Briefings

Crisis recovery

June 13, 2023

Much is made of the ecosystem of support that now serves our sector. In particular, social enterprise has received sustained, targeted investment from the Scottish Government over many years into a range of initiatives designed to encourage more start ups and growth. Which is all very encouraging and good news for those who can benefit but as everyone knows, life doesn’t always follow an upward, positive trajectory. Sometimes, often in fact, community and voluntary organisations of all shapes and sizes can find themselves in a crisis with no one to turn to. This new recovery service might help.

 

Author: Community Enterprise/SCA/CEiS/DTAS

We’ve had a perfect storm and it’s not over yet. Covid, Brexit, funding constraints and severe cost increases are putting exceptional pressure on the whole of our sector. We know that an increasing number of organisations are facing highly challenging circumstances and may be in need of help.

Difficulties can range from financial viability to governance and organisational dynamics with the board. Scotland already has a renowned and well-supported ecosystem of support but we know that sometimes the right kind of support can be hard to find or access especially when a group is stressed about its future.

To address this, some key partners, (Scottish Community Alliance, Development Trust Association Scotland, CEIS and Community Enterprise) have come together to begin the process of providing that support. We hope others who can help in this endeavour will soon join us.

As a starting point, a new Crisis Recovery button has been added to the social enterprise support map which can be accessed here.This leads to a very quick “request for support” form which will be responded to within 24 hours and a support package put in place.

Crucially this is not a new service or programme. It is a smarter, quicker and more collaborative way to access the ecosystem of support that already exists. Please spread the word to any organisations that you are aware of who might need to access this support.

For further information, please contact Douglas on douglas@communityenterprise.co.uk

Briefings

Try the local route

The summer season for Scotland’s tourism industry is well underway and, as ever, the best known tourist hotspots will be hooching with visitors. But this year, there’s a call for holiday makers to adopt a different approach to their visit. If they could just slow down, take time to get to know the locals and make a connection with the communities they visit, they would be assured of a much richer experience. In fact SCOTO, the community led tourism network, argues that by making the conscious choice to visit communities in this way, it’s a win-win for everyone involved.

 

Author: SCOTO

Find places throughout Scotland to ‘Stay, Eat, Buy, Do, Enjoy’ and receive a real community welcome.

Explore our map of Scotland to discover where you can meet proud and passionate locals and be welcomed into our world.

Scotland is a small but diverse country – which is a huge part of its appeal – and Community Tourism enterprises are popping up all across the map from Unst on Shetland, to Newcastleton on the English border, and from Angus on the east coast to virtually every island on the west coast – and everywhere in between.

To inspire conscious travel to each of these amazing places you can search under four regions of Scotland – and six different types of visitor offer. And do come back again as we are adding new places all the time as our network grows and expands.

Communities across Scotland own and operate a range of tourism services and experience ready for you to enjoy. By making a conscious choice on your travels, any spend you make will have important benefits that are felt across the host community.

SCOTO members are unlike other tourism providers because they are owned and operated by the communities they serve. Every penny spent with our members is reinvested back into local services, generating immediate and long-lasting benefits for that host community.

Community Tourism is delivered by professionals but also invariably engages volunteers who invest their time with a real passion for their local area, making your experience memorable. These enterprises are highly innovative and entrepreneurial in everything they do.

Briefings

By hook or by Crook

Anyone who thinks that taking ownership and then running a community asset is either easy or quick, is someone who hasn’t done it before. In 2006, 400 years after it first opened as a hostelry, the Crook Inn in Tweedsmuir (halfway up A701) closed its doors, amidst plans for demolition and new housing. The Crook Inn had always been the community’s only meeting place for miles around and so a campaign was launched to buy back the building and surrounding land and to reopen it in some form or other. 17 years, later their perseverance is starting to pay off.

 

Author: BBC

The site of one of Scotland’s oldest pubs has opened to the public again after more than 15 years.

The Crook Inn at Tweedsmuir closed in 2006 after more than 400 years of continuous operation.

A community campaign to bring it back into use has seen an old dilapidated steading building turned into a café.

The Wee Crook was open for community and private events but it is now opening to the general public for the first time.

The pub was first licensed in 1604 and ran for more than four centuries before its closure.

There were plans to turn it into accommodation but residents battled to buy the property and the Tweedsmuir Community Company (TCC) agreed a deal to take it over in 2012.

The £600,000 overhaul of the old steading is the first part of a three-phase plan to regenerate the site.

It would see a bunkhouse created to offer accommodation before the final phase to redevelop the Crook Inn itself.

Hazel Mason – who has lived in the little village her whole life – will run the café, which is initially opening on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays.

“Growing up here – it was a lovely place to grow up – but we definitely missed having a social area for people to meet,” she said.

“All members of the community really missed out on having somewhere that they could come and meet friends from afar or even just gather as a community.

“So it is going to be a really valuable space.”

As well as a meeting space for the community, Hazel said people passing on the A701 – which runs from Dumfries to Edinburgh – often pulled up to ask about progress on the project.

The old Crook Inn was once a popular stopping point on that route as it is about halfway between the south of Scotland town and the capital.

“We are right on a main road and we always have people stopping asking when we are next opening,” said Hazel.

“So I think it is going to be a great place to stop by on people’s way to Edinburgh for their lunch or a cup of tea.

“It is just the start of what we plan to do here at the Crook Inn.”

 

Briefings

Climate Confidence

Research published this week by NESTA into voting intentions at the next General Election suggests climate change is way down the list of voter priorities. When asked for their top three, only 12% gave it a mention. And this same apparent ‘indifference’  applies to our third sector. Beyond the environmental NGOs and the growing (but still relatively small) number of climate active communities, many third sector organisations feel at a complete loss to know what to do and so end up leaving it to others. Growing Climate Confidence could be exactly what these groups are looking for.

 

Author: SCVO etal

Growing Climate Confidence

What

Scotland’s third sector told us they need support to understand the climate crisis, and how they can take action- in their own organisations and with wider communities. We support and encourage organisations to take their very first steps in reducing their carbon emissions while helping them to embed sustainability within their work.

Why

The climate emergency affects us all. But as organisations across the third sector try to cope with rising running costs and increasing demand on services, environmental action can too often be pushed down the road. For organisations that focus on social rather than environmental causes, it can be difficult to know where to start and what action will be most proportionate and impactful. As funders and procurement increasingly look for evidence of progress towards net-zero, some organisations are feeling lost.

How

The Growing Climate Confidence website is for third sector organisations in Scotland looking for help to reduce emissions and engage their communities. We know that learning about climate change and net zero can be overwhelming – there’s so much to read, watch and think about. We’ve pulled together resources that we think are interesting, from top tips to policy reports, so they’re all in one place.

The website provides information about what the climate crisis is and actions that voluntary sector organisations can take to tackle it. Organisations can find out how to take action, search for funding, and share what they are doing to inspire others.

The Growing Climate Confidence scorecard helps organisations to assess where they are on their net zero journey and where they can find funding and support to make changes.

 

 

Briefings

Points of contention

The consultation responses for the forthcoming Land Reform in a Net Zero Nation Bill have now been analysed and published. SCA’s own response is here.  Lots of areas of contention to be thrashed out as the Bill works its way through the Parliamentary process. The proposal that large scale landowners might have new legal obligations imposed on them provoked a lot of comment from both sides. Most (although obviously not all) respondents considered the proposed threshold (3,000 hectares) as being far too high. Much debate too over the introduction of a public interest test. Interesting times ahead.  

 

Author: Scottish Government

Full report

Executive Summary

This summary presents headline findings from an analysis of responses to a public consultation on Land Reform in a Net Zero Nation.

The consultation paper set out a number of proposals for inclusion in the Land Reform Bill and also invited respondents to give their views on other ideas and proposals, which may or may not be included in the Bill. It opened on 4 July 2022 and closed on 30 October 2022, asking a total of 51 questions.

In total, 537 responses were received, of which 162 were from groups or organisations and 375 from individual members of the public. Five in-person consultation events were also held across Scotland with a further event online.

Large-scale landholdings: the consultation sought views on three criteria for determining a large-scale holding. Respondents were relatively evenly divided on the criteria, with a small majority (55% of those answering) disagreeing with the use of a fixed threshold of 3,000 hectares. Most respondents who suggested an alternative threshold called for a lower figure, with comments including that the proposed hectarage would affect a relatively small number of landowners and so have limited impact.

Other respondents commented on the general direction of the proposals, with the most-frequently raised concern that there is little or no evidence that land ownership at scale has negative outcomes for communities or the environment.

Respondents were split evenly on a fixed percentage of a data zone or local authority ward(s) and a small majority (57% of those answering) supporting a specified minimum proportion of a permanently inhabited island.

Strengthening the Land Rights and Responsibilities Statement (LRRS): There was support (75% of those answering) for placing a duty on large-scale landowners to comply with the LRRS and its associated protocols. A majority (69% of those answering) also thought this would benefit local communities. However, some respondents argued that there is evidence to suggest that a voluntary, guidance-led approach is working for both landowners and communities.

Compulsory Land Management Plans: A majority (77% of those answering) agreed that there should be a duty on large-scale landowners to publish Management Plans. In terms of how often Management Plans should be published, the most frequent suggestion was every 5 years.

A new public interest test: A majority of respondents (72% of those answering) agreed with the application of a public interest test to transactions involving large-scale landholdings. However, some were of the view that the proposed threshold for large-scale landholdings is too high and would apply to very few land transactions each year. Other respondents saw a range of potential disadvantages associated with public interest test proposals, including the risk of interference with landowner rights.

A majority (63% of those answering) agreed that if a public interest test concluded there was a strong public interest in reducing scale/concentration of ownership, then the conditions placed on the sale of the land could include that the land in question should be split into lots. A slightly larger majority (68% of those answering) agreed that the land should be offered to constituted community bodies in the area. The most commonly raised issue was that lotting has the potential to have an impact on the viability and market value of landholdings.

Receipt of public funding: A majority (79% of those answering) the question, agreed that eligibility requirements for landowners to receive public funding from the Scottish Government for land-based activity should include that all land, regardless of size, must be registered in the Land Register of Scotland. A majority (74% of those answering) agreed that funding should require large-scale landowners being required to demonstrate compliance with the LRRS and having an up-to-date Land Management Plan in place.

Other raised concerns or sought clarity around the scope of the proposals, such as whether they would apply only to central government funds and also potential barriers to registration on the Land Register.

Land Use Tenancy: A majority (71% of those answering) agreed that there should be a Land Use Tenancy to allow people to undertake a range of land management activities. Those supporting the proposed approach frequently pointed to the importance of introducing greater flexibility in the way let land can be used, including a greater focus on activities contributing towards just transition to net zero, climate adaptation, biodiversity recovery and nature restoration, community wealth building and population retention and growth in areas within rural Scotland. Respondents who had disagreed with, or were not sure about, developing a Land Use Tenancy most frequently commented that the lack of detail on the proposal makes it difficult to form an opinion.

Other issues covered: The latter sections of the consultation sought initial views about whether the Scottish Government should explore who should be able to acquire large-scale landholdings in Scotland and other land related reforms. Coverage of these issues, along with a detailed analysis of views on the policy proposals summarised above, is provided in the main report.

 

Briefings

Scotland’s triangle of failure

The unfolding public enquiries into the pandemic will hopefully shed some light on where those eye watering amounts of public money eventually ended up. Or perhaps they won’t. Because even when, to most casual observers, it seems obvious that public money has been misspent, even when criminal behaviour is suspected, the system has a disturbing habit of never quite reaching the point where individuals are ever held to account. Robin McAlpine, writing for the Common Weal, suggests that this springs from a worrying trend in the fundamentals of how government conducts itself.

 

Author: Robin McAlpine, Common Weal

Take a look at a little ‘triangle’ of stories in this week’s Scottish newspapers. At first glance they might not seem connected, but they are. They are because there are things about government in Scotland that don’t make proper sense until you connect them.

The first story is the heroic work by Conor Matchett at the Scotsman who has finally prised a list of registered interests of senior civil servants out of the hands of the Scottish Government (which spent two year trying to block this).

And there are quite a lot of interests. Much of it is in shareholdings in corporations which could be affected by public decisions, some of it is pretty harmless public-good roles they engage in, a generous sprinkling are landlords, rather too many of them seem to have second jobs (the details of which remain redacted), a number are members of the right-wing lobbying organisation the Institute of Directors.

Tracing the extent to which these interests clash with the immediate work of the civil servants concerned requires more time input than I have. But the point isn’t that there is a smoking gun in these revelations, it’s that this is all treated as ‘normal’.

And that is only the conflicts that occur with career civil servants, not those who are brought in on secondment (very often from corporations with vested interests in the policy concerned) or in agencies and quangos. Nor does it include other conflicting interests around what civil servants do after they leave the civil service.

(I was talking to a senior civil servant last week who laughed at me when I said ‘and when person X retired at 65…’, replying ‘oh, civil servants don’t work to 65’. Senior civil servants all take early retirement and many go on to monetise their knowledge in the private sector when they do.)

The second story is about two schools in Edinburgh which are partially closed because, despite being new schools, they have been found to have been built with substandard concrete. Common Weal is part of the Scotland Against Public Private Partnerships coalition and so we collect examples of major failures in public infrastructure which simply should never happen.

In the last couple of weeks along we’ve had these two schools, disasters in a major hospital ventilation system and a new school being built which was, ‘by mistake’, far too small. You probably can’t keep up with the ‘rate of fail’ in Scottish public infrastructure-building. These failures are routine here, but not in other countries.

The third story is about the imminent arrival of the outcome of an inquiry into the Edinburgh trams fiasco, an inquiry for which the word ‘imminent’ seems to have been strange and alien over the course of the two hundred and forty seven years it has been running. (Seriously, even the Jarndyces would consider this inquiry sluggish.)

The most relevant of these stories is that of the leader of Edinburgh City Council telling us that the inquiry is irrelevant now because it’s all in the past. If he was shouting ‘pay no attention to that man behind the curtain‘ it couldn’t be clearer how little he wants you to look at this report.

And that is Scotland’s ‘triangle of failure’. This is how it works. First, everyone involved in the system does well out of the system. They are very well remunerated and have open to them many great opportunities for increasing their wealth, now or in the future. This system is working gangbusters for them.

But the system keeps failing, and it is generally the politicians who answer for failure, not the system’s bureaucrats. So the bureaucrats have a strong incentive to protect the politicians, as we can see from the regularity with which Public Health Scotland had to keep ‘clarifying’ the various bits of data it was issuing in pursuit of the claim that deaths in care homes during Covid weren’t down to the decisions of the government.

And is there a quid pro quo? Sure there is. When it goes wrong, the politicians have a range of tricks and techniques to make sure no-one (including officials) pays a price. A favourite is a public inquiry, a process so laborious and so grindingly slow that by the time it reports no-one cares any more and half of the main players have moved on.

This of course creates a giant moral hazard. Everyone involved knows that if anything goes wrong, a wall of obfuscation and trickery will be put in place to make sure that no-one who was responsible is affected. So why learn lessons?

In fact if you look back now, one of the dominant features of devolution has been the failure to build public infrastructure competently. That’s how devolution started, a 10-fold cost overrun in building the parliament building itself. The legacy has been brand new sports centres that never opened, schools whose walls fall down and hospitals that kill children.

But the company which built the unusable sports centre and refused to participate into the inquiry over what happened (Keir Construction) then got the contract to rebuild the Glasgow School of Art, which burned down (again) seemingly because a sprinkler system that was meant to be fitted wasn’t.

Oxgangs primary (the PFI school where the wall fell down) appointed an architect who makes a substantial part of his income from PFI schemes to carry out an inquiry which was damning but gave the PFI element of the scheme the all clear. No officials resigned and the company which was criticised continues to win government contracts.

The cover-ups over the Death Start (no-one in the NHS calls it the ‘Queen Elizabeth’) continue. This week we have the rather shocking news that the Health Board which oversees the hospital hired private investigators to spy on the widow of one of their victims.

And just in case you’re wondering, 23 years on, absolutely everyone involved in the Holyrood Parliament debacle has progressed rapidly in their careers, despite the litany of errors discovered by Lord Frazer in his inquiry.

No-one ever fails in government in Scotland. It’s like gravity doesn’t work – if you trip over you fall upwards. Built a dreadful school where we needed to hold an inquiry it was so bad? Cool, come and build another. In fact here’s a contract for 17 schools.

You’d think someone, somewhere would be looking at this legacy and saying ‘hold on, we’ve got an agency that is in charge of public infrastructure and it seems continually to oversee disasters so perhaps we should review it’. On the contrary, the Scottish Futures Trust (‘the PFI people’) never, ever pay a price. No-one does.

Well, you do. You pay a price. You have a worse hospital, a worse school and a worse community centre – and anyone who might be in any way responsible will not only suffer no consequence, they will be facilitated in keeping going exactly like they were.

The Auditor General can’t fight this fight alone (though good grief he’s giving it his best shot). And this is most certainly not just public infrastructure. This week it’s the collapse of a Deposit Return Scheme, devised by a network of agencies which created a privatised company paying extremely generous wages overseen by a politician who barely anyone has ever voted for and between the lot of them they couldn’t make it legal before imposing major costs on businesses.

Want to take bets on whether anyone will pay a price for this? Once again, those crying foul at the UK Government are barking up the wrong tree. It is not the UK Government’s job to facilitate the Holyrood administration, it is the Scottish Government’s job to make sure it gets the legal permissions in place before it builds its private recycling empire.

Common Weal has a simple and elegant solution to this. The politicians and the civil servants need to know they’re not immune, that their failures are not theirs to hide, that inquiries are not tools they use to cover things up. Take the whole process out their hands. Create a permanent Citizens’ Assembly made up of ordinary people selected at random and put the power of accountability in their hands and not in the hands of those who are culpable.

And not everyone in the public sector makes these mistakes. There are more enlightened local authorities who eschew the Scottish standard model of infrastructure procurement and do it their own way. They get much better results. The anti-PPP campaign (for which we have full all-party support) proposes that we invert the system, create a centre of excellence in public infrastructure design, design the best school or hospital for the need and only then start putting finance packages together. The ‘finance first’ model is largely behind these failures.

I amn’t asking for tokenistic recriminations, scapegoating or ad hominem attacks. I frankly hate the pitiless, merciless nature of our society just now and everyone deserves a second chance. But it is a second chance, not a permanently uninterrupted first chance. The people who are making these mistakes must feel the breath of accountability on their necks or they have no incentive to change.

And goodness gracious we need change. It was second jobs, schools and trams this week, but next week you will also be able to find another three stories which form the same triangle. If we don’t escape it, things are just going to get worse.

 

Briefings

Jackie Weaver, you have authority

May 30, 2023

Interesting session at the Scottish Parliament’s Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee exploring the contribution of community councils over the 50 years of their existence. Particularly interesting was the appearance of Jackie Weaver of Handforth Parish Council fame. As she pointed out, the crucial difference between our two systems is that Parish and Town Councils have the power to raise their own income by setting local taxes as well as having borrowing powers. The degree of local transparency and accountability for locally raised finance ensures that even small amounts of money are well spent and have high impact.

 

Author: Scottish Parliament

Scottish Parliament’s Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee

 

Jackie Weaver comes in at 9.38 and at various points thereafter

Briefings

Absolute right to buy

Communities are now able to invoke a right to buy land even when the owner doesn’t want to sell. This ‘absolute right to buy’ came into force in 2020 and can be used when a community is able to argue that the purchase is necessary to further the sustainable development of the area. North Queensferry Community Trust argued that the purchase of the Albert Hotel and its restoration as a community hub and pub was vital to the community’s future and judging by the whopping turnout (78%) and even bigger vote in favour (98.7%), so does everyone else.

 

Author: NQCT

An excellent presentation from North Queensferry Community Trust about the campaign to Save the Albert can be viewed here

Briefings

Make the transition community led

The challenge of how to decarbonise our economy is complex enough from a technical standpoint but when it’s resisted by consumers and communities that’s when it really begins to become unstuck. Just witness some of the local reaction to the introduction of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods - a (relatively) benign attempt to get us out of our cars. Decarbonising the energy system is, by comparison, a much greater challenge and so it makes sense to place community benefit at the front and centre of its implementation. Germany seems to have embraced that concept. Why can’t we?

 

Author: Susanti Sarkar and Lynn Liu

RAA-BESENBEK, Germany—A two-hour drive from Hamburg, the small village of Raa-Besenbek is easily spotted from afar, its towering windmills casting long shadows across the grassy terrain. As you get closer, the turbines’ giant blades come into view, slicing through the air and hissing as they slowly turn wind into energy. 

These community-funded turbines and thousands like them are helping Germany weather the energy crisis brought about by a cutoff of natural gas from Russia after the invasion of Ukraine last year. 

Raa-Basenbeck, a community of 600 people in the northern Schleswig-Holstein region, has been sold on wind for years. Last year it warmly welcomed an expansion of its 24-year-old wind operation, opening a new turbine farm in October. Four wind turbines were commissioned in 2022, and together, they produce 50 million kilowatt hours of electricity per year. 

The aim is to speed a national transition to clean energy, enabling Germany to reach its target of meeting 80 percent of its electricity needs with renewable power sources including wind and solar by 2030.

“It’s difficult to convince people otherwise who are very strongly against wind energy,’’ said Johann Koeling, a one-time farmer who with his wife, Maren, was one of the 39 original investors in the village’s first wind farm in 1999. “It’s a lot easier when you live in a small community like this and can all talk about it.”

As an early adopter, Raa-Baebeck serves as a model of sorts for other communities in Germany that are considering taking the plunge, said Kristina Clemens, a spokesperson for the German Wind Energy Association. “It’s very much the idea of an energy democracy where people are in power to build this together.” Some analysts view such wind ventures as a beacon to people in other countries who object to big energy companies’ calling the shots.

With its recently added capacity, Raa-Besenbek now boasts eight turbines, powering up to 16,000 households as the energy flows into a sprawling European grid.

The center-left national government formed after Germany’s 2021 elections has taken significant steps to improve public acceptance of wind farms. Last year it won legislative passage of a revised Renewable Energy Act, which eliminated feed-in tariffs on wind power. The tariffs, which had been in place for 20 years, had provided producers—those who own the land on which a wind farm was built—with a fixed above-market price.

The new law emphasizes a more market-oriented model. Nonetheless, residents who invest in a local wind park are guaranteed a share of its income amounting to 0.2 cents per kilowatt hour for 20 years. Additionally, the majority of taxes on the income now have to be paid to the municipality where the turbines are installed. That means that most of the tax revenue stays in the community, along with the profits going to resident stakeholders. 

“It’s not that an outside company is coming in” and taking the profit, said Hans-Hermann Magens, a former pig farmer who is managing director of Raa-Besenbeck’s wind project. “That changes the attitude toward these wind farms, because the wind turbines are their own—they belong to the people and to the village.”

Polls conducted last year showed that Germany’s four-decade-old renewable energy initiative, known as Energiewende, or “energy transition,” had major support, with more than 85 percent viewing it as important or extremely important. The longtime goal of the effort is to propel the country toward a carbon- and nuclear-free energy system by 2045. 

Germany’s broadening embrace of wind energy has complicated roots. After the Arab oil embargo and oil price shocks of the 1970s, the nation embarked on an ambitious campaign to build nuclear power plants in the 1980s. 

Then skepticism set in. When the Chernobyl power plant exploded in 1986 in Ukraine, then part of the Soviet Union, the Koelings’ daughter was six months old. Radioactive particles borne by the wind traveled as far as Sweden. The Koeligs were afraid to even eat locally grown vegetables, and a distrust of nuclear energy remains potent among many Germans to this day. 

By the time the couple invested in Raa-Baebeck’s wind farm in 1999, they had developed a fierce aversion to nuclear power, while also being eager to turn away from oil and gas to play their part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. “You saw what happened in Chernobyl,” Johann Koelig said. “The cows weren’t allowed to go out and roam because the milk could have been contaminated, and there was a lot of anxiety.” 

When four nuclear power plants were proposed later in the region, violent protests broke out. Magens was among the demonstrators. “I swallowed enough tear gas when I was protesting that it launched me into my interest in renewable energy,” he recalls.

For many, the 2011 disaster at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan proved the defining moment, however: Angela Markel, the trained scientist who was Germany’s chancellor, resolved to phase out nuclear power altogether. On April 15, the country’s last three reactors shut down, officially ending an era of nuclear dependence even as the loss of Russian gas prompts some European neighbors to contemplate adding more nuclear plants today.

When residents of Raa-Baebeck set up their first community wind operation in 1999, participants bought shares for 5,000 Deutsche marks apiece, which would amount to 2,500 euros today. The wind farm was able to produce 13 million kilowatt hours per year, less than a quarter of what the wind park generates today. 

For Farmers, a Second Source of Income

The meadows on which wind turbines are built in Raa-Besenbeck mostly belong to farmers. For families like the Koelings, who have found it increasingly hard to keep up their farm operations amid rising prices for fertilizer, fuel and other basics, wind power is a second source of income. It allows them not only to make ends meet but also shrug off the fear of losing land that has been in their families for generations.

“Oftentimes, farmers would have to close their businesses if it wasn’t for renewables,” Koeling said. Of the village’s 600 residents, 125 now hold shares in the wind park. 

Today, the region of Schleswig-Holstein declares itself an “energy transition trailblazer.” But Magens said he understood the leeriness of people in other parts of Germany about living near a hulking wind farm. “Everyone wants wind energy, but nobody wants a wind turbine in their garden,” he said. “Everybody wants to drive their car, but nobody wants a highway running through their city.” 

Even people who are passionate about reining in climate change may take a “not in my backyard” attitude, fearful of the sound of whirring blades and the shadows cast by the wind turbines, Magens noted.

Michael Ruddat, a research associate at the University of Stuttgart who has researched public participation in climate-friendly behaviors, found that the key elements in local acceptance of a wind park include a fair decision-making process, individual and community benefits, ownership in the venture and attachment to the land. 

In Wind, Germany Ranks No. 3

When it comes to wind power, Germany has been a pathbreaker: Last year, it had the world’s third largest onshore wind capacity, after China and the United States, according to the Global Wind Energy Council, a Brussels-based industry association. Most of Germany’s windmills are in the north, where the wind is stronger, while solar panels are in the relatively sunnier south. 

Today there are around 30,000 wind turbines in Germany generating up to 130 gigawatt hours annually—enough for 43 million households, the German Wind Energy Association reports. Katharina Grave, a spokesperson for the German Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Action, said that proposals for community-owned wind parks are often proving more popular than projects initiated by big companies. “There is an incentive for the communities’’ because the income is funneled back to them, she said.

Last year, the German government secured passage of the Onshore Wind Energy Act, in line with a goal that 2 percent of Germany’s land area be designated for onshore power generation by the end of 2032. After a lull in wind construction in recent years, renewable energy advocates predict that this will lead to a wave of new projects.

“Things were a bit on hold, especially in the field of onshore wind,” said Astrid Dose, deputy managing director of the industry alliance Renewable Energy Hamburg. She predicts a spurt of wind activity as a result of the energy policies introduced since the country’s chancellor, Olaf Scholz, took office in December 2021. 

Yet even with government support, Clemens of the German Wind Energy Association observes,  onshore wind developers face significant local and federal hurdles. Biodiversity experts must be called in to assess the probability of birds and bats’ colliding with the turbine blades. State forestry laws requiring that wind farm owners plant new trees to replace any that have been cut down to make way for turbines must also be taken into account. 

Germany is known for operating one of the world’s most stable electricity grids, but Clemens says it still “needs a lot of work” to adjust to renewable energy generation. More lines need to be built so that wind turbines don’t need to be switched off to avoid overloading the grid on especially windy days in northern Germany, she said. 

Clemens views the extensive permitting process for new wind projects, which currently can take up to five years, as another major barrier. Projects must meet stringent requirements under licensing and building laws and address the concerns of environmental organizations. By contrast, she notes that even some members of Germany’s Green Party rapidly approved floating terminals for processing imported liquefied natural gas in response to the cutoff in natural gas from Russia. The first offshore terminal went online in December.

“It’s not helpful to [just] say, ‘We’ve set aside 2 percent of Germany’s land area for the use of wind energy,’” Clemens said. “Accelerated approval procedures are really important because LNG terminals showed how fast the permit process can be, if everyone wants it.”

Some point out that the German public is more open to wind power than many communities in the United States, where turbines are routinely denounced in Facebook groups and other social media forums as ugly bird-killing machines that can cause health problems,  with the claims ranging from cancer to ear-splitting noise that damages people’s hearing to “turbine sickness.” 

Some experts suggest that Americans could gain a different perspective by adopting an “energy democracy model’’ in which they have the option of taking a financial stake in local wind projects.

“The idea behind these community energy projects is, ‘What if you actually make people gain from these as well, rather than only have an ugly big white pole in your backyard?’” said Mareike Moraal, the Washington, D.C.-based energy and environment program director for the Heinrich-Böll Foundation, a think tank focusing on energy and policy reform in Germany. “What if you give them a stake in how it’s running?”

Frank Goetzke, a professor of urban economics, sustainability and governance at the University of Louisville, notes that Germany’s environmental movement got its start earlier and generally has more clout than its American counterpart. 

Add in the deeper political divide in the U.S., which complicates efforts to gain support for climate action there, he says, and the reasons for hesitation about wind power become clearer. “It’s an identity issue,” Goetzke said. ”In America, there’s an idea that the companies will do the job.  It’s not as community-oriented as Germany.” 

But for people seeking a say in their energy future, in Germany or elsewhere, Moraal says, locally run wind parks like the one in Raa-Besenbeck “are a fantastic answer.”

“Energy doesn’t have to be this source of conflict,” she said.

 

Briefings

The Black Black Carbon

The furore surrounding privatised water companies simultaneously discharging copious amounts of raw sewage into rivers and huge bonuses into their CEO’s bank accounts, will have those who were responsible for keeping Scottish Water in public ownership wondering how they managed it. As we are currently witnessing with the monetising of Scotland’s landscape, natural capital and carbon sequestration, the markets rarely let an opportunity pass them by. Community Land Scotland commissioned writer and academic Alastair McIntosh to do some digging. His final report - The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black Black Carbon - is a long, but very worthwhile read.

 

Author: Alastair McIntosh

Executive summary

Full Paper

Foreword by Ailsa Raeburn, Chair of Community Land Scotland 

Alastair McIntosh has been a leader in the debate on land reform and community ownership, and not just in Scotland, for many decades. His catalysing of the Eigg buyout and Harris quarry campaigns brought huge dividends for those communities who have since gone on to be international bywords for community sustainability, resilience and innovation. Community Land Scotland and our community members are in his debt not only for the manner in which he articulated the change that was possible but for the tireless support he continues to give to local people looking for a different, more empowered and accountable future. 

The genesis of this Paper came about following discussions at the Scottish Universities Insight Institute Conference in March this year and was inspired by Alastair’s open discussions with one of the new so called ‘Green Lairds’ – Highland Rewilding. It was to both Alastair’s and the Highland Rewilding lead, Jeremy Leggett’s credit that these discussions were played out in public. It gave us all the chance to think about some of the issues emerging from the huge rush to carbon and rewilding in the Scottish land market. And the effects this could have in the short and long term on local people and communities.

 It was originally intended just to be a short piece but what soon became clear were the many strands of Scottish public policy impacted by the changes – from community empowerment and wealthbuilding, to rewilding, to the Just Transition to Net Zero and attracting private finance. A much longer researched and evidenced piece has developed, which ranges across all of these issues and asks some extremely important questions about what land is for; who makes the decisions and who benefits; where does and should offsetting sit in our transition to Net Zero and how far should society ‘commoditise’ nature. Are there assets that should belong to everyone in Scotland, not just those rich or powerful enough to have the millions to spend to control them? How much agency do communities living in areas affected by these land ownership changes have over decisions that affect their everyday lives? 

When we seem stuck in the cost of living and energy permacrises and are facing huge challenges around climate change and biodiversity, it is very tempting to focus on the short term. What Alastair does so well in this Paper, is to force us to think about the long term, the future of the generations that follow us and what sort of Scotland, rural Scotland in particular, we want to leave behind. Apart from our people, Scotland’s land is its most important asset. We need to be very careful that the short term ‘carbonanza’ – the rush to monetise Scotland’s precious assets – doesn’t leave its people behind. I hope Alastair’s paper encourages you to think about some of these questions too. 

26 May 2023