Who should own the windy commons? Geopolitical and sustainability implications for Dutch offshore wind energy production ownership

Abstract

Geopolitical tensions and growing recognition of dependencies have sparked debates on the ownership of utilities. Offshore wind is promised to become a major part of the Dutch energy mix. Due to privatization, these generation assets are predominantly in the hands of major foreign energy companies. However, the shareholder distribution and the underlying investors remain opaque. Some would argue a lack of public ownership has put strain on the promotion of public values and the domestic retention of public capital. This leads to consider whether the current ownership configuration is optimal. Building on a theoretical foundation of nationalization and privatization debates, the present study sought to evaluate four ownership scenarios varying in their level of government involvement: Status Quo, Mixed Ownership, Nationalization, and Multilateral Cooperation. The scenarios were compared through an intuitive logics approach against a set of performance-indicating criteria, namely energy security, affordability, ecosystems, and innovativeness. The current ownership distribution was investigated through desk research. This revealed that less than 1% of Dutch offshore wind capacity is owned by Dutch public investors, and that foreign public investors (23%) and private investors (76%) hold nearly all the share. The establishment of current practices provided a basis for discussion on offshore wind energy ownership. From a literature study and thirteen interviews with field experts emerged a comprehensive array of arguments that supported or opposed the scenarios. These findings were refined by several stakeholders during a validation session. It became evident that the level of regulation influences competitiveness, which correlates with affordability and innovativeness. The Status Quo scenario is expected to maximize these factors as it involves less regulation than the alternatives. Stakeholders perceive this scenario to be less effective for energy security and ecosystems, as they may require more central steering and control. Consequently, the Nationalization and Multilateral Cooperation scenarios may be more meritorious in these regards. However, stakeholders expect trade-offs for affordability and innovativeness. The Mixed Ownership scenario is perceived as the most desirable alternative to the status quo and scores best overall. Scientists may take note of these findings to further research into ownership configurations, especially for offshore wind energy, which is currently limited. Policy makers would be prudent to consider the arguments when revaluating and steering policy decisions, or when they intend to alter ownership. The arguments are likely to supersede the context in which they were discussed and may also apply to other sectors or countries.