Significant factors in the success or failure of energy transition arise from the spatial potential of places and their communities. Scenario planning appears to be an appropriate design instrument to enable architects to unveil, conceptualise, imagine, test and communicate this potential to stakeholders. This paper critically refelcts on the scenario as an architectural design instrument. Inscribed with political intentions, scenario planning may be a far from neutral design instrument. Instead of triggering communities to explore local energy potential, a scenario may have a normative effect on a community's imagination. The paper aims to define guidelines for the deployment of scenarios in an open, participatory planning process. To mediate in a local participatory planning process, we argue, scenarios should be situational, dynamic and open-ended, allowing or even triggering communities to (re)define the issues relevant to a place during the ongoing process of energy-transition. How, when and where should scenarios be deployed in order to enable communities to understand and develop their local energy potential?
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
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
