With a diligent strategy based on delivering genuine community benefits, gaining the support of a strong political champion and engaging a balanced, well-rounded team, project proponents can turn a skeptical public and critical media into supporters and champions, as well as winning over public opinion and acquiring regulatory approval.
John P. Foden
Winning over public opinion for new or controversial projects can be a difficult, time consuming and expensive assignment. But it’s not impossible. The energy-from-waste (EfW) experience is instructive in this regard. Despite global success using technology that addresses one of the most intractable policy issues—managing waste locally while generating clean, renewable power—the industry continues to face opposition from groups too quick to label it “controversial.”
Nevertheless, the Canadian EfW industry has grown by approximately 100 percent over the past five years, a rate of success made possible by taking a diligent, strategic approach to project development and by proactively focusing on transparent communications.
Understanding the Business Case
Every project requires a business case, but a winning proposal needs to make an argument that establishes the merits of the project in a way that goes beyond costs and revenues. It should solve a long-term problem with a made-in-my-backyard solution. It should limit potential spillovers, ensuring problems created by the project effect only those who benefit from the proposal or have a direct connection to the project. Including sustainable attributes is key, particularly if it also demonstrates a long-term commitment to continuous investment in community renewal and quality of life. In other words, containing costs is key, but not the most important criteria if the lowest cost leads to a race to the bottom.
Setting the Political Stage
Establishing a relationship with a respected, independent politician is an essential early step. This “star” candidate will have to speak positively about the project and the vendors, understand the political (electoral) opportunities and risks of the project, and be willing to stand up to an impetuous council, strident opponents and a sensationalizing media.
Creating a Favorable Political Majority
With a political champion on your side, creating a favorable political majority is possible by highlighting the technological, political and financial benefits of the project that best align with legislative and regulatory objectives. In the case of EfW, this might explain how a new plant satisfies international, federal, provincial/state goals related to renewable energy, sustainable environmental practices, technological innovation and economic renewal. For the local audience, the alignment may come in the form of value-added job creation, increased property tax assessment and alternative revenue sources.
Managing the Approvals Processes
In seeking to produce a transparent and predictable result regardless of time or cost, public officials do not face the same expectations as private vendors, so the process seldom reflects a balance of interests. Whereas private companies want to economize on costs and reduce timelines, public officials seek to maximize citizen input and minimize any unnecessary externalities.
Proponents typically know more about proposed solutions than regulators, so the real challenge with any approvals process is closing the knowledge gap (between what is claimed and what can be controlled) in order to elevate the quality of the technical deliberations so that regulators and proponents share a common and mutually acceptable level of understanding. Face-to-face meetings are a productive means of bridging the gap; sharing peer-reviewed studies will insert third party objectivity into the deliberations; highlighting the positive experiences in other jurisdictions can empower decision-makers.
Negotiating the Deal
There’s a line demarcating when it’s time to stop selling and start working, and it’s important for vendors to know where it is. Americans, Canadians and Europeans hold distinctive world views and therefore, place different values on both the process and results of contractual negotiations, so it is prudent to hire some homegrown talent who understand the local language and business culture, and who are also most familiar with the political geography of the community.
Sharing long-term profits, or marketing secondary products collaboratively, such as heat, syngas, GHGs, etc., can improve the quality of any deal. Setting unregulated standards, such as sustainability measures, elevated recycling rates, and onsite emissions reporting, can represent a win-win-win scenario.
Managing Internal Resources
One strong political leader may drive the project, but it is critical that the project team engage talents from a cross section of disciplines. Getting the right talent on the project team means finding a balance between policy-specific knowledge and other forms of mission-critical experience, which may require employees from other departments where they may have gained intimate familiarity with approvals and regulations, project management (dealing directly with vendors and consultants), corporate history (gained through years of employment) or diplomacy (by virtue of reporting directly and frequently to the sitting members of council).
Organizing External Resources
When engaging outside resources, hire expert professionals whose track record and reputation will mitigate any doubt or challenges to the decision-making process. Then deploy the best presenter from each firm—the person most likely to inspire confidence in a critical public audience. This person is often not the same as the technical expert studying the issues.
Driving Public Affairs
The goal of any advocacy campaign is to provide political “cover” for a positive decision by maintaining an appropriate presence throughout the entire process—from idea origination to facility construction. Proponents must be a part of the process, informing policy development, procurement, leading (or at least cooperating) in the approvals phase, and then sharing the responsibility of educating the public and media once the project is under construction and headed towards operations. Showing up when an RFP is issued is almost always too late for any legitimate vendor.
It is important to be sensitive to local political idiosyncrasies, which means that project proponents must be creative and proactive with their media relations and stakeholder outreach to ensure that they are moving opinion despite attempts – even no matter how well-intentioned – to stifle it.
The importance of investing in a credible industry association – creating one if necessary – cannot be underestimated as it ensures that allies and partners from the broadest possible constituency hear one key message.
A successful public affairs campaign will identify all key political stakeholders and understand their trigger points related to the key issues, recognizing that all these individual decision makers play to different audiences. Relentless communication is essential; presenting key messages tailored specifically to select audiences will ensure divergent groups come to the same conclusion within the context of their own interests.
Coordinating Communications Planning
Project proponents must embrace an extensive public consultation process, from beginning to end, including church basement community meetings, cable television debates, council presentations, and regulatory briefings. There’s no way to avoid these outreach exercises, nor should that be a goal. Proponents should seek out public events as a means of engaging the most active and articulate citizens—both friends and foes, as well as those with an open mind.
Selecting Tools and Allocating Resources
As with any project and political campaign, it is important to align communications goals and objectives with key audiences, such as council members, regulatory officials, legislators, local media, and affected communities. Outreach documentation does not need to be too sophisticated or complicated—though accuracy, transparency, and accountability are the priorities in any communications campaign involving controversial issues. Success is possible with standard-issue communications tools, including fact-based briefing notes, “frequently asked questions,” and non-technical consultation material using simple language that is jargon-free. A Web site is essential and social media (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) are critical tools to push/pull messages.
Focus groups can be organized to test both messages and support within a host community while polling (Internet, automated phone system, traditional telephone interviews, etc.) may validate public support and provide evidence that this “controversial” project is actually an electoral winner to elected politicians, who live and die by polling.
However, despite the pervasiveness of social media, it is important to understand that it is still not treated as a legitimate measure of public input, a format given equal weight with traditional forms of outreach. Although social media provides direct access to public opinion, in too many jurisdictions it is not treated with the same validity as public meetings. Polling informs election strategy everywhere, but is seldom used as a primary means of informing policy decisions.
Maybe the Internet is still too new; or maybe the technology is too accessible to groups with no vested interest in the issues being debated. The fact is that politicians trust their gut instincts when it comes to controversy, and they intuitively understand the value of polls depends entirely on who controls “the ask” and how the question is presented. The Internet remains a bit of a novelty, out of political control, and the processes do not yet exist to eliminate the potential for manipulation. This must change.
Countering Organized Opposition
The first step in managing opposition is to acknowledge that it is real, and a permanent feature of every public affairs campaign. However, the “opponents” who fill the community hall during in the early public meetings are not the same as the “zealots” who will work against the project at all costs for the entire duration. The former typically arrive with some skepticism and curiosity, and will see the merits of the projects once presented with sensible, fact-based arguments; their numbers will decline in direct proportion to the transparency of the outreach and information. The latter, which can be usually counted on one or two hands, come to the process with an ideological position and will not acknowledge the positive benefits of the project under any circumstances.
Opposition is the first rule of politics; accepting the impossibility convincing the zealots on the merits of a winning project should come as a relief. These folks represent the “long tail of the bell curve,” so their strident position should actually free-up resources that can be invested in genuine, honest communications with the vast majority of citizens and taxpayers who want plain answers, to understand.
Relationships with local/ad hoc stakeholder groups and individuals must be nurtured, not assumed. The way to stand-up to criticism from “jet-setting celebrity” environmentalists is to maintain an on-the-ground presence, close to the project, in order to answer any questions or discuss any details to any person as necessary.
Working with Media
Serendipity is not a strategy, and hoping for positive media coverage is the easiest way to lose control of the agenda. Good news is never good enough; selling the “controversy” is too easy. Moving forward productively means accepting the fact that it may not be possible to get media on your project’s side entirely and that just a handful of opponents may continuously garner more sensational attention than the most unbiased and dedicated broadcast/press campaign. Quite often, the most well researched article will lie waiting for publication when there is a project opponent sowing baseless stories of fear.
Circulating background information in the form of simple, honest, unbiased documentation is key. Editorial board meetings are a highly effective means of modifying media perspectives and attitudes. Negative coverage should be addressed promptly in the form of letters to the editor, opinion pieces and freelance articles.
A Diligent Strategy
Faced with difficult public policy challenges, communities everywhere are searching for new, innovative solutions. However, “new” can lead to “controversy”, which can result in an unnecessarily long and difficult road to approval and implementation. With a diligent strategy based on delivering genuine community benefits, gaining the support of a strong political champion and engaging a balanced, well-rounded team, project proponents can turn a skeptical public and critical media into supporters and champions, as well as winning over public opinion and acquiring regulatory approval.
John Foden is President and CEO of PresterJohn Public Affairs (Toronto, ON). He is a communications executive with a 20-year track record of success providing strategic advice related to public policy, business planning and project implementation to a prominent array of international clients in the public, private and non-profit sectors. John has published and lectured widely on public policy issues, particularly on subjects concerning cities, energy and environmental sustainability. His analysis of global and North American developments have been presented to federal, state, provincial and municipal agencies, industry groups, professional organizations and the general public. He can be reached at (416) 763-0815 or via e-mail at [email protected].
Sidebar
Lessons Learned: Durham Region’s EfW Plant
After an extensive 10-year process, Durham Region in Ontario finally won approval to build a new, state-of-the-art EfW plant. The project is highly instructive; it involved hundreds of public meetings, a prohibition on “lobbying” (for proponents, though not between project opponents and council) and input from so-called experts flown in to testify against the project.
Despite the ban, the Canadian Energy-From-Waste Coalition (CEFWC) maintained a presence in Durham Region via its Web site, speaking engagements and media outreach. Although industry had no direct contact with municipal staff until all phases of the decision making process were complete, the industry was visible and informing the debate by educating other stakeholders, including citizens groups and provincial regulators.
In the end, determined political leadership and transparent decision-making won the day. Moreover, municipal staff derived community support by including architectural enhancements in the contract; taxpayer value was further enhanced with a cost of maintenance provision and a clause to protect a prescribed residual value of the facility.
Although built on a greenfield site, regulatory officials have indicated that going forward they would like to see other EFW projects built closer to commercial and institutional uses. They began to see the technology as part of the public health infrastructure, not unlike a water treatment plant. They have also stated that in the future they would like to have the preferred vendor selected before a municipality seeks Environmental Assessment approval because this would improve the process with a more timely technology review and engage the maximum amount of expertise at the earliest possible stage of development.
The Durham York Energy Centre is now under construction and headed towards operations in Q4 2014.
Caption
Durham York Energy Center.
Preferred concept rendering of Durham York Energy Centre provided by Covanta Energy and McMillan Associates Architects.