Offshore wind energy – sectoral marine plan: further research for social impact assessment

6. Relevance of findings to draft plan-level SEIA

This analytical chapter synthesises the findings from the desk-based review of the draft plan-level SEIA with feedback from the focus groups reflecting on the following key components:

• How did the focus group participants respond to the predicted impacts of the draft plan-level SEIA and were there any differences in views and reactions depending on local social and economic factors?
• Did participants present any additional areas of socio-economic impact that have not already been covered in the draft plan-level SEIA, probing a wider set of possible impacts?

The first aspects are addressed through the analysis of each draft plan-level SEIA theme as set out in the desk-based review. These components are analysed in conjunction with one another because participants’ responses to the draft plan-level SEIA demonstrated how the predicted impacts could interact with local factors, particularly in terms of house prices and local culture.

Additional areas of socio-economic impacts discussed by participants going beyond those mentioned in the draft plan-level SEIA are covered in the subsequent analysis. These include community benefits, tourism and health.

The following analysis is reflective of participants’ views and experiences of OWF and is not representative of the wider population of Scotland. The findings below should not be generalised without further quantitative research.

Local business/ economy

Participants did not contest the draft plan-level SEIA forecasts regarding the predicted impacts on the local economy. There was recognition of potential high level economic growth impacts, especially for local businesses through fostering a local supply chain and increased spending as a result of in-migration.

However, participants did not comment on the positive and negative predicted GVA impacts despite prompts from the research team. Discourse largely focused on employment impacts instead. This could be a result of participants lack of knowledge and awareness of GVA levels and how the local economy was expected to respond to changes resulting from OWF. Research with business representatives could add value to the assessment of potential local economy impacts and refine the conclusions of the draft plan-level SEIA within this theme.

Employment

The employment projections included in the draft plan-level SEIA were met with scepticism. Participants expressed that the FTE jobs expected as a direct result of OWF were likely an overestimation of reality. They anticipated that the offshore wind industry would not be able to deliver on these estimates. The proportion of employment opportunities delivered in the construction stage compared to operation and management was also scrutinised. Participants anticipated the majority of employment being delivered during short term construction contracts from overseas contractors, while the long-term operation and management roles delivering long-term sustainable employment for local residents would compose the smaller proportion of opportunities. Therefore, participants felt that the employment prospects contained within the draft plan-level SEIA misrepresented and overestimated the benefits of OWF to local residents.

Due to the perception that local residents were likely to be outnumbered by labour sources outside of Scotland during construction, participants discussed the scope for local communities to benefit from new employment opportunities. While the draft plan-level SEIA identify the estimated jobs within each Option Agreement Area, many participants suggested the introduction of a mandatory requirement for local employment as part of any development to ensure that employment opportunities would be available to local residents and prevent work from being outsourced completely by multinational organisations dominating the offshore wind industry in Scotland.

Participants also raised the risk of employment opportunities excluding certain demographic groups that are more likely to be underrepresented in the offshore wind industry and therefore are less likely to benefit, such as women, older workers and low-income groups.

Cost of living

According to the projections in the draft plan-level SEIA, the offshore wind industry could generate a negative cost of living impact as a result of increased income and in-migration. The uptake of high-paid green jobs could increase inflationary pressures within local communities and drive up the cost of living. However, focus group participants counteracted the draft plan-level SEIA and proposed that local OWF developments provided an opportunity to improve the cost of living for local communities through employment and Community Benefit Funds, especially in light of the current cost of living crisis.

The draft plan-level SEIA projected an increase in house prices as a result of OWF. However, this was received with both scepticism and agreement across the five focus groups depending on location. Participants living in coastal mainland Scotland, such as Dundee, were doubtful that increasing house prices would have a significant impact because prices were comparatively low in these areas. However, participants across island communities echoed the draft plan-level SEIA’s concerns regarding competition driving up house prices. Further, these participants proposed that inflating house prices would lead locals to relocate due to the absence of an affordable housing stock, especially younger generations, rather than rely on below standard housing as predicted in the draft plan-level SEIA.

Further to the projected cost of living impacts, focus group discussions specifically identified the potential for offshore wind to lead to a reduction in energy prices for local residents in close proximity to developments. Participants encouraged the government to harness this opportunity to reduce energy bills for affected communities and potentially wider populations, to produce a positive cost of living impact.

Local services

Participants were sceptical of the draft plan-level SEIA’s accuracy in estimating the number of people who could relocate for a job in the offshore wind industry. The majority of focus group discussions disputed the range of 900-22,000 people relocating across Scotland, suggesting this was an overestimation. Despite the researchers reinforcing that these projects were dependent on location – with the draft plan-level SEIA providing separate ranges across the North, North East, East, West and Shetland Islands – participants were doubtful that for example the East of Scotland would experience in-migration totalling 10,000 to 22,000 people as projected. The focus group participants were also interested in where these people were projected to relocate from and the proportion expected to migrate from other Scottish regions compared to in-migration from abroad for work.

Further, participants disputed the draft plan-level SEIA hypothesis that in-migration would catalyse investment into the local area. Participants were doubtful that Scottish ports and habours would have any involvement in the offshore wind industry due to the perception of most infrastructure being imported and constructed by barge. Instead, participants expressed concern that the offshore wind industry could inhibit existing port services, such as cruise terminals.

However, participants were in agreement with the draft plan-level SEIA prediction that local service pressures could be exacerbated by in-migration where services were perceived to be already under pressure. Similar to the draft plan-level SEIA, participant discourse largely focused on the impact to educational (e.g. schools and nurseries) and healthcare services (e.g. dentists and GPs). Although, participants discussed that they did not anticipate locals would relocate as a result. Instead, there was an expectation that service provision should increase in communities whose local services were impacted by the offshore wind industry.

Infrastructure

While the impacts of new infrastructure were limited within the draft plan-level SEIA, the potential for negative impacts of new infrastructure on the landscape were acknowledged by participants. In particular, discussions identified pylons that would carry the generated electricity, by land across the UK, as a major landscape obstruction while cable routes and sub-stations were not commented on. However, it should be noted that terrestrial elements such as electricity transmission and grid connections are beyond the scope of this study and were therefore not part of the focus group discussion, unless brought up by the participants.

More generally, participants expressed that they were not aware of many impacts on infrastructure as a result of OWF. This indicates that the public may want to know more about infrastructure development associated with OWF.

Socio-cultural

Participant discourse on socio-cultural impacts centered on local culture and language, while there was no discussion of the draft plan-level SEIA prediction that total GVA would increase for creative and cultural industries.

There was an agreement with the draft plan-level SEIA projection that local populations actively speaking Gaelic could decrease as a result of in-migration, however this was dependent on location. Participants who were residents of island communities with Gaelic speaking populations agreed with this predicted impact and expressed concern that the cultural identity of their communities could be lost as a result of the offshore wind industry. On the other hand, participants living in mainland Scotland felt that they experience more transient populations and there are no Gaelic-speaking residents, therefore they are less concerned about any cultural changes.

Recreation

The majority of participants expressed disagreement with the draft plan-level SEIA’s projected recreational impacts, with participants stating that activities were taking place too far inshore to experience displacement due to OWF. There was no direct debate of the cost implications to recreational fishing.

Additional socio-economic impacts

The focus group discussions were not limited to the projected impacts within the draft plan-level SEIA. Participants raised a number potential impacts for consideration going beyond those identified in the draft plan-level SEIA and listed above.

Additional to the cost of living impacts outlined in the draft plan-level SEIA, participants acknowledge the potential for distributional impacts through implementing community benefit mechanisms. As set out in the thematic discussion, focus group discourse centred on the use of Community Benefit Funds to increase procedural justice^[9] and acceptance of OWF within affected communities.

Beyond the draft plan-level SEIA, participants acknowledged the potential for tourism impacts as a result of OWF. Some coastal locations across Scotland are reliant on the local tourism industry which led participants to identify avenues that the offshore wind industry could contribute growth to local tourism, as well as inhibit the attraction to coastal areas. These avenues are further elaborated in the preceding thematic discussion summary.

Focus group discussions further indicated the potential for human health impacts as a result of OWF, in particular impacts on mental health. Despite evidence of potenital health impacts being limited in the draft plan-level SEIA and wider literature, participants identified that the presence of OWF could reduce eco-anxiety amongst local residents, especially younger generations. While the visual impacts of OWF could negate the benefits of coastal retreats and Scotland’s naturalness on mental health.