This study focuses on top-down and bottom-up processes within the field of energy transition. It aims at gaining insights into the ways that a more balanced approach can be achieved, by taking into consideration the (mutual) interests, barriers and expectations of the municipality and local citizen initiatives. The theoretical framework of the study is the implementation analysis framework, distinguishing top-down and bottom-up approaches. Specifically, this qualitative (thematic analysis) research study investigates the mismatch in expectations between a number of local energy initiatives and the municipality of Groningen regarding their roles within the local energy transition context. To this end, semi-structured interviews have been conducted with members of the municipality of Groningen, Grunneger Power (a local energy intermediary), and four local energy initiatives. Need and expectation gaps have been identified and potential solutions have been explored. The main findings of the study illustrate the need of professional support for citizen initiatives, at both technical and organizational level, especially in the first phases of their development. Additionally, clear mutual communication on short and long-term planning and ambitions of the involved parties is of key importance for the alignment of the interests and the course of actions. Consequently, a clear context is needed, within which an exchange of feedback on the envisioned strategies, and the subsequent energy saving or generation interventions, can take place in an efficient and effective way. Additionally, such a context increases confidence and provides a clear understanding to the citizen initiatives regarding their role and the level and nature of support they can expect in their intended projects and activities. Based on these findings, policy implications have been drawn.
DOCUMENT
More and more local bottom-up energy initiatives are emerging. Those involved encounter many barriers during the realization of their ideas. As the generation of renewable energy is mostly included, these local initiatives contribute to the targets set at regional, national & EU level. At the same time, they are an indication that end-users themselves want to be part of the energy transition. What are the reasons for citizens to organize themselves and start and initiative? What kind of barriers do they encounter? What does this mean for roles and responsibilities of professionals? And to what kind of opportunities does this lead for products and services? Answers to these questions provide a solid starting point to develop methods and instruments to stimulate,facilitate and upscale local energy initiatives. This paper bundles the outcomes of three workshops and three additional interviews in the Netherlands as part of the European E-hub project. Conclusions can be drawn on needs and drivers, barriers, risks and solutions (lessons learned), possible roles for professionals and opportunities for new products and services.
DOCUMENT
The municipality of Apeldoorn had polled the interest among its private home-owners to turn their homes energy neutral. Based on the enthusiastic response, Apeldoorn saw the launch of the Energy Apeldoorn (#ENEXAP) in 2011. Its goal was to convert to it technically and financially possible for privately owned homes to be refurbished and to energy neutral, taking the residential needs and wishes from occupants as the starting point. The project was called an Expedition, because although the goal was clear, the road to get there wasn’t. The Expedition team comprised businesses, civil-society organisations, the local university of applied sciences, the municipality of Apeldoorn, and of course, residents in a central role. The project was supported by Platform31, as part of the Dutch government’s Energy Leap programme. The #ENEXAP involved 38 homes, spread out through Apeldoorn and surrounding villages. Even though the houses were very diverse, the group of residents was quite similar: mostly middle- aged, affluent people who highly value the environment and sustainability. An important aspect of the project was the independent and active role residents played. In collaboration with businesses and professionals, through meetings, excursions, workshops and by filling in a step- by-step plan on the website, the residents gathered information about their personal situation, the energy performance of their home and the possibilities available for them to save and generate energy themselves. Businesses were encouraged to develop an integrated approach for home-owners, and consortia were set up by businesses to develop the strategy, products and services needed to meet this demand. On top of making minimal twenty from the thirty-eight houses in the project energy neutral, the ultimate goal was to boost the local demand for energy- neutral refurbishment and encourage an appropriate supply of services, opening up the (local) market for energy neutral refurbishment. This paper will reflect on the outcomes of this collective in the period 2011-2015.
DOCUMENT
Abstract: The transition towards renewable and sustainable energy is being accompanied by a transformation of communities and neighbourhoods. This transition may have huge ramifications throughout society. Many cities, towns and villages are putting together ambitious visions about how to achieve 100% sustainable energy, energy neutrality, zero carbon emission or zero-impact of their communities. We investigate what is happening at the local community level towards realizing these ambitions from a social perspective. We use the case study approach to answer the following question: how do local community energy initiatives contribute to a decentralized sustainable energy system? We find that especially the development of a shared vision, the level of activities and the type of organisation are important factors of the strength of the ‘local network’.
DOCUMENT
The energy transition requires the transformation of communities and neighbourhoods. It will have huge ramifications throughout society. Many cities, towns and villages have put together ambitious visions about how to achieve e.g. energy neutrality, zero-emission or zero-impact. What is happening at the local level towards realizing these ambitions? In a set of case study’s we investigate the following questions: How are self-organized local energy initiatives performing their self-set tasks? What obstacles are present in the current societal set-up that can hinder decentralized energy production? In our cases local leadership, vision, level of communication and type of organisation are important factors of the strength of the ‘local network’. (Inter)national energy policy and existing energy companies largely determine the ‘global’ or outside network. Stronger regional and national support structures, as well as an enabling environment for decentralized energy production, are needed to make decentralized sustainable energy production a success.
DOCUMENT
There is growing realisation amongst local communities that the organizations and societies within which they live and work need to become more sustainable in order to secure their social, environmental and economic futures (Coyle 2011, Müller et al. 2011). The underlying motivations vary but are often traceable to an increased need for certainty or security. The search for solutions is in part practically orientated towards resilience to different forces of decline. Whilst sometimes manifested in individuals it is more often evident within local initiatives seeking common ground and related to perceived needs for local independence or increased self-determination (Musall & Kuik 2011, Seyfang & Haxeltine 2012). In our project and in this paper, our focus is on local initiatives as opposed to developments at regional or strategic scales. In the Northern Netherlands such local initiatives are often comprised of village residents or more heterogeneous groups from the wider rural community, with local initiatives co-existent in urban areas and cities. Local initiatives may focus on different sustainability issues (or a combination of them), such as transportation, energy, water, natural environment, food production, solid waste or the local economy (Coyle, 2011). However, many of these local initiatives focus on energy issues and solutions, while they might expand their interests to other issues after a prolonged existence. Therefore, in this paper we refer to these local or communal activities as Local Energy Initiatives (LEI’s) that are at the grassroots of sustainable transitions.
DOCUMENT
In the last decade, the number of local energy initiatives (LEIs) has increased in western European countries. Although several success factors and barriers in the development of LEIs have been studied by other scholars, there has been limited scholarly interest in the overall impact of LEIs so far. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore their impact by determining their achievement. Additionally, levels of engagement were used to categorise the success factors for and barriers that impede this impact. Initiatives in two provinces in the north of the Netherlands were studied. For the data collection, 84 in-depth interviews were conducted with the initiators of LEIs. In general, it can be concluded that the impact of LEIs is limited. Success factors and barriers in the development of LEIs play out at different levels of engagement: the level of the initiative itself; the community level; and the public–private level. Theoretically, this study provides empirical insights on how to measure the impact of LEIs. Furthermore, the study brings together a variety of factors that influence this impact based on the levels of engagement. Practically, this research offers indications on how to contribute to the further development of LEIs.
DOCUMENT
To facilitate energy transition, in several countries regulators have devised ‘regulatory sandboxes’ to create a participatory experimentation environment for exploring revision of energy law. These sandboxes allow for a two-way regulatory dialogue between an experimenter and an approachable regulator to innovate regulation and enable new socio-technical arrangements. However, these experiments do not take place in a vacuum but need to be formulated and implemented in a multi-actor, polycentric decision-making system through collaboration with the regulator but also energy sector incumbents such as the distribution system operator. We are, therefore, exploring new roles and power division changes in the energy sector as a result of such a regulatory sandbox. We research the Dutch Energy Experimentation Decree (EED) that invites homeowners’ associations and energy cooperatives to propose projects prohibited by extant regulation. In order to localize, democratize and decentralize energy provision, local experimenters can, for instance, organise peer-to-peer supply and determine their own tariffs for energy transport. Theoretically, we rely on Ostrom’s concept of polycentricity to study the dynamics between actors involved in and engaging with the participatory experiments. Empirically, we examine 4 approved EED experiments through interviews and document analysis. Our conclusions focus on the potential and limitations of bottom-up, participatory innovation in a polycentric system. The most important lessons are that a more holistic approach to experimentation, inter-actor alignment, providing more incentives, and expert and financial support would benefit bottom-up participatory innovation.
LINK
The paper studies the impact of complex interrelationships between economic, societal, and political realms at multiple levels on the role of community energy initiatives in the energy transition process. The paper focuses specifically on the Netherlands, because of two aspects: (1) existence of the strong political support and favourable regulatory framework for development of community energy, and (2) the systemic challenge of the Dutch energy transition due to the largely fossil-based energy system. The paper identifies systemic, institutional, ideational, or communicative determinants of the role of community renewable energy in the conditions of political support and systemic lock-in.
DOCUMENT
Citizen participation in local renewable energy projects is often promoted as many suppose it to be a panacea for the difficulties that are involved in the energy transition process. Quite evidently, it is not; there is a wide variety of visions, ideologies and interests related to an ‘energy transition’. Such a variety is actually a precondition for a stakeholder participation process, as stakeholder participation only makes sense if there is ‘something at stake’. Conflicting viewpoints, interests and debates are the essence of participation. The success of stakeholder participation implies that these differences are acknowledged, and discussed, and that this has created mutual understanding among stakeholders. It does not necessarily create ‘acceptance’. Renewable energy projects often give rise to local conflict. The successful implementation of local renewable energy systems depends on the support of the local social fabric. While at one hand decisions to construct wind turbines in specific regions trigger local resistance, the opposite also occurs! Solar parks sometimes create a similar variation: Various communities try to prevent the construction of solar parks in their vicinity, while other communities proudly present their parks. Altogether, local renewable energy initiatives create a rather chaotic picture, if regarded from the perspective of government planning. However, if we regard the successes, it appears the top down initiatives are most successful in areas with a weak social fabric, like industrial areas, or rather recently reclaimed land. Deeply rooted communities, virtually only have successful renewable energy projects that are more or less bottom up initiatives. This paper will first sketch why participation is important, and present a categorisation of processes and procedures that could be applied. It also sketches a number of myths and paradoxes that might occur in participation processes. ‘Compensating’ individuals and/or communities to accept wind turbines or solar parks is not sufficient to gain ‘acceptance’. A basic feature of many debates on local renewable energy projects is about ‘fairness’. The implication is that decision-making is neither on pros and cons of various renewable energy technologies as such, nor on what citizens are obliged to accept, but on a fair distribution of costs and benefits. Such discussions on fairness cannot be short cut by referring to legal rules, scientific evidence, or to standard financial compensations. History plays a role as old feelings of being disadvantaged, both at individual and at group level, might re-emerge in such debates. The paper will provide an overview of various local controversies on renewable energy initiatives in the Netherlands. It will argue that an open citizen participation process can be organized to work towards fair decisions, and that citizens should not be addressed as greedy subjects, trying to optimise their own private interests, but as responsible persons.
DOCUMENT
