Scaling up community wind energy: the relevance of autonomy and community

Background

Renewable energy, especially wind power, is expanding rapidly in Sweden and elsewhere and has left the “niche” to become part of the mainstream energy socio-technical “regime”. However, the social innovation of community-owned wind energy is not expanding alongside. Despite its potential for an inclusive energy transition and for alleviating conflicts, community energy remains a niche phenomenon. In this article, we explore the conditions for community energy to scale up. Upscaling is sometimes regarded as alien to the spirit of community energy, but we argue that it can be positive and, assuming the existence of a “community wind energy trap”—increased market competition and decreased governmental support—even necessary for the long-term survival of community wind energy. We particularly study how two variables relate to upscaling: autonomy and community, the latter divided into communities of interest and place.

Results

A case study on four wind cooperatives and their main partners, municipal energy companies, based in western Sweden is conducted to generate a theory of how autonomy and community are related to their ambitions and capabilities to scale up their operations. The results indicate that for scaling up, autonomy is a more important factor than community, while communities of interest are more likely to scale up than communities of place. A provisional theory on possibilities for community energy to scale up is developed based on the case study results.

Conclusions

Even when upscaling is the will and ambition of a community energy initiative, neither autonomy nor community alone is a guarantee for it to happen—yet in combination, the likelihood increases: with autonomy as a prerequisite for action, and community as a motivation for action. Both communities of place and of interest can act as a motivational force and mobilise resources. Yet local rootedness can be difficult to combine with upscaling beyond a certain point, while a community of interest lacks physical borders. If regulators are keen on counteracting the community energy trap, our research suggests that they need to intervene and support these initiatives—yet without intruding on their autonomy.