DOCSLIB.ORG

Howell2019.Pdf (4.581Mb)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

This thesis has been submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree (e.g. PhD, MPhil, DClinPsychol) at the University of Edinburgh. Please note the following terms and conditions of use: This work is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, which are retained by the thesis author, unless otherwise stated. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. In sight and in mind: social implications of marine renewable energy Rhys Howell PhD Sociology The University of Edinburgh 2018 Declaration I declare that this thesis has been composed solely by myself and that it has not been submitted, in whole or in part, in any previous application for a degree. Except where stated otherwise by reference or acknowledgment, the work presented is entirely my own. Signed: Date: iii Abstract Scotland has significant marine energy resources and is at the forefront of the research and development of wave and tidal marine renewable energy technologies. Much of this research has focussed on the technological challenges of marine renewable energy (MRE) development, and accordingly there has been an important gap in understanding the social implications of the technology. This PhD contributes important new knowledge to the emerging field of the sociology of marine renewable energy. Previous studies have explored the many and varied grounds on which publics might come to support or oppose other low-carbon energy technologies, though to date there has been limited research into whether the same range of factors also inform social responses to MRE. This thesis presents new understanding of social responses towards MRE projects and the social impacts MRE may have on communities. Findings from eighteen months of ethnographic fieldwork, living, working, and coastal skiff rowing, on a Scottish island are presented, along with the results from a series of public dialogue workshops held in six Scottish communities. This innovative twin-track qualitative research approach provides a rich understanding of everyday life and practice in relation to community, environment and energy, and insight into some of the more intangible ways in which MRE projects may affect communities. The research shows that the strong and unique cultural and historical identity of coastal communities, together with the economic fragility of the areas, influences how MRE, and those promoting it, are perceived. Responses to energy projects depend on the perception of change that will occur as a result of the project and vary significantly both within and between communities. The data obtained show that MRE projects that are perceived to positively benefit the local area are welcomed, and that project developers and policy makers should focus as much on ameliorating positive benefits to communities as mitigating negative impacts. Planning processes that appropriately understand and negotiate these concerns are therefore required, in order to engage with communities and maximise the potential opportunities that MRE technologies present for marginal rural communities. v Lay summary Scotland’s seas have large waves and strong tides. These natural energy resources can be harnessed by innovative marine renewable energy technologies to generate electricity. In this research I focus on understanding the social implications of marine renewable energy, looking at both how communities located near to marine renewable energy projects will react to these new technologies being developed and how the technologies will impact these communities. In order to investigate this I completed two research activities: lengthy independent fieldwork on a Scottish island where marine renewable energy projects have been proposed and workshops with members of six other communities around Scotland organised by the Scottish Government. My findings suggest that people in Scotland are generally supportive of marine renewable energy projects believing that they could have a positive impact on Scottish communities. However, support for individual projects cannot be guaranteed as there are many reasons why some community members could withhold their support or come to oppose projects. The results show that whilst marine renewable energy devices are less visually intrusive than wind turbines, they are not necessarily certain to have more public support than wind energy. There have been negative public reactions to many previous wind energy projects and this research finds that all the reasons that influence community responses to wind energy projects seemingly also inform how people might react to marine renewable energy. People’s reactions to marine renewable energy projects appear to be based on their perception and understanding of several factors, including: the visual impact the project will have, the scale of the project, the fairness and transparency of the planning process, the trust that they have in decision-makers and developers, the local community context, and the positive community benefits that a project will have. The research highlights the importance of involving community members in planning processes, listening to their concerns, and utilising their local knowledge. In this way projects can be developed which are appropriate for a community and maximise both positive social responses and social impacts. vii Acknowledgements I am indebted to everybody who helped me during the course of this PhD. First, and most significantly, thank you to my supervisors. Enormous thanks to Claire and to Simon for supporting and encouraging me throughout the project, and to Rachel for helping me get over the line. I simply could not have done it without you three and your ever-sage guidance and advice, and the ever-present supply of biscuits. Thank you to everybody I met on the Island and during the Dialogue. I cannot name individuals here, but I am incredibly grateful to everyone who participated in, or helped to facilitate, both of these research components, particularly the team at the Scottish Government. Finally, thank you to my family; to my parents for their eternal support and to Anwen and Ansen for keeping me distracted. Heartfelt thanks to Beiyin for agreeing to go to the Island, sharing the adventure with me, and putting up with me throughout. 我写完了！ ix Contents Chapter 1 Introduction .........................................................................................1 Chapter 2 Context .............................................................................................. 15 Chapter 3 Literature review ................................................................................. 39 Chapter 4 Methodology ...................................................................................... 65 Chapter 5 Proem to the Island findings ............................................................... 121 Chapter 6 The Island findings............................................................................. 127 Chapter 7 The Dialogue findings......................................................................... 199 Chapter 8 Discussion ........................................................................................ 227 Chapter 9 Conclusions ...................................................................................... 247 References .......................................................................................................... 265 Appendix............................................................................................................. 291 xi Full table of contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................v Lay summary ......................................................................................................... vii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................. ix Table of Figures......................................................................................................xix Glossary ................................................................................................................xxi Chapter 1 Introduction .........................................................................................1 1.1 Marine renewable energy in Scotland ...........................................................1 1.2 Out of sight, out of mind? Social responses to marine renewable energy ...........6 1.3 Research questions and approach .............................................................. 10 Chapter 2 Context .............................................................................................. 15 2.1 Marine planning and community localism ................................................... 15 2.1.1 Marine planning in Scotland .................................................................. 15 2.1.2 Our Islands, Our Future ......................................................................... 19 2.1.3 The Highlands and Islands ....................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Sustainable Communities and Wind Energy Project Acceptance in Massachusetts

    Sustainable Communities and Wind Energy Project Acceptance in Massachusetts

    Sustainable Communities and Wind Energy Project Acceptance in Massachusetts Maria A. Petrova, PhD* I. Background ..................................................................... 530 II. Study Context ................................................................. 534 III. Literature Review and Research Questions .................. 539 IV. Methods ........................................................................... 543 V. Results............................................................................. 544 VI. Discussion and Conclusion ............................................. 551 The State of Massachusetts is one of the most progressive U.S. states in advancing sustainability through energy conservation and renewable energy. The Green Communities Act,1 signed into law by Governor Deval Patrick in 2008, has awarded 110 communities with the title “Green Communities” in the last five years.2 The title is earned after communities achieve “five clean energy benchmarks,”3 two of which are the provision of “as-of-right” siting for renewable/alternative energy generation and the adoption of an expedited application © 2014 Maria A. Petrova, PhD * Center for International Environment and Resource Policy, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, 160 Packard Ave, Medford, MA 02155, [email protected]. This work was done as a Postdoctoral Scholar at the Energy, Climate, and Innovation (ECI) Program in the Center for International Environment and Resource Policy (CIERP) at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. Financial support was provided through a grant to ECI from BP Group and Barbara Kates- Garnick. I am grateful for the review assistance of Professor Kelly Sims Gallagher and the research help of students Allison Thompson, Elena Nikolova, and Chantal Davis. 1. An Act Relative to Green Communities, 2008 Mass. Acts 308–80. 2. Press Release, Mass. Exec. Office of Energy & Envtl. Affairs, Patrick- Murray Administration Energy Officials Present Green Communities Award (Apr.
  • The Development and Improvement of Instructions

    The Development and Improvement of Instructions

    COMMUNITY BENEFIT FUNDS AND WIND POWER: A SCOTTISH CASE STUDY Dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN WIND POWER PROJECT MANAGEMENT Uppsala University Department of Earth Sciences, Campus Gotland Adam Christopher Mathers COMMUNITY BENEFIT FUNDS AND WIND POWER: A SCOTTISH CASE STUDY Dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN WIND POWER PROJECT MANAGEMENT Uppsala University Department of Earth Sciences, Campus Gotland Approved by: Supervisor, Dr Sanna Mels Examiner, Dr Heracles Polatidis Oct 2018 iii ABSTRACT The Scottish government’s aim of deriving 100 per cent of the nation’s electricity from renewable sources is dependent on the utilisation of wind energy. Social barriers, however, have continued to threaten these targets. Community benefit funds have often been paraded as the most common way of improving public attitudes towards wind farms in the United Kingdom, although little empirical evidence exists to support this notion. Using the proposed Ourack wind farm, approximately three and a half miles north of Grantown-on-Spey in the Scottish Highlands, this case study, consisting of a sequential explanatory research design comprised of an initial close-ended survey followed by in-depth semi-structured interviews, sought to explore the community’s perceptions of community benefits, identify the type of fund that the community wanted, and investigate the role of such benefit provisions in altering perceptions of wind farms. The key findings indicated that the majority of participants were in favour of benefits being provided, they preferred funding to be directed towards community organisations, and approximately one third of research participants (31.6 per cent) perceived the proposed wind farm in a more positive light after considering the possible benefits the region would accrue.
  • Consultation on Provisions for a Future Islands Bill

    Consultation on Provisions for a Future Islands Bill

    Consultation on Provisions for a Future Islands Bill September 2015 Contents Part one: Background and context Aim of this consultation Our Islands Our Future Campaign Lerwick Declaration Islands Areas Ministerial Working Group Empowering Scotland’s Island Communities Re-convened Ministerial Islands Group & Islands Bill Part two: Island-Proofing Part three: Empowering Island Communities Part four: National Islands Plan Part five: Parliamentary Constituency Protection for Na h-Eileanan an Iar Part six: Local Government Electoral Wards Part seven: Other General Issues not covered elsewhere Part eight: About this consultation The Scottish Government consultation process Handling your response Next Steps in the process What happens next Comments and complaints 1 Ministerial Foreword As Scotland’s first Government Minister with specific responsibility for the islands, it gives me great pleasure to launch this consultation which seeks the views of island communities and other interested stakeholders on potential measures that may be included within a future Islands Bill. Scotland’s islands have proud traditions, with rich and vibrant cultures. They are wonderful places to live, work, study and visit, and contribute so much to the fabric of Scotland as a nation. From Harris Tweed in the Western Isles to the famous Whisky distilleries in Islay, Scotland’s islands are renowned across the world. Over the last two years the Scottish Government has formed a positive partnership with our island councils to address some of the challenges our island communities face. The launch of the ‘Our Islands Our Future’ campaign in 2013 and the subsequent establishment of the Island Areas Ministerial Working Group brought these challenges to the fore.
  • Scottish Government Good Practice Principles for Community Benefits from Onshore Renewable Energy Developments Cares Supports Local Renewable Energy Generation

    Scottish Government Good Practice Principles for Community Benefits from Onshore Renewable Energy Developments Cares Supports Local Renewable Energy Generation

    ScottIsh Government Good practIce prIncIples for CommunIty benefIts from Onshore renewable Energy developments CarEs supports Local renewable energy generatIon Contents 1 Foreword ................................................................ 3 2 Introduction and overview ....................................... 4 3 Basic principles of community benefits ...................... 6 4 Community investment ............................................ 8 5 Other forms of community benefit ........................... 10 6 Identification of the community ............................... 12 7 Public consultation on community benefit schemes ... 16 8 Supporting effective fund spend .............................. 20 9 Fund administration and governance....................... 24 10 Ongoing role of developer .................................... 26 11 ANNEXES ............................................................ 28 This document is available alongside the shared ownership annex at: www.localenergyscotland.org/goodpractice Revised September 2015 for accuracy. 2 1 foreword winter 2013/14 and we are grateful for the work Renewable energy in Scotland presents an uprecedented opportunity for communities of the informal stakeholder group, as listed in to share in the benefits of their local energy Annex 11.5, convened under our Community and resources. Renewable Energy Scheme (CARES). We think this has produced a very helpful national reference to The Scottish Government has no powers to guide what is a voluntary local process, and we oblige developers
  • Empowering Scotland's Island Communities Your

    Empowering Scotland's Island Communities Your

    > Empowering Scotland’s Island Communities Your Introductory Guide A’ Toirt Ùghdarras do Choimhearsnachdan Eileanach na h-Alba Bhur stiùir fiosrachaidh > We believe that the people who live and work in Scotland are best placed to make decisions about our future – the essence of self-determination; therefore we support subsidiarity and local decision making. “Lerwick Declaration”, First Minister, Alex Salmond MSP, 25 July 2013 > Tha sinn a’ creidsinn gur iad na daoine a tha a’ fuireach agus ag obair ann an Alba a tha san t-suidheachadh as fheàrr gus co-dhùnaidhean a dhèanamh mun àm ri teachd againn – brìgh fèin-dhearbhaidh; mar sin tha sinn a’ cur taic ri bhith a’ toirt cumhachd nas fhaisge air na daoine agus a bhith a’ dèanamh cho-dhùnaidhean gu h-ionadail. “Dearbhadh Lerwick”, Am Prìomh Mhinistear, Ailig Salmond BPA, 25 Iuchar 2013 Message from Scotland’s islands are a special and hugely the First Minister valuable part of our nation. Their histories, of Scotland cultures, natural resources and initiative have been central to Scotland’s journey, and island communities will continue to play a vital part in our country’s future. In July 2013 I chaired a meeting of the Scottish Cabinet in Shetland where, inspired by the Our Islands Our Future campaign, we made clear our commitment to local decision making and empowering island communities. Then in April 2014 at a Cabinet meeting in Stornoway, we confirmed our support for constitutional protection for our islands. And in June 2014 in Orkney I launched Empowering Scotland’s Island Communities, comprising an ambitious set of practical proposals from the Scottish Government.
  • (For Official Use Only) PUBLIC PETITION NO. PE1188 Should You Wish to Submit a Public Petition for Consideration by the Public P

    (For Official Use Only) PUBLIC PETITION NO. PE1188 Should You Wish to Submit a Public Petition for Consideration by the Public P

    (For official use only) PUBLIC PETITION NO. PE1188 Should you wish to submit a public petition for consideration by the Public Petitions Committee please refer to the guidance leaflet How to submit a public petition and the Guidance Notes at the back of this form. 1. NAME OF PRINCIPAL PETITIONER Nick Dekker 2. TEXT OF PETITION Nick Dekker calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to investigate the circumstances whereby it agreed that 60 hydro-power stations could be accredited for subsidy under the Renewables Obligation scheme and that generation capacity could be cut to below the 20megawatt qualification threshold at others to enable accreditation and whether, in the interests of electricity consumers, it will rescind these accreditations. 3. ACTION TAKEN TO RESOLVE ISSUES OF CONCERN BEFORE SUBMITTING THE PETITION I have contacted and have been in correspondence with AuditScotland, OFGEM, Scottish & Southern Energy PLC and ScottishPower PLC. Alex Neil MSP also corresponded with Scottish & Southern Energy. 4. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION See— “The war on climate change – A licence to print money?” “Subsidies and Subterfuge – Hydro-power and the Renewables Obligation” (also on www.swap.org.uk) “ROCs earned by Alcan, SSE and ScottishPower from 'old build' hydro, April 2002 to December 2007” (a report by the petitioners); “Renewable Energy Data for Scotland (Hydro), May 2008” Correspondence generally pertinent to the petition but esp to Question 3 OFGEM’s “Annual Reports on the Renewables Obligation” 2004 to 2008; Press releases and other material referred to in “The war on climate change – a licence to print money?” and elsewhere 5.
  • Memorandum Submitted by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (WIND 01)

    Memorandum Submitted by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (WIND 01)

    Energy and Climate Change Committee The Economics of Wind Power written evidence REF: Page WIND 01 Department of Energy and Climate Change 5 WIND 02 Maureen Beaumont 9 WIND 03 D E Simmons CEng; MIMechE; CMIOSH; RMaPS 11 WIND 04 Galloway Landscape And Renewable Energy (GLARE) 12 WIND 05 Dr. Ian Woollen 15 WIND 06 Energy Technologies Institute (ETI) 16 WIND 07 Viscount Monckton of Brenchley 18 WIND 08 ABB 21 WIND 09 Roland Heap 24 WIND 10 David Campbell 29 WIND 11 The Renewable Energy Foundation 31 WIND 12 Brian Skittrall 34 WIND 13 Sir Donald Miller 37 WIND 14 Hengistbury Residents' Association (HENRA) 40 WIND 15 Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy ‐ UK 43 WIND 16 REG Windpower Ltd 46 WIND 17 Adrian J Snook 52 WIND 18 Montgomeryshire Local Council Forum; Welshpool Town Council 55 WIND 19 Ian W Murdoch 57 WIND 20 Mrs Brenda Herrick 60 WIND 21 Mr N W Woolmington 62 WIND 22 Professor Jack W Ponton FREng 63 WIND 23 Mrs Anne Rogers 65 WIND 24 Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) 67 WIND 25 Derek Partington 70 WIND 26 Professor Michael Jefferson 76 WIND 27 Robert Beith CEng FIMechE, FIMarE, FEI and Michael Knowles CEng 78 WIND 28 Barry Smith FCCA 81 WIND 29 The Wildlife Trusts (TWT) 83 WIND 30 Wyck Gerson Lohman 87 WIND 31 Brett Kibble 90 WIND 32 W P Rees BSc. CEng MIET 92 WIND 33 Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management 95 WIND 34 Councillor Ann Cowan 98 WIND 35 Ian M Thompson 99 WIND 36 E.ON UK plc 102 WIND 37 Brian D Crosby 105 WIND 38 Peter Ashcroft 106 WIND 39 Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) 109 WIND 40 Scottish Renewables 110 WIND 41 Greenpeace UK; World Wildlife Fund; Friends of the Earth 114 WIND 42 Wales and Borders Alliance 119 WIND 43 National Opposition to Windfarms 121 WIND 44 David Milborrow 124 WIND 45 SSE 126 WIND 46 Dr Howard Ferguson 129 WIND 47 Grantham Research Institute 132 WIND 48 George F Wood 135 WIND 49 Greenersky.
  • Islands (Scotland) Bill

    Islands (Scotland) Bill

    SPICe Briefing Pàipear-ullachaidh SPICe Islands (Scotland) Bill Ailsa Burn-Murdoch The Islands (Scotland) Bill was introduced to the Scottish Parliament on 9 June 2017. This briefing provides an overview of the background to the introduction of the Bill, a brief summary of the Bill, and links to further reading. 4 September 2017 SB 17-61 Islands (Scotland) Bill, SB 17-61 Contents Executive Summary _____________________________________________________3 Background ____________________________________________________________5 Scotland's islands ______________________________________________________5 Scotland's Census 2011________________________________________________6 Demographics______________________________________________________6 Health ____________________________________________________________7 Economic Activity ___________________________________________________7 The path to legislation ___________________________________________________8 Our Islands, Our Future ________________________________________________8 Lerwick Declaration ___________________________________________________9 Empowering Scotland's Island Communities ________________________________9 UK Government Islands Framework _____________________________________10 Representing island communities - wider context ___________________________ 11 European Small Islands Federation ____________________________________12 The Smart Islands Initiative __________________________________________12 Changes impacting legislation ____________________________________________12 Scottish
  • Petition Briefings with Petitioners Or Other Members of the Public

    Petition Briefings with Petitioners Or Other Members of the Public

    Briefing for the Public Petitions Committee Petition Number: PE01516 Main Petitioner: Malcolm Lamont Subject: Referenda for Orkney, Shetland and the Western Isles Calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to hold three separate referenda in Shetland, Orkney, and the Western Isles on Thursday 25 September 2014, one week after the Scottish independence referendum, asking the people of each island group whether they would prefer their island group: • to become an independent country, or • to stay in Scotland and, in the event of a yes vote in the referendum on Scottish independence, to have the following additional option: • to leave Scotland and stay in the remainder of the UK Background This petition asks for the Scottish Government to hold separate referendums in each of the three Island groups a week after the Referendum on Scottish Independence takes place. In the information accompanying the petition, the Petitioner acknowledges that the Order in Council which transferred the power to hold a Referendum on Independence to the Scottish Parliament requires the poll for this referendum to be held on a day with no other poll provided for by legislation of the Scottish Parliament. However, he goes on to state that there would be nothing to prevent, “… the Scottish Government from deciding to hold these three referenda a week later”. The “Edinburgh Agreement”, signed by the Scottish and UK Governments in October 2012, and the subsequent Order in Council made under section 30(2) of the Scotland Act 1998, gave a clear legal basis for the Scottish Parliament to legislate for a single-question referendum on Scottish independence to be held before the end of 2014.
  • Community Benefits from Offshore Renewable Energy Developments

    Community Benefits from Offshore Renewable Energy Developments

    ScottIsh Government Good practIce prIncIples for CommunIty benefIts from Offshore renewable Energy developments 1 1 IntroductIon Scotland is estimated to have around a quarter of Europe’s potential offshore wind resources, and The Scottish Contents Government wishes to see communities across the country share in the benefits 1. Introduction 2. Principles from this rich natural resource. 3. Background 4. Designing a Community Benefit Package for Offshore Renewable Energy Projects The Scottish Government’s National Marine Plan While the majority of this document is intended to 5. Identification of Community (NMP) Renewables Policy 10 states that “Good be for developers of wind projects, it is proposed 6. Maximising Impact of Benefit Practice guidance for community benefit from that this document will be reviewed over the 7. Further Principles offshore wind and marine renewable energy coming years to incorporate guidance and good development should be followed by developers, practice for other offshore technologies. 8. Case Studies where appropriate”. This document looks at good 9. Further Reading practice in shaping and delivering community This document is split into definitions, context, 10. Glossary benefits from offshore renewable energy projects, good practice expectations and supplementary complementary to environmental, supply chain guidance for all involved. The intended readers of and other socio-economic benefits to Scotland. this document are developers, communities, local authorities and other stakeholders. When providing community benefits from offshore renewables, there are a number of factors to be The Scottish Government is committed to This document is available at: considered such as identifying the community, supporting the development of a successful www.localenergyscotland.org/goodpractice.
  • Distance Matters: B a L D a C C H I N O Near Islands, Remote Islands, University of Malta and the Effect of Distance on Island Development

    Distance Matters: B a L D a C C H I N O Near Islands, Remote Islands, University of Malta and the Effect of Distance on Island Development

    Sanya City, Hainan Province, China 2 G O D F R E Y Distance matters: B A L D A C C H I N O Near islands, remote islands, University of Malta and the effect of distance on island development ABSTRAC T With a population of just 9 million, Hainan is China’s smallest province. It is also China’s southernmost province. This pres- ents the island with a unique opportunity to offer specialized national services that speak to its natural competitive assets: its islandness, its tourism potential, its proximity to the equator—significant for rocket launch facilities—and its loca- tion as the natural gateway to the South China Sea. At the same time, and in spite of its 30-km strait from mainland China, and the difficulties of constructing a fixed link over the typhoon- prone Hainan Strait, Hainan has the opportunity to operate as 62 D I S TA N C E M AT T E R S a ‘near’ island, pursuing niche development goals supported by Beijing; while enhancing its jurisdictional status and leveraging this in order to consolidate its status as a province supporting strong economic growth. This exploratory chapter offers a first insight into how distance from the mainland (and from central government) impacts on an island’s ability to determine its own destiny. It does so by adopting a global perspective and examining the manner in which near islands and remote islands have (a) nurtured different levels of jurisdictional status and autonomy; and (b) used that jurisdictional resource, where available, to chart their own development path, in ways that may be similar, complementary, different, and outright in opposition to mainland ambitions and plans.
  • Experiences of Place and Change in Rural Landscapes: Three English Case Studies

    Experiences of Place and Change in Rural Landscapes: Three English Case Studies

    University of Plymouth PEARL https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk 04 University of Plymouth Research Theses 01 Research Theses Main Collection 2015 Experiences of Place and Change in Rural Landscapes: Three English Case Studies Wheeler, Rebecca http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/3366 Plymouth University All content in PEARL is protected by copyright law. Author manuscripts are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author. EXPERIENCES OF PLACE AND CHANGE IN RURAL LANDSCAPES: THREE ENGLISH CASE STUDIES by REBECCA WHEELER A thesis submitted to Plymouth University in partial fulfilment for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences December 2014 Copyright Statement This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with its author and that no quotation from the thesis and no information derived from it may be published without the author's prior consent. i Abstract This thesis examines how changes to rural places and landscapes are experienced by residents and incorporated into place attachments and identities over time. It does so through exploring findings from seventy-eight qualitative, ‘emplaced’, oral history interviews in three English villages: Mullion (Cornwall); Askam and Ireleth (Cumbria); and Martham (Norfolk). These villages are located near to at least one existing windfarm, which – as an example of rural change - provides a common focus for the research.