Public participation and appeal rights in decision-making on wind energy infrastructure: a comparative analysis of the Danish and English legal framework

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Public participation and appeal rights in decision-making on wind energy infrastructure : a comparative analysis of the Danish and English legal framework. / Armeni, Chiara; Anker, Helle Tegner.

In: Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 14.06.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Armeni, C & Anker, HT 2019, 'Public participation and appeal rights in decision-making on wind energy infrastructure: a comparative analysis of the Danish and English legal framework', Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1614436

APA

Armeni, C., & Anker, H. T. (2019). Public participation and appeal rights in decision-making on wind energy infrastructure: a comparative analysis of the Danish and English legal framework. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1614436

Vancouver

Armeni C, Anker HT. Public participation and appeal rights in decision-making on wind energy infrastructure: a comparative analysis of the Danish and English legal framework. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 2019 Jun 14. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1614436

Author

Armeni, Chiara ; Anker, Helle Tegner. / Public participation and appeal rights in decision-making on wind energy infrastructure : a comparative analysis of the Danish and English legal framework. In: Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 2019.

Bibtex

@article{54072b52ec2d41f7920c797b2b0601ca,
title = "Public participation and appeal rights in decision-making on wind energy infrastructure: a comparative analysis of the Danish and English legal framework",
abstract = "This article is concerned with public participation and its linkages with appeal rights in planning decisions for major onshore wind farms in England and Denmark. We are particularly interested in how the legal framework shapes the scope of participation and appeals and, more specifically, whether a third party right to appeal (TPRA) has a participatory potential beyond the initial decision-making process. Despite structural differences, our analysis shows that in both countries the legal frameworks limit the participatory potential of administrative appeals, either through a restricted third party access to appeal mechanisms or through a restricted scope of review in appeals. Even where access is unrestricted, TPRA can hardly constitute an extension of participation, unless the scope for review is equally extended. Thus, reliance on TPRA as a participatory tool would require changes to the legal framework in both jurisdictions.",
author = "Chiara Armeni and Anker, {Helle Tegner}",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "14",
doi = "10.1080/09640568.2019.1614436",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Environmental Planning and Management",
issn = "0964-0568",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Public participation and appeal rights in decision-making on wind energy infrastructure

T2 - a comparative analysis of the Danish and English legal framework

AU - Armeni, Chiara

AU - Anker, Helle Tegner

PY - 2019/6/14

Y1 - 2019/6/14

N2 - This article is concerned with public participation and its linkages with appeal rights in planning decisions for major onshore wind farms in England and Denmark. We are particularly interested in how the legal framework shapes the scope of participation and appeals and, more specifically, whether a third party right to appeal (TPRA) has a participatory potential beyond the initial decision-making process. Despite structural differences, our analysis shows that in both countries the legal frameworks limit the participatory potential of administrative appeals, either through a restricted third party access to appeal mechanisms or through a restricted scope of review in appeals. Even where access is unrestricted, TPRA can hardly constitute an extension of participation, unless the scope for review is equally extended. Thus, reliance on TPRA as a participatory tool would require changes to the legal framework in both jurisdictions.

AB - This article is concerned with public participation and its linkages with appeal rights in planning decisions for major onshore wind farms in England and Denmark. We are particularly interested in how the legal framework shapes the scope of participation and appeals and, more specifically, whether a third party right to appeal (TPRA) has a participatory potential beyond the initial decision-making process. Despite structural differences, our analysis shows that in both countries the legal frameworks limit the participatory potential of administrative appeals, either through a restricted third party access to appeal mechanisms or through a restricted scope of review in appeals. Even where access is unrestricted, TPRA can hardly constitute an extension of participation, unless the scope for review is equally extended. Thus, reliance on TPRA as a participatory tool would require changes to the legal framework in both jurisdictions.

U2 - 10.1080/09640568.2019.1614436

DO - 10.1080/09640568.2019.1614436

M3 - Journal article

JO - Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

JF - Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

SN - 0964-0568

ER -

ID: 222752252