Energy communities in Sweden: Challenging established ideas of aim, place and engagement
(2024) In Energy Research & Social Science 115.- Abstract
- This paper contributes to the discussion about the importance of different energy community (EC) characteristics. Based on a questionnaire to the members of solar ECs in Sweden, it investigates (1) to what extent EC members agree with the established view of the “ideal” energy community, as described in previous literature, and (2) to what extent the studied ECs match the characteristics of such an “ideal” energy community, according to their members. The analysis addresses six dimensions: process, outcomes, place, interest, organization, and social interaction. The results show that EC members confirm the importance of member involvement (process), shared interests (interest), and a sense of togetherness (social interaction) but do not... (More)
- This paper contributes to the discussion about the importance of different energy community (EC) characteristics. Based on a questionnaire to the members of solar ECs in Sweden, it investigates (1) to what extent EC members agree with the established view of the “ideal” energy community, as described in previous literature, and (2) to what extent the studied ECs match the characteristics of such an “ideal” energy community, according to their members. The analysis addresses six dimensions: process, outcomes, place, interest, organization, and social interaction. The results show that EC members confirm the importance of member involvement (process), shared interests (interest), and a sense of togetherness (social interaction) but do not find either geographical proximity (place) or spending time with other members (social interaction) particularly important. The studied ECs score low on both actual and desired member participation in management (process), decision-making (organization), and other community-related activities (social interaction). Based on the results, we argue that ECs with environmental aims are less dependent on member engagement and social interaction than socially motivated ECs and also less likely to create conflicts of interests with local communities than economically motivated ECs; that allowing non-local membership does not necessarily interfere with securing local benefits; that local anchoring matters but does not necessarily require geographical proximity; and that a sense of community can be based on a common mission rather than on social interaction. Overall, this indicates that a more nuanced view on aim, place and engagement is warranted. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/7952b2b0-f7fe-40ac-9465-045c04747503
- author
- Bergek, Anna and Palm, Jenny LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2024-06-13
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- community solar, energy community, community energy, citizen engagement, citizen participation, energy justice, renewable energy community
- in
- Energy Research & Social Science
- volume
- 115
- article number
- 103626
- pages
- 16 pages
- publisher
- Elsevier
- ISSN
- 2214-6326
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.erss.2024.103626
- project
- Community solar: participation, organisation, and regulation
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 7952b2b0-f7fe-40ac-9465-045c04747503
- date added to LUP
- 2024-06-16 16:09:16
- date last changed
- 2024-06-17 09:22:32
@article{7952b2b0-f7fe-40ac-9465-045c04747503,
abstract = {{This paper contributes to the discussion about the importance of different energy community (EC) characteristics. Based on a questionnaire to the members of solar ECs in Sweden, it investigates (1) to what extent EC members agree with the established view of the “ideal” energy community, as described in previous literature, and (2) to what extent the studied ECs match the characteristics of such an “ideal” energy community, according to their members. The analysis addresses six dimensions: process, outcomes, place, interest, organization, and social interaction. The results show that EC members confirm the importance of member involvement (process), shared interests (interest), and a sense of togetherness (social interaction) but do not find either geographical proximity (place) or spending time with other members (social interaction) particularly important. The studied ECs score low on both actual and desired member participation in management (process), decision-making (organization), and other community-related activities (social interaction). Based on the results, we argue that ECs with environmental aims are less dependent on member engagement and social interaction than socially motivated ECs and also less likely to create conflicts of interests with local communities than economically motivated ECs; that allowing non-local membership does not necessarily interfere with securing local benefits; that local anchoring matters but does not necessarily require geographical proximity; and that a sense of community can be based on a common mission rather than on social interaction. Overall, this indicates that a more nuanced view on aim, place and engagement is warranted.}},
author = {{Bergek, Anna and Palm, Jenny}},
issn = {{2214-6326}},
keywords = {{community solar; energy community; community energy; citizen engagement; citizen participation; energy justice; renewable energy community}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{06}},
publisher = {{Elsevier}},
series = {{Energy Research & Social Science}},
title = {{Energy communities in Sweden: Challenging established ideas of aim, place and engagement}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/189178087/Bergek_and_Palm_2024.pdf}},
doi = {{10.1016/j.erss.2024.103626}},
volume = {{115}},
year = {{2024}},
}