Skip to main content

Institutional Aspects of Consumer (Co-)Ownership in RE Energy Communities

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

This Annex provides an overview of the examples of consumer (co-)ownership that are reported in the 18 country chapters following the analytical framework developed in Chap. 28. To enable a like-to-like comparison, other than grouping the country examples in the three categories developed, that is, communities of interest, communities of place, and communities of interest and place, we have organized the information on the examples in three columns. The first column summarizes the contractual arrangement and the type of project indicating—where available—the amount of the total investment and giving information on the contributions of the partners involved and legal peculiarities of the model. The second column provides information on the RE technology, the installed capacity, and the geography of the given project. The third column characterizes the participation of the local population, the distribution of benefits, and the drivers and motivations involved. Of course, not all pieces of information described above were always disclosed for the examples reported. To render the financial data comparable, all currencies in the tables have been converted into euro as of October 2018. For the original amounts please consult the individual country chapters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This notion considers a type of stabilized relationship between different networks and systems concerning humans but also animals, plants, biosphere, stratosphere, and so on. With regard to the four areas of sustainability that Feron (2016) considers, that is, institutional, economic, environmental, and socio-cultural sustainability, we would like to emphasize the institutional concern for a stable coexistence between them.

  2. 2.

    See the Fukushima Manifest Declaration 2016 available at http://www.wcpc2016.jp/en/about/declaration/, accessed 24 April 2018.

References

  • Baigorrotegui, G. (2018). Comunidades Energéticas en Latinoamérica. Notas para situar lo abigarrado de prácticas energo-comunitarias. In G. Baigorrotegui & C. Parker (Eds.), ¿Conectar o desconectar? Energía y Comunidad para las transiciones energéticas. Santiago: Colección IDEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, S., & Kunze, C. (2014). Transcending community energy: Collective and politically motivated projects in renewable energy (CPE) across Europe. People, Place and Policy, 8(3), 180–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridge, G., Bouzarovski, S., Bradshaw, M., & Eyre, N. (2013). Geographies of energy transition: Space, place and the low-carbon economy. Energy Policy, 53, 331–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cass, N., & Walker, G. (2010). Public roles and socio-technical configurations: Diversity in renewable energy deployment in the UK and its implications. In P. Devine-Wright (Ed.), Renewable energy and the public. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desmond, E. (2018). Legitimation in a world at risk. The case of genetically modified crops in India. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devine-Wright, P. (2010). From backyards to places: Public engagement and the emplacement of renewable energy technologies. In P. Devine-Wright (Ed.), Renewable energy and the public (pp. 57–70). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feron, S. (2016). Sustainability of off-grid photovoltaic system for rural electrification in developing countries: A review. Sustainability, 8(12), 1326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feron, S., Heinrichs, H., & Cordero, R. R. (2016). Are the rural electrification efforts in the ecuadorian amazon sustainable? Sustainability, 8(5), 443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, C., Boyer, D., & Barrera, E. (2015). Wind at the margin of the state: Autonomy and renewable energy development in southern Mexico. In J.-A. McNeish, A. Borchgrevink, & O. Logan (Eds.), Contested powers. The politics of energy and development in Latin America (pp. 92–115). Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurrelmann, A., Schneider, S., & Steffek, J. (Eds.). (2007). Legitimacy in an age of global politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, Y., Simcock, N., & Walker, G. (2012). Making power differently: Exploring in motives and meanings of community renewable energy developments in cases from the UK and South Korea. In A. Davies (Ed.), Enterprising communities: Grassroots sustainability innovations (pp. 105–121). Bingley: Emerald Group.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Opazo, J. (2014). The politics of system innovation for emerging technologies: Understanding the uptake of off-grid renewable electricity in rural Chile. Doctoral dissertation, University of Sussex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simcock, N., Willis, R., & Capener, P. (2016). Cultures of community energy. International case studies. Lancaster: Brirish Academy for Humanity and Social Science and Climate Change Collaboration. Retrieved March 1, 2018, from https://www.britac.ac.uk/sites/default/files/CoCE_Policy%20brief_online.pdf.

  • Smith, A. (2005). The alternative technology movement: An analysis of its framing and negotiation of technology development. Research in Human Ecology, 12, 106–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vancea, M., Becker, S., & Kunze, C. (2017). Local embeddedness in community energy projects. A social entrepreneurship perspective. Revista Internacional de Sociología, 75(4), e077.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, G., & Devine-Wright, P. (2008). Community renewable energy: What should it mean? EnergyPolicy, 36, 497–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, G., Devine-Wright, P., Hunter, S., High, H., & Evans, B. (2010). Trust and community: Exploring the meanings, contexts and dynamics of community renewableenergy. EnergyPolicy, 38, 2655–2663.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirth, S. (2014). Community matter: Institutional preconditions for community renewable energy. Energy Policy, 70, 236–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gloria Baigorrotegui .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Baigorrotegui, G., Lowitzsch, J. (2019). Institutional Aspects of Consumer (Co-)Ownership in RE Energy Communities. In: Lowitzsch, J. (eds) Energy Transition. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93518-8_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93518-8_28

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-93517-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-93518-8

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics