Community Benefits from Net Zero Energy Developments: Analysis of responses to the consultation exercise
Report by Craigforth Consultancy and Research, commissioned by the Scottish Government, analysing the responses to the Scottish Government's consultation on Community Benefits from Net Zero Energy Developments.
Introduction
Background
This report presents analysis of responses to the Scottish Government’s public consultation on Community Benefits from Net Zero Energy Developments. Community benefits are additional benefits that developers provide to the community, that sit independently of the planning and consenting system. They provide an opportunity for communities to share in the benefits of the energy resource and can have lasting social and economic impacts. The consultation forms part of a review of the existing Good Practice Principles for Community Benefits from Renewable Energy Developments, and the views expressed will be used to inform a refresh of the current version.
The consultation
The consultation exercise was launched on 19 December 2024 and ran until 11 April 2025. The consultation paper was divided into two parts: Section 1 related to offshore renewable energy developments and Section 2 to onshore net zero energy developments.
In addition to the online consultation, the Scottish Government commissioned the Scottish Community Development Centre (SCDC) to organise two national information webinars, five face-to-face and four online local conversations, and two national online conversations. One hundred and fourteen people attended the webinars and 116 people took part in the local conversations. Those participating in the local conversations included some involved in community benefit schemes; people involved in community activities who are not involved in community benefits; and individual community members. An independent report on findings from the events has been considered as part of this analysis.
Profile of responses
In total 401 responses were received, of which 167 were from groups or organisations and 234 from individual members of the public. Where consent has been given to publish the response, it can be found on the consultation section of Scottish Government’s website.
Respondents were asked to identify whether they were responding as an individual or on behalf of a group or organisation. Group respondents were allocated to one of eight groups by the analysis team and the Scottish Government. A breakdown of the number of responses received by respondent type is set out below, and a full list of group respondents is appended to this report as Annex 1.
| Type of respondent | Number |
|---|---|
| Organisations: | |
| Community council | 34 |
| Consultancy, research or lobbying organisation | 10 |
| Energy developer including membership bodies | 33 |
| Local authority | 17 |
| National advocacy organisation | 18 |
| Place-based community organisation | 37 |
| Public body | 7 |
| Representative or policy organisation | 11 |
| Organisations | 167 |
| Individuals | 234 |
| All respondents | 401 |
Place-based community organisations were the largest group of organisational respondents, followed by community councils and energy developers.
Analysis and reporting
The report presents a question-by-question analysis of answers to the closed questions and further comments at open questions.
Both the proportion of respondents answering closed questions and the number commenting at open questions varied from question to question. To reflect this differing level of response, tables are presented with different baselines, so the total shown in each case is the total number who answered that question.
A small number of the key findings from the SCDC report on the community consultations are presented but alongside the main analysis, primarily in the cross-cutting themes section.
Please note that a number of responses, particularly from organisations, were extensive and included significant and/or technical information or set out detailed recommendations. Although it is not possible to reflect this level of detail and complexity in an analysis of this kind, all responses are available to the relevant policy team within the Scottish Government.
Other points to note about the analysis set out are that:
- Respondents’ views were sometimes very clearly associated with concerns about the impact of existing renewable energy development(s) on their local community and/or the potential proliferation of certain technologies.
- The focus of the consultation exercise is on community benefits. However, the issue of compensation was raised, and sometimes connected to, or conflated with, community benefit payments. The analysis presented in the report focuses on the issue of community benefits, but brief references have been made to payments that may equate to compensation where appropriate.
- There were occasions when the intended meaning of certain words was not always clear. Examples included (as above) whether respondents were always making a distinction with community benefits when they referred to compensation, or whether they saw these things as synonymous. The geography that respondents were referring to when describing ‘regional’ initiatives was another example. Where possible, the analysis team sought to infer the intended meaning based on the context, but if this was not possible, the specific comment was not included in the analysis.
Finally, as with any public consultation exercise, it should be noted that those responding generally have a particular interest in the subject area. Therefore, the views they express cannot necessarily be seen as representative of wider public opinion.