Enframing the Viewshed: Deliberative Democracy Experiments in the Wind Energy Age

Macalester College, Saint Paul MN

Investigators

Abstract

This research project, funded by the Science and Society Program, explores the visual impact assessment process for wind energy development. Large scale wind farms are being sited and installed across the USA by state governments and private developers in the rush to mitigate global warming and secure energy independence. Yet, many communities in the United States have raised their voices against the 'aesthetic pollution' caused by this form of renewable energy. In response to claims of 'visual burden', wind developers are now required by state and federal agencies to conduct viewshed analyses to estimate the visual impact of a proposed project. These visualizations simulate what wind turbines may look like against the landscape or seascape. In the course of producing these images, visual analysts must decide which views need protecting and what those views represent to residents and tourists visiting the region. These models become the authoritative simulations that govern public aesthetics. Yet, these images are routinely delegitimated, and even distorted, by citizen groups who argue that wind farms will be vastly more conspicuous than the simulations suggest. The objective of this research is to articulate the stakeholder strategies that help produce social acceptance of wind technologies. Through comparative case study development in the United States, this research project aims to better understand 1) how visual impact is simulated, classified and standardized by experts; and 2) the forms of deliberative decision-making that engage diverse publics in resolving visual conflict and mitigating perceived 'aesthetic pollution'. The research will be performed over three phases. In Phase I, nine case studies representing different geographic regions, developers, and landscape types will be examined through contextual research, phone and e-mail interviews. Based on this initial sample, three case studies will be chosen for in-depth field investigation. Phase II research, focusing on these three cases, will involve long, semi-structured interviews with 10-12 stakeholders at each project site. The goal of these interviews is to understand in detail how deliberative democracy mechanisms, including public hearings and visualization forums, have engaged stakeholders in negotiation and mitigation of visual impact. In Phase III, the case studies will be compared to understand the socio-economic, political and institutional configurations that help produce conditions for aesthetic consensus. In this final stage of research, the research results will be used to produce a community best practices guide for visual impact assessment. The intellectual merit of the project lies in its innovative synthesis of key STS literatures from the fields of deliberative democracy and visualization studies toward addressing civic participation in wind energy debates. There is very little research about the role of visualization in deliberative processes. In addition to expanding this literature, the research will aid practitioners by presenting alternative formats for recording visual impact and engaging stakeholders in deliberating mitigation techniques. The project's broader impacts are based on its aims to move the current wind energy visual impasse toward a more robust, civically engaged, discussion about the value of protecting place in a world of global climate and energy challenges. In addition to academic articles, findings will be posted on an interactive website and presented before relevant citizen groups, agencies, and industry associations. A community toolkit of best practices in visual impact assessment will be made available to interested groups via the project website.