implementation achievements and market developments. The legitimacy of wind projects is not self-evident. Addressing socio-political embedding contributes to a better understanding of the development of this legitimacy. Not only researchers but also policy makers should address legitimacy as a central issue, not just an afterthought to the development and diffusion of new technologies. A policy and planning strategy that involves the institutionalisation of early participation of relevant stakeholders can enhance the legitimacy of both the process and outcome and contribute to social-political innovation needed to accomplish sustainable innovation journeys

The relative importance of social and institutional conditions in the planning of wind power projects.

Governments around the world try to stimulate the development and use of renewable energy technologies, like wind energy. While wind turbines are increasingly being implemented, however. it lack of social acceptance tit the local level remains an important challenge for developers of wind power plant.,;. This article aims to explore the relative importance of social and institutional conditions and their interdependencies in the operational process of planning wind power schemes. The article not only focuses on how negative local social conditions can frustrate public policy (cf. NIMBY syndrome), but also on how positive local social conditions can compensate for a negative public policy framework. We analyzed the cases of implementing wind power of two actors (the regional energy distributor and small private investors) in the municipality of Zeewolde, the Netherlands. Both cases illustrate that the formal institutional framework (formal rules, procedures and instruments) is neutral in a certain sense. Social conditions - management styles, interests and informal contacts - put meaning in this framework. The way stakeholders deal with the prevailing institutional structure clarifies social acceptance and therewith implementation