REZ inquiry highlights importance of social planning
Last month the Legislative Council’s Portfolio Committee No. 4 - Regional NSW handed down its final report into the impact of renewable energy zones (REZ) on rural and regional communities and industries in NSW. The inquiry contained specific findings related to social impact assessment (SIA) and recommended the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) review the SIA process so assessments are standardised, independently verified, and expanded. As a qualified and experienced SIA practitioner working across two REZs in NSW, we asked our Senior Social Planner Sonya Pascoe to share her views on the report.
As I read the findings of the NSW Parliamentary Council’s inquiry into renewable energy zones, I found myself reflecting on the many conversations I have had in REZ communities while conducting engagement for social impact assessments (SIAs).
The issues raised through the inquiry felt very familiar: pressure on housing and services, uncertainty for landholders, consultation fatigue and concerns, impacts on social cohesion, uneven distribution of benefits, and frustration about how communities are brought into decision-making.
It is concerning to see that angst continue in these communities, many of which are already navigating distinct challenges associated with life in regional Australia. But there was something reassuring in seeing these experiences reflected so clearly in the inquiry’s findings and recommendations.
The First Nations findings reinforce that consultation alone is not enough. First Nations communities need to be involved early enough to influence project design, cultural heritage protection and benefit sharing, with appropriate resources and capability to participate on an informed and equitable basis.
For those of us who work regularly in regional communities, these issues can start to feel like common sense. But the lived experience of rapid regional change is not always visible from outside the communities experiencing it. That gap matters.
The inquiry recognised the importance of SIA, while finding that its application needs greater consistency, better scoping and stronger consideration of cumulative impacts, social cohesion and long-term regional change.
To me, that is not an argument against SIA. It is an argument for taking it more seriously and recognising the opportunity it presents. Only six months ago, DPHI updated the SIA Guidelines for State Significant Projects to strengthen requirements about who can be considered a suitably qualified and experienced SIA practitioner. It’s an important step towards ensuring quality and consistency in assessments.
Done well, SIA contributes to good planning and good project development. It can give communities meaningful influence while giving proponents the insight to anticipate risk, design better projects, create sustainable benefits and strengthen social licence.
I remain optimistic about the energy transition. But infrastructure ultimately exists to serve people. Social sustainability needs to be considered along with environmental and economic outcomes from the outset.
