Trust

This section explores how public participation has contributed to trust building amongst residents in Statenkwartier and Twekkelerveld. Trust is defined as ‘one party’s level of confidence in and willingness to open oneself to the other party’ (Hon & Grunig, 1999, p.3).

The concept trust includes three dimensions: i) integrity: the belief that an organization is fair and just, ii) dependability: the belief that an organization will do what it says it will do, and iii) competence: the belief that an organization has the ability to do what it says it will do (Hon &

Grunig, 1999, p.3).

Trust was operationalized in the interviews by asking respondents how they have experienced the collaboration with various stakeholders and how they dealt with conflicts of interest if there were any. Additionally, residents’ trust towards stakeholder organizations in the energy transition was examined in the online survey. Survey respondents were asked to match stakeholder organizations with the trust dimensions statements (appendix 5) from the Grunig Relationship Instrument (Hon and Grunig, 1999). Housing associations were included as a stakeholder in Twekkelerveld as they own 47% of the housing supply. In Statenkwartier housing associations own 3% of the housing supply, hence they were not included as a stakeholder. The results for Twekkelerveld (N=27) and Statenkwartier (N=19) can be found in appendix 10. The question answered below is: How does participation aid to residents’ trust in stakeholder organizations within the energy transition?

From the qualitative analysis of the interviews with residents, commercial and political interest emerged as sources of distrust towards stakeholder organizations. Commercial interests are inherently interwoven with the energy transition process because the rules for the private energy market are being changed. However, residents cannot be sure of a fair and just process when commercial interests get the upper hand. TR2 argued that the grid provider EN Natuurlijk steered towards the ‘preferred’ collective solution presented by DWA. This claim was refuted by TR3, who said that the municipality had spoken with EN Natuurlijk but decided to not consult them any further at this stage of the process. According to TR3, the reason for this is that the municipality of Enschede wants to make an objective choice before involving any of the commercial parties. However, commercial interests cannot be ignored either.

SR3 from Duurzaam Den Haag argued that the government needs more time to figure out how to manage the commercial interests involving the energy transition. As long as government does not know how to manage these interests, it is also not possible to be transparent about how they influence the process.

SR3: “It will take time to organize this properly. There are major interests involved, with energy companies that risk losing customers, or companies that can get attract new customers. Or people themselves, who want to establish an energy cooperative. So that also plays a role, how do these conflicts of interests play out and how do governments respond to this.”

Another issue that can affect trust is when political interests are perceived as a hindrance to an objective participation process. Following international and national policy-making, local governments are required to push for an urban energy transition. Because of this obligation to advance the energy transition, residents might see local government as a biased stakeholder. In the case of The Hague, Statenwarmte received financial support from the municipality for doing research and organizing public participation. The initiative was transparent about receiving this financial support. Still, being sponsored by the municipality in combination with being regarded as the core representative of the neighbourhood was troublesome according to one of the respondents, SR5 comments on a conversation he had with the city councilor:

SR5: “She said: 'yes, in the current situation there is one club that thinks this and another that thinks that’. To which we said: ‘But that’s of course not how it plays out, this is a club that is heavily sponsored by the municipality. Moreover, they’re seen as thé representative’. And she settles it with 'there is one club that thinks this and another that thinks that’…. Sorry, but that’s not how it works.”

Moreover, a combination of political and commercial interests led to much resistance among residents in Twekkelerveld. DWA proposed to use residual waste from waste incinerator Twence, of which the municipality is shareholder.

TR1: “The waste incinerator is located in Hengelo, a company of which 14 municipalities in Twente are shareholders. Enschede is the largest with approximately

district, everyone simply knows that they are shareholders of that company, so nobody believes that anymore. There was a conflict of interest there, no one can stand that. Toe curling.”

Next to this, residents in Twekkelerveld expressed their discontent with continuously seeing new faces representing the municipality at information meetings.

TR4: “I was constantly approached by new people from the municipality, I could hardly see the forest for the trees. That welfare or social worker had already been replaced by someone else as well. Then it's like responding to a general chat.”

TR5: “There were always new faces at those information meetings, each time there was a different person in charge and a different team of people. At the third meeting, residents were actually quite tired of hearing over and over again 'we're going to look at it’ and ‘more options are coming'.”

A factor that emerged as means to raise awareness and possibly increase trust is the inclusion of a professional social organization in the participation process. In Twekkelerveld the welfare organization Alifa was included by the municipality to help informing residents. Social organizations are often in close contact with residents, are well aware of personal concerns, and help communicating these towards the municipality. Having personal contact with residents makes it likely that they receive more information about residents’ concerns than representatives from the municipality would. TR3 explained how Alifa helps with informing residents.

TR3: “There are also social opportunities within the energy transition. For example, welfare organization Alifa knows the problem cases in the neighbourhood well and sees an opportunity to combine these issues. The moment they visit for a problem, they also inform residents about the energy transition. Then they explain that this neighbourhood has be decoupled from natural gas at some point and that the municipality is working on a plan, and then residents are also asked how they see this themselves.”

The results from the Grunig Relationship Instrument (Hon and Grunig, 1999) are shown in appendix 10. Approximately half of the survey respondents trust the municipality most when

it comes to decision-making in the energy transition process. Still, one-third of the respondents think that the municipality has to be watched closely so that it does not take advantage of people like them. Respondents in both neighbourhoods think that the grid operator can make a difference in the energy transition. However, they have to be watched closely and only a few respondents trust the grid operator to be concerned about them when making an important decision. Moreover, housing associations receive a low score on integrity and dependability.

The results for the grid operator and housing associations support the finding that commercial interests are a course of distrust for residents.

Finally, trust towards citizen initiatives seems high. Appendix 11 shows that a majority of the survey respondents think that it is important to include citizen initiatives in the decision-making process and that they are important for creating support. Still, not all respondents agreed. One respondent who disagreed with the statement that citizen initiatives should be included in the decision-making process explained his choice c:

R1surveyST: “I think it is up to the municipality to set the guidelines and to make a careful assessment. In addition, as a resident, I ultimately want to be able to make my own choice, and not be tied to one option. I have the feeling that the various residents' initiatives are already quite polarized, on a subject that does not have a high urgency for me. I am not sure if involving residents' initiatives will improve the quality of decision-making.”

Another respondent agreed with the same statement but explained that citizen initiatives should not have a leading role and that there should be transparency about the municipal interests in the process.

R4surveyST: “Agree, but initiatives should not have a leading role. I assume that these initiatives receive subsidies. It is important to know what the conditions are and what influence the municipality has.”

In conclusion, commercial and political interests of stakeholders emerged as sources of distrust for residents. It is difficult for municipalities to be transparent about commercial interests as they do not yet know how to manage these. When residents participate while commercial and

results from the online survey show that residents trust the municipality more than grid providers and housing associations. Residents believe grid operators can make a difference in the energy transition but that it is important to watch them closely so that they do not take advantage of people like them. Building upon the work of Midden & Huijts (2009), the low levels of trust in commercial stakeholders found could be related to low acceptance of the energy transition.