Abstract
This document summarises findings from stakeholder engagement undertaken within the research project Assessing the extent and significance of uncertainty in offshore wind assessments (AssESs). The project explores how information on uncertainty in assessments of ornithological impact is translated into decision-making in the context of a precautionary approach in the UK offshore wind industry.
Active engagement with stakeholders involved in the offshore wind ornithological assessment process, including policymakers, regulators, Statutory Nature Conservation Bodies (SNCBs), consultants, developers and academics, has been key to this project. This report summarises findings from stakeholder engagement, which included an online workshop (see Appendix 3: Stakeholder Workshop Report) and individual interviews (n=9) with representatives working in consultancies, SNCBs/public sector, and industry organisations.
On uncertainty and precaution:
- Uncertainty is inherent in all aspects of marine assessment. How uncertainty is propagated through Habitat Regulation Assessments (HRAs) and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs)is challenging and at times unclear.
- Precaution is assumed to integrate and adopt a ‘worst case scenario’ approach at all times, rather than what some interviewees referred to as a more realistic, or more likely, scenario.
- Industry representatives highlighted questions about the application of precaution in assessments as being:
- where in the process precaution is added (and where it is scientifically justified to add precaution), and,
- the magnitude of precaution applied.
- SNCB/public sector respondents described the importance of applying precaution in assessments to enable them to rapidly identify parts of the assessment where there may be ‘adverse’ impact. In these instances, parameters values can be investigated further to identify whether additional evidence can be used to better inform the values, such as seasonal and site-specific information.
- The role of consultants is crucial, but while research projects and project steering groups often involve representatives from developers, academics, regulators and SNCBs, the consultants tasked with using increasingly complicated EIA tools are those with the least involvement in their development and testing. The potential for knowledge exchanges and shadowing, and ensuring consultants have time within project budgets for training and development were highlighted as potential solutions to allow for greater understanding.
- Concerns about over-precaution being built into calculations because of multiple ‘worst case scenarios’ or ‘precaution on precaution on precaution’ accumulating throughout the assessment process were discussed, with some respondents highlighting examples of situations where they regarded the results of this approach as highly biologically implausible; sometimes these figures lead to large compensation requirements on individual projects.
- Interviewees recognise the challenges of managing uncertainty through the assessment process, but would welcome more transparency about how uncertainty is propagated through tools.
- Interviewees talked positively of adopting a change in approach to understand areas of key impact and potential concerns at more a strategic, ecosystem level rather than the current ‘piecemeal’ project level. It is important that new evidence is evaluated and integrated in a timely manner. The rapid pace of development in the offshore energy sector and ongoing processes of consenting offshore wind projects means acting on the best available and most recent evidence in a timely manner is important.
- Stakeholders we spoke with are keen to work together to find a constructive way forward, recognising the urgency of the climate crisis and the importance of ensuring the continued deployment and development of offshore wind as an important means to provide renewable energy sources.