Comment

Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy: Realising the socio-economic benefits of onshore wind

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero recently published the Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy[1]. Themes 3 and 6 of the Strategy focus on sustainable economic growth and maximising social benefit, reflecting the range of socio-economic opportunities within the onshore wind sector. What does the Strategy propose? And what more could be done to fully realise the importance of wind to the UK’s economic growth?

The Strategy sets out six ‘Policy Themes’ and 42 ‘Actions’. Theme 3: ‘Communities and public perception'  and Theme 6:'Supply chain, Skills and Workforce', are of particular relevance to sustainable economic growth and maximising social benefit. This reflects on the range of socio-economic opportunities within the onshore wind sector, providing new skills, employment and supply chain prospects, as well as significant social benefits, via mechanisms such as community benefit funds, pooling funding and resources to tackle existing local needs.  

With this in mind, we welcome that the Government has produced related documentation to support the role of the Strategy and provide standardised guidance on capturing associated benefits across the country, such as the Community Benefit Guidance for Onshore Wind in England^[2], and the Job Estimates for wind generation by 2030: methodology note^[3].  

Below we consider Actions across Themes 3 and 6 which aim to provide support to the development of the onshore wind sector, and ensure that local communities reap maximum benefit from development.  

Action 16: The Government will consider mandating for the provision of community benefits in Great Britain^[4]

Action 17: The Government will publish an update to the 2014 Community Benefits Protocol and formally adopt it as government guidance for England^[5]

As set out in the Community Benefit Guidance note, the most common type of benefit scheme is a Community Benefit Fund, where a developer makes regular payments into a fund, which is then distributed to projects in the local community on a case-by-case basis, in collaboration with one another.  

The prospect of making Community Benefits mandatory across Great Britain is welcomed, it aligns with the Government's wider Clean Energy Superpower Mission as well as the key priorities of the Modern Industrial Strategy^[6] and its supporting Industry Sector Plan^[7]. We have reviewed and shared our views on the UK Government Working Paper on 'Community Benefits and Shared Ownership for Local Carbon Energy Infrastructure^[8]', published in May 2025 which can be seen here. By providing a standardised approach for delivery of Community Benefit Funds this would:

• Provide clear expectations on 'what good looks like'.
• Ensure Community Benefit Funds can be tailored to the local context, and made flexible to respond to need at the time of delivery, administered by those who know these issues best.
• Help develop long lasting relationships which can be established for the duration of the project lifecycle.
• Allow for communities to be involved in an open and transparent process and influence delivery, ensuring that residents surrounding the development are those who best benefit.
• Provide a more level, inclusive playing field for communities to access benefits, with no expectation to contribute towards maintenance or raise funding for shares, typical of other ownership models.

As alluded to in Action 17, whilst the Community Benefit Fund proposal is strong, there are still some areas which need further consideration, such as:

• Whilst the standardised approach for calculating monetary contributions (currently no less than £5,000 per MW of installed capacity, per year^[9]) is beneficial, the level of support provided should consider the local context and how acute needs are. It is welcomed that the Government recognise that alternative benefit mechanisms should be explored, such as local bill discounts.
• Community Benefit Funds should not seek to replicate existing provision by key local stakeholders. Existing social value delivery partners should still be consulted with, to maximise impact, and provide additional support.  
• The Government should also clarify whether there is an expectation to publicly report on impact, which is often difficult to define in numbers. Whilst the guidance^[10] states that developers are encouraged to carry out their own monitoring and evaluation work, there is still uncertainty with regards to the criteria for success.

Action 18: The Government will review the 2015 Community Electricity Right^[11]

Action 19: GBE will support locally owned renewable electricity projects through delivery of the local power plan^[12]

The main advantage of adopting a community ownership model is to give communities a vested interest and financial stake in the project, in direct consultation with the developer. It also raises awareness of individual energy usage and encourages energy efficient behaviours as residents can better understand how energy is generated, used and exported first hand.  

However, adopting a Community Ownership approach may not always be an appropriate mechanism to tackle specific needs of the community, or indeed be a popular option with those surrounding the development. Therefore, whilst beneficial in some respects, we believe that a full appraisal of community ownership models should be undertaken, and alternatives, such as Community Benefit Funds, considered, which may be more appropriate in terms of achieving tangible benefit and positive public perception.  

Some potential drawbacks of a community ownership model could include:  

• Those who have a vested interest in the project may not necessarily be those who are in closest geographical proximity to the development.
• Selected individuals who can afford to contribute to a stake in the project would also reap financial benefit, rather than funding wider community initiatives, which have farer reaching impact. As set out in Action 19, this option could be made more accessible for communities if guidance on Local Power Plans were provided, to assist with financial and technical support.  
• It is also a more complex model to set up and as operational costs can be unpredictable and sometimes long-term, this could result in periods of lower operational efficiency, which could, in turn, mean less revenue for the community. Residents may also be expected to contribute towards maintenance costs of the assets under their ownership.  

Awareness of the above is important in allowing communities to judge the comparative advantages of various community benefit options and affirms the importance of retaining a degree of choice and control.

Action 37: The Government will consider expanding the clean industry bonus to support onshore wind supply chain investment in the UK^[13]  

The Government is currently incentivising offshore wind developers to invest in comparatively more deprived communities, providing new investment and employment opportunities for communities in traditionally industrial towns and cities. It is welcomed that the Government are considering adopting a similar approach for the onshore wind sector to further attract investment, with associated incentives around skills and workforce requirements, to ensure that socio-economic benefits are spread across the country.  

Employment is widely recognised as one of the most significant factors in a person's health and wellbeing, identified as a primary determinant of health. Provision of a range of job opportunities throughout the project lifecycle will help to create a perceptible local link between developers, contractors and operators, and the communities who host them. This will therefore bring wider societal benefits that extend further than the individual.  

It is recognised that given the nature of the onshore wind industry, a proportion of the materials (e.g. the turbines themselves), are unlikely to be sourced from the local area, and indeed, outside of the UK. However, it is welcomed that the Government agree that developers should be encouraged, where possible, to utilise the local supply chain and smaller businesses, bringing the following benefits:

• If supply chain expenditure is with local SMEs, a higher proportion of its value is retained locally, than if spent with larger, national organisations.
• Helps to increase opportunities for entrepreneurship and allows new/small businesses to grow, which in turn creates supply chain diversity, innovation and resilience.
• Local procurement helps to tackle climate change and reduce waste of energy, materials and other resources. 

Action 41: The Government will publish the clean energy workforce strategy and explore options for boosting skills and delivering on the needs of the onshore wind industry^[14]

The continued focus on Clean Energy as one of the Government's key investment priorities within its Modern Industrial Strategy^[15] will bring associated high quality employment opportunities within the sector, which, as set out above, brings wider socio-economic benefits to communities.  

To ensure that local people benefit from investment associated with projects in the sector, it is welcomed that the Government recognise the importance of up-skilling and re-skilling communities to access these opportunities. The possibility of an Energy Skills Passport^[16] is therefore encouraging, to improve recognition and portability of skills across the sector. Engagement with local schools and colleges to raise awareness of the range of careers and routes to employment within the sector should also be encouraged, with commitments set out in a supporting Social Value Strategy or Employment and Skills Plan.

It is also important to understand the scale of workforce needed – and in turn, the jobs that can be created. It is noted that Action 41 relates to the methodology note published by DESNEZ on 23 June 2025, 'Job estimates for wind generation by 2030^[17]', focusing on the calculation of direct and indirect jobs associated with the sector. Our Economics team have developed a modelling approach for socio-economic benefits associated with energy schemes such as these. This modelling approach considers the unique characteristics of each development in terms of project timescales, costs and geographic context, utilising a more bespoke approach.

Whilst we welcome that a standardised approach for calculating employment opportunities has been provided there are several things to note:

• On initial review, the methodology note does not provide a breakdown between calculating employment associated with the pre-development and construction phases, which are distinct of one another, with each phase requiring a range of skills. These should be treated independently.  
• The calculation of employment uses a high level approach to estimating employment, utilising job-intensity ratio per GW for the respective construction and operational and maintenance phases (O&M). It would be our preference that project specific costs, timescales and local geographic context is taken into consideration, to provide a more scheme-specific estimate of job opportunities.
• The suggested multiplier to estimate indirect jobs is noted to be comparatively high (1.4 indirect jobs per 1 direct job), when considered against the ONS' UK Input-Output tables.

We encourage the Government to acknowledge the high-level design of the above methodology and to support and recognise the validity of the application of more granular modelling for individual projects which will depart from its national level assumptions, providing a more specific contextual approach for individual projects. 

Action 42: Industry will conduct new workforce monitoring to provide demographic data, from which appropriate targets will be set^[18]

By monitoring the profile of the workforce on a regular basis, developers, contractors and operators at all stages of the project lifecycle will gain greater insights into programmes, training, or integrate aspects into the on-site design to improve the skills, employability and wellbeing of their own workforce, or indeed the wider community. This in turn helps to encourage a diverse workforce and provide a route to employment for those who are traditionally under-represented in the sector. We would recommend that clear related targets are set out in collaboration with local social value delivery partners, who already understand the local context. These would be set out within a supporting Employment and Skills Plan, Social Value Strategy and/or an Equality Impact Assessment.

A welcome step forward but more guidance needed

We welcome that the Government has recognised the importance of the onshore wind sector to the UK's economic growth. It is encouraging to see that these national aims are underpinned by an ambition to ensure that local communities surrounding developments benefit as much as possible, through employment and skills opportunities, a preference to procure from local businesses, and an expectation that developers should contribute towards community benefit funds, or explore community ownership options.

However, we believe that further guidance should be provided to ensure that the local context is sufficiently recognised and reflected in the calculation of benefit. Equally, where the Government has presented a standardised methodology to allow national impact calculations to be made, it is important that it recognises the validity of more granular calculations. These can better reflect scheme specific information to arrive at more accurate estimations of the jobs to be generated, and the related supporting skills needed. Likewise, the provision of benefits aimed at enhancing local communities must allow sufficient flexibility to ensure they are ‘right’ for the host community and respond to local needs and capacity. Any provision of support should also be given in collaboration with existing social value delivery partners, to limit replication of existing delivery.  

For more information on the Strategy, Community Benefit Funds, and the socio-economic benefits of onshore wind please contact Beth Parsons or Robert Stott. Explore further insights on the Strategy from our wider services on our showcase page.  

21 July 2025  

[1] DESNZ Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy - July 2025

[2] Community Benefits Guidance for Onshore Wind in England 

[3] Job estimates for wind generation by 2030: methodology note - GOV.UK

[4] DESNZ Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy - Action 16

[5] DESNZ Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy - Action 17

[6] Industrial Strategy - GOV.UK

[7] Industrial Strategy: Clean Energy Industries Sector Plan 

[8] Community Benefits and Shared Ownership for Low Carbon Energy Infrastructure: working paper 

[9] Community Benefits Guidance for Onshore Wind in England

[10] Community Benefits Guidance for Onshore Wind in England 

[11] DESNZ Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy - Action 18

[12] DESNZ Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy - Action 19

[13] DESNZ Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy - Action 37

[14] DESNZ Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy - Action 41

[15] The UK's Modern Industrial Strategy

[16] DESNZ Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy - July 2025

[17] Job estimates for wind generation by 2030: methodology note - GOV.UK

[18] DESNZ Onshore Wind Taskforce Strategy - Action 42