Putting the green back into greenfield management

Fragmented legislation and conflicting interests among different government agencies make Norway's management of greenfield sites piecemeal, not holistic, one legal researcher argues.

According to Winge, this trend can be characterised as bit-by-bit expansion with no foundation in holistic planning. The total of a number of initiatives over time can result in unforeseen and undesirable effects. Photo: Colourbox.com

This is the conclusion Nikolai Winge draws in his doctoral thesis written at the Faculty of Law of the University of Oslo.

Greenfield land comprises our water and land areas which have not been characterised by development. These areas are the habitat for the majority of the country’s biodiversity and are where we find our cultural heritage. The greenfield sites are also a resource for outdoor interests, tourism, agriculture, forestry, hunting, fishing and reindeer husbandry. At the same time, greenfield land is an arena for rolling out new initiatives of varying nature. For this reason a number of conflicting interests have emerged.

“There are two features of greenfield site development today. The first is that we are building more and more, and the second is that this is happening at the expense of other social and public interests. Several reports show that land use management is not following a very sustainable path. So the question is: Which policy instruments does legislation provide to ensure that development cases or issues are decided on the basis of comprehensive, holistic assessments?

Fragmented legislation

“On the whole, we are unable to safeguard those values and considerations emphasised by the Norwegian Parliament as being essential for guaranteeing sustainable land use management,” says Winge.

“The legislation is fragmented with a complex division of jurisdiction across sectors and between different decision-making levels of government. In addition, the regulations are vague and extremely discretionary. This means that our greenfield land is managed by different bodies, each with their own considerations and interests to look after. Decisions made by one body will often affect or intervene in the interests of other bodies. This creates a breeding ground for conflicts over land use management.

Bit by bit

According to Winge, this trend can be characterised as bit-by-bit expansion with no foundation in holistic planning. Although a single development initiative alone does not lead to particularly damaging effects, the total of a number of initiatives over time can result in unforeseen and undesirable effects. The challenge is to see the overall effect of all of the small initiatives.

“It is this that is the paradox and the background for my thesis. The expansion of small power stations is a good example. The government said at the turn of the millennium that the era of large power plant expansion is now over, and instead we have been concentrating on small plants. But the total impact of the small ones can be just as far-reaching as that of the large ones,” Winge points out.

Around the world several times

We also face an era of extensive plans to develop power lines and wind power stations. This is an initiative that presents great potential for conflict with other land use interests in the greenfield sites.

Nikolai WingeNikolai Winge har written his doctoral thesis at the Faculty of Law of the University of Oslo.

“Of the thousands of kilometres of untouched nature which have been lost in the last five years, energy initiatives alone account for around 40 per cent,” states the researcher.

“The national grid in Norway has now been extended by more than 128,500 kilometres of power lines. If you imagine this as one continuous power line, it would go round the earth more than three times."

The fight for land

The increased pressure on greenfield land has led to clear differences of interest in public administration. The situation in Norway today can be characterised as a ‘fight for land’, according to Winge.

“The fight generally concerns development cases where administrative bodies attempt to get the most support for their particular interests, rather than decision-making processes where the authorities work together in search of solutions that everyone can agree on. The failure of the law to control land use management contributes to this fight,” summarises Winge.

Laws become empty phrases

The question of which interests should be prioritised is still first and foremost a topic for political debate. The legislation gives voice to many good values and considerations, but several provisions are in practice just empty phrases. The principle of sustainable development says no more than what the individual decision-maker finds appropriate in the individual case,” the researcher points out.

“Legislators must make a choice and take a position as to what has to be taken into consideration, rather than passing the buck to a sector-specific and level-controlled administrative instrument.”

Human intervention is spreading

“Don’t we still have plenty of untouched land in Norway?”

“Only 1.5 per cent of Norway’s land is developed. We also have the second lowest population density in Europe, with only Iceland’s being lower than ours. So you would assume there is enough land to take care of all interests,” says Winge.

“But the conflicts in greenfield land management are often linked to areas under pressure, close to where people live or visit. In large parts of Norway it is also difficult to find areas that are less than a few kilometres away from human intervention. In step with gradual redistribution of land, greenfield sites in many places have gone from being a shared, multi-purpose asset to a scarce resource."

VindmøllerThe increased pressure on greenfield land has led to clear differences of interest in public administration. The situation in Norway today can be characterised as a ‘fight for land’, according to Winge. Photo: Colourbox.com

 

 

By Jorunn Kanestrøm
Published Dec. 11, 2012 10:37 AM - Last modified Dec. 11, 2012 11:17 AM