Community Benefits in Energy Projects

Community opposition has been a long-standing factor in delayed or derailed energy projects. But there is a growing body of real-world examples showing how to address that opposition differently.

This report shares findings from a joint study of community benefit plans (CBPs) made by utilities and developers. RMI and the University of Minnesota (UMN) Center for Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy (CSTEP) collaborated on the research and analysis. Although the development of the CBPs in our study was federally driven, several project developers went beyond compliance in their commitments, experimenting with partnerships to support community benefits design and distribution, transparency and accountability mechanisms, and internal organizational shifts to deliver on their commitments.

Analysis of the plans and real-life examples show how three recommended practices can be put into action:

1. Build stakeholder relationships and enable communities to engage, ideally in early project stages and through two-way engagement processes.
2. Use community engagement to determine community benefits.
3. Use direct accountability to communities to earn trust and buy-in.

Details within the report help other utilities and developers adapt these practices to engage with the communities surrounding their projects, deliver meaningful benefits, and navigate the concerns that generate local opposition.

We cite specific examples from over 25 utilities and developers that illustrate how to identify and engage external partners, how to determine appropriate community benefits, and ways to demonstrate accountability for benefits to communities. We offer the selected examples as implemented precedents that clarify how to move from abstract values to operational decisions.

The report also points to resources and tools for putting best practices into action. These include the Community Benefits Building Blocks, which support internal and external community benefits planning discussions. As a range of local concerns might fuel community opposition, project owners and communities can use the Building Blocks to match benefits to local priorities for process inclusion, benefit distribution, and outcome accountability.