There is currently a considerable emphasis on delivering major renewable energy infrastructure projects. Such projects will have impacts on local communities; some impacts may be perceived as positive but others will be viewed more negatively. Any just regulatory process for considering and permitting such infrastructure will need to heed the concerns that local communities voice. But what counts as a local voice? In this paper it is argued that the regulatory process plays a performative role, constructing what counts as a local voice. Furthermore, this has consequences for how regulatory deliberations proceed and the outcomes of regulatory processes. The empirical basis for this argument is a study of major offshore renewable energy infrastructure in England and Wales and the way that it is regulated through a specific regime – the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) regime established by the Planning Act 2008. Through a detailed study of eight projects that have passed through the regime, the analysis unfolds the way that the voices of local residents, local businesses, local NGOs and local authorities are constructed in the key boundary object of the Examining Authority’s report; it then draws out the implications for the mitigation measures that are negotiated. The research suggests that what counts as a local voice is constrained by how the performative role of the NSIPs regulatory regime differentiates between interests and suggests that new ways of giving voice to local people are required
