A public administration perspective on wind power development: decision-making logic of local government officials

ABSTRACT

Onshore wind power has experienced decades of controversies and conflicts between national policies and ambitions for development and local government and community opposition. This discrepancy has spurred extensive studies on economic, socio-cultural and environmental variables of (lack of) social acceptance. To understand controversies surrounding wind power development there is a need to investigate how decision-making is shaped by various factors in local governments affected by wind power. This paper develops a public administration perspective related to key assumptions of social acceptance theory and examines how different factors interact and mutually affect each other in local decision-making logic. We suggest an integrated analytical model that delineates three types of decision-making logic among local government officials: a logic of consequences, a logic of trajectory and a logic of appropriateness. As such we highlight the importance of public administration decision-making as a pivotal component of wind power development. This study is informed by interviews with municipal political and administrative leaders in Norway. The analysis shows that local decision-making logic is shaped by a reciprocation between considerations of socio-economic benefits (consequences), by past procedural experiences with energy development (trajectory) and by linkages to community, place and nature (appropriateness).

KEYWORDS:

• Wind power
• decision-making behaviour
• governance
• local government
• renewable energy
• social acceptance

Introduction

Onshore wind power has been surrounded by substantial controversies and conflict. There has been corresponding scholarly interest in understanding the complex interface of drivers behind local social acceptance and resistance (Ellis, Schneider, & Wüstenhagen, 2023; Fournis & Fortin, 2017; Frate et al., 2019; Horbaty et al., 2012; Wolsink, 2000; Wüstenhagen et al., 2007). Much of this literature falls under the umbrella of social acceptance theory, which has been a dominant perspective within this scholarly field. The main aim of this literature has been to examine what, and how various factors impact community and stakeholder attitudes towards wind power. Most of these studies, however, have studied explanatory factors in isolation from each other (but see for instance Busch & McCormick, 2014; Klok et al., 2023) and have had only limited attention towards local decision-making and governance processes and how these affect wind power development (Dermot, Ingold, Kammermann, & Stadelmann-Steffen, 2017; Vasstrøm & Lysgård, 2021). Important exceptions here are Gulbrandsen et al. (2021) who analysed political steering power in Norwegian licensing procedures, and Eikeland et al. (2023) who studied changes in municipal perceptions of justice and stance on wind power concerning national policies.

In this article, we integrate a public administration perspective to better understand local decision-making logic in wind power development. A public administration (PA) approach posits that public institutions have an independent effect on policy development and outcomes and argues that an understanding of policies thus requires an understanding of government structures and processes (Egeberg & og Trondal, 2018; Olsen, 2018; Olsson, 2020). Translated to the context of wind power development, we argue that understanding local policy outcomes requires an understanding of the decision-making logic of government officials. There are at least two rationales for focusing on this: first, local government officials at the local level may have substantial direct influence by initiating, drafting and adopting policies relating to local wind power development. Second, local government officials may also exert more indirect influence on local communities by facilitating and shaping (initial) processes and debates (Gürtler & Herberg, 2021; Karakislak & Schneider, 2023).

Studies based on social acceptance theory have provided valuable insight into drivers of support and resistance towards wind power and had a strong focus on residents and local stakeholders (Ellis & og Ferraro, 2016; Leiren et al., 2020). Fewer systematic studies address how decision-making logic is shaped by a variety of concerns by local government officials in wind power development projects. Local government officials play a key role as mediators of different considerations and concerns. They must consider different, and often conflicting demands from residents, stakeholders, and central government actors. Additionally, they need to balance potential benefits, such as financial revenues and job creation, against potential drawbacks such as siting impacts on wildlife, landscape and place. Wind power plants may also challenge established municipal identity, existing economic activities and their perceived role in the green transition. The decision-making premises for local government officials are thus highly complex and characterized by dynamic and turbulent surroundings and situations (Ansell & Trondal, 2018; Sovacool et al., 2022).

We argue that to understand energy transition deployment, there is a need to better understand how the decision-making logic of local officials is shaped by a variety of national and local factors. The Norwegian wind power context can shed light on how changes in national wind power policies influence local government decision-making logics. Norwegian wind power policies and development have experienced radical changes since 2019. In 2019, all licensing procedures were halted due to massive public protests, in particular, from local government officials (Sovacool et al., 2022; Vasstrøm & Lysgård, 2021). In 2022, licensing procedures were resumed, but with substantial changes in both procedural and distributional frameworks that increased local government influence and tax revenue of wind power (Vasstrøm & Lysgård, 2024).

To explore local government officials’ decision-making logic, we develop a framework of decision-making logic inspired by institutional theory and insights from the social acceptance literature. The paper thus examines local government acceptance by asking two main questions:

1. What are the main arguments and concerns of local government officials towards wind power development?

2. How can these arguments be understood from a public administration perspective, and what is the relative importance of these decision-making logic?

The first RQ is an empirical assessment of the main arguments analogous to studies of social acceptance literature. The second RQ links these arguments to the three decision-making logic. The article thus makes two main contributions: theoretically, it develops an analytical model that integrates perspectives from social acceptance and institutional theory to address the decision-making logic of local government officials. It thereby responds to the need for a more systematic consideration of public administration in the study of renewable energy (Dermot et al., 2017). Second, it adds to the social acceptance literature by examining decision-making behaviour among local government officials. More specifically, it improves the knowledge of how, and under what circumstances, local authority positions towards wind power development are shaped and maintained by three interrelated decision-making logic.

The following section describes the wind power context of Norway. Thereafter, the theoretical outset and analytical framework are presented, and the data collection is described. The empirical section describes the main arguments (RQ1) and links these to decision-making logic (RQ2). The study concludes with a summary and reflections on implications and the way forward.

Policy context: wind power policies and controversies in Norway

Wind power policies and development in Norway have experienced radical changes since introduced in 1998. Although a somewhat slow start, from 2016 and onwards, windpower development accelerated and by 2020 it accounted for approximately 10 per cent of Norwegian energy production (Vasstrøm & Lysgård, 2021).

Norway has a three-tiered government system with 356 municipalities. Residents elect the mayor and representatives to the municipal council for four years. The administrative directors are civil servants employed on a permanent basis. Norwegian municipalities have a strong local planning authority, a multifaceted role with a strong emphasis on community development, and collaboration between political and administrative leadership (Vasstrøm & Normann, 2019). Wind power licensing procedures have until 2023 been centralized at the state level and the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) (Inderberg et al., 2019). In 2019 large-scale public protests against wind power arose across Norway. This eventually led to a halt in all wind power licensing in 2019. Local government resistance was a key contributor to this, underscoring the vast impacts of local power on national policies (Sovacool et al., 2022; Vasstrøm & Lysgård, 2021).

Norway has a century-long hydropower history ensuring municipal tax revenues, as well as affordable and reliable energy provision. Increasing energy demands for electrification coupled with a growing European energy crisis, have generated an unprecedented spike in energy prices, particularly in southern Norway. Moreover, it is estimated that Norway will have an energy deficit by 2027 (Statnett, 2022).

These changes have led the Norwegian government to accelerate the planning of renewable energy infrastructure, hereunder a renewed plea for increased onshore wind power (OED, 2022). The Norwegian government recently launched two key changes: First, a regulatory framework was introduced giving municipalities de facto decision-making power in planning processes (NOU, 2023). Secondly, the financial framework was adjusted securing the municipalities’ increased financial revenues. This includes the introduction of a ground rent tax with an effective rate of 40 per cent. Tax revenues are estimated at approximately 2.5 billion Norwegian kroner annually and will be distributed equally between central and local government sectors (FIN, 2022).¹ This generates an interesting empirical case for exploring how changes in national policies and energy conditions influence local government decision-making logic.

Wind power development and decision-making behaviour among government officials: three competing logic

Social acceptance theory has laid the groundwork for understanding how attitudes towards wind power development may evolve. There is, however, less consideration of how these assumptions may be more systematically understood in the context of public governance. Institutionalists share the assumption that institutional contexts shape and condition policy preferences – and choices of political actors (decision-making behaviour) (March & Olsen, 1989; Powell & DiMaggio, 2012). They differ, however, in their accounts of how institutions may influence their incumbents. Institutionalism harbours a variety of sub-fields that continue to develop through both specialization and incorporation of new influences (Peters, 2000; Scott, 2001). Hall and Taylor (1996) provide a much-cited distinction between rational-choice institutionalism, historical institutionalism, and sociological institutionalism. These perspectives are specific lenses that provide valuable and complementary insights whereas rational choice institutionalism is based on the premise of strategic calculation and utility-maximizing, the two remaining also emphasize the broader institutional context. Historical institutionalists make the case for the analytical value of institutions’ developmental trajectory (Steinmo, 2008) whereas sociological institutionalists argue that outcomes are a product of interactions of various groups, ideas, interests, and structures (March & Olsen, 1989). Based on these different conceptualizations of agency, we may delineate three types of decision-making logic: we apply March and Olsen’s (1989) distinction between a logic of consequences and a logic of appropriateness as main analytical categories. Regarding the historical institutionalist underpinnings and path-dependency, we additionally introduce a logic of trajectory. It is important to recognize that the logic of consequences and the logic of trajectory stem from the same ontological basis (rational choice) and thus, they should not be perceived as theoretical opposites. However, analytically we emphasize utility-maximizing and experience as mechanisms for decision-making behaviour, and hence we distinguish between these two logics. In sum, these three behavioural logics render an analytical framework that allows us to capture patterns of decision-making of local government officials and relate these to insights from social acceptance theory. Analogous to March and Olsen (1989), we thus argue that, when confronted with controversial decisions, three public officials ask themselves three basic questions corresponding with three decision-making logics.

What is in it for us? (a logic of consequences)

Evolving from the rational-choice core principles of rules and incentives, a logic of consequences involves strategic action base on anticipated outcomes. The main assumption is that actors have fixed preferences and direct their efforts into maximizing their preferences. In other words, actors make rational calculations to achieve outcomes that are aligned with their own, objectives and adjust their behaviour accordingly. Decision-making behavioyr is seen as exogenous. Aligned with rational-choice scholarship, we presume that action may be explained by actors’ anticipation of future outcomes, and that institutions may influence by incentivizing actions and reducing uncertainties. Translating this into a case of wind power development, we would assume that local government officials would express an instrumental view of such projects, seeing them as means to secure desired outcomes such as increased revenues.

This logic connects to several observations made in social acceptance literature. In particular, positive economic aspects may be directly linked to an assumption of rational agency (Leiren et al., 2020; Mulvaney, Woodson, & Prokopy, 2013; Slattery, Johnson, Swofford, & Pasqualetti, 2012; Sovacool & Ratan, 2012). Specifically, economic benefits may include direct compensation through bank payments, or they may arise more indirectly (Kerr et al., 2017; van Der Horst & Vermeylen, 2010) for example through the availability of low-cost energy (Baxter et al., 2013; Brennan, Van Rensburg, & Morris, 2017; Liebe et al., 2017) or by job creation (Bergmann, Hanley, & Wright, 2006). Financial enticements are a typical incentive applied by governments to secure broader support. From a rational choice perspective, we thus may assume that attitudes towards wind power development are influenced by financial benefits for the municipality.

What are our experiences so far? (a logic of trajectory)

We assume that officials also draw on past experiences and formative paths to assess current dilemmas. This assumption is rooted in historical institutionalism that proposes decision-making to be conditioned by institutional history and tradition (Christensen et al., 2007; Steinmo, 2008). The key assumption is that historical choices of institutionalizing procedures and policies will explain subsequent patterns of decision-making behaviour (Pierson, 2004). The focus of this scholarship involves the study of an institution’s developmental trajectory and an inquiry into why, and how, it shapes outcomes. This enables us to identify landmark events or ‘critical junctures’ that influence current events and adaption strategies (Firestone et al., 2012). Historical institutionalism thus has a strong focus on the explanatory value of timing and the sequence of events as an explanatory factor for policy outcomes. It assumes that the sequence of events drives the evolution of constraints and opportunities. In other words, the previous choice persists in influencing current situations. This is also known as path dependency.

In the context of social acceptance theory and wind power development, a historical institutionalist perspective would imply that decision-making behaviour is conditioned by previous policy choices and experiences. We may relate this to ‘fairness’ and ‘procedural justice’ that have been widely debated within social acceptance literature (Firestone et al., 2012; Karakislak & Schneider, 2023; Saglie et al., 2020). We thereby assume that previous experiences and events related to similar matters will guide current attitudes (Frantal, 2015). This can also be related to ‘trust’. We may assume that that previous processes (events) that have been perceived as sincere and trustworthy increase the likelihood of welcoming new processes (Aitken, 2010; Wolsink, 2000). Conversely, we may assume that processes that are perceived as deceptive have the opposite effect. Following Saglie et al. (2020), we may also assume that the local government’s role and experiences with hydropower may represent practices and ‘benchmarks’ that influence current positions on wind power.

Who are we? (a logic of appropriateness)

Actors do not only respond to the hard-wiring of their institutional environment but also consider frames of reference, moral obligations, and normative orientations. This perspective is based on sociological institutionalism that advocates the existence of a logic of appropriateness that prescribes a set of ‘appropriate’ codes of conduct (March & Olsen, 1989). In contrast to the instrumental outlook represented by rational choice institutionalists, this perspective holds that behaviour follows rules of appropriate behaviour for a given role or identity. The key feature of sociological institutionalism is thus the matching of rules and norms to a given situation. Effectively, this implies that institutions tend to impose certain worldviews, expectations, and allegiances on their members (March & Olsen, 1989) that ultimately skew decision-making behaviour according to institutionalized practices of collectivity (‘logic of appropriateness’). It follows that preferences are not fixed but are determined by shifting conditions and circumstances. Values, norms, and identity are key components of sociological institutionalism. Decision-making behaviour is hence a reflection of what actors see as a suitable response given their identity or role. This also suggests that behaviour is endogenously driven based on internalized values and norms.

Social acceptance theory has also identified mechanisms that are analogous to sociological institutionalism. This pertains to arguments with a normative foundation (Batel, 2020; Karakislak & Schneider, 2023). For this study, we particularly draw on identity and place attachment (Sonnberger & Rudat, 2017). Place attachment may be seen as a fundamental pillar of the collective identity and represents an emotional bond between the municipality and their surroundings (Devine-Wright, 2009; Fast & Mabee, 2015). It is thus a key component of local identity. Rural municipalities may display a degree of inherent tensions rooted in the centre–periphery divide (Lipset & Rokkan, 1967). Arguably, this may materialize through resistance towards multinational companies and foreign ownership of energy infrastructure (Firestone & Kempton, 2007; Liebe et al., 2017; Pasqualetti, 2013; Petrova, 2013).

Based on the three decision-making logics outlined above, we suggest an analytical model that integrates assumptions from social acceptance theory and institutional theory. We categorize observations from social acceptance theory that are arguably strongly aligned with the three decision-making logics. In our empirical analysis, we use these categories to structure the arguments made by government officials related to (lack of) social acceptance and tie them to decision-making logics. Furthermore, we consider the relative importance of these arguments (Table 1).

Table 1. Analytical framework: three logics of decision-making.

Decision-making logic	Theoretical underpinning	Mechanisms	Key assumptions institutionalism	Key observations social acceptance theory
Logic of consequences	Rational choice institutionalist	Utility-maximizing	Actors have a fixed set of preferences and behave instrumentally based on systematic foresight and strategic cost-benefit calculation	Direct and indirect economic benefits
Logic of trajectory	Historical institutionalist	Path-dependency	Preferences are shaped by past events and decisions that constrain or shape the next decisions.	Past experiences and decisions
Logic of appropriateness	Sociological institutionalist	Norms and values	Preferences reflect the rules and values of the institution. Behaviour reflects perceived identities and what is deemed ‘appropriate’	Place attachment and ownership

Data and methods

Wind power development in the county of Agder has been among the most controversial in Norway, making these cases highly relevant. The municipalities included in this study are seven smaller inland municipalities in Agder county in Norway with resident numbers ranging from 1000 to 6000. These municipalities have all previously been involved with wind power development projects. Only two municipalities currently have wind power plants, hereunder one of which later declined further development plans. The remaining six municipalities all commenced processes of wind power development, but these were ultimately temporarily blocked in 2019, mainly due to extensive protest movements and local discontent. The question of wind power development, however, persists in all municipalities. The Norwegian government recently also encouraged all of these municipalities to re-consider onshore wind power given the improved contingencies (OED, 2022).

In this study, we conducted 12 semi-structured interviews with political and administrative leadership in seven municipalities in southern Norway (Agder county) that are current, or have been cited as potential, hosts for windpower farms. Additionally, we included one informant who is both a mayor and a member of the ‘Association of Wind Power hosting municipalities’ to compare perspectives from Agder with a more general municipal perspective. This does not necessarily imply that our findings are generalizable but increases the alignment with other similar cases. We draw on official national policy documents related to wind power development from 1998 to 2023, to position our analysis in the development of the national context.

We opted for informants from the political and administrative leadership in the municipalities due to their complementary roles in deciding on – and implementing local policies (Vasstrøm & Normann, 2019). We aimed for a small but experienced group of informants who have several years of experience and involvement with wind power processes. The initial research design was skewed towards political leadership (2/3), which is also reflected in our final selection which consists of three municipal directors and nine elected officials. We do recognize that elected officials versus civil servants in part have different incentives driving their decision-making logic. However, administrative leadership work closely with political leadership and can thus provide valuable observation of political processes. This combination of actors gave a unique opportunity to assess different concerns and arguments, of priorities and interactions within the most affected municipalities in the county of Agder. The analytical focus was on the impersonal arguments, that is, arguments that pertain to the municipality per se, and not arguments that centred on individual gains such as re-election. The latter may admittedly be an ulterior motive in some cases; however, we do not assume that this undermines our main findings that appear to be consistent across both respondents and municipalities (Table 2).

Table 2. Informants³.

Informant	Position	Municipality	Onshore wind power installations
A1	Mayor	A	No
A2	Municipal council member	A
A3	Municipal director	A
B1	Mayor	B	No
B3	Municipal director	B
C1	Mayor	C	Yes
D1	Mayor	D	No
E3	Municipal director	E	No
F1	Mayor	F	No
G1	Mayor	G	No
G2	Municipal council member	G
H1	Mayor/expert	H	Yes

The informants were asked about their experience with previous projects related to wind power and energy infrastructure, as well as their views on the changes and current state of national policies and potential for renewed debates on wind power, in particular, given improved procedural – and financial conditions. A pivotal focus in the interviews where how informants gauged plans for wind power development shortly and, what key arguments they used to support their views. The interviews were conducted from June to October 2022. Each interview lasted between 30 and 60 min. All the interviews were transcribed and analysed through keyword classification and content analysis.

In this study, we apply key factors, namely economic incentives, procedural justice/fairness and finally, place identity and ownership, as indicators of the three decision-making logics. First, a logic of consequences is characterized by a strong focus on material or immaterial benefits following wind power installations. Improved economic incentive structures make up the strongest indicator in this case. Second, a logic of trajectory implies that previous experiences, such as aspects relating to previous processes of, or existing energy infrastructure will have a notable impact on opinions. Indicators rely on references and arguments that build on trust and fairness of previous events. Thirdly, a logic of appropriateness is marked by an emphasis on norms, values, and identities. Strong indicators in this case are attention to municipal values, applying place attachment and ownership and key indicators.

Decision-making logic among local government officials

We start with an account of the main arguments and concerns relating to wind power by local government officials (RQ 1) and then proceed to analysing these arguments in light of the conceptual framework of decision-making logic to assess the relative explanatory value of the arguments (RQ 2).

Main arguments and concerns

Based on our indicators derived from social acceptance theory, we identify three main concerns among the informants: economic compensation, procedural fairness and nature preservation.

First, financial compensation is frequently addressed by all informants. The informants emphasize that financial compensation offered so far, has been insufficient to justify the overall costs, primarily destruction of natural areas through the assembly of turbines and construction of infrastructure. Informants also express that there is a need for viable, long-term solutions that are predictable and transparent. Recent developments at the national level, promising local communities increased revenues and enhanced decision-making powers are thus overall seen as a positive contribution that could have a substantial effect on local attitudes. However, although the informants overall welcome the new tax regime, they are reluctant to infer that this alone will directly affect wind power development within their own municipality. In part, this is due to the conditions of the financial framework itself: it is perceived as overly complex due to different stipulations and distribution mechanisms spanning different actors at different levels of governance. This makes it challenging to recognize de facto outcomes for the municipalities. Nonetheless, there is an agreement that a viable financial framework is a prerequisite for wind power development. Specifically, the informants confirm that regular bank payments are the strongest incentive (compared to more indirect financial benefits). Although positive externalities such as job creation are seen as an advantage, these are of relatively lesser importance. This is also the case for other more indirect financial compensation measures, such as the availability of low-cost electricity.

Second, all informants describe the processes of wind power development as unpredictable and at the mercy of changing technical, regulatory, and procedural arrangements. Because of lengthy licensing processes, conditions have often changed during the proceedings resulting in different technical deployment measures (high and placement of turbines) than what was initially agreed upon. This is described as being a fundamental challenge of unpredictability for municipal planning and decision-making, and that jeopardizes community trust and political legitimacy. Alhough developers are partly blamed for this, several interviewees also highlight the inadequacy of the central government to provide clear regulatory and procedural frameworks for wind power development.

One can only be surprised by the fact that the central government chooses to unleash wind power onto the free market without any kind of [framework for] governing, participation or ownership. (Informant B3)

Moreover, based on the interviewees’ past experiences with these actors there is also scepticism towards windpower developers (private market actors). Previous processes may often leave a lasting impression that, to a large extent, contributes to guiding current attitudes. This is evident if previous processes have been perceived as inadequate or even deceitful. More specifically, one issue that is often raised by our interviewees is developers’ tendency to bypass the municipal leadership at the initial phases, dealing directly with landowners. This bypassing of the formal authorities is described as a catalyst for subsequent turmoil within the local communities. Because the contracts have been kept confidential, little has been known about the content and financial compensation that was agreed on. This resulted in widespread speculation and rumours among residents. The secrecy also led to increased conflict within the local communities, such as conflicts between landowners that had been given different financial conditions, or conflicts between landowners and/or other residents concerning the establishment of wind power plants. This significantly affected municipal leadership, in particular, because these communities are relatively small, and many individuals questioned the municipal role in the process. Additionally, there appears to be a common understanding among the interviewees that, although there does not exist a legal requirement for the early involvement of municipalities, there does exist a moral obligation to do so. This indirectly also suggests proper recognition of the role and implications for the municipality as a whole, rather than treating this issue as more of a bilateral and isolated matter between landowner and developer. Several informants imply that these experiences suggest a lack of understanding of local context and customs.

[Windpower] is a matter of national concern […] It is similar to hydropower, but hydropower has been beneficial to the municipalities. It has been the opposite with windpower […] If you are giving up your natural resources, then you have to have some financial benefits, and you have to have some say. That is not something we have experienced. Instead, there has been a direct line of communication between private actors and landowners. That is not the Norwegian way to do things – it is not the Norwegian model [of transparency and participation]. (Informant A3)

We may infer that these processes illustrate a clash of a marked-oriented logic with a strong emphasis on profit and efficiency, on the one hand, and a public-governance logic marked by expectations of transparency and stakeholder involvement on the other hand. This is arguably caused by the lack of a clear governance framework specifying roles and procedures at the local level (Inderberg et al., 2019; Vasstrøm & Lysgård, 2021). The outcome has been considerable uncertainty, and even mistrust, towards actors (developers and central government), processes and long-term outcomes for the municipalities. Hence, current prospects are marked by ambiguity and hesitation, which are reflected also in reluctance towards newly launched financial incentives discussed above.

Echoing observations were made by Saglie et al. (2020), another notable feature is the effect of hydropower. Overall, being publicly owned and securing significant income, hydropower is seen as the benchmark for wind power. There is a general understanding among the interviewees that these two energy sources have significant similarities in common, yet regulatory and financial frameworks of hydropower are seen as notably more profitable for the local community. All of the informants draw heavily on experiences with hydropower, and there is a clear expectation that wind power development projects should be anchored in similar structures and benefits. In addition, hydropower installations are often factored in when emphasizing the total burden. The data suggest that municipalities that already host wind power installations (two of seven municipalities in Agder), and, in particular, more comprehensive hydropower installations (in at least two of the municipalities), are less likely to entertain the idea of additional wind power projects. The main arguments emphasize the need for a more holistic approach, considering the accumulated burden that these municipalities are left with.

We have already given up extensive areas [for renewable energy infrastructure], this amounts to a significant invasion of our natural habitat […] We have to start considering the bigger picture and look at the effect all of these installations and adjacent infrastructure as a whole […] We need a more holistic approach, rather than seeing this as several decoupled initiatives as we currently tend to do. (Informant C1)

This also highlights the understanding of energy planning and development to be considered along with a broader societal and environmental development perspective of the municipality as a whole.

Third, the municipalities are small, rural communities known for large areas of uncultivated landscapes and natural sites. This has been a prime asset and also been a pivotal selling point for tourism and recreational economies, as well as attractive living conditions related to outdoor life and hunting. Correspondingly, the informants express repeated concern about the conservation of nature. As shown in previous studies (Devine-Wright, 2009; Fast & Mabee, 2015), not only do wind turbines represent the intrusion of natural habit, but also raise questions about the fundamental identity of the municipality. This observation is particularly prominent in municipalities in which the planned – or accumulated – projects are relatively comprehensive. This aligns well with previous findings that point to the effect of a saturation point (Leiren et al., 2020) and is also reflected in similar observations relating to the total scope of the project.

We oppose wind power mainly due to the comprehensive invasion of natural sites. The amount of projected wind turbines in combination with other infrastructure will ultimately signify an entire industrial complex. (Informant A1)

Added to this comes the questions of ownership and national ownership in particular. Media reports² on foreign ownership with links to tax havens and subsequent exportation of millions in revenues have intensified levels of mistrust towards wind power developers. This ties to the overall understanding of procedural and distributional justice and even more so, to perceptions of values, norms, and local identities. The informants also consistently express that a bigger proportion of the value created from windpower development should remain within national borders, preferably local ones. This can be related to the idea of local autonomy and resource sovereignty (Saglie et al., 2020). In other words, there is overall discontent with the systematic export of natural resources by foreign companies. The respondents express concern about the export of value creation stemming from Norwegian natural resources. Also, some point out that foreign investors often have less knowledge about local context and customs, creating unnecessary misunderstandings and conflicts.

Shaping decision-making logic in local governments

Our research indicates that there is a logic of consequences underpinning wind power decision-making. The point of departure for wind power development is the question of what is in it for us? Reflecting the municipal role as a public service provider, increased revenue would improve financial clout benefitting the inhabitants. This is an important concern to all municipalities. We may infer that this is a fundamental principle, and that wind power development in general thus hinges on financial arrangements that are perceived as relatively fair and beneficial to the municipalities (Leiren et al., 2020). This can be understood as a ‘surface’ condition, meaning that this represents an initial requirement that needs to be in place to even open a discussion on wind power development in the municipality. However, the effect of financial compensation can be contested (Kerr et al., 2017) and understood as a persuasion of undesired development (Batel, 2020). Despite a prolonged call for improving financial frameworks and securing municipalities more financial compensations, we do not observe strong effects of the financial distribution scheme that has been established as a response to these calls. Some interviewees express cautious optimism that this may contribute to more social acceptance over time, however, there is a general scepticism towards the effects of financial enticements alone. This may partly be ascribed to the complexity and subsequent lack of clarity concerning de facto income. Financial benefits are thus only part of the equation and need to be understood in light of both a logic of appropriateness and a logic of trajectory.

Broader ideological principles underpinning the wind power debate (a logic of appropriateness) are linked to local identity and place perceptions. Local identities and values are emphasized as important aspects in potential wind power considerations. These appear to specifically build on their understandings of being smaller communities with extensive areas of untouched nature and outdoor life traditions. This appears to be the case for municipalities with a political platform that is strongly anchored in resistance towards wind power. Substantial wind power development is seen as the industrialization of traditional recreational landscapes and practices. Such changes can generate conflict with existing perceptions of place identity and values.

Finally, these fundamental values and identities have been reinforced by past encounters with wind power development (logic of trajectory) that have highlighted principled and pragmatic grounds for questioning wind power development within own municipality. The principled dimension concerns transparency and participation in development processes, and lack of procedural justice (Firestone et al., 2012), as also discussed by Eikeland et al. (2023). Previous experiences of mistrust with both developers and national authorities thus influence current grounds for decision-making (Aitken, 2010). Furthermore, decision-making logic is affected by an antagonistic view of foreign ownership and exportation of what is perceived as local – or national – values and rights. These concerns relate to how aspects of distributional justice influence local authorities’ perception of wind power (Frate et al., 2019). We observe how these factors have led municipalities to rally around their core values. For example, perceived secrecy surrounding ownership and business models, including foreign profit and links to tax havens, are depicted as a stark contrast to ideas of transparency, sovereignty and local (national) ownership to process and outcome. In a similar vein, procedural ‘injustices’ such as lack of municipal inclusion in development processes, have highlighted the importance of certain core principles such as predictability, participation, and accountability. This mismatch between municipal expectations and the modus operandi of private actors and national authorities has made it difficult to find sufficient common ground, and , it has amplified existing cleavages and tensions. The pragmatic dimension here is linked to systematic comparisons with hydropower. Perceptions of the historic socio-economic value creation from hydropower development and the ‘Norwegian model’ of local energy sovereignty generate a critical reflection of current wind power development premises. These dimensions illustrate how a variety of historical premises and decisions may create lock-in effects that influence future avenues and choices. We observe such comparisons along all aspects – from ownership and financial compensation to siting and processes.

Conclusions

In this study, we examined Norwegian municipalities’ response to improved regulatory and financial frameworks designed to ensure more municipal autonomy and revenues, in a policy context with increased national energy demands. Responding to calls for more systematic attention towards public decision-makers, we suggested an integrated framework consisting of social acceptance- and institutional theory. Building on March and Olsen (1989), we argued that attitudes towards wind power development are guided by three fundamental questions: (1) What is in it for us? (2) What are our past experiences? (3) Who are we? Correspondingly, our analytical framework was designed to unveil the main driving forces behind the decision-making logic of local government officials.

The study suggests that a logic of consequences (what is in it for me?) in terms of economic outcomes, is a prerequisite, and appears to be particularly enticing in municipalities with less financial discretion. The effect of financial enticements is, however, conditioned by a logic of trajectory and a logic of appropriateness. The former is expressed through the significance of hydropower both as a point of reference, as an attestation to municipal dedication to the green transition and finally, it is also an important factor when considering the total burden of renewable energy infrastructure. Moreover, a logic of trajectory also materializes through the impact and experiences of previous processes. These experiences have been characterized by a lack of adequate structures and procedures creating mistrust, generating local conflicts and disregarding the importance of local governance processes. This also links with a logic of appropriateness by demonstrating the effect of values and norms related to local community development and procedures. Moreover, perhaps the strongest observation relates to the importance of identity and how this links with municipal attachments to their natural sites. This concern has been strongly emphasized by all the informants. The importance of nature is particularly emphasized where existing or planned projects are seen as overly comprehensive. In these cases, wind power plants may signify a transformation of identity and image. Improvement of distributional or procedural measures in national policies may thus not alone change the logic of appropriateness of wind power decision-making in small municipalities.

Taken together, we find that values and local identities (the logic of appropriateness) are at the core of local government acceptance; however, these can be moderated or amplified through process and compensation. Decision-making logic is thus intertwined with understandings of collective identity from the past, in the present and connected to future aspirations and relations to the region or national surroundings.

What we may learn from the Norwegian case is that wind power development often necessitates a holistic approach that is not mainly based on specific financial enticements, but considers how development processes may be adapted to local context and immaterial requirements. So far, wind power development has been marked by a stringent top-down approach (Inderberg et al., 2019) and market liberal justifications for development (Vasstrøm & Lysgård, 2024). Our case suggests, however, that wind power development processes would benefit from a bottom-up focus through proactive municipalities and the collective community benefits. First and foremost, this includes expanding their role from mere ‘case managers’ to enacting their governance role as local planning authorities and societal developers. A more holistic approach can generate a broader political discussion and public participation in energy development as an inherent part of municipal development and planning (Vasstrøm & Lysgård, 2021). This article has highlighted the local government’s acceptance of wind power development processes and has emphasized its complex and multifaceted nature. It is difficult to pinpoint one main driver of local government acceptance, rather, it relies on a reciprocal process between different decision-making logics. In this article, we suggest some initial steps towards a broader understanding of linkages between local government acceptance and factors influencing decision-making logic. To improve local government acceptance, energy transition policies should thus strive to account for factors on all three decision-making logics. Discussions, on what and how energy development, contribute to broad societal welfare and development might be a good starting point at both municipal and national levels. There is a need for increased research that focuses on the institutional dimensions of wind power development and links various empirical contexts.

Disclosure statement

The research leading up to these results had been partly funded by the non-profit industry organization Renewable Norway, and partly by WINPLAN project at the University of Agder. This manuscript has been written independently and reflects only the opinions of the authors without any role of the industry.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Renewables Norway.

Notes

1 For detailed information on proposed measurements, see https://www.regjeringen.no/en/aktuelt/resource-rent-tax-on-onshore-wind-energy/id2929117/

2 See, for instance, Figved et al. (2019); Kleppe et al. (2021).

3 Due to informant anonymity, we are not able to provide a more detailed account of the municipalities, nor demographic profiles of the informants.