A Supreme Administrative Court ruling last Tuesday on the illegality of the use of agriculturally designated land by Thep Sathit Wind Farm Co's project to convert wind into electricity in Chaiyaphum province could jeopardise other planned wind power projects or the country's overall development of this type of renewable energy.
It should act as a reminder that Thailand's wind power development policy requires a much clearer regulatory framework supported by well thought-out plans and enabling environments.
Executives and officials of the Agricultural Land Reform Office (Alro), who are holding discussions to come up with solutions this coming week, must clear up the legal hurdle that could bar another 18 wind farm projects in Chaiyaphum and Nakhon Ratchasima from using land which had been originally designated for distribution to farmers under the agricultural land reform scheme, or Sor Por Kor land. They should turn this crisis into an opportunity to make wind power development a win-win solution for both developers and local residents.
Thailand is indeed in need of renewables to power electricity generation to meet increased demand and replace dirty and polluted sources such as oil and natural gas while reducing the dependence on energy imports. The Energy Ministry has a goal to boost the consumption of renewables by 25% by 2021.
While wind power development has considerable potential in Thailand, many promising sites with strong enough wind speeds happen to be located in Sor Por Kor land areas.
The land use barrier involving the project of Thep Sathit Wind Farm Co should not send a signal that wind power is not promising. The legal complication occurred because of a loose interpretation of the law by the agencies involved.
After holding talks with the Energy Ministry and the Natural Resources and Environment Ministry in 2009 over their cooperation to promote wind power development in Sor Por Kor areas, Alro advised all agencies that land use for wind farms was allowed by the amended notification of the agriculture and cooperatives ministry.
Alro cited a provision of the notification that allows the use of Sor Por Kor land by "businesses which economically and socially serve or relate to the livelihoods of farmers in the land reform areas". Unfortunately, it is not applicable. The court ruled that the use of land by Thep Sathit Wind Farm Co does not serve this purpose.
It is unclear why Alro used such a provision as a legal basis for land use by developers. It cited the amendment to the notification that broadly designates activities eligible for the use of Sor Por Kor land when it could have further amended the law and make it more specific for wind power development.
Several large plots of Sor Por Kor land have been misused to serve personal gains by powerful figures in the country and the current government has attempted to solve this problem. Therefore, if Alro wants to revise the notification to facilitate wind power development, a legitimate justification must be given along with conditions for project development to avoid exploitation of lands and to ensure the livelihoods of local residents are not significantly affected.
Moreover, the Thep Sathit Wind Farm case implies that there is local resistance against the project and that it failed to secure local buy-in. Alro, as the legal owner of the land, should have engaged energy development agencies and wind farm developers to hold open and free stakeholder participation, informing local residents of the benefits and potential social and environmental impacts this type of project can bring about while offering redress to affected farmers.
Negative impacts from wind farms are minimal. But local people need to know how they will be affected by noise from the operation of wind turbines, disturbance from the construction of access and transmission facilities and shadow flicker. Project developers must let them know how these impacts will be mitigated.
A solution proposed by Alro's Nakhon Ratchasima office on Friday to use the rent money from project developers as a source of loans for farmers or for use to purchase more land for redistribution to landless farmers is a good start. Compensation packages, such as rents for the use of land, can be considered and offered to farmers as a grievance redress mechanism. This will help ensure that residents will not lose income sources.
More importantly, wind farm projects should co-exist with farming activities and local residents. As wind farms usually do not exhaust the entire land they occupy, Alro should seek a compromise with developers to let local residents continue using unused plots of land.
Making the development of renewable energy attractive to developers and their lenders requires supportive policies and enabling environments facilitated by the state. Alro must not let this land barrier issue become a key obstacle to developing wind power.