In the Lammermuir Hills of the Scottish Borders, a developer is proposing to build three data center buildings, each up to 24 meters tall, on land where the loudest sound has typically been wind. The £2 billion ($2.7bn) investment project is still in the pre-application phase, but it has already prompted a 10,000-signatures-strong public petition and organized local opposition.

This is increasingly the opening chapter for hyperscale developments around the world: a proposal, followed by resistance, followed by delays that often prove harder to overcome than the engineering itself.

AI is driving an unprecedented need for compute capacity, while governments increasingly view digital infrastructure as a strategic asset rather than simply another real estate class. Analysts expect global demand for data center capacity to continue rising sharply over the remainder of the decade, fueled largely by AI workloads. Meeting that demand will require new facilities at a scale the industry has never attempted before.

For many communities, that investment brings genuine opportunity. Large-scale developments create construction jobs, attract long-term capital and support local businesses throughout the supply chain. Regions that have experienced decades of industrial decline can benefit from a new generation of infrastructure investment, while operational facilities create skilled technical roles that contribute to local economies long after construction has finished.

Yet those benefits do not erase legitimate concerns.

The same qualities that make a site attractive to a developer — open land, available power, a quiet setting — are exactly what a nearby community values about the place it lives. Construction on a hyperscale campus runs for years, not months, and the noise carries. Landscapes change dramatically. Facilities consume significant amounts of electricity and, depending on their design, substantial volumes of water. Residents naturally ask whether local infrastructure will come under pressure and whether the character of their area will be permanently altered.

These are just some of the specific, recurring reasons opposition keeps forming around new projects, and they show up again and again once a proposal becomes public.

Outside Melbourne, Australia, local communities have objected to the expansion of a hyperscale campus, citing prolonged construction noise and plans to increase the site’s backup diesel generators. In Inzai, near Tokyo, residents have sued the private inspection company that approved a 52-meter data center planned next door, seeking to have the building permit nullified.

All over the world, we’re seeing the same underlying pattern: a project moves forward on its own timeline until it collides with a community that was never meaningfully part of the conversation.

The industry should resist the temptation to dismiss this as simple resistance to progress. Most people understand the importance of digital infrastructure: every cloud application, online transaction, and AI model depends on facilities like these, and few would argue that we need fewer data centers.

The question is whether we are building them in a way that earns public confidence, and too often, communities feel the answer is no.

For developers and investors alike, community engagement needs to be treated as an essential part of project delivery, because the cost of getting this wrong extends well beyond public relations.

Delayed approvals, legal challenges and prolonged planning disputes create uncertainty for investors, increase project costs and slow the delivery of infrastructure that markets urgently need. In an industry where access to power, land and grid capacity is already constrained, losing months or even years because of avoidable community opposition is an increasingly expensive mistake, but an avoidable one.

Fixing it starts with transparency and building trust. Communities deserve clear information about what is being built, why a site has been selected, and how disruption during construction will be managed. Engagement should begin before positions become entrenched, not after opposition has already formed.

It also means recognizing that every community has different priorities. In one location, water consumption may be the dominant concern. Elsewhere, it may be visual impact, traffic or noise — a standardized consultation process is unlikely to address issues that are inherently local.

Environmental performance also matters, not simply because regulators expect it, but because communities increasingly do. Operators are investing in more efficient cooling technologies, renewable energy procurement, closed-loop water systems and waste heat recovery. These measures improve operational efficiency, but they also demonstrate that developers are taking local concerns seriously rather than asking communities to accept disruption in exchange for promises of future economic benefit.

Finally, developers should think beyond the site boundary.

The strongest projects create lasting relationships with the communities around them through local hiring, skills partnerships with colleges and universities, investment in supporting infrastructure and procurement opportunities for regional businesses. These initiatives can help ensure that the economic benefits of a project are visible to the people living alongside it.

As more capacity competes for a shrinking pool of sites with adequate power, land, and water, the developers who have already built local trust will have first pick of the remaining good ground, while the ones who have not will find every subsequent application slower and more expensive than the last.

Data centers are long-term assets whose value is measured over decades, not planning cycles. Projects that establish strong relationships with local communities are often better positioned to expand, adapt and operate successfully throughout their lifespan. Those that fail to do so may secure planning permission, but they inherit a more difficult operating environment from day one.

Data centers are long-term assets. Let’s not forget that communities are too.