A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF LOCAL POLITICIANS’ CHANGED ATTITUDES TOWARDS WIND POWER PROJECTS

This qualitative study investigates the complex relation between wind power developments and municipal decision-making in two Swedish project cases. The study is investigating why the municipalities have changed their attitude towards the developments and thus used their veto-right to stop it. The two cases have been identified by the research company Westander. They recently published a report, commissioned by The Swedish Energy Association, showing that 78% of all planned wind turbines in 2021 got rejected by the municipal veto. The cases are Tönshult, in the Municipality of Hultsfred, and Skottfjället, in the Municipality of Munkedal. The resulting courses of events are discussed in relation to municipal decision-making. The purpose is thus to highlight possible influencing factors on the decision. The complex relation between local resistance and decision-making is thus forming the discussion of the study. The theoretical framework begins with a conceptualization of three main topics, which are: Public choice, Social acceptance, and Attitudes. These theories are forming the literature review and the topic of decision-making in municipalities. Local politicians have the power to make decisions that should be in harmony with the public interest. However, the relation between locals and politicians are complex, which can be seen as subjective attitudes are involved in the decision-making. The results show that local politicians decided to change their attitude toward the development as there were too many perceived negative consequences of it. The results of the study indicate that municipal decisions get effected by local resistance. The decision is affected in a direct way by locals opposing it, and in an indirect way as locals change the subject of the debate to the development. Both ways risk undermining the purpose of the municipal veto. The usage of the veto is supposed to be a way for municipalities to secure that their land is used for its intended purpose. The political statements and media coverage expressed in relation to the decision shows thus that the veto is not being used for this purpose. Instead, other arguments can be seen in the discussion, and in the political explanations behind decisions. That is the resulting interpretation of the political statements and other media coverage, in relation to the decision. However, it is difficult to establish any specific conclusion as clear interviews with decision-makers would have been required