Tokenism or Empowerment?: Evaluating operator consultation with communities hosting proposed shale gas exploration

Recent research on decision-making around energy infrastructure projects has focused on issues of procedural justice, including rising concern about the degree to which communities near proposed shale gas sites have been able to influence decision-making. We draw on mixed methods research focused on two UK case study communities (Great Altcar, Lancashire and Woodsetts, Yorkshire) to critically evaluate community consultation prior to the submission of planning applications for exploratory drilling. We ask: (1) How, when and why do shale operators engage with local communities? (2) What are local community perceptions and responses to those engagement activities? (3) What are the implications for a just energy transition? To answer these questions, we draw on qualitative (interviews, participant observation, documentary analysis) and quantitative (survey of local residents) data. We find a significant gap between operator claims of early and transparent consultation, as stated in Statements of Community Involvement, and engagement outcomes. Further, engagement efforts in both communities were perceived by local residents as insufficient, ineffective and insincere. In neither case did consultation lead to significant change to planning applications. We conclude that operator consultation with shale gas host communities was tokenistic, lacked procedural justice, and partly contributed to ‘shale fail’ in the UK. Given that shale operators are also engaged in net zero underground projects (e.g. geothermal energy, thermal storage), these findings have important lessons for the credibility of land-use planning, a just energy transition and the achievement of net zero policy targets.