000			02796nab a2200265 4500
999			_c11702 _d11702
003			OSt
005			20210610151314.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			210610b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aTafon, Ralph _946196
245			_aPolitics of Estonia’s offshore wind energy programme: Discourse, power and marine spatial planning
260			_bSage, _c2019.
300			_aVol 37, Issue 1, 2019 (157-176 p.)
520			_aThere is growing recognition that marine spatial planning is an inherently political process marked by a clash of discourses, power and conflicts of interest. Yet, there are very few attempts to make sense of and explain the political practices of marine spatial planning protests in different contexts, especially the way that planners and developers create the conditions for the articulation of objections, and then develop new strategies to negotiate and mediate community resistance. Using poststructuralist discourse theory, the article analyses the politics of a proposed offshore wind energy project in Estonia within the context of the country’s marine spatial planning processes. First, through the lens of politicization, it explores the strategies of political mobilization and the rival discourses of expertise and sustainability through which residents and municipal actors have contested the offshore wind energy project. Secondly, through the lens of depoliticization, it explains the discursive and legalistic strategies employed by developers, planners and an Administrative Court to displace – spatially and temporally – the core issues of contestation, thus legitimizing the offshore wind energy plan. We argue that the spaces created by the pre-planning conjuncture offered the most conducive conditions for residents to voice concerns about the proposed project in a dialogical fashion, whereas the marine spatial planning and post-planning phases became mired in a therapeutic-style consultation, set alongside rigid and unreflexive interpretations and applications of legality. We conclude by setting out the limits of the Estonian marine spatial planning as a process for resolving conflicts, while offering an alternative model of handling such public controversies, which we call pragmatic adversarialism.
650			_aMarine spatial planning, _946197
650			_a politicization and depoliticization, _946198
650			_adiscourse theory and power, _934417
650			_a offshore wind energy conflict, _946199
650			_adiscourses and resistance strategies _946200
700			_aHowarth, David _946201
700			_aGriggs, Steven _946202
773	0		_08872 _915873 _dLondon Pion Ltd. 2010 _tEnvironment and planning C: _x1472-3425
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/2399654418778037
942			_2ddc _cART