Locality, community and the energy transition

This post will draw on three papers published this year which are all concerned with the role of locally based energy projects in the transition towards net zero. The first discusses the situation in the UK; the second addresses the wider European picture; and the third concentrates on community energy in Portugal. Each paper covers a range of issues, but here the focus will be on the importance of community engagement and how to promote and evaluate it.

UK energy projects

Gupta, Zahiri and Gregg (2026) consider three kinds of project in the UK: community energy, local energy, and smart local energy systems; their study suggests ways in which the effectiveness of such projects can be improved. The differences between projects described by the terms community energy, local energy, and smart local energy systems can be loosely summed up as follows.

Community energy projects are typically owned and controlled by members of a local community and aim to benefit the community. They often involve renewable energy generation and energy efficiency measures and may try to achieve change in energy use through education. Surplus income from projects is invested locally.

Local energy projects are defined by place, but do not necessarily involve community ownership. Local authorities, Distribution System Operators and private developers may be the main drivers of the projects, and community energy groups may or may not be involved. Projects can include microgrids, district heating, and local energy markets as well as local generation.

Smart Local Energy is a term used for decentralized energy projects aiming to decarbonize energy use while emphasizing local benefits. Projects are likely to be driven by several parties such as local government, technology companies, and energy companies; community groups are not necessarily involved. Projects are likely to feature system optimisation and smart integration using digital platforms.

Projects and evaluation

The study used information on 445 local energy projects in the UK and covered the years 2008 to 2020. Of these projects, 210 were Community Energy (CE) initiatives, 91 were Local Energy (LE) and 144 were Smart Local Energy Systems (SLES). Analysis considered the energy technologies and energy forms, the lead actors and funding sources, location, commencement year, and user engagement and its evaluation.

Projects were concentrated in “regions with a strong presence of community energy organizations, engaged local authorities, and favourable technological conditions such as renewable capacity or grid constraints.” CE projects were associated with strong community networks, LE projects with proactive local authorities, and SLES projects with the need for advanced grid management solutions and with private sector or DNO actors. The authors suggest that “successful deployment of local energy projects depends on a combination of technological capability, institutional support, and social capital”. They noted that “only one-third of SLES projects incorporated any form of user engagement.” In general, engagement activities were one-off events, and there was little attempt to use approaches which could capture “how users initially engage, interact with technologies, and adapt over time.” Only 8% of CE, 15% of LE, and 25% of SLES projects included both engagement and its evaluation.

The authors believe that the “limited use of evaluation – especially longitudinal evaluation – represents a missed opportunity to assess project effectiveness, enhance trust, and improve scalability.” They see community groups and local authorities as “well-placed to foster inclusion, trust, and user empowerment” but stress the need for “stable funding, clearer mandates, and stronger integration into national policy frameworks”. The Great British Energy initiative (GOV.UK, 2025) and Local Power Plan (LPP, 2026) “signal a renewed commitment to localized clean energy” and offer opportunities for improved user engagement with projects. Success will depend on “embedding rigorous engagement strategies, supported by continuous evaluation and shared learning.” Future projects are likely to integrate artificial intelligence, automation, and user-centred digital interfaces. Projects may include aspects of CE, LE and SLES, combining “technical sophistication with social embeddedness” and user engagement should be a core design principle.

Renewable energy in Europe

Lowitzsch (2026) notes the growth in renewable energy (RE) and stresses the importance of “empowering energy citizens, fostering active engagement, and overcoming resistance to RE deployment” if the European Union is to promote continued growth. This author explores conditions for successful engagement, individual versus collective participation, and the role of ownership in fostering inclusion.

Civic engagement in the EU

Possibilities for civic engagement for consumers and producers exist “from the local to the regional and the national levels” and from the political to the economic sphere. Lowitzsch sees climate change, the COVID crisis, and war in Ukraine as “catalysts for RE but also for social segregation and injustice”. More people could be activated as energy citizens, and private investments in RE are needed but “structural empowerment for citizens to invest in RE is missing”.

Some groups such as women, people with a migrant background, and those with low education or low income have limited opportunity to take part in the energy transition. Male dominance in technical areas, unequal distribution of care work and the gender pay gap may partly account for women not engaging in the energy system. Other social groups may need to be specifically targeted if they are to know about energy communities and feel welcome in them.

Lack of education can lead to a worse position on the labour market, which can result in lack of access to finance, and lack of time and social capital, all of which can make participation in energy projects unlikely. The state “has an outstanding responsibility to develop an institutional setting that would facilitate inclusive energy citizenship.”

Citizen engagement can be encouraged through campaigns, networks, research projects, and the workspace, but barriers exist, such as lack of legal competency, complex administrative frameworks, and lack of political will and public awareness. Local authorities have a role in educating citizens about the energy transition and in working on issues of social justice, diversity, and inclusivity.

Pleasure and empowerment in Portugal

Moniz, Oliveira and Neves (2026), like the authors cited above, recognise the importance of energy communities, which “allow people to produce, share, and manage renewable energy together, helping reduce carbon emissions and decentralize the energy system.” These groups can only succeed if people want to participate, and the study explores the motivation of those who engage with energy communities, “especially the influence of positive emotions and the feeling of empowerment.” The research aims “to identify the factors impacting engagement in energy communities and related activities.” It is based on a survey of Portuguese citizens, and its insights “can help policymakers and practitioners create more engaging and citizen-centred sustainable initiatives.”

Motivations for engagement

Two theories about motivation are central to the study. One is related to Hedonic theory, which is concerned with the basic human drive to experience pleasure and avoid pain, and the other to Empowerment theory, which focusses on how individuals and communities can gain control over their lives.

More specifically, the study draws on how people have related to the introduction of those technologies which provide pleasure, entertainment or social interaction: hedonic systems. A theory describing how such technologies come to be accepted is known as the Hedonic-Motivation System Adoption Model (HMSAM), and the research applies this framework to engagement with energy communities.

The application of Empowerment theory depends on context, but it has three primary components: intrapersonal empowerment, which implies personal influence over social and political systems; interactional empowerment, which focuses on effective engagement with one’s environment; and behavioural empowerment, which affects the social and political spheres. The concept can be broken down into four dimensions: competence, meaning, impact, and self-determination. Competence requires the skills needed to perform effectively; meaning is the personal significance of an activity, impact relates to its results, and self-determination to the feeling of being responsible for it.

The authors have extended the HMSAM using empowerment theory to provide “a deeper understanding of the psychological and emotional factors that drive individuals to participate in energy communities.”

Their research reveals the importance of joy, curiosity, and empowerment in promoting engagement in energy communities and related activities. Participants gain a “sense of expertise and purpose” and feel able to contribute to society. The research advocates a citizen-centred perspective, “rather than the institutional or operational focus that dominates previous research”. It supports and extends the “importance of emotional and social dimensions in shaping sustainable behaviours” and “complements research based on social identity and pro-environmental behaviour theories, where community commitment, trust, and knowledge were highlighted as substantial predictors of participation.” An understanding of motivation can help create more inclusive energy communities and maximise “the positive impact that energy communities can achieve at larger scales.”

 

References

 

GOV.UK, 2025, Great British Energy Strategic Plan, 2025, online, accessed 22 April 2026

https://www.gbe.gov.uk/strategic-plan-2025-html

Gupta, Zahiri and Gregg, 2026, Energy transition through community energy, local energy and smart local energy system initiatives in the UK: a systematic review of technologies, ownership and user engagement, Gupta, R., Zahiri, S.,  and Gregg, M., Advances in Building Energy Research, 20:1, 33-61, online, accessed 17 April 2026

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/17512549.2025.2562190

Lowitzsch, 2026, Developing Energy Citizenship—Empowerment Through Engagement and (Co-) Ownership, Individually and in Energy Communities, Lowitzsch J. et al., 2026, Social Sciences, online, accessed 22 April 2026

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/15/1/56

LPP, 2026, Great British Energy Local Power Plan, Department for Energy Security & Net Zero, online, accessed 22 April 2026

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/698b50136c8ef8db1fcfd88e/gbe-local-power-plan-2026.pdf

Moniz, Oliveira and Neves, 2026, Fostering energy communities’ engagement: the role of empowerment and hedonic motivations, 2026, Moniz D., Oliveira, T., and Neves, C., Global sustainability, online, accessed 22 April 2026

https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2025.10044

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Directed technology and the environment

Climate Resources Online

Growth and its Tradeoffs