Networks of Trust in a Local Energy Project: Dissertation reflections, two years on…

My 2024 dissertation explored trust dynamics in the context of a battery energy storage (BES) project in Bristol. It argued that dominant framings of trust, which underpin policy on increasing the social acceptance of energy infrastructure, are overly linear, ignoring the complex interrelations between actors, contexts and technologies which engender trust, mistrust and distrust.

The research interrogated how engagement approaches seek to build trust - as well as acceptance - while often failing to take into account the complex determinants of trust over which energy developers and their partners have little to no control. 

The research was conducted during and shortly after the 2024 general election, when the groundwork was being laid by the incoming Labour government for the changes which are being rolled out now, in 2026. 

Here I revisit the findings, moving away from the theoretical orientation of the academic context, and the case which is highly context-specific, to instead consider how each of the main findings shed light on the current; ever-evolving, energy policy landscape. 

Mistrust spills over between renewable technologies

In the research, several technology-specific risks, associated with BES solutions, emerged as potential drivers of mistrust among local residents and other stakeholders: chief among these was the risk of fires and explosions. 

While fires at utility-scale BES sites have been known to occur, they are extremely rare when compared to the prevalence of fires stemming from less-regulated consumer products such as e-scooters and e-bikes. 

The understandable tendency for individuals to associate the fires they’ve heard about stemming from consumer devices with utility-scale BES was a recurring theme in the research. Interviewees’ views on these concerns varied: some suggested that developers often avoided providing information on fire risk for fear of exacerbating concerns, whilst others argued this was counter-productive and that providing clear and balanced information on BES fire risk would more effectively engender trust.

The dissertation did not engage with the question of domestic battery energy storage; however as the Warm Homes Plan seeks to encourage home battery and heat battery take-up, there will be a need to clearly communicate the fire safety standards for these solutions, and respond to concerns rooted in this spillover from other battery products.

The installation of such domestic battery solutions is intrinsically linked to smart meters to ensure a connected system. Smart meters were viewed as a key source of distrust in the wider energy system during the research, due to concerns over consumer privacy and overcharging, as well as meters simply not working. With the Government considering making smart functionality obligatory for electric heating solutions in 2027, there is a clear need for investment in the effectiveness of these solutions, both for the policy itself to achieve its goals, and for the potential trust spillover impacts which this research has highlighted.

Trust by non-association complicates professionalisation and expansion of community organisations

The building of trust through opposition to an “untrustworthy other”; or trust by non-association was another key theme from the research. The specifics of the case, whereby a BES solution replaced a polluting alternative, created particularly strong conditions for this dynamic. However, the finding has wider relevance as well as implications for the future growth and professionalisation of segments of the community energy sector, particularly intermediary organisations. 

This was visible in terms of several features of organisations, namely being local to a project vs based elsewhere, being profit-driven vs purpose-driven, and being linked to Government or Councils vs independent. 

For commercial developers, the ability to highlight a local connection to the location of planned site may help build trust with residents; but very few developers will base their siting strategy on their own office’s location. They cannot rely upon this trust-driver across their portfolio, and indeed may encounter its inverse.

For community energy organisations and local intermediaries, it was noted that trust may be placed in them as they offer services which are associated with local government, but without the potential distrust some may feel in such actors, particularly in deprived areas. Again, this is a fragile trust-enabler, which requires the perception of distance between organisations rooted in communities and the entities they rely upon for funding. 

In today’s context, with GB Energy’s remit growing, and more funding soon to be passed to community energy organisations to expand and professionalise, this finding has clear implications for sector’s future. 

In summary, that trust can be placed in individuals and organisations precisely because of who they are not, illustrates the lack of control stakeholders in the energy transition have over how they are viewed.

Complex networks of trust must not act as an excuse for non-engagement

The above findings highlight the complex environment into which any engagement activities enter: and the limitations of assuming that more engagement - at whatever level on a spectrum between one-way information provision to significant participation and partnership - will result in more trust, and therefore greater acceptance. 

With Clean Power 2030 driving an increasing pace of renewable development, it is urgent that such complexity does not prompt stakeholders to divest from engagement. Instead, engagement must be flexible to local specifics, cognisant of peoples’ potentially conflicting views, and wherever possible, geared towards genuine participation and input, rather than simple information provision. 

Regen’s paper: The value of public engagement, strengthens the evidence base for genuine participation which extends far beyond the initial pre-planning engagement, and shows that personalised and proactive community engagement which acknowledges the complexity of trust can represent a strategic investment, rather than a cost.

Full dissertation available on request.