Community Power

Overview

The challenge for the world in general, and Africa in particular, is to make a transition towards clean, democratically controlled, participatory and distributed renewable energy sources. That means moving away from the centralised energy systems to decentralised renewable solutions. Use of Community Power implementation will bring even more benefits to local communities.  This articles summarises the definitions, dynamics and feasabilty of community power projects. Furthermore,

What is a Community-based Energy Project?

Community-based energy projects, also known as community energy (initiatives), include energy production, collective procurement, distribution or conservation of energy. Such projects are determined by their governance structure, participation, ownership, local consumption and technology. There are several models of community energy: local individuals investing in renewable energies, citizen wind parks or electricity or heating cooperatives (Kalkbrenner and Roosen, 2016).

Defining ‘Community’

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/community

The term ‘community’ in the context of community-based energy projects refers to social geographic entities. However, the geographic definition is over-simplistic and communities are likely to be more accurately defined in terms of a political and social process (Dalby and Mackenzie, 1997).

Definitions of Community Energy

Numerous definitions of and approaches to community energy are found worldwide. The WWEA defines community energy as “the economic and operational participation and/or ownership by citizens or members of a defined community in a renewable energy project”. Further they state community energy appears in both large and small scale. WWEA also claims that a minimum of two of the following criteria must be fulfilled for it to be community energy initiative (IRENA Coalition for Action, 2018; Schick et al., 2016; Tenk, 2018):

Figure 1: Three main elements of Community Power (Tenk, 2018).

Rogers et al. (2008) define a rural community energy scheme as an “installation of one or more RE technologies in or close to a rural community, with input from members of that community”. Further, they claim that the definition of community renewable energy project is flexible. The term is applied to various types of schemes by different groups.

Also (Seyfang et al., 2013) claim that defining the term ‘community energy’ is difficult since there is no consensus over it. The degree of community involvement varies between the understanding of policymakers, intermediary organisations, academics and practitioners have of it. However, they interpret it as projects where communities of place or communities of interest are highly involved and have a high degree of ownership.

Seeking for a definition of the word community in the context of renewable energy projects Walker and Devine-Wright identified two main dimensions taking into account the views of project participants, activists, administrators, policy makers and local residents:

“First, a process dimension, concerned with who a project is developed and run by, who is involved and has influence. Second, an outcome dimension concerned with how the outcomes of a project are spatially and socially distributed—in other words, who the project is for; who it is that benefits particularly in economic or social terms.” (Walker and Devine-Wright, 2008).

Nonetheless, these dimensions do not refer to the technology itself, but to the social arrangements through which a given technology is being implemented (Walker and Cass, 2007).

Objectives and Challenges of Community Energy

Especially renewable energy systems present possibilities for local governance of energy production since their social impact is very different from that of fossil-based conventional systems (van der Schoor and Scholtens, 2015). Therefore, the literature mainly discusses community-based projects with regard to renewable energies.

A community renewable energy project must benefit the community either directly or indirectly. Direct benefit results through supply of energy to numerous properties or a community facility. Indirect benefit could arise e.g. by selling energy generated to the grid (Rogers et al., 2008).

Challenges that are faced during the whole process of creation and implementation of community-based energy projects are the following:

• group can lack clear direction or management
• project needs skills, information, financial and material resources
• community must first overcome public disinterest and mistrust of new energy systems and needs to tackle a sense of disempowerment in the public
• a network is necessary to consolidate learning and skills so they can be transferred to others; and
• policy support is crucial; often inconsistent and hard-to-access grant funding; possible difficulties with planning and other legal issues(Seyfang et al., 2013)

Dynamics of Community-based Energy Projects

Building a community energy project is very complex, whichever development model is applied. Legal conditions as well as economic and technical viability have to be taken into account. Receiving support and advice from experts and learning from previous experiences is substantial (Walker, 2008).

Trust plays a substantial role in the implementation and outcome of community RE projects Walker et al. (2010) showed. Trust can even be enhanced by following a communal approach. However, this conclusion cannot be generalised and trust and the cohesion between the local residents cannot be ensured just because the project has a community label.

In an empirical investigation on the terms of motivations and level of engagement of members of community renewable energy projects the analysis revealed diversity in the members’ motives. This heterogeneity can be explained by three aspects:

1. institutional factors ⇒ members are norm-driven when community logic is paramount, whereas material incentives are motivational for the members when they are connected through a market relationship with the organisation
2. spatial patterns ⇒ communities of interest are less likely to foster norm-driven behaviours than communities of place
3. attitude towards the diffusion of institutional innovations

Lastly, it was concluded that norm-driven individuals are the ones who are more involved and invest more in the governance of organisations. Thus, the diversity of motivations also depends on the level of engagement of members (Bauwens, 2016).

Feasibility of Community Energy Initiatives

From a study on rural community energy schemes carried out in the UK Rogers et al. concluded that local control of projects might not be a realistic option for many rural communities. Despite the concept itself being popular and people finding the participant role attractive:

• majority was interested in participation, and yet nobody wanted to take on the role of the project leader
• then again residents did not think community control was a viable option due to negative experiences with other local initiatives
• residents who showed interest did not know how or where to find specialists nor how to develop specialist knowledge and skills themselves

► required: more institutional support needed to enable and further projects and participation (Rogers et al., 2008)

Van der Schoor and Scholtens (2015) similarly concluded that to achieve lasting results further development of organisational structures and viable visions for local energy governance.

Research/Literature on Community-based Energy Projects

The research concerning this topic largely investigates community energy initiatives implemented in the Global North (e.g. US and EU). These projects mainly emerge as grassroot approaches enabling citizens to engage in the transition to a sustainable energy future. The dynamics observed and lessons learnt in these initiatives might not be explicitly translatable to the implementation of community-based energy projects in developing countries. The composition, objectives and the business models are different in these two contexts (Koirala et al., 2016). Further, Kirubi et al. (2009) pointed out the limited amount of empirical case studies of rural electrification programs in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly community-based projects.

Conculsion: Supporting Structures are needed

In order to overcome the challenges, to steer the dynamics in a favourable way and to make community power project feasable and scalable, several supporting mechanisms should be placed in the foreseeable future:

1. Policy support within all countries that want to reforce communtiy power projects
2. Network support to consolidate learning and skills so they can be transferred to others (knowledge management).
3. List the many community power projects globally, sort them by different categories of the difinition that includes the broaden variety of projects:
   1. Identify succesful projects and their stories to learn from
   2. Identify relevant communities, organisations, companies and individuals intersted in participating in community power projects
   3. To match them up in order to improve the success rate of community power projects

1. Research facilities should be strengthend to facilitate research about the behaviour and conditions that lead to succesful community power projects
2. Community, projects, individuals all need guidance on how to best structure and steer the development of community power projects and to further develop organisational structures and viable visions.

Future of Community Power in Afrika

In addition to large power plants, Africa will also need decentralized mini-grids and “green people’s energy” in order to build anrenewables-based energy supply. The German Development Coopertation wants to help set up thosewith enhancing the energy cooperation with African countries during the next 5 years. "Green people’s energy” for Africa is the answer that can help meet the rising demand for energy across the African continent while preventing the devel - opment of a high-carbon energy sector. Sun, wind, biomass and hydropower are available in abundance. Everyone can benefit from these sources of energy and from the expansion of energy access.

Germany can draw from its own experience: In the 19th century, energy cooperatives were a driving force behind rural electrification in Germany. And also the recent energy transition was only thanks to the dedicated efforts of citizens, municipalities and SMEs that renewable energy sources were developed on a massive scale. Nearly 900 energy cooperatives are active in energy projects of this kind. Bioenergy villages, municipalities that are energy self-sufficient, municipal utilities that belong to the people, and citizens who produce their own energy form the backbone of the energy transition: Most of Germany’s renewable energy installations are owned by individuals, municipalities or farmers.

Community power has a proven, very positive impact on deployment rates of renewable energy and increases the economic and social benefits of renewable energies for local communities and their actors. It increases community acceptance, involvement and benefits from renewable energy installations, and has been key driver in pioneering European countries adopting renewable energy. Community Power has the potential to boost renewable energy adoption in Africa, which has currently the lowest electrification rates and population densities in the world. The decentralised renewable resources can be matched with decentralised populations and can have a real and measurable impact on Africa’s living conditions and economic development while providing incentives allowing people to live in regions already affected by climate change.

In 2018, the leading community power proponents around the world together to discuss the role community power has to play in the global shift towards renewable energy, including a global community power strategy and its national and local implications.

• 2° World Community Power Conference will take place 8-10 November 2018 Bamako - Mali

The 1st World Community Power Conference 2016 took place in Fukushima City, Japan. The conference concluded with the “Fukushima Community Power Declaration – for the future of the earth” which was agreed by the more than 600 participants from more than 30 countries, to support community power. The declaration mentions that sustainable energy is essential to future wellbeing of all and that the implementation of this renewable energy future must respect local and regional needs and priorities, as well as existing societal, cultural and environmental conditions, and, in other words, follow the principles of “community power."

Further Readings

• BMZ: Green people’s energy for Africa
• IRENA: Community Energy
  
• WWEA: Community Wind
• World Community Power Conference in Mali, Nov 2018
  
• Lessons learnt from community-based pico- and micro-hdyropower schemes
  
• Participatory Management (PM) Approach for Achieving Rural Electrification. Nepal
• Community Based Rural Electrification – Micro Hydro: Tungu-Kabiri Pico-Hydro Project, Kenya
• Mini-grid portal on energypedia
• Community Involvement in Mini-grids
• German Success factors of the Energy transition#Citizen-owned_Projects and Citizen participation models in Germany#Bankability_and_Project_Financing
• Community Engagement for Power Projects