In the U.S., ‘collaboratives’ play a fundamental part in wildlife conservation and land use management to overcome cooperation barriers or deal with ‘wicked problems’ (Inness & Booher 2010). Collaborative action of wildlife conservationists and the renewable energy sector has shaped a variety of US-American initiatives, e.g. the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC), Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC), and state-level collaboratives. This allows various stakeholders (e.g. from industry, agencies, research, consultants, and the civil society) to see opportunities even in crises, to make use of the innovation paradigm, and invent solutions together (Wondolleck & Yaffee, 2000).
Our contribution aims at retracing reasons why collaborative governance seems to be well established in contemporary US-American wind and wildlife conservation practice, whilst no comparable collaborative action has been achieved in the relevant German setting so far. Research was conducted in 2017 at the nexus of wildlife conservation, planning and technologies, and social issues. Funded by the German Federal Environmental Foundation (DBU), we established a horizon scan of emerging issues in sustainable wind energy development. We applied a multi-faceted, inclusive, and peer-reviewed research process, building on the relevant state of research and 50 explorative expert interviews. Interviewees ranged across academia, agencies, consultants, wind developers, associations, and environmental groups. The horizon scan yielded 18 emerging issues that would often require collaborative approaches. In the aftermath, we raised preliminary hypotheses as to why German stakeholders might still struggle in facilitating collaborative action, e.g.:
Collaborative governance of socio-ecological systems (SES) requires creating trust and win-win situations for all stakeholders involved; yet, interviewees revealed that the German wind and wildlife community seemed to struggle with suspect of partiality and mistrust among stakeholders.
Incentives for US-American stakeholders in co-operating with each other seem stronger than in the German setting. To avoid listing of species under the Endangered Species Act, which would require ‘incidental take permits’ for individual projects and could trigger a National Environmental Policy Act Review process, the wind energy sector benefits from seeking consensus and envisaging collaborative approaches. Wildlife conservationists often collaborate to achieve a good conservation status of non-listed species: For instance, the protection of bat species underlies a patchwork of federal and state laws where only 9 out of 47 species are federally listed.
The German interpretation of the European directives for species protection provides a robust regulatory regime in focusing on the generic protection of an individual animal. German associations are legally entitled to appeal in environmental matters (Verbandsklagerecht), e.g. in wind project licensing procedures. Often wind projects are subject to litigation, both pertaining to wildlife conservation aspects and social concerns.
As collaborative planning is apt to dealing with complex, fragmented, and changing systems (Inness & Booher 2010), it can assist in building bridges. In focusing on the problem and not who to blame, collaboration can foster trust among different stakeholders and engender ownership of processes (Wondolleck & Yaffee 2000). Similar formats to the US-American ‘collaboratives’ could be road-tested in Germany to overcome the great divide in collaborative wind energy and wildlife planning.
Topics: Natural Resource and Conservation Stakeholders: Managing Expectations and Engageme
