Inclusive intent, instrumental outcomes: how developer rationales shape participation in solar energy projects

This paper examines the motivations driving stakeholder participation in 20 Solar Power Plant (SPP) projects in Gelderland, the Netherlands. Using a framework for participation rationales, we analyse how SPP developers' normative (strengthening democracy), substantive (improving the quality of decisions), and instrumental (efficiency-driven) motivations shape their design and practice of public participation. By comparing participation policies with actual practices, our findings reveal the developers' critical role in translating policy requirements into practice and challenge the perception of developers being a homogeneous group by highlighting their diverse motivations. Our findings indicate that developers often strive for inclusiveness and transparency and seek to incorporate local knowledge to improve project outcomes. However, we also show that instrumental (efficiency-driven) rationales dominate the design and implementation of participation processes. Furthermore, we show that the adoption of these instrumental rationales is driven by a mix of commercial pressures and governance constraints. As a result, instrumental rationales limit the depth of stakeholder participation, particularly in terms of inclusiveness and legitimacy, marginalizing normative and substantive principles outlined in participation policies. Based on the findings, we propose strategies for policymakers and practitioners to enable normative and substantive rationales to shape participatory practices in ways that can enhance democratic engagement in future renewable energy planning. • Solar Power Plant developers significantly influence whether participatory processes can either ‘open up’ or ‘close down’. • Developers predominantly adopt instrumental rationales for participation, focused on effective project implementation. • This contrasts with policy goals that promote inclusivity and legitimacy. • Institutional and commercial pressures further restrict participation. • Clarifying participation rationales can help balance effectiveness with inclusion in the future