The decarbonisation of energy systems is leading to a reconfiguration of the geographies of energy. One example is the emergence of community energy, which has become a popular object of study for geographers. Although widely acknowledged to be a contested, capacious, and flexible term, "community energy" is commonly presented as singular, bounded, and localised. In this paper, we challenge this conception of community energy by considering evidence about the role and influence of three categories of actors: community, state, and private sector. We demonstrate how community energy projects are unavoidably entangled with a diversity of actors and institutions operating at and across multiple scales. We therefore argue that community energy is enabled and constituted by trans-scalar assemblages of overlapping actors, which demands multi-sectoral participation and coordination. We point to the need for further academic attention on the boundaries between these actors to better understand the role of different intermediary practices and relationships in facilitating the development of decentralised energy systems with just outcomes.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Community energy projects take a decentralised and participatory approach to low-carbon energy. We present a quantitative analysis of business models, financing mechanisms and financial performance of UK community energy projects, based on a new survey. We find that business models depend on technology, project size, and fine-tuning of operations to local contexts. While larger projects rely more on loans, community shares are the most common and cheapest financial instrument in the sector. Community energy has pioneered low-cost citizen finance for renewables, but its future is threatened by reductions, and instability, in policy support. Over 90% of the projects in our sample make a financial surplus during our single-year snapshot, but this falls to just 20% if we remove income from price guarantee mechanisms, such as the Feed-in Tariff. Renewed support and/or business model innovations are therefore needed for the sector to realise its potential contribution to the low-carbon energy transition.

We use the term 'Great Britain' rather than 'United Kingdom' as the latter term refers to England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but the research that this paper is based on was not conducted in Northern Ireland. Several aspects of energy regulation are different in Northern Ireland. 2 The term 'third sector' refers to charities, social enterprises, voluntary organisations and similar groups. It includes a diverse range of 'not for profit' organisations that are neither part of the public sector (the state) nor the private sector (commercial 'for profit' organisations).

SummaryThis paper employs Gaventa's 'powercube' framework to examine how the Scottish community land movement has woven together different forms and sources of power in pursuit of local development. It finds that, while localism is a strong element in community land action, connections to institutions operating at wider spatial levels have been vital to the growth of the movement. It explores the Scottish Highlands and Islands context that has facilitated these connections. It also discusses the movement's relationship with states and markets, noting both its emergence in the context of their perceived failures, but also analysing its engagement with them. It draws on primary research carried out by the author in Scotland, including ethnographic research into the working of two community land initiatives at local level, and into the community land movement more widely. It concludes with some remarks about community-led development, states and austerity; and contemporary developments in Scotland.

Community is frequently called upon in policy to meet environmental challenges. It is increasingly recognised that the success of these environmental interventions relies on community awareness and action. But what this emphasis on community does, and what the impacts are, are often neglected, or left uncritiqued. To explore this issue, we surveyed literature from the UK across four distinct environmental domains—energy, urban greenspace, water, and land—to chart what characterises the use of community in pursuit of environmental goals. We highlight the main conceptual commonalities across the domains by focusing on research that gives insight into the increased interest in communities in environmental policy. In summary, we posit that where community is used environmentally, it brings with it (a) a reframing of justice, (b) processes of ‘public making,’ and (c) a rescaling of governance.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract