2012 apr 9 osea social friction v2 update japan
TRANSCRIPT
Getting to the root of social frictionOpportunities in the new green energy economy
Kristopher Stevens
Executive Director
February 27, 2013
2
legitimate
vested
opportunist
Three types of concerned stakeholders
Assumptions
A change in how we see the world
EnergyAdvocate.ca, 2009 –St-Jean de Brebeuf CHS, Vaughan, Ontario 4
A change in scale and distribution
Preben Maegaard, 2010 – Nordik Folkecenter, Denmark 5
Shared adversity and success build community
M’Chigeeng First Nation built small solar projects first and then two 2MW windmills!
The Mother Earth Renewable Energy project will generate $300,000 over 14 years and then $1.2 million for 6 years
Kristopher Stevens, M’Chigeeng First Nation, 2012 – http://go.ontario-sea.org/MChigeengWind 6
There are a lot of causes of social friction
Image by K. Stevens, 2008 - http://tinyurl.com/3omev8o
Local vs. Foreign ownership/control/benefitCentralized vs. Distributed
Consumptive vs. Renewable
What do you value?Do you want to be a Prosumer?
Centralized vs decentralized energy webinar – http://go.ontario-sea.org/centralized-vs-decentralized-energy-webinar
Image by Preben Maegaard, 2010 – Nordik Folkecenter, Denmark 8
Think about how you would like to participate…
Sherry Arnstein, 1969 – Ladder of Citizen Participation 9
Raise the bar for the lowest denominatorBe explicit
• Be principle centered not rules centered• Create certainty to reduce risk/costs• Make it easy for people to participate
10
Take time to understand each other
Communities are:
•Concerned•Frustrated•Annoyed•Fearful•Suspicious•Misinformed
Developers are:
•Disengaged•Divisive•Secretive•Non-transparent•Distrust•Ignoring (legitimate concerns)
Panel at FIT Supply Chain Forum, 2012 – Toronto, Ontario Canada 11
Be principle centered not rules centered
• Talk, talk, talk, try, talk and try some more• Give communities influence and benefit
• Require a land pooling/collaborative land lease• 3rd party developers/municipal negotiation forum• Prescribed stakeholder engagement format• Require that communities get a minimum stake
in projects and provide them tools (ie. Loan guarantee) to enable participation
• Establish a broadly endorsed (and required) community engagement code of conduct
• Expand municipal guide into a consultation and partnership roadmap/toolkit for communities
Community “Has”
Community “Needs”
A focus on improving the quality of life of through energy services (not just electricity generation or infrastructure)
A clear vision, mission and goals for the political, bureaucratic and business strategies and the entities responsible for their delivery
Clearly defined, understood and supported guiding principles A desire to build a successful for-profit or not-for-profit business that can compete and succeed in the energy sector
A streamlined bureaucracy for dealing with political and business decisions based on agreed principles, vision and mission
Conflict resolution mechanisms Effective internal communication tools Effective external communication tools Trust of the Mayor and council Trust of the community Trust of your team Trust of your partners (they have done their due diligence) Completed due diligence on your partners Assessment of the resources of the communities and region A plan to build human capacity A plan to build incremental experience A plan to grow equity A plan to gain access to debt and for repayment Identified “fatal flaws” that could lead to failure A well plotted critical path with clearly defines milestones to check in at to test the risk threshold of current and future decision points (monitor 3 steps ahead at each check point)
Alternate plans identified in case the primary plan or strategies need to be abandoned
13
Set up a way to deal with conflict and remember we need everyone
14
Keep in touch and join us!
http://www.all-energy.ca
http://www.ontario-sea.org
15