energies

Article

The Energy Landscape versus the Farming Landscape: TheImmortal Era of Coal?

Iwona Markuszewska

�����������������

Citation: Markuszewska, I. The

Energy Landscape versus the

Farming Landscape: The Immortal

Era of Coal? Energies 2021, 14, 7008.

https://doi.org/10.3390/en14217008

Academic Editor: Tomonobu Senjyu

Received: 5 October 2021

Accepted: 23 October 2021

Published: 26 October 2021

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

with regard to jurisdictional claims in

published maps and institutional affil-

iations.

Copyright: © 2021 by the author.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

This article is an open access article

distributed under the terms and

conditions of the Creative Commons

Attribution (CC BY) license (https://

creativecommons.org/licenses/by/

4.0/).

Faculty of Geographical and Geological Sciences, Adam Mickiewicz University, ul. Krygowskiego 10,61-680 Poznan, Poland; iwmark@amu.edu.pl

Abstract: This article explores the land use conflict. Coal exploitation precludes agricultural produc-tion and, as a result, mining-energy projects come across NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) oppositionfrom the farming community. An investigation was carried out in two rural communes: Krobiaand Miejska Górka in the Wielkopolska Region in Poland. The aim was to obtain an answer to thefollowing questions: (1) if acting in the name of energy security, should we accept the state govern-ment interest and start exploitation of the lignite resource? (2) If acting in the name of landowners’rights, should we accept the local community interest and maintain the current farming production?and (3) is it possible to reconcile the interests of the conflict beneficiaries? The following qualitativemethods were used: keyword and content analysis of word data, such as scientific papers, legaldocuments, and parliamentary questions (PQs), while the discourse analysis was focused on thepolicy and procedural conflicts. In the results section, possible solutions for heading off the conflictare presented. The results contribute to an integrated understanding of conflicts over mining andfarming land use.

Keywords: land use conflict; resources; energy policy; energy transition; food security; opencastlignite mining; farming; place attachment; affected community; state government

1. Introduction1.1. Introduction to Conflicts over Mining and Farming Land Use

The European Union is a global leader in promoting environmentally friendly energypolicy; however, certain countries still rely on fossil fuels [1]. For instance, Poland remainshighly dependent on conventional energy sources and, similarly to Germany and the CzechRepublic [2], is one of the leading producers of coal-based energy. In Poland, lignite (browncoal), with an annual electricity production exceeding 9000 MW, delivers ca. 25% of thepower capacity installed in all power plants in the country [3]. The exploitation of lignitedeposits is estimated at ca. 65 million Mg per year until 2030. Aspects of the state energystrategy [4] render lignite a fuel of strategic importance due to its rich coal resources, lowcost of mining, security of fuel supply, and stable prices. Though the state government inPoland has stated that it will close down mines from depleted deposits, at the same time,new ones are going to be opened.

Opencast mining (commonly practised in lignite excavation) meets with growingNIMBY opposition [5] due to (farm) land deprivation, forced displacement, unemploy-ment, and social and environmental injustice [6]. In addition, large-size opencast lignitemining contributes to land use conflicts that are posited to derive from differences in land-scape values and land use preferences [7]. Additionally, the greater the local communityattachment to place, the greater the opposition against mining projects [8].

1.2. Conflict over Mining and Farming Land Use—The Literature Overview

Land use conflicts occur between two or several parties when one land user is per-ceived to infringe upon the rights, values, or amenity of another land user, and when

Energies 2021, 14, 7008. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14217008 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 2 of 23

one party attempts to derive personal gain at the other parties’ expense without theirapproval [9]. Land use conflicts indirectly result in disagreements over the distributionof certain material or symbolic elements related to the control of, usage of and access tonatural resources [10]. Land use conflicts are caused by social factors [11,12], economicinterests [13], and dissatisfaction with actions undertaken or planned by private institutionsor public authorities [14]. In any conflict, one side will have a feeling of being defeated [15].This is due to being ignorant of the value systems of defeated actors: an individual’s beliefs,attitudes, and behaviours [16].

Perhaps no single industry has precipitated more disputes over land use than min-ing [17,18]. Mining activity changes entire landscapes [19,20], produces temporary landuse (which usually transforms farming to mining land use), and finally creates post-mininglandscapes [21]. Opencast coal mining, compared with underground coal mining, has agreater scale and degree of landscape degradation [18]. It also contributes to severe landuse changes [22–24]. Arable land, forests, built-up areas, infrastructure, and supply net-works are replaced with large pits, heaps, and landfill sites, which appear at mining areas.Further, while restoration and reclamation methods of post-mining sites have recently beenimproved, surface lignite mining remains a very controversial land use [25].

Overall, mining conflicts are determined by environmental injustice and externali-ties [26], by economic and procedural unfairness, and by social injustice [27,28]. Opencastlignite mining projects cause problems with social acceptance [29], as mining has an impacton collective and individual well-being [30–32], including the physical and mental healthof affected communities [33,34]. In addition, large-scale opencast mining triggers conflictsbecause of enforced displacement, land dispossession and patrimony deprivation [35],food insecurity [6], loss of (current) livelihood, and higher costs of living [18]. Most of all,however, opencast lignite mining is in contradiction to the existing use of natural resourcesand land ownership [20].

As the research shows, it is not easy to gain social acceptance for mining projects as theeconomic justification for mineral extraction often given at the national level is not alwayssufficient to convince local communities [25]. Studies have proved that to obtain a sociallicence for mining, it is necessary to have the following: company–community dialogue,procedural fairness around mining and trust in mining [28], and open dialogues andinteractions with different social groups [28,36,37]. Other research showed that proceduralfairness (a company’s honesty, honouring its promises, listening, and responding to thepopulation’s demands) had the highest positive long-term effect on trust [38]. Thus, forthe mining entrepreneur, building trust is very important [27]. In particular, it is crucial toinvolve the community in this process by listening and responding to people’s demandsand needs, keeping promises, engaging in mutual dialogue, and considering people asa relevant part of the collaborative process [39]. Finally, the key to acceptance lies in anunderstanding of how the local community perceives the role of mining in its region.Nonetheless, the results of the investigations cited here prove that, although agreement isnot easy to achieve, it is possible to work out a mutually accepted compromise.

Most mines are situated within rural areas and, considering this, the polarized interestsof farming and mining means that farmers (landowners) and mining entrepreneurs willinevitably end up in conflict situations. For this reason, it needs to be explained that forfarmers, farmland plays a fundamental role in creating and consolidating the sense of placeand place identity [40–42]. Attachment to farmland is fostered over time due to severalreasons. Farmers spend their whole life in one place (a village) [43–45]. For farmers, a familyfarm is their everyday workplace [46,47]. Farmers are rooted to their farmland via familyrelationships and dependence on patrimony [48]. Farmland, as land ownership, creates asense of continuity—it has been passed down through the family for generations [49,50].Farmland is a reason for pride—farmland can serve as the basis of inheritance for potentialheirs [51]. By this, farmland is not only economically valuable; farmland also becomes ameans for conveying intangible values [52]. In other words, the relationship of farmers with

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 3 of 23

farmland is based on emotional individual experiences and symbolic meaning, which refersto an unselfconscious bond to a place that is taken for granted [53].

All this means that farmers faced with enforced displacement (inherent in opencastmining) relate reluctantly to resettlement and the loss of patrimony. Emotional bonds thatroot farmers to patrimony are important not only in decision-making about farmland man-agement [54,55]. Emotional attachment to patrimony supports farmers’ place protectionbehaviours against place disruption and loss of the farmland [56–61]. This explains whyfarmers can have such a strong reaction to a new opencast mine project. For instance, if amining project is successful, farmers are forced to resettle. In a case like this, the financialcompensation and social support provided is insufficient and very rarely makes up for theloss of family heritage.

1.3. Contribution to Conflicts over Mining and Farming Land Use

The relationships between mining and farming and conflict situations have beenillustrated in several works, for example, [1,33,62,63]. Still, however, this relationshipbetween farmers’ attachment to their farmland and new mining projects has not beensufficiently recognised. Thus, my intention is to contribute to the literature on conflicts overfarming and mining land use. In particular, the novelty of this paper is its analysis of howthe discourse takes place between the state government and the local farming communityand local/regional authorities.

In addition to this, while many efforts have been made to explain land use conflicts,and researchers have examined various aspects of conflicts, such as concepts, causes, types,and implications, as well as methods for evaluation and management, there is still a gapin the integrated understanding of conflicts over mining and farming land use. In order toundertake an empirical analysis of a conflict situation, I focused on the Oczkowice case study.

The Oczkowice lignite resource, located in the Wielkopolska Region, is a lucrativetarget of the mining industry in Poland. Its geological resources are estimated at 966million Mg, while the operational resources at approximately 785.0 million Mg. Bearingin mind the annual coal extraction at the level of ca. 18.0 million Mg, a power plantwould deliver up to 3000 MW [3]. This rich coal deposit is a potential future miningproject. The planned opencast mine and energy power station are going to be locatedin a traditionally farming-oriented region. This is the reason why the mining project isthe subject of much controversy among the local community that is highly attached topatrimony (farmland). To be more precise, this land use conflict results from differentpreferences for resource utilization: soil (for food production) and lignite coal (for energysupply). The analysed region stands out for having the richest soil resources in the country,and farming production significantly contributes to the supra-regional economy. At thesame time, the analysed region stands out for having one of the richest domestic lignitedeposits; it is estimated that its energy power would meet supra-regional demand.

The aim was to obtain an answer to the following questions: (1) if acting in the nameof energy security, should we accept the state government interest and start exploitationof the lignite resource? (2) If acting in the name of landowners’ rights, should we acceptthe local community interest and maintain the current farming production? and (3) is itpossible to reconcile the interests of the conflict beneficiaries?

2. The Methodological Context of Analysis2.1. How the Methodological Framework Was Developed

The investigation over farming and mining land use conflict started from the followingassumptions: (1) mining is always spatially limited to the geological location of naturalresources, which as a rule, is in conflict with current land use; and (2) most lignite minesare situated within rural areas, which usually conflicts with farming activity. Consequently,regions of the extraction of lignite coal are sites of immense contestation over value andplace attachment [64].

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 4 of 23

The analysed land use conflict is specified as follows: two different natural resourcesoverlap in the same space (soil and lignite coal), and at the same time, two different publicnecessities and interests in resource utilisation contradict each other. On the one hand, theanalysed region stands out as having the richest soil resources in the country, and farmingproduction significantly contributes to the supra-regional market-oriented economy. On theother hand, the analysed region stands out as having the richest domestic lignite deposits;it is estimated that energy power would maintain supra-regional demand. The plannedlocation of the opencast mine and energy power station in a traditionally farming-orientedregion is the subject of much controversy among a local community that is highly attachedto patrimony (farmland).

The analysed conflict involves many actors. There are local, supra-local, and provinceauthorities, businesses, entrepreneurs, and farmers on the one hand. The local non-farmingresidents of the affected community, however, do not speak with a common voice. Thereare those who are against and those who are in favour of the mining investment. Thelocal community is conflicted, but still, most of them support the non-mining opinion.The opposing side of the conflict is represented by the state government and the potentialmining investor, both interested in the lignite coal project.

2.2. How the Conflict over Farming and Mining Land Use Was Analysed

This paper explores conflict over farming and mining land use as a function of unequalaccess to natural resources. To meet this aim, the following specific questions were pursued:(1) if acting in the name of energy security, should we accept the state government interestand start exploitation of the lignite resource? (2) If acting in the name of landowners’rights, should we accept the local community interest and maintain the current farmingproduction? and (3) is it possible to reconcile the interests of the conflict beneficiaries?The analysis explores procedural and policy contexts, as well as social and environmentalissues (Figure 1).

Figure 1. The methodological context of analysis.

The following qualitative methods were used: keyword and content analysis of worddata, such as scientific papers, legal documents, and parliamentary questions (PQs), whilethe discourse analysis was focused on the policy and procedural conflicts. In the resultssection, the conflict over legal procedures relates to the licence for the investigation of theOczkowice lignite deposit, the licence to mine the deposit, environmental hazards andsocial injustice, and spatial planning and regional development under farming-mininginterests. These issues were selected due to the frequency with which they appear in themedia discourse.

The analysed conflict involved many actors. For the sake of simplicity, this paperpresents the arguments of the opposing sides of the conflict: the local community andauthorities versus the state government and mining entrepreneur. The ‘sociological’ argu-ments were confronted with ‘scientific’ and ‘legal’ arguments, which by nature are more

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 5 of 23

objective. The purpose of the directed content analysis of documents (such as reports target-ing the farming sector and concerning the mining condition in the study area, as well asdifferent variables describing the profile of the territory from the point of view of the socialdimensions, of environmental issues, and of the economic dynamics) was a comprehensiveand systematic review of selected sources in order to explain the conflict situation.

The information and data gathered from scientific research and expertise concernedissues on the economic and ecological consequences of lignite mining. The analysis of thesedocuments was aimed at finding arguments for and against the construction of the mine.Legal documentation (acts and regulations) served as the basis for the procedural andpolicy context: property rights versus exploration and exploitation of mineral resources,and the results of environmental and social impact assessment. In addition, the collecteddata provided information about the different administrative decisions that are liable togive rise to opposition (e.g., the concession to the investigation of the lignite deposit).The commitment in the conflict was also manifested in less institutional ways, such asparliamentary questions (PQs) that concerned questions about what the state governmentposition to the analysed lignite deposit is.

2.3. Case Study

During the 1970s, mineral exploration was carried out within the tectonic formationin the Poznan Rift Valley. Rich lignite deposits were discovered and highly recommendedby the central authorities for a potential coal basin and energy purposes [65,66]. However,before taking appropriate steps, the province authorities (in cooperation with regionalgovernments) outsourced a comprehensive analysis. In 1978, an interdisciplinary councilof experts (established among the researchers of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Poznan)expressed their scientific opinion on a potential mining-energy project. The elaborateddocument, ‘Natural, social and economic consequences of potential exploitation of lignitedeposits in the region of Mosina-Czempin-Gostyn’, presents the environmental and socialhazards as well as the economic losses that would result from lignite exploitation in thePoznan Rift Valley [67].

From the beginning of the next decade, the potential mining operation met with strongopposition from local residents, farm owners, and enterprises, as well as academics andjournalists. Additionally, the administrative and political province authorities concurredwith the social anti-mining movement, when in 1989, they accepted the environmentalprotection program, stated as follows: “The Provincial Council recognises the projectof the Poznan Rift Valley for energy purposes as being contrary to social and economicinterests, and considers this issue to be finally resolved” [67]. Relevant resolutions werealso established by supra-local governments. This decision was upheld when adoptingfurther spatial development plans for the Wielkopolskie Province for the years 2001–2010.However, the authorities’ definitive stand on mining investment could result from the factthat in the 1980s, sufficient energy security was fully guaranteed by other domestic lignitedeposits. Only over the last decade, when it turned out that the current resources of lignitedeposits are becoming depleted, has the matter of the coal deposits of the Poznan RiftValley re-entered the conversation.

One of the lignite resources located in the Poznan Rift Valley is the Oczkowice deposit.This coal deposit is situated within the borders of two rural communes: Krobia and MiejskaGórka (the Wielkopolska Region, Poland) (Figure 2). The Krobia commune is inhabitedby just over 13,000 residents, including 8900 rural dwellers, and covers 129.59 km2. Agri-cultural land occupies 87% of the total area of the commune (11,274 ha). The number ofagricultural farms is 1189, in which 11.3% are made up of large-size holdings that exceed15 hectares. As for the Miejska Górka commune, the number of inhabitants is ca. 9500, ofwhich 6200 are rural dwellers. The total area is 103.62 km2, of which 88% covers agriculturalland (9119 ha). The number of agricultural farms is 916. In both communes, good qualitysoil predominates, consisting of soils in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th classes [68]. The unemploy-ment rate is low and fluctuates around 4.1% [69]. It is estimated that mining activity would

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 6 of 23

have an influence on the degradation of ca. 90 km2 of farmland [70], including agriculturaland grasslands (approximately 90% of the total surface), woodlands (5%), and residentialareas (10%).

Figure 2. Location of the case study.

It should be mentioned that the Biskupian ethnic group has its roots in the Krobiacommune. Over the years, the local community, which was isolated from other surroundingregions, was able to create a sense of place and local patriotism. Enfranchisement of thepeasants was carried out relatively quickly here, and under more favourable conditionsthan in other regions (land allocations were much greater here than anywhere else). Thisallowed the creation of a rich folk culture and a strong place attachment that distinguishesBiskupizna from other regions [52].

3. Facts and Findings3.1. The Licence for Deposit Exploration and Investigation

The geological documentation for the Oczkowice deposit, based on resource in-vestigation conducted in the 1970s, was approved by the Minister of the Environment(hereinafter referred to as the Minister) on 21 February 2011 (file ref. DgiKGkzk-4741-16/7954/7850/10/AW). On 11 May 2011, the Minister guaranteed to the PAK GórnictwoSp. z o.o. (the leading coal company in the country) the licence for deposit explorationand investigation (10/2011, amended by the Minister’s decision of 27 September 2011,file ref. DGiKGe-4770-141/43763/11/BG). Whereas on 17 December 2014, the Ministeraccepted the Supplement No. 1 to the geological documentation of the Oczkowice lignitedeposit, which was compiled on the updated geological appraisal.

The licence for deposit exploration and investigation aimed to assess the amount of theOczkowice lignite deposit via geological investigation. According to the rules, boreholesshould be made only with the landowners’ permission. Originally, the licence expected391 boreholes to be performed. Nevertheless, following the appeals of the landowners,the Minister revoked the licence to 52 boreholes. However, eventually, due to the farmers’protests and lack of access to the land, only 137 boreholes were carried out [71]. Thisgeological investigation served to elaborate Supplement No. 1. The authorisation of thisdocument, however, found the public outraged and became a matter under discussion.Local and regional authorities, the affected community, and the scientific arena all madean attempt to contest the licence and the results of the geological investigation itself. Theopponents of the mining sought support from MPs via parliamentary questions (PQs) toprove how the state government’s decision was detrimental for the local community andthe region as well. In addition, they took steps to ensure government assurance that theopencast mine will not be opened.

The local authorities demanded that Supplement No. 1 be revoked due to concernsthat this would make it easier to obtain a mining licence. The following arguments justifiedthis position: (1) a cursory geological survey is insufficient to compile such an important

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 7 of 23

document (only half of the planned boreholes were carried out), and (2) the lignite depositwas overestimated (according to the Supplement, the deposit reaches almost one billion tons,whereas previous data suggested a much smaller amount). These crucial issues were raisedin PQs. The government’s position in this case is summarised in the following discourse.

The Minister assured the legal correctness of Supplement No. 1 [71]. As he explained,the geological documentation of a mineral deposit defined the deposit’s boundaries, theamount of resources, the geological conditions, and the possibility of mining. SupplementNo. 1 met all the requirements, and therefore there was no reason to question it [72].

As for the manner in which the lignite deposit was calculated, the Minister explained:“The fact that the mining entrepreneur made a smaller number of boreholes than pro-vided in the licence meant that the resource’s category was lower than initially assumed.Consequently, the deposit was partly documented in the C1 category and partly in theC2 category. Therefore, the lower than intentional number of performed boreholes onlymakes the deposit less recognisable. However, the resources are not overestimated orcalculated using inaccurate data as the geological investigation eventually covered a muchlarger area than was originally planned” [71]. As for the latter, the current geologicalrecognition was enriched by 20 archival boreholes (made in the 1970s) purchased by theentrepreneur from the State Treasury. The Minister emphasised: “There is no evidence ofany distortion of the geological investigation” [73].

At the same time, self-government authorities appealed the Minister’s decision aboutgranting the licence for deposit exploration and investigation to the administrative court.Alas, it was to no avail. The Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw decided thatthe licence was definitive (of 2 December 2013, file ref. VI SAB/Wa135/13). In turn, theSupreme Administrative Court (of 17 September 2015, file ref. IIGSK1217/14), dismissedthe cassation appeal from the above-mentioned judgment [73].

Another proceeding concerned the annulment of the Minister’s decision to approveSupplement No. 1. Again, this was without success. The proceeding upheld the Minister’sdecision (22 December 2016). The local authorities appealed to the Provincial Administra-tive Court in Warsaw against this court’s decision. However, the Supreme AdministrativeCourt dismissed the complaint (14 February 2017) [72].

The failure in the court proceedings prompted local governments to turn to theMinister with a request for the Minister to amend his decision. The explanation was asfollows: “The decision on 17 December 2014, is definitive. Pursuant to the principle ofthe permanence of a decision, regulated by Art. 16 of the Act on Code of AdministrativeProcedure, revocation or amendment of definitive decisions, declaration of their invalidityand resumption of proceedings may take place only in cases provided in the Code orspecific acts. Currently, the Minister of the Environment is not conducting proceedingsaimed at changing the decision on 17 December 2014. Only the occurrence of premisesenumerated by law would entitle the Minister of the Environment to take action andconduct proceedings that interfere with the content of the final decision.” [72].

In the presented discourse, the state government position is that all decisions andactions taken on behalf of the Minister of the Environment obey the law and operate withinthe law. The legal rules, however, are enacted, adopted, and revoked under majorityrule. Additionally, bearing in mind that the governmental regime supports a carbon-basedenergy strategy, they created laws in favour of the preferred government policy.

3.2. The Licence to Mine the Deposit

Since it was not possible to overturn the results of the geological exploration, local andprovincial authorities took actions on a licence to mine the deposit. As a rule, the licenceto mine the deposit is granted by the Minister of the Environment [74]. Additiionally,according to [75], every entrepreneur running a business may apply for a concession.

However, the licence for deposit exploration and investigation is not tantamount toissuing a decision on exploitation of the deposit, as the Minister ensured, e.g., [71,76–78]. TheMinister, as the licence authority, justified a possible decision to issue such a licence as follows:

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 8 of 23

“The initiative is taken by the investor who submits an application for a licence to mine thedeposit. The licence authority who approves the application must operate within the law andmaintain impartiality towards all stakeholders” [78]. In the case of the Oczkowice deposit,the procedure for granting a mining licence has not been initiated, as no application has beenreceived. However, the Minister highlighted that: “There are no grounds for refusing toissue a licence” [79], justifying this as follows: “Taking into account the increasing demandfor energy, the emergence of new lignite mines is considered, even more so as Poland hasrich lignite deposits. The documented resources of lignite are estimated to be 23.5 billiontons and the potential resources amount to almost 1.2 billion tons” [78].

In many responses to PQs, the Minister has ensured that the mining licence mustbe accepted by the local authorities, otherwise the concession authority cannot issue thelicence award decision [71,76,78,80]. This assurance, however, does not reassure localgovernments. In fact, the role of local authorities is to accept the ready-made decision andto include the mining project in local zoning plans. Thus, it is not an agreement reachedthrough dialogue or negotiation, but a clearly stated obligation that local authorities, inaccordance with the law, should have to fulfil [81].

On the other hand, the Minister calmed the farming community by ensuring that:“Landowners, whose properties are located within the boundaries of the mining area, arethe parties in proceedings for granting the mining licence” [78]. However, the Minister didnot specify that when the mining licence is guaranteed, the entrepreneur has to obtain therights to the land via its acquisition. Then, the landowners’ participation comes down tothe consent to sell the land and (if need be) negotiation of the price. Is such landowners’participation satisfactory since the landowners do not want to leave their patrimonies?

Following the legal rules, before submitting the application for a licence to mine thedeposit, the entrepreneur has to present a Decision on environmental conditions [82,83].Such a Decision includes a number of conditions for implementation of the investment(with particular emphasis on the protection of natural values) and for reducing the negativeinfluence of the planned investment to neighbouring areas. In addition, the Decision obligesthe entrepreneur to monitor the environmental conditions (e.g., groundwater and surfacewaters, soil, noise, air, and electromagnetic radiation). The condition for such a Decision, ifnecessary, is also to provide environmental compensation. The issuance of the Decisionis preceded by the EIA. The EIA analyses, in a complex way, the impact of the plannedopencast mine on the environment. Moreover, the Decision is preceded by the Report onthe environmental impact of the planned investment.

The dispute around the EIA Report, however, concerns inefficient public participationin the proceedings. The local community demands to be a part of the procedures at theearliest possible stage. In practice, it can only express its opinion on the content of thealready elaborated EIA Report. How information about the Report is announced alsogives rise to reservations. The announcement is published on the website of the PublicInformation Bulletin and on a notice board of the Ministry of the Environment, as wellas being sent to the seats of the involved communes. As for the latter, the information isposted on a notice board at the commune office and/or on the notice board in localitiesconcerned by the case. Moreover, there are only 21 days to send comments on the contentof the Report.

3.3. The Water Issue and Local and Regional Development

In the ongoing dispute, the hydro-geological conditions of the Oczkowice depositare of the highest interest. According to the scientific research [70], the potential opencastmine would require aquifers to be drained and depleted up to a depth of 115–165 m forat least 50 years. The radius of the depression cone would be up to 3–10 km away fromthe open pit, although it would be widespread by an additional ca. 20–25 km in thedeeper groundwater levels. Depleting both underground and surface water resourceswould become the local threat as well as a huge risk in the Wielkopolska Region. On theother hand, underground water pumping would reduce the piezometric pressure, and this

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 9 of 23

results in an increase in the chloride levels in the surface water. It is estimated that theshare of chlorides in saline underground water is above 500 mg/L, and sometimes reacheseven 700 mg/L [70], as compared to less than 50 mg/L in the freshwater zone. In addition,the question of needing a substantial amount of water for the cooling system of the powerplant station is raised [84]. Bearing in mind the above, the scientific environment has anumber of objections to the way the hydrogeological documentation of the Oczkowicedeposit (integrated in Supplement No. 1) was elaborated.

The water issue was questioned (among others, in [74]): “The hydrogeological docu-mentation may raise serious doubts due to the fact that the network of boreholes is too sparse,and due to the fact that the local residents have destroyed several piezometers, as well asthe fact that several boreholes were not equipped with piezometers. So where do the resultscome from?” The Minister clarifies that pursuant to the legal regulation, the hydrogeologicalinvestigation (included in Supplement No. 1 and for which the boreholes were made) is not ahydrogeological documentation within the meaning of Art. 88 sec. 2 point 2 [73]. Indeed, itis the geological documentation of the mineral deposit specified in Art. 88 sec. 2 point 1 [73].This means that extraction of the lignite deposit requires additional hydrogeological re-search/documentation, which specify the conditions for draining the area before extraction.Such documentation should meet the requirements set out in § 9 [85].

Nevertheless, the concern about water disturbance (both the amount and quality) doesnot constitute any reason to suspend the opening of the mine. Therefore, the question ariseswhy the opinion of the scientific experts (which mentions the hazardous consequencesof establishing a mine) was not accepted in the approval procedure of Supplement No. 1.The Minister clarified that the local authorities did not submit the scientific data whenSupplement No. 1 was proceeding. The scientific opinion was submitted only in thecourse of a request for retrial, which ended unsuccessfully for local governments. TheMinistry of Justice rejected the matter (24 October 2016), indicating that pursuant toArt. 78 paragraph 1 [86], a reconsideration is only justified when the subject of evidenceis a circumstance relevant to the case. The presented scientific opinion does not meet thispremise, as the local authorities are not parties of this case and consequently, the localauthorities are not entities entitled to annulment of Supplement No. 1 [72].

At this point, the reason for passing the local authorities beyond the decision-makingprocess needs to be explained. In accordance with [73], only the Minister of the Environ-ment (acting with the assistance of the Chief National Geologist) is able to approve thegeological documentation of mineral deposits. Whereas the only party involved in theproceedings is the entrepreneur who submitted the geological documentation [72]. Thismeans that the local government is excluded from decisions made in the field of geologicaldocumentation of mineral deposits.

The local authorities demanded an evaluation of Supplement No. 1 by membersof the Commission of Resource and Hydrogeological Documentation. This initiative,however, was not taken into account as the Minister ensured that, before issuing theSupplement, an in-depth analysis had already been conducted. In addition, the geologicaldocumentation had been positively assessed by an independent peer—a specialist inthe field of documenting lignite deposits—and had received a positive opinion from theMineral Resources Committee, an auxiliary body of the Minister of the Environment [71].

A forecasted depression cone is a very disturbing issue for the proper functioning ofthe local community and the region itself. To limit harmful consequences of the lignitedeposit over drying, the following solutions have been recommended. For instance, specialgeological isolation, a protection-curtain against drying built into the rock mass thatwould isolate the aquifers [78]; or an artificial groundwater recharge via canals, ponds andabsorbent wells [87]. However, up until now, PAK Górnictwo Sp. z o.o. (the potentialmining investor) has not practised any of these solutions in other mining areas, dueto economic and technical limitations. Thus, the fact that such protective solutions areimplemented in the analysed case study is questionable.

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 10 of 23

It is worth quoting the arguments that have been raised during public discussion [87].Among non-mining arguments, the deepening deficit of water resources and the extensionof farming drought are the strongest. The counter arguments suggest that considering thecurrent water issue, future mining dehydration may only increase the current water deficit,not create it [87]. The results of hydrogeological analysis presented by academia have alsobeen questioned. Nonetheless, defenders of the farming option argued that the uniquenessof this region is that, despite having the lowest precipitation in the country (450–520 mm),the geological structure provides an excellent condition for farming. Namely, clay materialskeep soil moisture throughout the vegetation period without the need for irrigation. Onthe other hand, PAK Górnictwo Sp. z o.o. points out the development strategy of theprovince [88]: “The expansion of agriculture in previous centuries caused irreversiblechanges in water conditions and, indirectly, climate change. [ . . . ] This is expressed in thedeficit of groundwater, insufficient precipitation and its uneven distribution throughoutthe year. This is aggravated by the progressive drainage of the catchment, includinginappropriate one-sided drainage, desiccation and vanishing of moist biocoenoses, and thelack of adequate artificial retention, which results in a decrease in soil retention in favourof surface runoff.”

Indeed, such a formulation was found in the cited document. Nonetheless, in thecurrent Spatial Development Plan of the Wielkopolkie Province [89], the impact of agri-culture on the environment was less harmful. Moreover, an emphasis was placed on theuniqueness of the region due to its long-term farming traditions, favourable agriculturalconditions, and the role of the region in maintaining continuity in agro-production. In thescope of the protection of mineral deposits, the Spatial Development Plan clarifies thatopencast extraction is limited or excluded from areas of high-quality soils and areas thatmaintain domestic food security. In relation to potential new lignite mines, this documentemphasises the importance of the economic, social, spatial, and environmental conditionsthat have to be taken into consideration when a new opencast is planned. This documentalso draws attention to the protection of surface and groundwater resources, agriculturalproduction space, and cultural heritage.

The controversies around spatial planning took varied forms. Representatives ofthe mining company accused the local authorities of disobeying the legal rules [87]. Thisconcerns the lack of revision of the Study on local planning and development of thecommunes. Namely, in 2011, the geological documentation of the Oczkowice depositwas approved. According to [73], over the following two years, the study needed tobe updated and the actual data and the Oczkowice deposit should be included in theStudy. However, it was not. These shortcomings were also indicated in the report of theGovernment Inspectorate. Instead, a wind farm was constructed in the area of the deposits.The representative of the mining company raised the question: “Who will bear the costs ofdismantling windmills if a mine is to be opened there?” [87]. In response, local governmentofficials explained that, in relation to the Study of local planning and development of thecommunes, farming was specified as the predominant land use and a leading economicfunction. At the same time, the authorities guaranteed that both communes could produceenergy from renewable sources whose amount would be comparable to coal. As for rightnow, a wind farm (11 wind turbines) produces 82 GWh of electricity annually. However,restrictions imposed by the amendments of the Act on renewable energy resources (2016)became an obstacle to the development of wind farms. Namely, a minimum distance (up to2 km) of wind turbines from residential buildings made it impossible to introduce newwind installations in such a densely populated region. Instead, a supra-regional energycluster will stimulate technologies of renewable energy (solar, geothermal, and biomass).

The provincial authority showed solidarity with the local government. Enacting ofthe Spatial Development Plan protected the case study against easy land use changes.However, drawing up a spatial development plan, the regional authorities had to combineboth bottom-up development strategy and top-down regulations (legal and strategic).Namely, the strategic goal was to improve the natural conditions for farming development.

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 11 of 23

At the same time, the legal rules imposed mineral resources to be included in zoning plans,and to obey all limitations reserved for strategic deposits [90]. This was in contrary to theintention of the authorities and led to imbalance between mining and farming functions.

So far, a list of strategic deposits has not been drawn up; however, publishing [91]provoked a discussion on this. The Oczkowice deposit has been assessed as one of themost promising domestic lignite deposits [4]. Therefore, there is a real desire to put theOczkowice deposit on the list. The possible consequences of this are very disturbing.Specifically, protection of the lignite deposit means that investments within the geologicalborders of the mineral deposit are prohibited. That is because investments would makefuture coal exploitation impossible. The protection period for the lignite starts from whenthe deposit is entered on the list of strategic resources and ends when the mining begins.The protection imposes restrictions and has a number of ramifications. For instance, publicsupport for farming development is ruled out. For the analysed case study, this would haveresulted in economic deterioration in farming and the agro-food business. The protectionalso means a lack of any social investments, which deteriorates social well-being anddecapitalises property values. In fact, it is not only the abandonment of activities in theagricultural sector, but also in the non-farming sector. Regardless of this, local authoritiesplan the successive development of the communes, as the role of the stewardship body isto do this. In particular, the period of deposit protection, while waiting for the decision tostart or not to start mining, forces local authorities to take action to protect residents andentrepreneurs against social and economic collapse. In fact, it is a big challenge to maintainprosperity, and at the same time, to stop developing the region.

3.4. Social Injustice

The local community feels that they have been left out of the ongoing discussion overthe Oczkowice mining-energy project. This has given rise to a strong sense of social injustice.Additionally, this is not without reason since local residents are both legal (through theland deed) and psychological (through the emotional bonds) owners of the land. Forinstance, during discussions with the representatives of the state government, an explicitanswer has never been received as to whether the planned energy investment is trulynecessary, bearing in mind the following arguments: (1) the investment will affect nearly18,000 inhabitants living in 60 localities, (2) the investment will suspend the functioningof ca. 1300 business entities and annihilate nearly 1800 agricultural holdings, (3) theinvestment is being planned in an area that provides supra-regional food security, andsimultaneously, this region could provide regional energy security based on renewableresources, and (4) the investment will take place in a highly developed region wherethe local residents have a strong place attachment. Nonetheless, a lack of alternativesuggestions for what to offer displaced inhabitants, farmers, and entrepreneurs who willlose their patrimonies, businesses, jobs, and places of living, is the strongest argument.Namely, the name of the area where the displaced population would settle down has neverbeen mentioned. In addition, it should be noted that the entire region is densely populated,and the land is under private ownership.

The local residents argued that, despite collecting ca. 30,000 signatures from residentsopposing the drilling of boreholes (in 2011) and ca. 22,000 signatures of people opposed tothe construction of the opencast mine (in 2015), public opinion has been downplayed bythe state government since the very beginning of the conflict situation. Therefore, in severalPQs, the question has arisen whether the Minister of the Environment is going to providepublic consultations, e.g., [71,92]. In response to the inquiry of ‘Our Home’ (‘Nasz Dom’),a local NGO, the Minister specifies that it is the entrepreneur who is responsible forsocial dialogue, while the Minister “Fulfils the obligations resulting from the competenciesspecified by law and cannot replace the entrepreneur. [In addition, the Minister] must beimpartial towards all involved stakeholders” [93].

The Minister points out that, so far, the Ministry of the Environment has held severalmeetings with representatives of the local community and local governments at which

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 12 of 23

the procedures for issuing the licence for exploration and deposit investigation and thelicence to mine the deposit were discussed. For instance, to meet the expectations ofthe local community and the invitation of the Wielkopolska Chamber of Agriculture, on26 February 2015, representatives of the Ministry of the Environment took part in theAgricultural Forum 2015 (in Dłon in the Miejska Górka commune). During the meeting,“The numerous participants were fully informed about the consequences of approving thegeological documentation as well as the procedures for granting a licence to mine the deposit,including the participation of local authorities in making this decision” [74]. Therefore, it isnot true that there is no dialogue between the government and the local community.

In addition, the Minister ensures that: “The lignite exploitation brings many benefits,including new jobs in mines, power plants and scientific and technical back-up companies.Lignite mining creates opportunities for the development of co-productive companies.Lignite mining increases income for municipalities from licence fees, operating fees, en-vironmental fees, property taxes and personal and corporate income taxes” [71,76]. Inrelation to the case study, however, the vast majority of the population has farming ex-perience. When the mining operation starts, farming employees will lose their jobs, andthey will certainly not find employment either in the mine or the plant power as theyare not specialists in these professions. In addition to this, the labour market is saturatedwith top-class specialists, which means that local residents will not be able to compete forjobs. Furthermore, the economic dimension of income will change; local governments willlose incomes from farming-action taxes in place of revenues from the mining operation.Nonetheless, farming taxes are predictable. From the perspective on changes in land-useand taxes, in 30 years when the lignite excavation will end up, there will be no incomesfrom mining, while forecasted incomes from tourism (after reclamation of post-miningareas) will be too early.

The Minister admitted that “An indispensable consequence of opencast mining activ-ity, which is unfavourable for the local community, is often the change in living conditionsand the necessity to relocate the inhabitants. This is the greatest disadvantage for theaffected community, and it is often the cause of protests.” Therefore, he explained therole of the mining investor in this regard: “The entrepreneur who applies for a mininglicence has to make effort to obtain social consent and should work out an agreementwith the local community long before its commencement” [78]. The Minister also addedthat: “Undertaking social dialogue is a proven way to reach an agreement in a conflictsituation” [93]. Furthermore, the Minister ensures that “The analysis of potential prosand cons [economic, environmental, and social] of an undertaken investment has to beperformed by the entrepreneur long before its commencement, due to the fact that theresponsibility for all kinds of effects of the planned operational activity rests with theentrepreneur” [93].

Nonetheless, the local residents feel that they were disregarded in the formal proce-dures and decision-making process, from the licence for exploration and deposit investi-gation to the licence to mine the deposit. The Minister disputed this statement, arguingthat: “In the administrative procedure of acquiring a licence for exploration and depositinvestigation concluded with the issuance on 11 May 2011, [ . . . ] the parties to the proceed-ings were all landowners within whose properties the geological research was conducted,i.e., 277 people. Everyone who was dissatisfied with the decision could submit a reconsid-eration request to the Minister of the Environment. In this way, several people exercisedtheir rights. The reconsideration procedure, resulting in the decision of 27 September 2011,revoked the creation of 52 boreholes. Again, after this decision, the dissatisfied landownerscould lodge a complaint with the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw. Again,several people exercised their rights” [74].

In another PQ, the Minister referred to the involvement of the affected communityby ensuring that “The parties to the proceedings for granting the mining licence are alsoowners of land located within the boundaries of the mining area, who are entitled toparticipate actively in the proceedings. Without their consent, it is impossible to grant a

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 13 of 23

licence, let alone conduct any activity” [80]. The mining entrepreneur, however, has notinitiated the consultation as he admitted it is too early for such actions. Perhaps the mininginvestor was afraid of unfavourable results coming from the negotiations and this waswhy he avoided open confrontation since negotiations involve a significant share of theaffected community and make decisions unfavourable to the investor. A representativeof PAK Górnictwo Sp. z o.o. explains: “It is good to talk about many topics beforehand,but this is not that stage. We do not know yet whether we will open a mine there, we donot know yet whether this deposit is profitable. Anyway, I am glad I was able to speakon this occasion and say a few words about it” [87]. It should be noted, however, that theinvolvement of the affected community in the proceedings is limited to the enforcementof financial compensation in exchange for the loss of their land. In other words, duringthe consulting process, there is no space for questions, such as ‘are you for or against theopencast mine?’, as negotiations begin just after the mining licence has been granted. Itseems, however, that this is not the answer that the local community expects. Certainly, theMinister’s assuredness that the mine will never be open is an unfulfilled wish.

4. General Discussion4.1. Mining Context

According to [4] (supported by research findings, e.g., [3,66], lignite is perceived asthe cheapest medium of primary energy. From this perspective, lignite is perceived asbeing competitive with other energy resources, such as hard coal, natural gas, fuel oil, oreven renewable resources. This calculation, however, does not include all the externalitiesof lignite mining, namely the hidden costs of the complex process of coal exploitation,processing, and combusting. The hidden costs that are incurred throughout the full life cycleof coal-derived electricity include social expenditures (welfare deterioration and healthcare) [63], environmental externalities (hazards associated with deforestation, productivityloss, mining waste remediation, ground and surface water pollution and treatment, over-drying poorly reclaimed soil and its limited future development, destruction of local habitatsand loss of biodiversity) [94], and losses in property values and farmland resources, aswell as serious limitations on land use [95,96]. In fact, incorporating the full costs ofcoal-fired power plants, using current combustion technology, nearly doubles the costs ofelectricity generation from coal [97]. Thus, the argument mentioned here is very biased and,additionally, it downplays the sense of social injustice mentioned in the previous chapter.

Another argument, which in the opinion of the state government is very convincing,exemplified in the studies of [1,57,98,99], is that lignite mining-energy projects bring aneconomic boom to economically poor areas. However, one should always pay attentionto the fact that economic recovery applies exclusively to economically underdevelopedregions. Otherwise, when the investment is planned in an economically developed region(such as the case study), the mining-energy project meets with resistance from local author-ities and communities as the mining project has a damaging effect on the local economy.The performed calculations indicate how the Oczkowice coal-based energy project is highlyuneconomical and unreasonable in the analysed region. The experts’ analyses have shownthe environmental hazards, threats to farming and agro-food processing, harmful land usechanges, and deterioration of human well-being, and have proven that the external costsare to the detriment of the planned mine [100,101].

The author of [102] clearly identifies that the competitiveness of the Polish nationaleconomy in the European/international arena can be achieved via the coal-based energysector due to huge domestic deposits of fossil resources. In the opinion of the rulingparty, coal is a symbol of energy independence and energy security. Additionally, thelong-standing mining tradition (that used to have a key importance during periods of thecountry’s dynamic development) is also an argument in favour of lignite mining. Thediscussion below thoroughly analyses the theses presented here.

Coal is a strategic fuel in Poland. Its share of the total energy production is 49.3%for hard coal and 17.8% for lignite coal [103]. Among renewable resources, wind farms

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 14 of 23

(almost 16%) and waterpower plants (almost 5%) are important; the share of other RESis marginal. Due to the fact that the amount of domestic RES deposits is unrealistic, theargument about the self-sufficiency of coal is compelling. Nonetheless, putting coal at theforefront not only belittles the role of the RES, and therefore justifies the carbon choice, butabove all, is used for propaganda purposes. Some see this as a reference to the communistslogan when coal used to be called ‘black gold’, and which was underlined by the stategovernment, for example, the Prime minister’s speech in 2016: “There will be no strongPolish economy without a strong mining industry” [104].

In turn, external energy dependence is not in the interests of the Polish stewardshippolicy. For this reason, however, Poland will hardly be able to proceed with a drasticphase-out of the mining of its coal deposits. In addition, current regulations in Polandsubsidize coal-fired options and discriminate against renewable sources [105]. There are anumber of studies that have analysed the economic impact of phasing-out the dependenceof power plants on coal in Poland. For instance, [106] developed the energy dependencemodel, which shows the differences in energy sources if coal were completely eliminatedfrom the energy mix and the entire amount of energy originally attributable to coal wasimported. In relation to Poland, the difference is very significant and reaches ca. 54%. Theauthor of [105] explains that biomass technology becomes the best option when coal isphased out. Considering the limited capacity of biomass energy, wind and nuclear powershould replace it. Emphasising energy independence, the state government has stated thatimported RES is not a subject for discussion. Nonetheless, this does not mean that Polanddoes not import energy resources. Since 2008, imports of hard coal have begun to prevailover exports, where Russia is the main supplier of coal (68% in 2018) [107].

In discussions on energy issues, one thing should be emphasised, namely the monop-olistic nature of mining companies that are under the influence and control of the stategovernment. In one of the public discussions [87], the representative of the Ministry ofthe Environment made the position of the government very clear: “We live in a unitarystate, the government is centrally-managed. Poland is not a federation of communes. Itis a question of local interests versus state interests, which of course should be in somereasonable way solved by the ruling political class at a given time, and also by a sanepolitical class that takes power according to the normal democratic cycle.” Therefore, sucha strategy reduces the role of local governments and essentially deprives them of thepossibility of making decisions and thereby gives leading mining enterprises an advantage.The same privileged position is also held by mining trade unions. For instance, to avoidconflict with the mining trade unions, the debate on decarbonising of the national energysector was blocked [107,108].

The dominance of coal in the Polish energy mix also results from the number of do-mestic deposits. The statistical data regarding lignite coal are very promising [4], althoughit is not so optimistic as the President of Poland assured people at the Climate Summitin Katowice in 2018: “Coal is our strategic raw material. We have supplies for 200 yearsand it is difficult for us to completely give it up. [ . . . ] Coal is supposed to provide energysovereignty. There is no plan to abandon coal in Poland.”

In addition, the findings of [109] indicate that, despite similar material conditionsin the European coal heartland (i.e., Germany, Poland, and the Czech Republic), in themedia discourse, the paradigm of energy policy is presented in a different manner. Namely,Germany facilitates coal phase-out policies, the Czech Republic presents political uncer-tainty around lignite mining in the northwest part of the country, while Poland acts as aninhibiting factor for decarbonisation of the energy sector.

4.2. Farming Context

The literature on the attachment of farmers to a place (mentioned in the introductorysection) proves that they have strong bonds with their farmland. It is worth emphasisingthat these relationships go beyond the legal nature of land ownership, as these bonds aremarked emotionally. Accordingly, the farmers’ emotional relationship with place has a large

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 15 of 23

influence on how the farmers perceive family farms and farmland, and how they create socialbonding and how they build place dependence, which is important in place protection.

Disagreement with the mining operation, in this particular case study, stems fromthe strong attachment of the farming community to patrimony [52]. The study of [110]confirmed this place rootedness: strong attachment to place was recorded in 33.6% of thefarming community, whereas moderate attachment was scored by 54.1% of respondents.However, what makes the attachment to place and farmland exceptional is the followingaspects: (1) farms are owned and operated by a family, (2) farms have been handed downfrom one generation to another, (3) farmers spend their whole life in one place and workon the family farm [35], (4) farm work has been the main source of income for manygenerations [111], and (5) despite its high price, farmers refuse to sell farmland, beingafraid of non-agricultural use of the land [112]. This makes farmland important for botheconomic and emotional reasons, which is synonymous with non-material richness and asense of place belonging [35].

Opencast mining results in enforced displacement of the local community and theresettlement of a deeply attached community is particularly problematic. Despite the poten-tial threats, the inhabitants of the analysed region seem to trivialise this matter [96,110]. Thisignorance could result from failure to notify the affected community about changes in landuse due to the opencast mine. Or this could result from their demand to the rights to theland by arguing: ‘We will never go anywhere from here’, ‘Old trees cannot be replanted’,‘Whatever happens, we will stay here forever’, ‘As long as we are here, no mine will beopened’, ‘The lignite must remain in the ground. You will not burn our future’, or morebluntly, ‘Get off our land’. Scholars have conducted research on how difficult it is fordisplaced farmers to adapt to new conditions and accept the loss of patrimony; the ‘newlife’ is marked by the stigma of nostalgia. It is worth referring to the argument of themining lobby, which says that it is the human capital that makes this region outstanding inmarket-oriented farming production. So, repeating farming success in any other area, afterlocal community displacement, is not a problem. Nonetheless, this is a very selective viewon this issue because the mine will interrupt a well-functioning region and the sense ofplace cannot be reconstructed in any other area. The eradication of family farms meansthe eradication of small enterprises. Family farms should not be considered as the sumof buildings and hectares of farmland, but as a certain production value of enterprises, ofwhich there are almost 2000 or so. This is a construction of material and immaterial valuescemented by the history and memory of the place, generational continuity, and family ties.

As for the mine, the affected community does not speak in a consistent voice. Theplanned mining investment divided the community into supporters and opponents. Mostresidents take the view that the opencast mine is a socially harmful and environmentallyunfriendly investment. Research conducted in 2016 revealed that as many as 93% of re-spondents expressed their opposition to the mining project. As time passed, indifferenceamong mining opponents was observed; in 2018, the share of the opponents was 87% [110].The supporters’ profile indicates people for whom the lignite mine is perceived as aneconomic regional boost and cost-effective individual benefits. Some of them are satisfiedwith changing their place of residence and the new quality of the post-mining landscape.What is important here is the fact that more than 76% of the supporters are not involvedin farming, nor are they farm owners or workers. Opponents of the mining investmentexpressed concern about landscape degradation and cultural heritage, deteriorating qual-ity of the environment, loss of employment in farming, and loss of farmland and soilresources [35,110].

A strong link between attachment to a place and oppositional responses (the threat ofplace disruption) leads to a negative attitude towards the coal mine project. As the resultsshow, high attachment to place was negatively related to support for the mining operationand at the same time, positively related to the support for a wind farm project. The socialcontext (family dependence and patrimony protection) and environmental framework(soil resource protection) build a strong unwillingness to changing place, which is harmful

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 16 of 23

in the opinion of the affected community. Instead, a less harmful and socially acceptedsolution was proposed. The findings of the survey research [110] show that the majorityof respondents (almost 75%) would prefer wind farm instead of fossil fuel investment.Other RESs are also acceptable. A minority (represented by a share of 8%) expressed itsopposition to the renewable energy solution (among them, the pro-mining supporters werepredominant). In addition, the media report draws the conclusion that energy gatheredfrom bio-waste (so common in agricultural activities) can provide an important chance forthe development of the agricultural sector, as they can reduce production costs or increasethe local entrepreneur’s income through energy sales [113–115]. In this way, the studyresults propose new insights into the ‘not-in-my-backyard’ attitude due to their twofoldperception in the farming-energy landscape: from the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) tothe YIMBY (Yes In My Back Yard) [96].

As noted by [116], the self-interested NIMBYism position is much more varied thanthe simple opposition to an unwanted project. NIMBY has a pejorative meaning: localselfishness, ignorance, or irrationality regarding developmental projects that appear toserve community needs, projects that are locally perceived as unattractive, dangerous, or anuisance [117]. However, NIMBY syndrome has a complex nature as it builds on variedland uses and facilities, diverse motivations, and concerns of participants. The causes ofNIMBYism should be carefully analysed in each case and the answer to the question of‘why?’ should be identified (e.g., why the local community keeps its anti-project position?Why the investment raises such strong opposition?). In the analysed case study, it is notthe ‘democratic deficit’ speaking in favour of NIMBYism as [118] suggested that it openlyhappens in NIMBY environments), where a minority takes control of decision making.In the analysed case, this is the majority of the public that expressed opposition to themining investment and again this is the majority that would prefer renewable energysolutions. Moreover, the local community appeals for a deep place dependence and theresponsibility for a place; by knowing the consequences of mining destruction, the affectedcommunity proposes less harmful energy options (similar findings were found by [119].This alternative option that was proposed is a wind farm. Additionally, while wind farmsare widely recognised as socially unwanted and landscape-harmful investments, wind farmprojects are gaining more and more public approval [57,120]. Further, other studies showthat socially, the most desirable energy source in Poland is wind farms (75% of respondentsexpressed this wish) [107]. This proves that communities demand more transparencyand participatory governance in energy democratisation and the need to speed up thelow-carbon transition in Poland [121].

5. Limitations and Prospects for Resolution of Land Use Conflict

Each mining location and mining conflict is unique in terms of its physical environ-ment and socio-cultural, historical, political, and economic background [36,98]. On theother hand, Ref. [122] claims that ending a conflict is not always possible, at least at aspecific moment in time or in light of some other factors, such as personalities or objectives.As for the analysed conflict situation, one thing is certain: in the analysed conflict, thepower of influence seems to be unbalanced as the financial and legislative power to pursuethe growth of the energy industry is under state government control, as evidenced byamends in legislation supporting pro-mining interests. The local community and authori-ties, however, demand their rights. Despite the odds, they do not back down and have onefinger on the pulse.

The current model of social participation in the decision-making process comes downto imposing previously established solutions. Therefore, the affected community demandsthat dialogue and cooperation are improved. Residents claim that negotiations and media-tions will alleviate the conflict. They are of the view that to minimise conflict situations,social participation in the decision-making process should consist of informing, consulting,and co-deciding. They argue that the dialogue should include reasonable arguments andopinions from both sides of the conflict. However, what does a ‘reasonable’ argument mean

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 17 of 23

here? What does an ‘expert opinion’ mean in a case like this? Both parts of the conflictcan provide ‘objective calculations’, ‘unbiased data’, and ‘irrefutable proofs’ because, evenbased on the same raw data, different results and conclusions can be compiled. So, it isdebatable who will be the winner in a real round table discussion. As for now, the localresidents can exert their rights via public actions, such as protesting and lobbying.

The negotiations aim to work out a compromise that is acceptable for both sides of theconflict. What, then, would the compromise come down to in the analysed case? Whichcompromise would be acceptable to both sides of the conflict? What would the negotiationschange? Would the farmers, with their attitude towards the mine, be satisfied with financialcompensation and agree to displacement and to leave their patrimony? Or would themining investor, being aware of the farmers’ emotional attachment to their patrimony andthe framing potential of the region, give up the mining project? Would the governmentwithdraw its plans to create a mine and power plant complex in favour of implementingrenewable energy solutions in the region?

It seems, however, that this is not about negotiation as a means of working outcompromise, but about a clear message that the local community will not allow the mineto be opened. Additionally, the importance of regional farming (backed up by meticulouscalculations) has nothing to do with this. It is about the sacred right to land property,which has been strengthened by family dependence, farming traditions, and local heritage.Residents protect their home according to the principle: “When you feel that this placeis yours, you protect the place better”. This self-centred perception of a piece of land,so-called ‘mine-ness’ [61], stimulates the farmers’ feeling of taking control of the place.Nonetheless, private rights to land (legal and psychological ownership) can be pushed intothe background when it comes to maintaining the national interest and fulfilling commonneeds (in this case, energy demand) [123]. It should be emphasised once again that theresidents are not passive NIMBYists but being aware of the resistance to the lignite project,they showed understanding for the necessity to propose an alternative energy solution.

It is another matter entirely how the EIA Report is elaborated. Elaboration of thisdocument upon the mining entrepreneur’s request raises further suspicions; commission-ing this to an independent specialist would avoid a subjective assessment of the Report’scontent [96]. Furthermore, although the contents of the EIA Report refer to human aspectsof well-being, the local community insists on a supplementary Social Impact Assessment(SIA is not statutory in Poland). In particular, an SIA would estimate the influence of theplanned investment on the local community; social impacts are defined as a change topeoples’ way of life, their culture, community, their environment, health and wellbeing,personal and property rights, and their fears and aspirations. This demand stems fromcriticism of EIA Reports, which are currently being prepared, where improper recognitionof environmental risks at the initial stage and underestimation of threats to human well-being are a common practice. In this connection, the current situation brings frustrationand distrust and is the main reason for the division between ‘us’ and ‘them’.

There are also doubts as to the abundance of the Oczkowice deposit as, in the opinionof the mine’s opponents, it was imprecisely documented. It is not known, therefore,whether the deposit is as lucrative as the government assures, although it is known that inPoland, there are richer lignite deposits than the Oczkowice one. For instance, the Legnicadeposit that accompanies a copper deposit (Legnica-Głogów copper district). However, asthe representative of PAK Górnictwo Sp. z o.o. claims: “KGHM does not want competitionat home.” KGHM Polish Copper is a monopolist company of copper mining in Poland.

As a solution to this land-use conflict, the affected community and local authoritiesoffer a wind farm and scattered renewable bio-and-solar energy production spots. However,these sources of energy would not offset the coal-based energy; this would only maintaina supra-regional energy demand. The state government, on the other hand, offers coalgasification. In this way, both land use options, farming and mining, can coexist together.Coal gasification is a very promising technology; however, as for the current experience,

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 18 of 23

carbon dioxide emissions would be incomparably greater than the emissions from coalcombustion in a power plant. Therefore, in the long run, both proposals seem unsatisfactory.

6. Conclusions

It seems, however, that throughout the history of coal extraction from the very begin-ning to advanced extraction since the industrial revolution and continuing through the20th century, coal has been a symbol of power and profit and, at the same time, of abuseand exploitation [124]. At present, what is under criticism and leads to opposition againstthe lignite mining industry is dissatisfaction with the generation of external costs that affectthe local community, while the benefits are distributed among consumers who do not sharethe costs. Accordingly, the grassroots movements (permeated with the ideology of placeattachment) constitute the social demand to fair access to the land, good quality of theenvironment, and human well-being [125].

Coal, as this case study shows and confirmed by other studies, e.g., [5], is deeplyrooted in political-economic power. This paper contributes to the literature on the field of‘farming-mining’ land use conflicts by looking at a community that wants development butnot the loss of environmental and social well-being. This paper intended to establish thebackground of the conflict situation by analysing the bottom-up and top-down positionsthat represent mainstream conflicts. This paper advances the opposition to coal expressed bythe affected community, which is deeply attached to farmland. This case study demonstratesthat the strength of the place attachment of the local community and its responsibility forthe place forces the government authorities to look for alternative measures that effectivelyreduce the negative impact of coal not only on a local scale but, taking into account all costsand impacts, also on a global scale (e.g., carbon emissions). In a low-carbon society affectedby global climate change, coal exploitation has a very negative impact.

This article is an important contribution to understanding the social attitude towardsthe climate challenge in a country whose energy independence relies on a conventionalenergy source, such as coal, a country in which social protests against the coal-based energysector continue. In particular, the presented case study discusses the conflict betweenfarming and mining land use in an area that is distinguished by the strong attachmentof the local community to patrimony, and a region that is economically well-developed.To overcome the NIMBY syndrome, bottom-up substitute proposals based on renewablesources have been discussed.

The novelty of this paper is its analysis of how the discourse takes place between thestate government and the local community and local/regional authorities. The results showthe discrepancy between top-down coal-based energy policy and bottom-up low-carboneconomy transition. The presented case study is an example of highly developed socialawareness and a willingness to transition to a low-carbon economy, which is ahead ofossified government policy and a vision of state power inadequate for the economic andenvironmental realities. The findings present a case study, which is an opportunity torespond to the energy transition in a country that has a long tradition in lignite mining andelectricity production.

The analysis presented in this paper is not intended to exhaust all issues related toconflict over mining and farming land use. In my research, I focused on the topic of socialperception of the proposed coal mine and in this area, I was looking for possible solutionsto the land use conflict. Strands of research threads that are worth paying attention to arealternative methods of coal-based energy production. This concerns underground coalgasification, for example, which does not interfere with land use. Although, at present,using this technology is a rather distant prospect, as the experience so far indicates fargreater carbon dioxide emissions than in conventional coal combustion, not to mentionother environmental and social impacts.

In addition, other technological solutions may be used to resolve the land use conflictin terms of access to energy resources, in particular, technologies that use renewable energy

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 19 of 23

sources. It is worth mentioning the current latest achievements in this area, e.g., [126–129]and considering the possibility of their wider use as very promising solutions.

Funding: Publication financed by the subsidy granted to the Faculty of Geographical and GeologicalSciences, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement: No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing isnot applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest: No conflict of interest.

References1. Karasmanaki, E.; Ioannou, K.; Katsaounis, K.; Tsantopoulos, G. The attitude of the local community towards investments in lignite

before transitioning to the post-lignite era: The case of Western Macedonia, Greece. Resour. Policy 2020, 68, 101781. [CrossRef]2. Euracoal. Available online: https://euracoal.eu/info/euracoal-eu-statistics/ (accessed on 29 September 2021).3. Kasztelewicz, Z.; Ptak, M.; Sikora, M. Wegiel brunatny optymalnym surowcem energetycznym dla Polski. Zesz. Nauk. Instyt.

Gospod. Sur. Mineral. Energia PAN 2018, 106, 61–84. [CrossRef]4. Program for the Lignite Mining Sector in Poland; The Ministry of Energy: Warszawa, Poland, 2018. Available online: https:

//www.gov.pl/attachment/9cf46169-01a5-492a-b6c4-98c06713a45e (accessed on 29 September 2021).5. Delina, L.L. Topographies of coal mining dissent: Power, Politics, and protests in southern Philippines. World Dev. 2021, 137,

105194. [CrossRef]6. Worlanyo, A.S.; Jiangfeng, L. Evaluating the environmental and economic impact of mining for post-mined land restoration and

land-use: A review. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 279, 111623. [CrossRef] [PubMed]7. Brown, G.; Raymond, C.R. Methods for identifying land use conflict potential using participatory mapping. Landsc. Urban Plan.

2013, 122, 196–208. [CrossRef]8. Graybill, J.K. Mapping an emotional topography of an ecological homeland: The case of Sakhalin Island, Russia. Emot. Space, Soc.

2013, 8, 39–50. [CrossRef]9. Mann, C.; Jeanneaux, P. Two approaches for understanding land-use conflict to improve rural planning and management. J. Rural

Community Dev. 2009, 4, 118–141.10. Lumerman, P.; Psathakis, J.; Ortiz, M. Climate Change Impacts on Socio-Environmental Conflicts: Diagnosis and Challenges of the

Argentinean Situation; Initiative for Peacebuilding: Brussels, Belgium, 2011.11. Wehrmann, B. Land Conflicts: A Practical Guide to Dealing with Land Disputes, GTZ; Land Management: Eschborn, Germany, 2008.12. Nolon, S.; Ferguson, O.; Field, P. Land in Conflict: Managing and Resolving Land Use Disputes; Lincoln Institute of Land Policy:

Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013.13. White, R.M.; Fischer, A.; Marshall, K.; Travis, J.M.; Webb, T.J.; Di Falco, S.; Van der Wal, R. Developing an integrated conceptual

framework to understand biodiversity conflicts. Land Use Policy 2009, 26, 242–253. [CrossRef]14. Torre, A.; Melot, R.; Mags, H.; Bossuet, L.; Cadoret, A.; Caron, A.; Darly, S.; Jeanneaux, F.; Kirat, T.; Vu Pham, H.; et al. Identifying

and measuring land-use and proximity conflicts: Methods and identification. SpringerPlus 2014, 3, 1–26. [CrossRef]15. Petrescu-Mag, R.M.; Petrescu, D.C.; Azadi, H.; Petrescu-Mag, I.V. Agricultural land use conflict management—Vulnerabilities,

law restrictions and negotiation frames. A wake-up call. Land Use Policy 2018, 76, 600–610. [CrossRef]16. Colvin, R.M.; Witt, G.B.; Lacey, J. Strange bedfellows or an aligning of values? Exploration of stakeholder values in an alliance of

concerned citizens against coal seam gas mining. Land Use Policy 2015, 42, 392–399. [CrossRef]17. Hilson, G. An overview of land use conflicts in mining communities. Land Use Policy 2002, 19, 65–73. [CrossRef]18. Gao, Y.; Wang, J.; Zhang, M.; Li, S. Measurement and prediction of land use conflict in an opencast mining area. Resour. Policy

2021, 71, 101999. [CrossRef]19. Svobodova, K.; Owen, J.R.; Lebre, E.; Edraki, M.; Littleboy, A. The multi-risk vulnerability of global coal regions in the context of mine

closure. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Mine Closure, Perth, Australian, 3–5 September 2019; pp. 553–562.20. Kivien, S.; Kotilainen, J.; Kumpula, T. Mining conflicts in the European Union: Environmental and political perspectives. Fennia

2020, 198, 163–170. [CrossRef]21. Markuszewska, I. Funkcjonowanie oraz zagospodarowanie obszarów poprzemysłowych zwiazanych z eksploatacja surowców

ilastych ceramiki budowlanej. Prace Kom. Kraj. Kult. 2007, 6, 115–125.22. Stepans, R. A case for rancher-environmentalist coalitions in coal bed methane litigation: Preservation of unique values in an

evolving landscape. Wyo. Law Rev. 2008, 8, 449–480.23. Morgan, M.I.; Hine, D.W.; Bhullar, N.; Dunstan, D.A.; Bartik, W. Fracked: Coal seam gas extraction and farmers’ mental health. J.

Environ. Psychol. 2016, 47, 22–32. [CrossRef]24. Matilainen, A.; Pohja-Mykrä, M.; Lähdesmäki, M.; Kurki, S. “I feel it is mine!”—Psychological ownership in relation to natural

resources. J. Environ. Psychol. 2017, 51, 31–45. [CrossRef]

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 20 of 23

25. Bloodworth, A.J.; Scott, P.W.; McEvoy, F.M. Digging the backyard: Mining and quarrying in the UK and their impact on futureland use. Land Use Policy 2009, 26, 317–325. [CrossRef]

26. Bustos, B.; Folchi, M.; Fragkou, M. Coal mining on pastureland in Southern Chile; challenging recognition and participation asguarantees for environmental justice. Geoforum 2017, 84, 292–304. [CrossRef]

27. Moffat, K.; Zhang, A. The paths to social licence to operate: An integrative model explaining community acceptance of mining.Resour. Policy 2014, 39, 61–70. [CrossRef]

28. Mercer-Mapstone, L.; Rifkin, W.; Louis, W.R.; Moffat, K. Company-community dialogue builds relationships, fairness, and trustleading to social acceptance of Australian mining developments. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 184, 671–677. [CrossRef]

29. Widana, A. The Impacts of Mining Industry. Socio-Econ. Political Impacts 2019, 19, 65–73.30. Hajkowicz, S.A.; Heyenga, S.; Moffat, K. The relationship between mining and socio-economic well-being in Australia’s regions.

Resour. Policy 2011, 36, 30–38. [CrossRef]31. Fitzpatrick, L.G. Surface Coal Mining and Human Health: Evidence from West Virginia. South. Econ. J. 2018, 84, 1109–1128.

[CrossRef]32. Zhang, X.; Xu, J.; Ju, Y. Public participation in NIMBY risk mitigation: A discourse zoning approach in the Chinese context. Land

Use Policy 2018, 77, 559–575. [CrossRef]33. Hossain, D.; Gorman, D.; Chapelle, B.; Mann, W.; Saal, R.; Penton, G. Impact of the mining industry on the mental health of

landholders and rural communities in southwest Queensland. Australas. Psychiatry 2013, 21, 32–37. [CrossRef] [PubMed]34. Haddaway, N.R.; Cooke, S.J.; Lesser, P.; Macura, B.; Nilsson, N.E.; Taylor, J.J.; Raito, K. Evidence of the impact of mental mining

and the effectiveness of mining mitigation measures on social-ecological systems in Artic and Arboreal regions; a systematic mapprotocol. Environ. Evid. 2019, 8, 1–11. [CrossRef]

35. Markuszewska, I. ‘Old trees cannot be replanted’: When energy investment meets farmers’ resistance. J. Settl. Spat. Plan 2021, 8,5–13. [CrossRef]

36. Prno, J. An analysis of factors leading to establishment of a social license to operate in the mining industry. Resour. Policy 2013, 38,577–590. [CrossRef]

37. Suopajärvi, L.; Umander, K.; Leneisja, J. Social license to operate in the frame of social capital exploring local acceptance of miningin two rural municipalities in the European North. Resour. Policy 2019, 64, 101498. [CrossRef]

38. Cruz, T.L.; Matlaba, V.J.; Mota, J.A.; dos Santos, J.F. Measuring the social license to operate of the mining industry in an Amazoniantown: A case study of Canaã dos Carajás, Brazil. Miner. Econ. 2019, 32, 75–90. [CrossRef]

39. Boutilier, R.G.; Thomson, I. Modelling and measuring the social license to operate: Fruits of a dialogue between theory andpractice. In Proceedings of the International Mine Management Conference, Melbourne, Australia, 20–21 November 2012.Available online: http://socialicense.com/publications.html (accessed on 29 September 2021).

40. Dominy, M.D. Calling the Station Home: Place and Identity in New Zealand’s High Country; Rowman and Littlefield Publishers:Lanham, MA, USA, 2001.

41. Hildenbrand, B.; Hennon, C. Above all, farming means family farming. J. Comp. Fam. Stud. 2005, 36, 357–366. [CrossRef]42. Brown, G.; Raymond, C.M. The relationship between place attachment and landscape values: Toward mapping place attachment.

Appl. Geogr. 2007, 27, 89–111. [CrossRef]43. Riley, R.B. Attachment to the ordinary landscape. In Place Attachment, 1st ed.; Altman, I., Low, S., Eds.; Plenum Press: New York,

NY, USA, 1992; pp. 13–35.44. Williams, D.R.; Patterson, M.E.; Roggenbuck, J.W.; Watson, A.E. Beyond the commodity metaphor: Examining emotional and

symbolic attachment to place. Leis. Sci. 1992, 14, 29–46. [CrossRef]45. Walker, A.I.; Ryan, R.L. Place attachment and landscape preservation in rural New England: A Maine case study. Landsc. Urban

Plan. 2008, 86, 141–152. [CrossRef]46. Hay, R. Sense of place in development context. J. Environ. Psychol. 1998, 18, 5–29. [CrossRef]47. Kuehne, G. My decision to sell the family farm. Agric. Hum. Values 2013, 30, 201–213. [CrossRef]48. McCuaig, J.M.; Quinn, M.S. Place-based environmental governance in the Waterton Biosphere Reserve, Canada: The role of a

large private land trust project. George Wright Forum 2011, 28, 95–110.49. Low, S.M. Symbolic ties that bind: Place attachment in the plaza. In Place Attachment, 1st ed.; Altman, I., Low, S., Eds.; Plenum

Press: New York, NY, USA, 1992; pp. 165–185.50. Wheeler, R. Mining memories in a rural community: Landscape, temporality and place identity. J. Rural. Stud. 2014, 36, 22–32.

[CrossRef]51. Coelho, J.C.; Portela, J.; Pinto, P.A. A social approach to land consolidation schemes. A Portuguese case study: The Valenca

Project. Land Use Policy 1996, 13, 129–147. [CrossRef]52. Brzezinska, A.W.; Machowska, M. Etnografowie na Biskupiznie. In Biskupizna: Ziemia—Tradycja—Tozsamosc; Brzezinska, A.W.,

Machowska, M., Eds.; Gminne Centrum Kultury i Rekreacji: Krobia, Poland, 2016; pp. 7–30.53. Hummon, D. Community attachment, local sentiment and sense of place. In Place Attachment, 1st ed.; Altman, I., Low, S., Eds.;

Plenum Press: New York, NY, USA, 1992; pp. 253–278.54. Palang, H.; Helmfrid, S.; Antrop, M.; Alumäe, H. Rural Landscapes: Past processes and future strategies. Landsc. Urban Plan.

2005, 70, 3–8. [CrossRef]

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 21 of 23

55. Baldwin, B.; Smith, T.; Jacobson, C. Love of the land: Social-ecological connectivity of rural landholders. J. Rural Stud. 2017, 51,37–52. [CrossRef]

56. Anton, C.E.; Lawrence, C. Home is where the heart is: The effect of place of residence on place attachment and communityparticipation. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 40, 451–461. [CrossRef]

57. Frantál, B. Living on coal: Mined-out identity, community displacement and forming of anti-coal resistance in the most region,Czech Republic. Resour. Policy 2016, 49, 385–393. [CrossRef]

58. Clarke, D.; Murphy, C.; Lorenzoni, I. Place attachment, disruption and transformative adaptation. J. Environ. Psychol. 2018, 55,81–89. [CrossRef]

59. Wilson, S.A. Mining-induced displacement and resettlement: The case of rutile mining communities in Sierra Leone. J. Sustain.Min. 2019, 18, 67–76. [CrossRef]

60. Xu, G.; Li, Y.; Hay, I.; Zou, X.; Tu, X.; Wang, B. Beyond Place Attachment: Land Attachment of Resettled Farmers in Jiangsu. ChinaSustain. 2019, 11, 420. [CrossRef]

61. Preston, S.; Gelman, S. This land is my land: Psychological ownership increases willingness to protect the natural world morethan legal ownership. J. Environ. Psychol. 2020, 70, 101443. [CrossRef]

62. Bec, A.; Moyle, B.D.; McLennan, C.J. Drilling into community perceptions of coal seam gas in Roma. Australia. Extr. Ind. Soc.2016, 3, 716–726. [CrossRef]

63. Yang, X.; Ho, P. Is mining harmful or beneficial? A survey of local community perspectives in China. Extr. Ind. Soc. 2019, 6,584–592. [CrossRef]

64. Wright, S.; Hodge, P. To be transformed: Emotions in cross-cultural, field-based learning in Northern Australia. J. Geogr. High.Educ. 2012, 36, 355–368. [CrossRef]

65. Ciuk, E. Geologiczne podstawy dla nowego złoza wegla brunatnego w strefie rowu tektonicznego Poznan—Czempin—Gostyn.Przegl. Geol. 1978, 26, 588–594.

66. Urbanski, P. Wegiel brunatny systemu Rowów Poznanskich jako gwarancja bezpieczenstwa energetycznego Polski. Biul. PIG2018, 472, 83–92. [CrossRef]

67. Kasprzak, K. Wegiel brunatny zagrozeniem dla przyszłosci Wielkopolski. Przegl. Komunal. 2015, 1, 34–41.68. Kołodziejczak, A. Rolnictwo czy wegiel brunatny—utylitarnosc zasobów w rozwoju lokalnym gminy Krobi. Stud. Obszar. Wiej.

2016, 44, 125–136. [CrossRef]69. Local Database. Available online: https://bdl.stat.gov.pl/BDL/start (accessed on 29 September 2021).70. Przybyłek, J.; Górski, J. Złoze wegla brunatnego Oczkowice—głos za własciwym rozpoznaniem hydrogeologicznym. Przegl. Geol.

2016, 64, 168–191.71. Parliamentary Question K7INT30539/2015. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/interpelacje.xsp/page=12

(accessed on 29 September 2021).72. Parliamentary Question DKG-VIII-4741-8224/102/51211/14/MW. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/

interpelacje.xsp/page=12 (accessed on 29 September 2021).73. Parliamentary Question K7INT34526/2015. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/interpelacje.xsp/page=12

(accessed on 29 September 2021).74. The Act on 9 June 2011 on Geological and Mining Law. J. Laws 2011, As Amended. Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/

isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20111630981/U/D20110981Lj.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2021).75. The Act on 2 July 2004 on Liberty of Economic Activity. J. Laws 2004, As Amended. Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/

isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20041731807/U/D20041807Lj.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2021).76. Parliamentary Question K6INT1296/2012. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/interpelacje.xsp/page=12

(accessed on 29 September 2021).77. Parliamentary Question K7INT33276/2015. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/interpelacje.xsp/page=12

(accessed on 29 September 2021).78. Parliamentary Question K8INT5253/2016. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/interpelacje.xsp/page=12

(accessed on 29 September 2021).79. Parliamentary Question BPS/043-22-896-MS/12. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/interpelacje.xsp/page=

12 (accessed on 29 September 2021).80. Parliamentary Question K8INT4150/2015. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/interpelacje.xsp/page=12

(accessed on 29 September 2021).81. The Act on 27 March 2003 on Spatial Planning and Development. J. Laws 2003, As Amended. Available online: https://isap.sejm.

gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20030800717/U/D20030717Lj.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2021).82. The Act on 3 October 2008 on the Provision of Information on the Environment and its Protection, Public Participation in

Environmental Protection and Environmental Impact Assessments. J. Laws 2008, As Amended. Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20081991227/U/D20081227Lj.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2021).

83. The Regulation of the Council of Ministers on 10 September 2019 on Projects that May Significantly Affect the Environment. J. Laws2019. Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20190001839/O/D20191839.pdf (accessed on29 September 2021).

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 22 of 23

84. Przybyłek, J.; Dabrowski, S. Planowana kopalnia odkrywkowa na złozu wegla brunatnego „Oczkowice” zagrozeniem dlagospodarki wodnej i srodowiska południowo-zachodniej Wielkopolski. Przegl. Geol. 2017, 65, 1000–1008.

85. The Regulation of the Minister of the Environment on 8 May 2014 on Hydrogeological Documentation and Geological-EngineeringDocumentation. J. Laws 2014. Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20140000596/O/D20140596.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2021).

86. The Code of Administrative Law on 14 June 1960. J. Laws 1960, As Amended. Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU19600300168/U/D19600168Lj.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2021).

87. Meeting of the Environment Committee (117th) on 3 March 2015. In Lignite in South-Western Wielkopolska—Expected Causes ofOpencast Mining; Senate of the Republic of Poland: Warszawa, Poland, 2015.

88. Wielkopolska 2020. Updated Development Strategy of the Wielkopolska Province by 2020, 2012, Poznan. Available online:https://wrpo.wielkopolskie.pl/system/file_resource_archives/attachments/000/000/404/original/Zaktualizowana_Strategia_RWW_do_2020.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2021).

89. Resolution No. V/70/19 of the Government of the Wielkopolskie Province, on 25 March 2019 on the Adoption of the SpatialDevelopment Plan for the Wielkopolskie Province Together with the Spatial Development Plan of the Functional Urban Area ofPoznan. Available online: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj3w5S04OXzAhWVnosKHZCZBhEQFnoECAsQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbip.umww.pl%2Fartykuly%2F2824952%2Fpliki%2F20190328121632_70.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0jWVIcqz2L-QG81d9DJwST (accessed on 29 September 2021).

90. The Act on 10 May 2018 Supporting New Investments. J. Laws 2018, As Amended. Available online: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20180001162/U/D20181162Lj.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2021).

91. White Book of the Protection of Mineral Deposits; Ministerstwo Srodowiska: Warszawa, Poland, 2015. Available online:https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwicoIS84eXzAhWwxIsKHQBpD3YQFnoECAIQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Finfolupki.pgi.gov.pl%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fczytelnia_pliki%2F1%2Fbiala_ksiega_zloz_kopalin.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2zCJbT2rGlgsa0-laipB7r (accessed on 29 September 2021).

92. Parliamentary Question K7ZAP950/2015. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/interpelacje.xsp/page=12(accessed on 29 September 2021).

93. Parliamentary Question K7ZA308580/2015. Available online: https://www.sejm.gov.pl/sejm9.nsf/interpelacje.xsp/page=12(accessed on 29 September 2021).

94. Epstein, P.R.; Buonocore, J.J.; Eckerle, K.; Hendry, M.; Stout, B.M.; Heinberg, R.; Clapp, R.W.; May, B.; Reinhart, N.L.; Ahern, M.M.;et al. Full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2011, 1219, 73–98. [CrossRef]

95. Mancini, L.; Sala, S. Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks. Resour.Policy 2018, 57, 98–111. [CrossRef]

96. Markuszewska, I. From NIMBY to YIMBY: When a new open cast mine creates land use conflict. In Gospodarowanie Gruntami naObszarach Wiejskich; Kołodziejczak, A., Kaczmarek, L., Eds.; Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe: Poznan, Poland, 2020; pp. 149–168.

97. The Future of Coal: Options for a Carbon-Constrained World; Technical Report. Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Cambridge,MA, USA, 2007. Available online: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj4kIX84eXzAhUOy4sKHW4YDXsQFnoECA0QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fweb.mit.edu%2Fcoal%2FThe_Future_of_Coal.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2i86djRZS9x_uXVmKFQXRh (accessed on 29 September 2021).

98. Badera, K.; Kocon, P. Local community opinions regarding the socio-environmental aspects of lignite surface mining: Experiencesfrom central Poland. Energy Policy 2014, 66, 507–516. [CrossRef]

99. Wozniak, J.; Jurczyk, W. Social and environmental activities in the Polish mining region in the context of CSR. Resour. Policy 2020,65, 101554. [CrossRef]

100. Peplinski, B. Skutki Budowy Kopalni Odkrywkowej Wegla Brunatnego Na Złozu Oczkowice—Analiza Kosztów Dla Rolnictwa iPrzetwórstwa Rolno-Spozywczego; Expertise: Poznan, Poland, 2016.

101. Poczta, W.; Peplinski, B.; Sadowski, A.; Czubak, W. Wpływ Planowanej Kopalni Oczkowice na Ekonomiczny, Produkcyjny i SpołecznyPotencjał Rolnictwa i Jego Otoczenia na Agrobiznes Południowo-Zachodniej Czesci Województwa Wielkopolskiego; Expertise: Poznan,Poland, 2017.

102. The National Raw Material Policy; The Ministry of Environment: Warszawa, Poland, 2018. Available online: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjjst2l4-XzAhXOmIsKHa45C5gQFnoECAoQAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pgi.gov.pl%2Fdokumenty-pig-pib-all%2Fkalendarium%2Fkal-2018%2F5399-polityka-surowcowa-panstwa%2Ffile.html&usg=AOvVaw0q9fqBraWv19P8vfAU9fvO (accessed on 29 September 2021).

103. Central Statistical Office. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/obszary-tematyczne/srodowisko-enegia (accessed on 29 September 2021).104. Kuchler, M.; Bridge, G. Down the black hole: Sustaining national socio-technical imaginaries of coal in Poland. Energy Res. Soc.

Sci. 2018, 41, 136–147. [CrossRef]105. Kiuila, O. Decarbonisation perspectives for the Polish economy. Energy Policy 2018, 118, 69–75. [CrossRef]106. Sivek, K.; Jiráasek, J.; Kavina, P.; Vojnarováa, M.; Kurkováa, T.; Baásováa, A. Divorce after hundreds of years of marriage:

Prospects for coal mining in the Czech Republic with regard to the European Union. Energy Policy 2020, 142, 111524. [CrossRef]107. Zuk, P.; Zuk, P.; Plucinski, P. Coal basin in Upper Silesia and energy transition in Poland in the context of pandemic: The

socio-political diversity of preferences in energy and environmental policy. Resour. Policy 2021, 71, 101987. [CrossRef]

Energies 2021, 14, 7008 23 of 23

108. Gryz, J.; Kaczmarczyk, B. Towards low-carbon European Union society: Young Poles’ perception of climate neutrality. Energies2021, 14, 5107. [CrossRef]

109. Osicka, J.; Kemmerzell, J.; Zoll, M.; Lehotský, L.; Cernoch, F.; Knodt, M. What’s next for the European coal heartland? Exploringthe future of coal as presented in German, Polish and Czech press. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2020, 61, 101316. [CrossRef]

110. Markuszewska, I. Emotional landscape: Socio-environmental conflict and place attachment. In Experience from the WielkopolskaRegion, 1st ed.; Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe: Poznan, Poland, 2019; p. 152.

111. Urbanska, J. ‘Dla nas Biskupizna to jest pepkiem swiata’. Rozumienie i przejawy lokalnosci na Biskupiznie. In Biskupizna:Ziemia—Tradycja—Tozsamosc; Brzezinska, A.W., Machowska, M., Eds.; Gminne Centrum Kultury i Rekreacji: Krobia, Poland,2016; pp. 57–72.

112. Andrzejkowicz, K. Poczucie tozsamosci i zmiany w krajobrazie kulturowym. In Biskupizna: Ziemia—Tradycja—Tozsamosc;Brzezinska, A.W., Machowska, M., Eds.; Gminne Centrum Kultury i Rekreacji: Krobia, Poland, 2016; pp. 73–94.

113. Sgroi, F.; Donia, E.; Alesi, D.R. Renewable energies, business models and local growth. Land Use Policy 2018, 72, 110–115.[CrossRef]

114. Newell, D. Implementing wind power policy—Institutional frameworks and the beliefs of sovereigns. Land Use Policy 2018, 72,16–26. [CrossRef]

115. Petersen, J.P.; Heurkens, E. Implementing energy policies in urban development projects: The role of public planning authoritiesin Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. Land Use Policy 2018, 76, 275–289. [CrossRef]

116. Muthoora, T.; Fischer, T.B. Power and perception—from paradigms of specialist disciplines and opinions of expert groups to anacceptance for the planning of onshore windfarms in England—Making a case for Social Impact Assessment (SIA). Land UsePolicy 2019, 89, 104198. [CrossRef]

117. Brown, G.; Glanz, H. Identifying potential NIMBY and YIMBY effects in general land use planning and zoning. Appl. Geogr. 2018,99, 1–11. [CrossRef]

118. Bell, D.; Gray, T.; Haggett, C.; Swaffield, J. Re-visiting the ‘social gap’: Public opinion and relations of power in the local politicsof wind energy. Environ. Polit. 2013, 22, 115–135. [CrossRef]

119. Devine-Wright, P.; Howes, Y. Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: A wind energy casestudy. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 271–280. [CrossRef]

120. Warren, C.R.; Lumsden, C.; O’Dowd, S.; Birnie, R.V. ‘Green on Green’: Public Perceptions of Wind Power in Scotland and Ireland.J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2005, 48, 853–875. [CrossRef]

121. Szulecki, K. Securitization and state encroachment on the energy sector: Politics of exception in Poland’s energy governance.Energy Policy 2020, 136, 111066. [CrossRef]

122. Sidaway, R. Resolving Environmental Disputes: From Conflict to Consensus; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2013; p. 320.123. Constitution of the Republic of Poland. J. Laws 1997. Available online: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&

source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjMhquC5OXzAhUitYsKHdZDDnkQFnoECBAQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fisap.sejm.gov.pl%2Fisap.nsf%2Fdownload.xsp%2FWDU19970780483%2FU%2FD19970483Lj.pdf&usg=AOvVaw016QbBTvvTbxcxNizDqfmF(accessed on 29 September 2021).

124. Brown, B.; Spiegel, S.J. Coal, climate justice, and the cultural politics of energy transition. Glob. Environ. Polit. 2019, 19, 149–168.[CrossRef]

125. Mitchell, T. Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil; Verso: London, UK, 2011.126. Emara, D.; Ezzat, M.; Abdelaziz, A.Y.; Mahmoud, K.; Lehtonen, M.; Darwish, M.M.F. Novel Control Strategy for Enhancing

Microgrid Operation Connected to Photovoltaic Generation and Energy Storage Systems. Electronics 2021, 10, 1261. [CrossRef]127. Said, M.; Shaheen, A.M.; Ginidi, A.R.; El-Sehiemy, R.A.; Mahmoud, K.; Lehtonen, M.; Darwish, M.M.F. Estimating Parameters of

Photovoltaic Models Using Accurate Turbulent Flow of Water Optimizer. Processes 2021, 9, 627. [CrossRef]128. Abaza, A.; El-Sehiemy, R.A.; Mahmoud, K.; Lehtonen, M.; Darwish, M.M.F. Optimal Estimation of Proton Exchange Membrane

Fuel Cells Parameter Based on Coyote Optimization Algorithm. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2052. [CrossRef]129. Abbas, A.S.; El-Sehiemy, R.A.; Abou El-Ela, A.; Ali, E.S.; Mahmoud, K.; Lehtonen, M.; Darwish, M.M.F. Optimal Harmonic

Mitigation in Distribution Systems with Inverter Based Distributed Generation. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 774. [CrossRef]