UK government commits to onshore wind community engagement guidance

The commitment comes in the government’s recently published response (26 pages / 312 KB) to last year’s consultation on increasing the benefits to be offered to local communities where onshore wind farms are sited. The response outlines the government’s plans to provide tangible benefits for local communities, including potential electricity bill savings.

"The most important action arising from the consultation is the recognition from the government that the concept of a wind farm having to demonstrate ‘community support’ needs to be clarified,” Gary McGovern onshore wind expert at Pinsent Masons said.

This concept, as required by National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (78 pages / 703 KB), is “currently unclear”, the expert said. However, the response includes a commitment from the government to provide guidance on this concept.

The consultation sought views on improvements that could be made to the existing system of community engagement and community benefits. The government is clear that communities hosting onshore wind should directly and tangibly benefit from the development, previously endorsing the Community Benefits Protocol for Onshore Wind in England developed by industry body Renewable UK. This protocol expects developers to offer packages or in-kind benefits of £5,000 per megawatt of installed capacity, per year, for the operational lifetime of the project for the community the wind farm has been developed within.

The current NPPF policy which, uniquely, requires that developers demonstrate their scheme has community support “requires to be clarified and it is welcome that the government has committed to guidance on this aspect. It is important that any forthcoming guidance takes a sensible and pragmatic approach to defining community support, reflecting that the planning system should work in the wider public interest,” McGovern added.

The original consultation considered taking a more strategic approach to community benefit – for example, by aggregating funding from individual projects to a regional pot to deliver more strategic interventions and more impactful benefits. However, this is not to be taken forward and is a “missed opportunity” McGovern said.