Social Innovation in Community Energy in Europe: a Review of the Evidence

Social innovation in community energy in Europe: a review of the evidence 1 Richard J. Hewitt 1*, Nicholas Bradley 2, Andrea Baggio Compagnucci 1, Carla Barlagne 2, 2 Andrzej Ceglarz 3,4 , Roger Cremades 5, Margaret McKeen 1, Ilona M. Otto 6, and Bill Slee 2 3 1Information and Computational Sciences Group, James Hutton Institute, Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen 4 AB15 8QH, Scotland UK 5 2Social, Economic, and Geographical Sciences Group, James Hutton Institute, Craigiebuckler, 6 Aberdeen AB15 8QH, Scotland UK 7 3Bavarian School of Public Policy, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany 8 4Renewables Grid Initiative, Berlin, Germany 9 5Climate Service Center Germany (GERICS), Hamburg, Germany 10 6Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association, Potsdam, 11 Germany 12 * Correspondence: 13 Richard J. Hewitt 14 [email protected] 15 Keywords: social innovation 1, community energy 2, renewable energy 3, cooperative 4, 16 grassroots 5, crisis 6, participation 7, energy democracy 8. 17 Abstract 18 Citizen-driven Renewable Energy (RE) projects of various kinds, known collectively as community 19 energy (CE), have an important part to play in the worldwide transition to cleaner energy systems. 20 On the basis of evidence from literature review and an exploratory survey of 8 European countries, 21 we investigate European CE through the lens of Social Innovation (SI). Broadly, three main phases 22 of SI in CE can be identified. The environmental movements of the 1960s and the “oil shocks” of the 23 1970s provided the catalyst for a series of innovative societal responses around energy and self- 24 sufficiency. These first wave CE innovations included cooperatives (e.g. in Sweden and Germany) 25 who financed and managed risks for RE developments in the absence of support from governments 26 and banks. A second wave of SI relates to the mainstreaming of RE and associated government 27 support mechanisms. In this phase, with some important exceptions, successful CE initiatives were 28 mainly confined to those countries where they were already embedded as innovators in the previous 29 phase. In former communist countries of central and eastern Europe (Poland, former East Germany) 30 CE development was hindered by societal mistrust of cooperative movements for their association 31 with the state socialism of the past. In Scotland, UK, strong public support was given to CE, and a 32 new form, the Community Development Trust, emerged and was later replicated elsewhere in the 33 UK. 34 The third phase of CE innovation relates to the societal response to the Great Recession that began in 35 2007-8 and lasted most of the subsequent decade. Though climate change had become a pressing 36 concern, CE initiatives formed around this time were also strongly focused around democratization Social innovation in community energy in Europe: a review of the evidence 37 of energy and citizen empowerment in the context of rising energy prices, a weak economy, and a 38 production and supply system dominated by excessively powerful multinational energy firms. CE 39 initiatives today are more diverse than at any time previously, and though seriously constrained by 40 mainstream energy policy in most countries, are likely to continue to act as incubators for pioneering 41 initiatives addressing virtually all aspects of energy. 42 1 Introduction 43 With the goals of the Paris climate agreement looking difficult to achieve (e.g. Kriegler et al 2018, 44 Larkin et al 2018), and Europe’s efforts to increase the proportion of RE in its energy systems only 45 partially successful (Fig 1), new approaches to the clean energy transition are needed. This necessity, 46 together with citizens’ growing interest in sustainability and energy democracy (Szulecki 2018a) 47 offers both a clear motivation and opportunity for communities to address both concerns together by 48 forging a new relationship with energy. In this context, a wide range of community-led sustainable 49 energy projects (CE) are currently being implemented all around the world. European countries are at 50 the forefront of this emerging trend. CE is found in diverse forms throughout Europe, including wind 51 turbines and solar farms in cooperative ownership that return profits to local investors, mini-hydro- 52 electricity schemes which power local homes and businesses, farmer’s bioenergy collectives, church 53 or community center renewable heat initiatives, locally-owned energy distribution networks and 54 “eco-villages” which promote self-sufficiency, zero-waste and energy efficiency. The common 55 denominator that binds these diverse projects together is that all, in some form or other, emphasize 56 citizen participation around the common issue of energy. 57 Fig 1: Renewable energy as a percentage of total final energy (top) and 2020 targets (bottom). 58 In this sense, the concept of social innovation (SI) is relevant. SI refers to the reconfiguring of social 59 practices in response to societal challenges, with the aim of improving societal well-being through 60 the engagement of civil society actors (Polman et al 2017). SI has been instrumental in citizen-based 61 activity associated with reducing emissions or increasing renewable energy production (Harnmejjer 62 et al 2018), but remains a contested concept. MacCallum et al. (2009) see reconfiguration of social 63 practices, institutions and networks as key elements of social innovation where civil society agency 64 creates new ways of responding to crises and opportunities. We concur with this conceptualization, 65 which is broadly matched by later commentators (Cajaiba-Santana 2014). Howaldt and Schwarz 66 (2016: 1) note that “social innovations are gaining in importance not only in relation to social 67 integration and equal opportunities, but also in respect to the innovative ability and future 68 sustainability of society as a whole.” Within the field of renewable energy research there is a copious 69 literature on CE, which although rarely described as social innovation, sits comfortably in the 70 definitions of social innovation offered by Cajaiba-Santana and others. In this paper, we address two 71 main research gaps with regard to CE and SI. 72 Firstly, while there is a large and growing literature on CE itself, a broad review of its form and 73 extent across Europe is generally lacking. There is a pressing need to map, characterize and 74 investigate the range of CE initiatives across Europe, in order to better understand the circumstances 75 that lead to high levels of development. While several projects, like the EU-funded REScoop project 76 (Vansintjan 2015) or the Energy Archipelago (Harnmejjer et al 2012) have already begun to address 77 this need, the scientific literature remains somewhat disconnected from the extensive publicly 78 available information on individual CE initiatives found in grey literature, news reports and 79 community websites. At the same time, the literature is generally focused on CE in pioneering 80 countries like Germany and Denmark with few studies of the phenomenon in Southern Europe 2 This is a provisional file, not the final typeset article Social innovation in community energy in Europe: a review of the evidence 81 (Candelise and Ruggieri 2017, Heras-Saizarbitoria et al 2018), or the former communist countries of 82 Central and Eastern Europe (Holstenkamp 2018). This leads to the first of our research objectives: 83 RO1: Develop a greater understanding of what constitutes CE in Europe by reviewing relevant 84 literature and collecting evidence for CE initiatives from primary sources for a range of European 85 countries. 86 Secondly, while SI clearly provides a useful conceptual framework for the study of CE, there are few 87 studies that use current understanding of SI as a framework for direct analysis of CE. We address this 88 through two further research objectives: 89 RO2: Apply social innovation criteria based on literature review and data collection exercise as a 90 framework for analysis of the CE phenomenon in our case study countries. 91 RO3: Identify hypotheses and questions for future research in CE and SI in Europe. 92 2 Research Background 93 2.1 Community Energy 94 CE is found in diverse legal, organizational and financial forms (Holstenkamp 2018, Rae and Bradley 95 2012; Walker 2008), and may involve participation in project development (process), and/or sharing 96 collective benefits (outcomes) (Walker and Devine-Wright 2008). CE initiatives may comprise 97 communities of place – emphasizing shared values associated with a particular territory or landscape 98 – or communities of practice – emphasizing shared ethics and world views, financial circumstances 99 or problems (Magnani and Osti 2016). Energy cooperatives (REScoops) are the oldest, and perhaps 100 best known, type of CE; these may be either energy producers, suppliers, or both (Magnani and Osti 101 2016, Capellán-Peréz et al 2016), and provide energy or revenue from sales to their members, who 102 are not necessarily part of the same geographical community. Other types of initiatives include 103 community development companies or not-for-profit organizations who manage production or supply 104 for direct local benefit (Slee and Harnmeijer 2017, Harnmeijer et al 2018), and sustainability 105 movements of various sorts ranging from substantial and well-organized transition towns initiatives 106 (Seyfang and Haxeltine 2012) to eco-villages and informal citizen’s groups emphasizing self- 107 sufficiency and energy saving (Renau 2018, Zhu et al 2015, Georg 1999). However, as Creamer et al 108 (2018) have observed, CE refers to a broad spectrum of energy-related initiatives, not a specific class 109 of project. Though often considered to be sustainable, democratic, decentralized, grassroots, 110 cooperative and local, many CE projects may address only one of these aspects. In fact, engaging 111 with such a complex emerging phenomenon is a non-trivial task, which the energy research 112 community is just beginning to address.

Load more