Potential socio-economic impacts from high voltage transmission infrastructure projects in rural Scotland – a review of the literature

 

 

Dr Alan Jones, PhD, CEng, FIET. 

 

Summary

The expansion of Great Britain’s renewable generation has identified constraints with a significant number of existing high-voltage electricity transmission networks and associated substations which, coupled with the age of many of these systems, means new infrastructure with larger capacity will be required.  

This can cause problems for communities in both accepting such infrastructure and dealing with the consequences.  This paper attempts to provide a credible explanation for how people and communities within rural Scotland in general and one specific region in particular are likely to perceive these impacts and the possible consequences.

The outcomes of this paper, if aided by further research, may be used to achieve ‘greater acceptance’ of future electrical transmission infrastructure projects by awareness of the socio-economic sensitivities at the early development stage of a project lifecycle.  Success here has the potential to reshape the proposal and reduce the scale of objection to such schemes as well as speed up the planning and consenting process.

The learning from this research is likely to prove useful in guiding other forms of major infrastructure projects which have similar potential to negatively impact on communities and the environment.

Introduction

The last decade has seen a rapid expansion of renewable generation in the UK to the point where many parts of the existing high-voltage electrical transmission infrastructure are incapable of transferring the power generated from these widely distributed and usually remote sources to where demand exists, often resulting in network constraints.  Consequently, as well as dealing with obsolescence issues, Transmission Operators are also faced with the need to upgrade elements of the transmission network and associated infrastructure to cope with the additional capacity. 

While these comments apply to Great Britain as a whole, the focus of this paper relates more to Scotland because of the nature of the landscape, the predominance of the rural setting in which many people and communities reside, and the dependence on the natural and cultural heritage encouraging tourism to supplement the farming and forestry economy to aid the economic survival of these local communities.  

Southwest Scotland is a particular example, facing various challenging socio-economic factors with one region of Dumfries and Galloway - Galloway and the surrounding area, identified as a suitable case in point for this paper because of an earlier 2015 SP Energy Networks proposal to upgrade the existing 132kV regional electricity transmission network, parts of which are up to 80 years old, to a 400kV overhead network with associated substation infrastructure. 

While this proposal faced local opposition and was subsequently withdrawn, possibly only temporarily, it was subsequently replaced by an alternative, smaller-scale project to relocate, extend and upgrade a section of the 132kV network through parts of the area surrounding Galloway. This proposal also faced substantial local opposition culminating in a recent Public Inquiry in which the Reporter rejected SP Energy Networks plan.  However, the Reporter’s decision was overturned by the Scottish Government in 2024, and the proposal will now go ahead, much to the concern of local communities.

In light of this forthcoming development along with the proposal for a National Park for Galloway, now with the Scottish Government, the paper explores the literature surrounding electrical transmission infrastructure projects as well as adjacent literature to analyse the various socio-economic and environmental factors that may impact this part of Dumfries & Galloway and the potential resulting perceptions and sensitivities of its people to such a scheme now that the new project, using overhead lines and pylons, has been approved. 

Discussion

Anecdotal evidence gained from a similar campaign in a case like the one above suggests that most people and communities are not against renewables or even pylons, they simply want a sympathetic solution for their area – one that takes due account of and values the rich natural heritage of the region.  

The Transmission Operator needs to recognise that people living in rural areas tend to bear the brunt of infrastructure development even though they may not directly benefit and although they have real skills and local knowledge the present system of ‘decide on a solution and then consult’ does not encourage a positive community engagement which, were it to do so, may avoid lengthy delays and lead to faster implementation. 

The general view from such evidence suggests that little consideration is given to the broader environmental and socio-economic impact of network investment on local communities by the network developer.  This is not Ofgem’s role and yet there has been no government-led study of the impact from such development.  The feeling remains that lessons can and should be learned about how major infrastructure projects are progressed in Scotland.  

The more specific view to such development is that the Scottish Government should consider a spatial approach that balances the potential for renewables against minimising the consequences for social, environmental and economic damage to Scotland’s unique natural resources.

The need for this paper, along with the further research proposed, arises from these comments which is reinforced, at least in part, by the dearth of UK-based peer-reviewed journal papers dealing with electrical transmission infrastructure projects from which empirical data on factors such social, economic and environmental impacts may be expected to arise.  

Consequently, stakeholders and those charged with overseeing and regulating such projects presently have little firm, unbiased and universally recognised evidence on which to base decisions and, although the project may be strategically important, the resolution to proceed with an overhead line approach may be made in the absence of sufficient knowledge of whether the proposal is good or bad for a particular region.  

Set against this background, Transmission Operators, such as Scottish Power Transmission Ltd, and their parent company, SP Energy Networks, have a statutory duty under Schedule 9 of the Electricity Act 1989 to have regard to the desirability of preserving the natural beauty and special features of any area that its lines will pass through and to take reasonable steps to mitigate the impacts of these proposals [1].  Ofgem interpret this to mean that any network plans must include reasonable measures - where the term, reasonable, is left to the interpretation and discretion of the Transmission Operator - to avoid unacceptable disturbance to the host environment and to the people who live, work and enjoy recreation within it [2]. 

In practice the responsible Scottish Government Minister discharges this requirement by a process of consenting, refusing or calling for mitigation measures in considering Section 37 planning applications.  While it hoped the Minister will have sufficient knowledge to make this judgement call - of balancing strategic needs against protecting the needs of a region, perhaps it is less reasonable to assume the Transmission Operator has sufficient representative background data at the project development stage to accurately evaluate the socio-economic and environmental impacts called for by Ofgem [3].  

In practice the Transmission Operator through the parent company, SP Energy Networks, is only required to submit the Environmental Statement - the process by which these and other factors are addressed and impacts evaluated - after applying for planning consent when consultation has concluded.  Consequently, this process, which some might consider flawed, provides a vanishingly small window of opportunity for non-statutory consultees to comment and for any meaningful two-way dialogue to occur.  In practice this imperfect process invariably gives rise to objections down the line.

What is missing, therefore, in the current infrastructure development process, is data - both quantitative and qualitative - that can be used to test sensitivities, to inform and shape the proposal at an early stage and thereby improve the consultation phase and consequent acceptance of the need for the project.  Such data needs to be recognised by all parties as providing a credible account of the situation.  This paper explores the need for research to put these missing data, and particularly the learning that emerges from it, into the public domain. 

In more specific terms, these data should be used to generate a model that can test the sensitivity to and thus evaluate the likely impact from an infrastructure project on the economy of a particular region along with a range of other factors such as employment and inward migration over a time horizon equivalent to the asset life of the overhead line proposal.  In less objective terms the model should also be capable of being used to evaluate the perception of the impact on the natural and built assets of the region arising from the various external environmental factors associated with overhead pylon lines and substation development.   

In addition, and of equal importance, there is a need to appreciate how those who live and work in the region, as well as those who visit it, perceive their continued enjoyment of the region’s assets in the face of new infrastructure and the extent to which this may have consequences for the health and well-being of residents. 

Further support for the need for such research comes from the Beauly-Denny experience, where anecdotal and subjective evidence from local people suggests that transmission infrastructure based on overhead lines and pylons, and the word, blight, are synonymous.  It is in cases such as this that the presence of a credible evidence-base model could help to test local impacts and sensitivities.  

With such a model the Transmission Operator would be able to present a comprehensive Needs Case at an earlier stage in the process, ahead of the planning application, and such a move has to be advantageous to the view held by many of those who object to such schemes that the current methodology is one of ‘decide, propose, consult, defend at all cost, face criticism and objections, encounter delays and Public Inquiry, and then finally gain consent’.

The following chapter reviews the theoretical literature dealing with the effect of electrical transmission infrastructure projects on communities, and emerging from this review is a theoretical framework, or general-purpose model, which begins to tease out the factors and sensitivities that influence the level and direction of socio-economic perception by those who are the recipients of such projects.  A further chapter examines these findings against the background of a particular region of Dumfries & Galloway presently facing an infrastructure project to draw conclusions on the potential impact on the people and communities living in this region.

Literature Review of the Socio-Economic Impact from Infrastructure Projects

There is a growing body of literature, mainly ethics-based, that seeks to understand what drives opposition to high-voltage transmission lines.  In the last decade this research has been given fresh impetus [4] from the realisation in both developed and developing economies that the lack of transmission capacity has become the largest barrier to the development of new renewable electricity sources.  This problem arises due to the remote location of many of these new forms of renewable energy source which lack connection to a convenient transmission or distribution network [5].  Consequently, plans to overhaul, replace and strengthen network infrastructure to facilitate a low-carbon future, and secure long-term sustainability may experience countless delays and setbacks caused by the resistance of local groups to nearby projects [6].

The main thrust of this research to date has largely focussed on the broad subject of individual opposition to transmission lines.  For instance, Cain and Nelson [4] examine the individual drivers of opposition in a USA context while Elliot and Wadley [7], who, from an Australian perspective, approach the subject from a perception of risk.  Other researchers, Cohen et al., [6] examine the issue from a social acceptance perspective while Batel and Devine-Wright [8] take the social acceptance of infrastructure further by arguing that transmission networks that are proposed, or imposed by authorities or companies on individuals and communities often assume that as far as people who do not actively oppose or contest these proposals, are accepting of them [9].

This focus on distributive justice or equity issues [8] has, from a regulatory viewpoint, sought to ensure that the benefits from proposed projects are proportionate to the costs incurred.  The cost to individuals and communities, however, receive less attention but result in opposition.  Here, [4] examines a range of drivers of opposition arising from effects on property prices, visual and noise impacts, land use attributes, psychological stigma and perception of risk.  

Drawing from the literature they cite property prices falling by between 2-9% near to an overhead line while proximity to towers can cause a price reduction of 10-15%.  For higher value properties this can increase to 15-20%.  This upper range is also found to apply to agricultural property [10] while in the UK Sims and Dent [11] find values fall for a semi-detached house within 50m of a pylon by 19% and for a detached property within 100m, by up to 38%.  On the other hand, National Grid, in line with several planning decisions, consider the effect on property values is not a material consideration [12].

Visual disruption has been identified as one of the prime sources of opposition to wind power [4] and similar findings emerge in relation to transmission infrastructure from a UK study in relation to the reduction in landscape quality [8].  In terms of residential visual amenity there is a dearth of academic research but one useful piece of commercial research [13] establishes the concept of very large-scale visual effects arising from 50m pylons when located less than 400m from a residential property, although this distance may be modified, up or down, by a range of factors. 

The level of concern for landscape quality and residential amenity has been established through research conducted on behalf of the National Grid [14] which has established that consumers are willing to pay up to about 3% extra on their annual utility bills, to mitigate the visual impacts arising from high-voltage overhead lines, with undergrounding being the preferred option.  Meanwhile, many countries in Europe have endorsed significant underground schemes, with Germany and Austria likely to approve legislation to limit high voltage transmission lines within 400m from residential or environmentally sensitive areas [15]. 

Aural disruption is also reported to be one of the drivers for opposition [4] with a positive correlation between the level of disturbance and the operating voltage.  In this case greater disturbance is reported by residents living close to overhead lines than to substations.  However, this appears to be at odds with the Beauly-Denny experience [16].  

Land use is a further factor which attracts individual perceptions of the social acceptability of or opposition to high-voltage transmission lines.  Although not researched to the same extent as wind farms, the development of new pylon lines appears to elicit a greater negative response than the existence of current pylons [6].  Conversely, people living in areas with more transmission line cover are more likely to respond favourably to new lines [4].  

Research into the effects of high-voltage overhead lines and risks to human health from low-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) has received considerable scientific attention for decades, and in several studies it has been found to be one of the primary drivers for opposition to transmission lines [17].  However, despite an extensive controlled study of 29,000 cases of childhood leukaemia a decade ago [18], which found a raised risk of childhood leukaemia in children living within 200m of high voltage power lines compared with those living beyond 600m away, official bodies generally accept the prevailing view of the scientific community that firm evidence pointing to a risk of cancer from EMF exposure is lacking.  

Several UK planning authorities, in their concern for the on-going uncertainty about the possible risks associated with EMF exposure, have called upon the need for Transmission Operators to adopt a precautionary principal and where this has failed, they resort to a 50m exclusion zones on the grounds of amenity or alternatively cite a possible risk to health or safety [17].  

As well as this direct potential risk to health from EMFs, other research suggests a reinforcement mechanism leading to heightened opposition.  In this sense, the uncertainty about the effects of EMFs created by power lines in turn can lead to a sense of stigma that amplifies individual attitudes to raise the dislike of such infrastructure [7].  

These examples of distributed justice, taking account of the potential impacts to property prices, visual and aural amenity, human health, risk, and psychological stigma, can lead to winners and losers: with losers usually being closely associated with the unwanted common good [16].  

Against this background it is interesting to note that a significant proportion of the population have health concerns, with 31.4% of those surveyed reporting dissatisfaction with their health in the year ending 2013.  The survey, part of the ‘Measuring National Well-Being’ programme, found that positive feelings about where people live can also create a strong, inclusive community with a feeling of belonging and safety.  In other words, given the time people spend at home and in their local neighbourhood, how they feel about where they live is vital to their overall well-being [19]. 

A further recent theme emerges from the literature concerning procedural justice [5].  Here, community actors affected by outcomes of planning processes have limited opportunities to participate in the making of decisions, where siting processes prioritise the local perception of certain areas and communities over others.  In such circumstances the Transmission Operator’s consultation practices are questioned as ‘legitimising previously made decisions,’ ‘giving false hope,’ or a means of ‘divide and conquer.’  Problems are also cited due to a lack of community decision-making control because of the limited range of technological options presented.  Alternatively, there may be a perception that the ‘public’ are unwilling or incapable of taking a strategic viewpoint due to a lack of technical sophistication; factors which exacerbate public opposition leading to mistrust and planning conflicts.  

This theme of procedural justice is taken up by other authors [19] who also contend that procedural justice, or the extent to which the public are engaged in decision making, is at odds with the traditional ‘decide-announce-defend’ approach followed by Transmission Operators.  In these circumstances outcome trumps process as the people and communities affected are often involved downstream of key strategic decisions, such as routeing corridors, key stakeholder involvement and the technical aspects of the proposal planned [5].  

Another aspect of infrastructure projects explored in the literature is the character of and importance of place.  There is, for example, an assumption [8] that proposals for large-scale transmission networks have a material reality unique to each community giving rise to a particular physical, social and economic footprint.  Here, the authors argue that the way in which the research is studied may not allow that material reality to be grasped.  The reason they offer, based on local perceptions, is because factors associated with distributed justice may not account for the particularities associated with distinct settlements or local communities.  This additional dimension, they argue, adds a perspective of how residents make sense of and take account of their feelings or relationships to those places.  

A similar theme is taken up by Cotton and Devine-Wright [5] who describe how the threat of overhead lines can loosen the ties that people feel with the place in which they live, indicating a disruption to place attachment.  This can introduce stigma relating to the sense of place and place values leading to economic blight as well as significant social and psychological consequences.  The authors argue that these ‘place identification’ factors are important impacts arising from the overhead line siting process which are often overlooked by Transmission Operators where concerns for wildlife, visual amenity and other issues predominate.  

The literature review has so far concentrated on the themes of distributive and procedural justice as perceived by individuals and communities [20].  Moving beyond this confine into broader territory there is a dearth of academic literature covering the economic impacts from transmission infrastructure arising to individuals, communities or regions.  To help address this gap use is made of adjacent literature relating to wind turbines and their impact on tourism, but even here commercially generated research tends to dominate.

In this sense, a survey of Scottish tourism conducted in 2005 [21] found that tourism depends heavily on landscape with 92% of respondents stating that scenery was important in the choice of Scotland as a holiday destination while the natural environment was important to 89% of visitors.  

This importance of scenery and landscape in attracting tourists is not confined to Scotland. Failte Ireland, in their 2014 survey found similar levels of priority assigned to the natural environment by their tourists [22].  What should not be overlooked, however, is that while scenery and the natural environment are the most important attraction for visitors to Scotland, research by Visit Scotland in 2012 [23] showed that almost one third visit to learn about the history and culture of the region.  The Scottish Government is right, therefore, to describe Scotland as having a world-class environment in which nature and culture are inextricably linked, with the principal physical asset being its land [24].  

The 2005 survey of Scotland’s tourists found that the highest level of negative perception arising from man-made structures arose from pylons, at 49% of those surveyed.  Wind turbines, on the other hand, were fourth highest at 25% [21].  These survey figures show Dumfries & Galloway’s Gross Added Value (GVA), arising from the hospitality, recreation and catering sector falling because of the negative impact from wind farms by £4.1m (£3.0m due to less tourism visits and £1.1m from reduced accommodation spending) with a consequent loss of 277 jobs.  At 2005 prices these figures represent a fall of 5.9% in GVA and 5.8% in jobs.  

What is not known is how these projected falls in GVA from wind farms can be extrapolated to new pylon infrastructure.  What is known, however, is that pylons have a rate of negative reaction around twice that of wind farms although whether there is a linear or non-linear association between negative perception and GVA is unknown.  On the other hand, it seems reasonable to assume that the impact of pylons on tourism will be greater than that from wind farms.    

To fill this gap in the research and provide a reference base for socio-economic decision making associated with major infrastructure projects National Grid commissioned further commercial research [25] to evaluate the public perception of infrastructure development.  This survey research was undertaken across a range of National Grid projects, including five built projects (three electricity and two gas) and two proposed projects, both electricity.   Two control locations were also included, with some interviewees asked about gas, and the remainder about electrical infrastructure.  The survey covered two receptor groups; businesses and recreational users, including residents as well as visitors and tourists with respondents located within 2km of the proposed or actual infrastructure.

The empirical evidence from this survey suggests that most businesses and recreational users do not perceive there to be an impact from National Grid projects on either their own business or personal behaviour.  However, the greatest levels of perceived effects were on the local area, with the main negative impact being to landscape and visual factors.

While this evidence usefully adds to the literature there are several challenging observations that can be levelled at the research, and especially the methodology that question the veracity of the conclusions.  For instance, there is no attempt to justify sample size to the point where statistical confidence can be established.  Indeed, in many instances, the report points out that because the sample size is too small it is not possible to establish statistical confidence in the results.  Furthermore, non-coverage and non-response error are not addressed and there is an almost tacit acceptance that the results are representative of the broader population when clearly, they are not.

A General-Purpose Model

Figure 1 shows the theoretical framework, in the form of a model, that emerges from the literature that helps articulate the evidence base.  As each region facing the prospect of new infrastructure will have its own uniqueness the model identifies the various sensitivities emerging from the literature with the potential to influence the overall perception of impact on people and communities.

At the core of the model is the recognition that location and how people attach themselves to that location are important factors in the formation of local perception making.  Landscape supports location and government is aware it must work with and not against the environment in which people live, work and enjoy recreation to strengthen further its contribution to society [24].  

Ranged against this is the impact of infrastructure development, whether it is a road, railway, wind farm or an electrical transmission network.  Here, scale matters as it may be a small road or a motorway, for example, and there may be more than one new road or set of developments.  Furthermore, it may simply be a repair or replacement, or a new development that is strategically important either to the region, the country, or both.

Potential mitigation of this impact lies in the extent to which the region has suffered blight through previous infrastructure development, in which case there appears to be greater tolerance of further development.  Where there is little previous experience, the negative perception is heightened.

There are also other, specific, factors that influence perceptions towards infrastructure development as shown on the left of the framework.  In this case the degree to which these factors are correlated, or interact, is unknown.  There may also be additional factors.  For example, age appears to be an influence; young people tend to have a lower negative perception from that of older people.  

Rural environments tend to have a heightened perception and, as the ERM study [25] shows, where the natural assets have been preserved and exploited by encouraging tourism, the negative perception is raised further.  

Potential for further economic growth and the impact this may have on employment prospects and inward migration also feed through to perceptions, as does the view of personal well-being – formed, in part at least, by how people feel about where they live.   Thus, perception towards infrastructure projects is also shaped and influenced by life-style choices.  

Figure 1, Theoretical Framework 

Demographics of the study region 

The literature review, especially the findings from National Grid survey, demonstrate a close correlation with the area in question within Dumfries & Galloway.  In this case the choice of control locations, drawn from an area of the Yorkshire Dales and the Chilterns is particularly germane.  Both share many features with the study area under consideration in so far as they are predominantly rural, dominated by agriculture, blessed with outstanding landscapes and offering tourism and recreational facilities.  And, as might be expected, the National Grid survey results for this rural group portray a different set of perceptions from those from the receptor audience, with both users and businesses in the former group being more concerned about the negative impact that infrastructure has on the region in terms of being a place to visit, a place to live and a place to do business.

Against this background, Dumfries & Galloway, including the study area, makes a major contribution to the wealth creating power of Scotland through tourism, with an industry worth around £6bn of GDP (in basic prices) and accounting for 7.7% of employment [26].  Dumfries & Galloway, while contributing in a greater than proportional basis to this wealth, has a dichotomy of assets.  And while, in economic terms, it is a relatively poor region in comparison to the rest of Scotland in terms of natural assets the region remains one of the few relatively unspoiled areas of the UK.

The region is a predominantly rural area [27] with a greater propensity for micro and small businesses, dominated by declining primary industries, especially agriculture [28].  Furthermore, the fundamental indicators of economic well-being are weak with the area classified as ‘less developed’ within the European Union [29], with a GVA growth rate predicted to lag increasingly behind other parts of Scotland and the rest of the UK [30].  Additionally, business start-up rates for the region lag comparable regions, and business closures in 2012 exceeded the start-up rate by a large margin, while for Scotland the reverse held true [31].  

To add to matters, in the past, up to 2010, inward migration – helping bring a fresh source of entrepreneurs into the region – exceeded outward migration, but a reversal occurred in 2011.  In the three years to 2013 the loss of young people leaving the region looking for jobs and seeking education exceeded the gain from older people moving to the region [32], a trend projected to continue over the coming decades culminating in an expected 6.1% population fall against an increase of 8.8% for Scotland overall by 2037 [33].  

Existing estimates also suggest there are about 5500 people currently out of work and seeking employment; a figure that has doubled since 2008 and higher than the rest of Scotland and other comparable regions.  However, more recent statistically generated model data indicates the number of unemployed may have fallen to around 3800 [34].   Of those out of work the region is one of the worst for unemployed young people [35].

On the other hand, the region is rich in natural resources as well as historic and cultural assets, the sort of qualities that make the area so attractive for people to visit but which need protection from adverse development.  These qualities offer growth opportunities for increasing GVA [36] and associated employment from a growing tourism sector which, in 2009, contributed £270m or 11% to the economy [37] compared with just 8.5% for Scotland’s tourism sector overall [38].  

Tourism is therefore an increasingly important component of Dumfries & Galloway’s rural economic offering both in terms of jobs and wealth creation - with income in 2014 rising for the first-time beyond £300m and attracting more than 2,000,000 visitors [39].  These numbers are expected to further increase having won the Countryfile Magazine Best Holiday Destination in Britain Award [40].

Dumfries & Galloway has another attraction and that is in 2014 the region had the lowest carbon emissions per capita of any of the 406 Local Authority Areas in the UK.  Indeed, the figure was so low, at 0.3teCO₂compared to 8.2teCO₂ for Scotland as a whole, that it could reasonably considered as being ‘carbon neutral’ [41]. 

Consequently, the region, and especially the rural area of Galloway and the environs where this new infrastructure project is intended, should present business with an opportunity to capitalise on these ‘green’ credentials by attracting increasing visitor numbers from the rising interest in eco-tourism.  

Given that a poll of 60,000 visitors ranked Scotland as the top European eco-destination, and ninth in the world [42], if Dumfries & Galloway can nurture and protect its natural assets it has the potential to become the eco-destination of choice in both Scotland and Europe.

Relating these socio-economic metrics to the rural study area in question - on the boundary of Galloway where this new transmission infrastructure is destined, provides an interesting application for the general-purpose model shown in Figure 1.  

In considering the vertical inputs to Figure 1 this new electrical infrastructure, even though remaining at 132kV will have greater capacity requiring additional, larger conductors than the existing line and will be supported on more substantial pylons some 5-10m taller than the existing pylon line.  To further heighten awareness, the line follows a new route through an area that has no previous experience of hosting such infrastructure.

Beyond these points and turning to the horizontal inputs, the area is almost wholly rural and, in the main, supports an elderly population within what is generally considered a long-established asset base where the principal economic activity, beyond agriculture, fishing and forestry, depends on natural assets to attract visitors and tourists to partake in outdoor pursuits and hospitality activities.

These metrics paint a picture of an area surrounding Galloway that knows what its strength is – its natural assets and tourism.  Indeed, the area is almost wholly dependent on tourism, outdoor pursuits and hospitality to survive.  It is a place where, due to the overall age and relative isolation of population centres its people and communities care for their environment and hence they attach great importance to place and place attachment. 

In short, by employing a relatively simple analytical model derived from the literature it can be appreciated how the area and its residents is likely to be particularly sensitive and therefore unsuitable, from a socio-economic perspective, to accommodate the type of development to the one underway by SP Energy Networks without suitable mitigation measures that protect the needs of the region to avoid any unacceptable disturbance to the host environment and to the people who live, work and enjoy recreation within it.

Conclusions

Great Britain is currently undergoing a transformation in the need to upgrade and extend the current high voltage electrical transmission network and associated infrastructure to cope with the integration of distributed sources of renewable generation that are often remote from centres of demand.  Consequently, people and communities throughout the length and breadth of the country are being informed of plans to locate these new, large overhead line structures in their locality and their acquiescence is being sought.

Unfortunately, the opposite appears to occur whereby local people and communities, even though they may support the need for renewable energy, see these development-led initiatives put forward by Transmission Operators as giving little or no thought to the impact of trashing some of the most beautiful and remote regions that are so important, for all sorts of reasons, to the local population.

It is understandable that opposition to these plans emerge for a range of reasons, such as: the proposal pays little heed of the need to preserve the natural beauty and special features of any area the line will pass through, the proposal will unduly disturb the host environment as well as the people who live, work and enjoy recreation within it, to the needs of the region are not sufficiently protected and the mitigation proposed is judged as inadequate to protect these needs.

One consequence is that objections arise as do campaigns to stop the development and delays occur, and costs increase.  The result is usually a win-lose situation and although the developer often emerges the winner from this process they too can suffer from unwanted negative publicity and reputational damage. 

It does not have to be this way, and this paper illustrates how a relatively simple socio-economic model can be used to provide a measure of the potential local sensitivity to a typical electrical infrastructure project in a rural part of Dumfries & Galloway and the likely reaction to it.  

By extrapolating the learning from this small case study, it is possible to envisage how the availability of an enhanced version of this model could assist industry and non-industry parties assess and quantify at an early stage in the lifecycle of a wide range of infrastructure projects the likely impacts arising from new investment and test the effect of various mitigation measures.    

In other words, with adequate research to build accuracy and credibility into such a model it could be used by any agency to test the social and economic sensitivity of an area or region of Scotland to various types of infrastructure project.  And by being able to do this at an early stage it would provide the developer with not only an early warning of issues likely to arise but also what level of mitigation may be required to make the impact acceptable.   In effect, helping developers and recipients of infrastructure projects move towards a win-win outcome.

 

References

1 Electricity Act 1989, HMSO.

2 Personal communication, email from A Kulhavy of Ofgem to A Jones, dated 11 February 2016.

3 Ofgem (2010) Handbook for Implementing the RIIO-T1 Model, 4 October 2010.

4 Cain, N.L. and Nelson, H.T. (2013) What drives opposition to high-voltage transmission lines? Land Use Policy. Vol.33, pp.204-213.

5 Cotton, M. and Devine-Wright, P. (2013) Putting pylons into place: a UK study of public perspectives on the impacts of high-voltage overhead transmission lines. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. Vol.56(8), pp.1225-1245.

6 Cohen, J.J, Reichel, J. and Schmidthaler, M. (2014) Re-focussing research efforts on the public acceptance of energy infrastructure: a critical review. Energy. Vol.70, pp.4-9.

7 Elliot, P.E. and Wadley, D. (2012) Coming to terms with power lines. International Planning Studies. Vol.12(2), pp.179-201. 

8 Batel, S. and Devine-Wright, P. (2015) A critical and empirical analysis of the national-local ‘gap’ in public responses to large-scale energy infrastructures. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. Vol.58(6), pp.1076-1095.

9 Batel, S., Devine-Wright, P. and Tangeland, T. (2013) Social acceptance of low carbon energy and associated infrastructures: A critical discussion. Energy Policy. Vol.58, pp.1-5.

10 Kroll, C.A. and Priestley, T.P. (1992) The effects of overhead transmission lines on property values: A review of the literature.  Report prepared for the Edison Electric Institute, Siting and Environment Task Force.

11 Sims, S. and Dent, P. (2005) High voltage overhead power lines and property values: a residential study in the UK. Urban Studies. Vol.42(4), pp.665-694.

12 National Grid (2015) Factsheet: Our transmission infrastructure and its effect on local people, communities and the local economy. Reference, CFRS11/0/15.

13 Gillespies (2014) Wind Turbines and Pylons: Guidance on the application of separation distances from residential properties, July 2014.  Report prepared for Gwynedd Council, Isle of Anglesey County Council and Snowdonia National Park Authority.

14 Accent (2012) Consumers’ Willingness to Pay Research, Final Report. July 2012. Report prepared for National Grid.

15 Ritchie, H., Hardy, M., Lloyd, M.G. and McGreal, S. (2013) Big Pylons: mixed signals for transmission. Spatial planning for energy distribution. Energy Policy. Vol.63, pp.311-330. 

16 The Substation at Balblair [Online] Available at: http:www.windsofjustice.org.uk/2014/08/the-substation-at-balblair [Accessed 2 February 2016]

17 Jay, S.A. (2007) Pylons in the backyard: local planning and perceived risks to health. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy. Vol25.(3), pp.423-438.

18 Draper, G., Vincent, T., Kroll, M.E., Swanson, J. (2005) Childhood cancer in relation to distance from high voltage power lines in England and Wales: a case control study. BMJ. Vol.330, 4 June 2005.

19 ONS (2015) Measuring National Well-being: Life in the UK, 2015.

20 Kier, L., Watts, R. and Inwood, S. (2014) Environmental justice and citizen perceptions of a proposed electric transmission line. Community Development. Vol.45(2), pp.107-120.

21 Moffat Centre (2008) The economic impacts of wind farms on Scottish Tourism: a report for the Scottish Government.

22 Millward Brown (2014) Visitor Attitudes Survey: Main Markets 2014. Report Number 41112938/MR prepared for Failte Ireland.

23 SCNP (2015) National Parks and Tourism: how more National Parks could help to develop the tourism economy in Scotland. Dated 24 September 2015.

24 Scottish Government (2014) Scotland’s Third National Planning Framework.

25 ERM (2014) A study into the effect of National Grid major infrastructure projects on socio-economic factors: Business and recreational user survey report. February 2014.

26 Scottish Government (2016) Tourism is everyone's business - everyone in Scotland is an ambassador. [Online] Available at: www.gov.scot/topics/business-industry/tourism [Accessed 1 March 2016]

27 Scottish Executive (2005) Scottish Rural Development Programme.

28 ONS (2014) Enterprises in Scotland.

29 Eurostat (2014) Eurostat Regional Yearbook, 2014.

30 Dumfries & Galloway Council (2008) Regional Economic Strategy.

31 Crichton Institute (2014) Dumfries & Galloway Regional Economic Strategy, 2014-2020.

32 National Records of Scotland (2015) Dumfries & Galloway Council Area-Demographic Factsheet.

33 NHS Dumfries & Galloway (2012) Migration Summary, 2012.

34 ONS (2016) Regional labour market LI01-Local indicators for counties, local and unitary authorities, January 2016.

35 SRUC (2014) Rural Scotland in Focus, 2014.

36 Crichton Institute (2014) Dumfries & Galloway Regional Economic Strategy 2014-2020.

37 Dumfries & Galloway Council (2011) Regional Tourism Strategy 2011-2016.

38 Tourism Scotland, 2020.

39 ITV News (2015) Tourists bring record profits to Dumfries & Galloway, 8 July 2015.

40 Dalziel, M (2016) Best in Britain. Dumfries & Galloway Standard, 12 February 2016, p.1.

41 DECC (2014) 2005-2012 UK Local and regional CO2 emissions: full dataset, MS Excel spreadsheet.

42 Kelbie, P. (2007) Scots must join green tourism race. The Guardian.  23 September 2007.