Across Australia, renewable energy projects and their supporting transmission networks, once considered technically sound and politically assured, are being increasingly delayed, redesigned or cancelled due to community opposition. From wind farms on the Queensland coast to renewable energy proposals in NSW Renewable Energy Zones and transmission lines across farming regions, social licence continues to emerge as a critical project risk, at times more determinative than engineering feasibility or financing. Existing environmental, land access, and compensation frameworks are being tested like never before, exposing developers to heightened financial, project delivery, reputational, and litigation risks.
This article explores this challenge and real-world examples where a lack of community acceptance has derailed major projects and why proactive, socially-aware planning is now more essential than ever to the future of the nation’s renewable energy transition.
An emerging risk: social licence as a determinant of project success
For much of the past decade, renewable energy infrastructure in Australia, including wind, solar and the essential transmission links to carry that power, has been framed as an inevitable and broadly welcomed transition. However, recent developments have made it clear that technical and economic viability alone is no longer sufficient to ensure project delivery. Instead, community sentiment and social licence have become critical risk factors, capable of slowing or halting projects that otherwise meet statutory requirements and commercial conditions.
This shift reflects a growing disconnect between high-level policy ambition and on-the-ground community experiences. While government policy frameworks prioritise targets, timelines and generation capacity, affected communities experience the renewable transition very differently, through land access negotiations, construction disruptions, ongoing uncertainty and a perceived loss of control over their surroundings. The failure to reconcile these perspectives can and has fuelled opposition, delayed projects, and escalated conflict across multiple regions. The following examples illustrate this tension, showing both the practical consequences and the critical role proponents play in managing (or failing to manage) community acceptance.
Moonlight Range Wind Farm — An approval overturned
One of the most striking recent examples is the Moonlight Range Wind Farm in Central Queensland, a planned 450 MW project with 88 turbines and a large battery energy storage component that had been conditionally approved by the State Assessment and Referral Agency in late 2024. Despite that approval, the Queensland Deputy Premier exercised ministerial “call-in” powers to reassess the application in January 2025 and ultimately refused planning consent in May 2025, citing (amongst other matters) insufficient community consultation being undertaken by the proponent prior to lodgment and community and social impacts, including concerns that the projected 300 person workforce would strain the region’s existing housing and short-term accommodation supply and that the project generally would provide minimal local community benefit. The Minister’s decision noted that 88% of the local resident submissions received during the call-in period objected to the proposal.
In making his decision, the Deputy Premier also explicitly had regard to the Planning (Social Impact and Community Benefit) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 20251, which was introduced into Queensland Parliament in May 2025 and is now law. These reforms require major renewable projects to build social licence by actively demonstrating how they will deliver long-term benefits to affected communities. The Deputy Premier’s decision reflects this legislative shift and establishes that social licence is an important statutory consideration in addition to consideration of traditional planning, environmental and technical factors.
In response to the Minister’s decision, industry stakeholders such as the Queensland Renewable Energy Council expressed concern at that point in time that such decisions risk undermining investor confidence and the broader clean-energy pipeline, effectively signalling that Queensland is ‘closed for clean energy business.’2
The Moonlight Range saga highlights how social licence considerations can derail renewable energy projects, even after statutory approvals have been well advanced and projects are thought to have been secured.
As part of the Government’s recent overhaul to the environmental assessment process for renewable energy projects in Queensland, mandatory social impact assessments (SIA) are now required for all new wind farms, solar farms (greater than 1MW), and large battery storage (greater than 50MW) to build social licence. Proponents must submit an SIA report alongside Community Benefit Agreements (CBAs) to manage community impacts, ensuring developer accountability and tangible local benefits.
Renewable Energy Zones: Parliamentary inquiries and third-party legal challenges
The Renewable Energy Zone (REZ) model, central to Australia’s energy policy as a mechanism to cluster generation and transmission investment, has also experienced rising tensions. In NSW, there are five REZ locations: Central-West Orana (CWO), New England, Hunter-Central Coast, Illawarra and South West region.
The NSW Government’s recent discussion paper on strategic planning3 indicates that these tensions have emerged from deeper structural shortcomings in the planning system itself. The paper proposes a new three-tier framework (referred to as State, Region and Local Planning) intended to clarify responsibilities, improve infrastructure sequencing and better align land use with infrastructure delivery. Under this model, regional plans would translate statewide priorities into spatial strategies that identify where and when growth and enabling infrastructure should occur, providing clearer pathways for projects that cross local boundaries, such as transmission lines. The scale and controversy often associated with REZ transmission corridor infrastructure underscores the absence of this kind of coordinated approach to date, with infrastructure often advanced ahead of coherent and organised regional planning and community engagement, rather than as an integrated outcome of it.
A Parliamentary enquiry was established in July 2024 to inquire into and report on the impact of REZs on rural and regional communities and industries in NSW. In its first report, published in August 2025, the following finding was made (amongst others):
“Finding 3: That there has been inadequate consultation between the NSW Government, renewable energy developers and the Central-West Orana community. This has had significant repercussions, including, but not limited to, impacting the mental health of community members, eroding social cohesion and undermining the social licence of renewable energy operators in the region.”4
This finding arises from complaints made by a number of landholders in the CWO REZ. In response, the committee recommended that EnergyCo provide mental health support to landowners who are affected by the CWO REZ, a recommendation endorsed by the NSW Government.5
The Hills of Gold Wind Farm6 approved near Tamworth, about 15km southwest of the New England REZ is an example that illustraes the fraught intersection arising from attempts to secure a social licence and the associated legal risks. The development, comprising 62 wind turbines and a 100 MW/400MWh battery energy storage system and associated infrastructure, was embroiled in a legal appeal originally brought by resident and landholder ground, Hills of Gold Preservation Incorporated, in the NSW Land and Environment Court. Tamworth Regional Council later joined and became the sole applicant in the appeal.7 The appeal sought to overturn the State significant development consent issued for the project by the NSW Independent Planning Commission in September 2024. It was reported that the Council’s appeal hinged on their contention that the consent authority did not have sufficient information to approve the road upgrades that would be needed to move tonnes of equipment and construction materials to the site.8 Although the Council’s appeal was reportedly grounded in technical arguments of this nature, in essence, as we understand it the underlying issues ultimately related to land access impacts and infrastructure outcomes—matters closely linked to social licence.
The Hills of Gold project has been at the centre of a bitter dispute between supporters and opponents, which has persisted for several years. Local residents who opposed the development launched a campaign voicing their concerns about land use, environmental impacts and the cumulative effect of multiple renewable projects in the region. The controversy attracted national attention, including coverage by ABC’s 4 Corners in late 2024, which investigated broader wind planning issues and highlighted the tensions between government approvals, community expectations, and the developer’s engagement processes. This prolonged conflict and the legal appeal underscores how social licence challenges, once overlooked, can escalate into entrenched local campaigns and sustained media scrutiny. Ultimately, the parties resolved the appeal and the Hills of Gold Wind Farm was approved by the Court on certain conditions.
Landholder backlash and transmission delays
A key tension in Australia’s renewables rollout is the collision between developers’ land access needs and landholders asserting their property rights. While opposition to wind and solar projects often make the news headlines, the challenges around the delivery of transmission infrastructure which enables generated electricity to reach consumers have emerged as a significant contentious issue and provide a lesson in the limits of technical planning without social licence.
In western Victoria for example, farmers along the planned route of the Victoria to NSW Interconnector West (‘VNI West’), a priority high-voltage link designed to transport renewable energy from generation zones to demand centres, vowed to lock gates and physically block access to contractors and surveyors.9 It is reasonable to deduce that this very real resistance to what they see as imposed infrastructure is no doubt contributing to the delay in the project’s completion date, with the Australian Energy Market Operator reporting it will be pushed out by about two years, from an original target around 2028 to late 2030. Originally forecast to cost $3.9 billion, the project is now estimated to be upwards of $7.5 billion.10
Recent state legislation in Victoria, passed amid fierce local objection, imposes significant fines and potential police action against people who obstruct the construction and operation of power transmission infrastructure.11 Under the new legislation hefty fines may be issued for those who interfere with authorised works, a move that has inflamed perceptions of heavy-handed government intervention.12 In the case of the VNI West project, some farmers publicly declared they are prepared to face any such fines and even arrest rather than acquiesce to what they see as an unwanted transformation of their landscapes and livelihoods.13
Why ‘social licence’ matters and how it is misunderstood
The concept of social licence, which at its essence is the informal public acceptance that underpins a project’s sustainability and longevity, is harder to quantify than statutory approval requirements, but no less consequential. Projects that presume community goodwill without actively fostering it often run into entrenched opposition early or mid-development phases, wasting capital and delaying outcomes.
The adverse impacts of such community opposition to a project can persist even after a project has been approved and proponents might feel its future has been secured.
Social licence does not require unanimous community support, but nor can it be treated as a box to tick in a planning report. In many rural and regional areas, it is frequently documented that residents feel poorly informed about project plans and impacts, or see little direct benefit from hosting infrastructure that fundamentally changes their landscapes.
Importantly, social licence issues go well beyond simple NIMBYism and dismissing project opposition as that invariably oversimplifies the real structural and social factors that determine whether, and the extent to which, a project is accepted or resisted. Planning and social impact assessment literature identify that social licence issues more often relate to cumulative pressures on local services, environmental values, housing availability and social cohesion-impacts that traditional environmental impact assessments do not always capture well.
Moving toward better engagement and policy coherence
If Australia’s target of achieving 82% renewable electricity by 2030 is to be met without compounding community backlash, developers and policymakers must not ignore the social dimensions of project delivery. Whilst it is widely acknowledged that meaningful engagement involves early, transparent, and iterative consultation and is not simply satisfying baseline regulatory requirements, it is clear that there is still work to be done in this space.
From our review, emerging best practice suggests the following action is critical:
- Clear identification of community values and experiences, challenges faced and opportunities to address these;
- Benefit-sharing mechanisms tied to local outcomes;
- Clear and early communication strategies about project timelines, impacts and mitigation which carefully manage expectations; and
- Cumulative impact planning across renewable energy zones rather than piecemeal project-by-project approaches.
Best-practice guidelines emphasise that early and genuine engagement with communities helps prevent costly delays and opposition and strengthens social licence. Poor engagement and lack of trust are linked with project delays, increased costs and resistance.14
Social licence is not optional
Australia’s renewable rollout presents an unprecedented opportunity to decarbonise the grid, create jobs, and future-proof energy security. Yet, as the examples discussed in this article demonstrate, this transition could falter without adequate community consultation and acceptance.
Social licence should not be treated as a peripheral concern when it is a strategic imperative that has tangible implications for project timelines, finances, feasibility and the nation’s ability to meet its climate commitments. Without collaborative and respectful engagement between industry, government and host communities, the energy transition risks continuing to face the kind of gridlock described in this article.
[1] Committee Details | Queensland Parliament
[2] ‘Chaotic signals’ from Queensland government causing uncertainty and wavering investor confidence in renewable energy sector – ABC News
[3] ‘A new approach to strategic planning’ Discussion Paper, NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, dated December 2025 (A New Approach to Strategic Planning: Discussion Paper | Planning Portal – Department of Planning and Environment)
[4] Report No. 62, ‘Impact of Renewable Energy Zones (REZ) no rural and regional communities and industries in New South Wales’ First Report –28 August 2025 (Impact of Renewable Energy Zones (REZ) on rural and regional communities and industries in New South Wales)
[5] Government response – Report No. 62 – Impact of Renewable Energy Zones (REZ) on rural and regional communities and industries in New South Wales, 21 November 2025 (Impact of Renewable Energy Zones (REZ) on rural and regional communities and industries in New South Wales)
[6] Hills of Gold Wind Farm. | Planning Portal – Department of Planning and Environment
[7] Tamworth Regional Council v Independent Planning Commission – NSW Caselaw
[8] Tamworth council to get its day in court in last ditch attempt to stop Hills of Gold wind project
[9] Farmers defy compulsory access powers to block VicGrid staff – ABC News
[10] AEMO 2025 Electricity Network Options Report, p. 37
[11] National Electricity (Victoria) Amendment (VicGrid Stage 2 Reform) Bill 2025 | legislation.vic.gov.au
[12] Farmer outcry as politicians give late-night nod to controversial electricity legislation – ABC News
[13] Farmers face fines for blocking access during transmission line projects under plan – ABC News
[14] Energy Ministers release National Guidelines for Community Engagement and Benefits for Electricity Transmission Projects | energy.gov.au