Analysis of factors affecting a shift in a local energy system towards 100% renewable energy community

Journal of Cleaner Production 169 (2017) 117e124

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Analysis of factors affecting a shift in a local energy system towards 100% renewable energy community Jasminka Young*, Marleen Brans Public Governance Institute, KU Leuven, Parkstraat 45 - bus 3609 - lokal 03.231, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 2 February 2016 Received in revised form 3 August 2017 Accepted 3 August 2017 Available online 4 August 2017

We explore what factors play a critical role in a shift of a local energy system towards 100% renewable energy community by examining the case using a framework that highlights the role of key state and non state actors (investors, local officials, citizens and policy entrepreneurs) and the role of governance mode (horizontal “self steering”, partnership, participation, inclusiveness of energy decision-making, coownership of the process) for the actual outcome. The framework is based on recent transition literature that has focused on the dynamics of change. The case study provides the evidence of the important role of participation of local community in the open decision making process from the onset, their partnership in the local energy system solutions, sense of ownership, as well as the role of mayor as a policy entrepreneur. © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Decentralized experiment Local participation Open decision-making process Local ownership Policy entrepreneurship 100% renewable energy Energy self-sufficiency

1. Introduction Energy accounts for two-thirds of global greenhouse gas emissions. This makes climate change largely an energy problem. In the EU member states, despite the increase of renewable energy deployment, the energy systems still largely depend on fossil fuels, the major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions (IEA, 2014). One of the major challenges for climate change governance is the shift of established energy systems based on the fossil fuels towards renewable sources (AGECC, 2010; EU, 2011). The studies on energy transition at global, national and local levels and analysis of the critical factors of energy system change represent a growing field of the social science research (Araújo, 2014; Markard et al., 2012; Strunz, 2014). Decentralized local energy based on renewable sources is expected to fundamentally contribute to the goals of energy transition. This makes local experiments the building blocks of local energy system change. The local level provides a context in which experimentation comes to the fore, spaces and political arena within which innovation and change is created, endorsed and implemented (Green and Gerber,

* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected], jasminkaoliveric@ gmail.com (J. Young), [email protected] (M. Brans). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.023 0959-6526/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

2003). Therefore, we need a better understanding of local experiments dynamics and the context-specific factors affecting a change in a local energy system towards 100% renewable energy community (Rutherford and Coutard, 2014). The transitions of local energy systems and the new modes of local energy governance are evident in Germany where they take form of new action arenas. A number of local communities take initiatives to transform local energy systems. Those pursuing local energy system change form alliances and local networks involving diverse public and private actors (Gailing and Rohring, 2016). However, the factors affecting local energy system change are diverse and context sensitive (Sabel and Zeitlin, 2012). We analyse one such case in Germany that achieved 100% renewable energy local system. The case analysis provides the evidence of process characteristics and drivers of actual outcome and shed a light on the factors affecting a shift in a local energy system towards 100% renewable energy community. Decentralized experimental projects have developed in Germany in the policy environment that promotes renewable energy (for overview see Chapter 2). To analyse how a small local community has achieved energy transition to 100% renewable energy, we choose the case of Feldheim, a small community in the district of Treuenbrietzen in the state of Brandenburg. In 2010, Feldheim became one of the first communities in Germany to supply its own

118

J. Young, M. Brans / Journal of Cleaner Production 169 (2017) 117e124

electricity and heat with local grids, generating its own electricity and heat with wind turbines and biogas systems on its property without using coal, gas, or nuclear energy. In 2015, it became completely self-sufficient in terms of electricity by installing a storage battery. It took 20 years to achieve a local 100% renewable energy system (Busch and McCormick, 2014; Go 100% Renewable Energy). This achievement leaves us wondering what factors enabled this outcome. We analyse this outcome through the following research question: “What factors play a critical role in a shift of a local energy system towards a 100% renewable energy system”? We define our dependent variable as the achievement of a local 100% renewable energy system. Energy transitions are often visualized as a number of wind turbines, biomass plants, solar panels, electronic cars, and storage batteries. Still this image does not answer the question of how the local 100% renewable energy system comes about. Agency and power, human actions, institutions, legal frameworks, trade-offs and compatibilities between different organizations and policies, ideas, beliefs and motivations, as well as ownership aspects shape a shift in a local energy system towards 100% renewable energy community (Moss et al., 2015). To address the research question we put forward an operational framework that includes core ideas on local energy system change such as the multi-level perspective of socio-technical transitions, features of decentralized energy governance, and the role of actors. We look into selected aspects through an empirical in-depth case study to identify critical factors, their roles and stakes in the observed outcome of 100% renewable energy local system. We first present the operational framework and methodology. We continue with the findings presented through the key stages of the case development. In the discussion section we review the findings considering the relevant literature. Finally, in a brief conclusion, we summarise our research findings focusing on the lessons learned from this case.

Sijm, 2002). In 1998 the Red-Green governing coalition came to power with ambitious plans for renewable development. Along with the administrative establishment and competencies within the federal administration, the ruling coalition pushed additional policies and legislation promoting the growth of renewable energy. For example, the 100K Solar Roofs Program was launched in 1999. The long-term soft loans with low and fixed interest rates were given for 20 years (Bruns et al., 2011). This push in Germany matched the initiatives at the EU level (Europa, Summaries of EU Legislation). In 2000, the new Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) provided attractive incentives for investments in renewable energy, including solar photovoltaics and biomass. Investor security was enhanced by a 20-year compensation guarantee. A priority purchase obligation for renewable energy was introduced. Finally, an equalization scheme was introduced to reduce the cost differentials paid by grid operators in different parts of the country (Bechberger and Reiche, 2004; Bruns et al., 2011). The EEG has been a subject of periodic revisions that mainly dealt with remuneration schemes and selective promotion (EEG, 2014). In 2004, it brought a more differentiated remuneration scheme for biomass power (mainly with increased incentives for the smallest installations), including an extra bonus for innovative biomass technologies such as liquid manure as a combustible, and higher remuneration rates for PV power (Bechberger and Reiche, 2004). The last revision from 2014 departs from the feed-in tariff system, switching to a system of tendering and requiring operators to market their electricity themselves. Finally, the long-lasting nuclear debate, with the decision from 2012 to phase it out combined with the energy security issues, have played an important role in the promotion of the goals of renewable energy policy (Interview 4). We take into account the presented policy environment and its dynamics to estimate how it affects the development of our case.

2. Research design

2.2. Operational framework

2.1. Contextual background

Our operational framework is derived from elements and ideas presented in the literature on transitions and societal change, listed in Table 1:

To address our research question “What factors play a critical role in a shift of a local energy system towards a 100% renewable energy system”? we choose to study the case that is embedded in an enabling renewable energy policy environment. That is the reason we look for the case in Germany. German renewable energy policy could itself be considered as an innovation and experiment. According to Bruns et al. (2011) the innovation process of renewable energy in Germany was contingent on the institutionalization of renewable energy, mainly in national politics, administration, and interest groups combined with the public perception of climate change and related benefits of using renewable energy (Knill et al., 2012; Interview 4). In Germany, the significant expansion in renewable energy started in 1991 with the adoption of the federal Electricity Feed-In Act (StrEG) that regulated the purchase and price of electricity generated by renewable sources, guaranteed connection to the grid, and offered a feed-in tariff to renewable energy producers that triggered a wind power market breakthrough. This was followed by various state programs, subsidies, and low-interest loans for the promotion of renewable energy, for example, support for the operational costs of “100/250 MW Mass Testing Programme”, “100 M DM Promotion Programme for RES” and investments in new wind power installations by the Deutsche Ausgleichsbank. A number of authors agree that the StrEG combined with state programmes and subsidies was the most significant regulatory policy instrument for the promotion of renewable energy (Bechberger and Reiche, 2004;

Table 1 The elements and ides of operational framework. The role of key actors The mode of governance

Non state actors: local citizens, local community, investors State actors: local officials, policy entrepreneurs Experimental governance and horizontal “self-steering”: inclusiveness of decision making process, trust, sense of local ownership, local partnership in the local energy system solutions

The transitions literature aims at describing and understanding how technological innovations commence or fail, combining the micro-level processes of creating new technologies with the macro- and meso-level configurations of society, culture, organization, markets, rules and structures (Geels, 2002; Markard et al., 2012; Schot, 1998; Smith et al., 2010). The MLP that is one of the approaches used in transition studies suggests that successful innovations develop out of small protected niches. The MLP framework is taken into account as a way to explore our case and the circumstances under which the current regime provides opportunities for change in the existing context. The starting point of the MLP is that socio-technical transitions result from alignments between developments at three analytical levels: niche-innovation, sociotechnical regime and sociotechnical landscape (Geels and Schot, 2007; Moss and Gailing, 2016). Niches

J. Young, M. Brans / Journal of Cleaner Production 169 (2017) 117e124

represent “incubation rooms” where radical or incremental innovations are created (Geels, 2002, p. 1260-1). A socio-technical regime covers technical and material elements as well as social, political, institutional and cognitive components (Geels, 2006). The landscape dimension is “a broad context that sustains action and makes some actions easier than others” (Geels and Schot, 2007, p. 404). It has both static and dynamic aspects of a different frequency, amplitude, speed and scope that can be compared to soil condition, forests, climate, and its processes include long term social, cultural and political changes, key events such as energy crises, etc. The MPL suggests that landscape, niche or internal pressures on the regime can trigger the change of the present regime. This can result in the strengthening of the regime or its drastic change (Geels and Schot, 2007; Van Driel and Schot, 2005). As a sociotechnical regime can develop at different empirical levels, we choose to study a regime at the level of local energy system that includes production, distribution and consumption of electricity and heat. Within the MLP framework we examine the role of key actors and the role of governance mode for the actual outcome as proposed by the relevant literature (Geels and Schot, 2007; Kern et al., 2014; Moss and Gailing, 2016; Rutherford and Coutard, 2014; Sovacool, 2014; Smith and Stirling, 2007; Smith et al., 2010, 2005; Ulli-Beer, 2005). Firstly, we engage in a deeper analysis of agency and look closely into the role of non-state and state actors including investors, citizens and local officials based on Smith et al. (2010) and Sovacool (2014) suggestion and following Geels and Schot viewpoint “that agency is always present in the MLP because three levels provide different degrees and kinds of structuration to local practices” (Geels and Schot, 2007, p. 414). Actors themselves develop complex processes through discussion, debate, and experimentation (Garud et al., 2010). They are central to the effectiveness of an intervention; for example officials and community groups need to be supportive of the intervention as their agreement is needed for a change in the status quo policy position and practice (Stoker, 2010). The case also explores the agency of entrepreneurs who can be agents of change in the context of energy system change (Garud et al., 2010). King and Roberts (1992, p. 183) describe policy entrepreneurs as “… achievement-oriented changeagents who espouse and adhere to core values while seeking to serve the public interest and make a lasting contribution to society”. To accomplish their goals, a policy entrepreneur, besides on power, relies on the influence of their innovative ideas, the logic of their arguments, and their ability to convince others to embrace their ideas. Their innovative ideas and the promotion of new patterns usually go against prevailing social, political, or economic arrangements (Etzioni, 1987; King and Roberts, 1992; Mintrom, 1997). Implementing bureaucrats may also be policy entrepreneurs. They seek to develop policy innovations to improve the implementation processes and embed the innovations in the daily activities. A policy entrepreneur analyses policy instruments to address the issue they prioritize and promote innovative but promising policy ideas (Arnold, 2015; Zahariadis, 2007). Based on Arnold's research results, we assume that policy entrepreneurs are found among government officials. We look for policy entrepreneurs in our case and analyse how they affect the process of energy system change in our case. Secondly, we examine the mode and dynamics of governance that can influence or guide regime change in many ways through the rules and norms that can either constrain or enable regime change. At this point there is interlinkage with the role of actors in the niche or regime as they are rooted in rule structures acting as both active users and makers of the rules, hence shaping the outcome (Geels and Schot, 2007). Smith et al. (2005) also point out that to achieve the outcome governing requires involvement of

119

different institutions and individual or institutional regime actors, the coordination of resources, creation of markets, and the alignment of actors' ambitions, ideas and activities. The governance of regimes among other things modify the processes of change, their pace and orientation. Broadly speaking, governance refers to decisions making process, the rules and institutions that shape individual behavior and enable the group of people to achieve desired outcomes (Florini and Sovacool, 2009; Sovacool, 2014). We explore if there are new modes of governance based on horizontal decision making and “self-steering” that is, according to Wurzel et al. (2013) placed to effectively satisfy the criteria of decentralized and flexible community energy solutions. As decentralized, community-based, 100% renewable energy governance represents a form of experimentalist governance, it encourages communities to participate in the design of solutions to the problems they face. In local, inclusive, democratic communities citizens through participation and partnership can co-own the process and drive energy transition away from dominant fossil fuel system (Kostevsek et al., 2013; Rutherford and Coutard, 2014). The ownership model is particularly important in this, especially with regard to wind energy. We consider that ownership goes beyond property and legal entitlements to include issues of local community control, environmental sustainability, and look for those specific factors (Moss et al., 2015). Finally, we pay special attention to the questions of trust, partnership, participation, inclusiveness of energy decision-making, transparency and coalition building in the processes of change (Smith et al., 2005; Sovacool, 2014). 2.3. A case-study approach We choose the case study approach to analyse the factors introduced in the operational framework. Although we are aware of the limitations of single case study including its generalizability we focus on the advantages of this approach (Bennett and Elman, 2007). Case studies commonly afford multiple observations of a single case, thus providing firmer evidence of the factual accuracy of a given angle. They are empirically-rich, context-specific and therefore suitable method to approach our research question (Bennett and Checkel, 2014). We use process-tracing to unfold the events or situations over time. This is according to Collier widely regarded as a part of a temporal sequence. He suggests that to characterize a process the researcher has to first characterize the key steps in the process which then allows for the sufficient analysis of change and sequence (Collier, 2011). Careful description is groundwork of process tracing, a standpoint that Mahoney emphasises (Mahoney, 2010). What might appear as a “static” description is actually an essential building block in the process that is being analysed. In our case study, process tracing has the goal of minute tracing of the narrative to the point where the events to be explored are detailed and the factors defined in operational framework are correspondingly more certain. The second goal is tracing the actions and motives of involved actors (Gerring, 2004). Identification of the key steps of the process and the temporal sequence is crucial for our analytical ordering as it helps define the relative contribution of factors for the outcome presented in the operational framework. We address the research question through desk research and secondary literature of the German national policy framework starting from 1991 that marks the start of supportive policies for renewable energy as well as Feldheim's story. Administrative procedures, financial and legal aspects are also reviewed. Then we analyse the case through chronological and developmental stages identified through primary and secondary sources. We visited the community in late 2014 and directly observed the case. This is followed by six interviews aiming to identify actors, understand

120

J. Young, M. Brans / Journal of Cleaner Production 169 (2017) 117e124

their motivations, and identify the critical factors of the local energy system transition in this case. The interviewees come from different stakeholder groups identified as the most important during the field visit: the local citizens of Feldheim, an investor, local government representatives and the mayor's office, as well as non-governmental organization involved in renewable energy policy analysis in Germany. The open-ended in-depth interviews were conducted in the period from February 20th to March 20th, 2015. The written response to open questionnaire from the Mayor of Treuenbrietzen office was received in April, 2015. 3. Findings through the key stages of the case development 3.1. 1995e2000 start with the wind The start of the Feldheim project coincides with major policy developments at the national level. In 1995, motivated by the new policy framework and entrepreneurial enthusiasm, an investor who was a graduate student started looking for a good location to install four wind turbines. Convinced that it was a sound investment opportunity, he visited the wind-abundant Feldheim in search for a building site (Interview 1, 5). This suggests that the interest in wind energy development was triggered by an renewable energy policy that promoted wind energy, as well as favorable landscape conditions at the location (Bechberger and Reiche, 2004; Geels and Schot, 2007). However, with tensions between the supporters and opponents of the RE supporting schemes it was unclear how the whole policy debate would evolve over time. In 1994, according to Bruns et al. as a result of strong pressure lead by environmental Minister Angela MerkeI, StrEG was amended to adjust compensation rates. But the electricity industry became aware of the effects of StrEG and advocated to overturn it (Bruns et al., 2011). Tangible economic interests could not solely drive the decision of the investor at that point. In addition, the ultimate objective of the Feldheim initiative was not defined at the time, and it was not expected that Feldheim could and would advance so far. Success was rather driven by the entrepreneurial spirit of the investor and his belief in investing in something innovative and promising (Interviews 1e3, 5). From the very beginning, the investor initiated the discussion about the wind farm with the local community of some 130 people through the Feldheim Local Council. Such participation is known to reduce local resistance (Wüstenhagen et al., 2007). At that time, Feldheim had the function of “lady mayor” (this function ceased to exist) who was highly supportive of the investor's idea. The discussion was held through a number of Open Feldheim Local Council meetings, with most of the residents agreeing to participate in this initiative (Business Insider, Zeller, 2014; Interviews 1, 5, 6). The interview that one of the local residents gave for ABC News implies that residents backed the project. He said: “There wasn't much headwind … the project was done in open discussions at resident's meetings. Everyone was allowed to voice his or her opinion”. (ABC News, 2014). The final agreement came about through the investor's proposal to local residents to invest in one of the four wind turbines, which they accepted, making them co-owners of the project. This turned to be an important step towards the establishment of partnership and sense of ownership among local residents (Interview 1, 6; BBC, 2013). Also, the local residents own the land which is in turn leased for the wind farm. This was an additional incentive for residents of Feldheim to partner in this project. Direct and early citizen

participation through a number of open meetings allowed residents to express their opinions and reach an agreement (Written response from the Mayor's office, 2015; Interview 6). After the agreement between local residents and the investor, the first four wind turbines were erected in 1995. This was followed by the installation of another six wind turbines in Feldheim in 1998 through the investor's company Energiequelle (Interview 5). Compared with the 42 wind turbines that are operational at the moment, we can say that this was a cautious start. The first stage of the case development highlights the interaction between local and national level. Our findings suggest that the developments in the first stage were contingent upon the interaction among major policy developments at the national level, landscape conditions and readiness of actors to invest in an innovative niche. However, the elements from our operational framework namely supportive role of the local decision-makers, the direct involvement of the local residents in the open decisionmaking process, and the promotion of the process ownership among the local residents have played more prominent role at this stage. 3.2. 2000e2004 breakthrough The breakthrough in the Feldheim development started after 2000. Since 2002, the development of the wind farm and other renewable energy projects in Feldheim has continued in a more dynamic way than in the 1990s. The initial trigger was the adoption of the EEG, which offered attractive incentives for renewable energy. After 2002 an additional 39 wind turbines were built. At that time, the established company Energiequelle already proved to be a trustworthy partner and enjoyed a good reputation among local residents. Again through open consultation with the residents, the investor developed a plan to build thirty-nine more wind turbines in two phases. This included annual lease payments for the local land owners (Green Building Advisor, Dey, 2014; Interview 1, 5). As a result, these additional turbines were perceived by the local community as enhancing the local economy. From that point onwards, local residents have benefited from this public-private partnership. There was a high probability of a “win-win” situation for both the local community and investor (Interview 1, 3, 6). We found that some permit procedures were noticeably long, but according to the Interview 1, this is usually the case with wind farms and there was no exception in this case (Interview 1). At this stage trust and partnership dimension that is listed in our operational framework played the most important role. Furthermore, in 2002, there were important changes at the municipal level when Mr. Knape came to power as a mayor of municipality of Treuenbrietzen, the community of Feldheim belongs to. From 2002 onwards he has demonstrated a profound interest and enthusiasm for the development of renewable energy. Based on numerous available interviews that Mr. Knape has given in recent years and material obtained through his office, it became apparent that his personal devotion to the development of renewable energy and his role of ambassador of Feldheim project has played a significant role in the making this project the first 100% self-sufficient RE community in Germany (Interview 1, 5, 6). We characterize the mayor's role as that of policy entrepreneur. 3.3. 2004e2008 take-off The start of the new projects is again triggered by an enabling policy framework, the new revision of the EEG in 2004. The revision brought increased incentives for the smallest installations, including an extra bonus for innovative biomass technologies and higher remuneration rates for PV power (Interview 5; Reiche and

J. Young, M. Brans / Journal of Cleaner Production 169 (2017) 117e124

Bechberger, 2004). The idea to build a solar park near Feldheim came around 2004, about the same time as the idea of biogas plant came about. The Municipality of Treuenbrietzen did not have the resources to make use of an abandoned military site. Energiequelle bought the site for a nominal sum and invested about V1.7 M in demolition and site remediation. Energiequelle established a daughter company, EQSys, in Feldheim to manufacture trackers for solar arrays used in this solar park. The relatively low cost of electricity and heat was also a factor in Energiequelle's decision to build the production plant of a daughter company, EQ-Sys, in Feldheim (Interview 3; Feldheim, Photovoltaics; Green Building Advisor, Dey, 2014). From this point we again see how different sectors (agricultural and energy) supplement each other, creating a window of opportunity for the establishment of a new regime. For example, as the most important local business is an agricultural cooperative that produces milk, pig meat and grains, the idea for a biogas plant came from the local farmers organized as agricultural cooperative. Their manager approached the existing investor to explore ways in which the cooperative and Energiequelle could work together. The cooperative approached this company thanks in large part to its good reputation in the community of Feldheim (Interview 1). In 2008, as a result of this partnership, the village of Feldheim opened its own biogas plant jointly-owned by agricultural cooperative Feldheim eG and Energiequelle with an installed electric power capacity of 500 kW. The local agricultural cooperative operates the biogas plant (Interview 1). It uses raw materials – mainly pig and cow manure, maize and wholegrain cereal – to supply the biogas plant. These raw materials are all produced within a radius of about four km on land owned by the agricultural cooperative. The gas is burned in a combined heat and power (CHP) plant to produce electricity and heat (Feldheim. Biogas; Stadt Treuenbrietzen, Energie und Klima; Interview 1). 3.4. 2009e2015 separate grids and lithium storage battery Originally, the idea was to heat stalls of the cooperative's large pig-breeding operation, but after biogas plant was built it became clear that the system could heat the local community. At the same time, heating systems had to be replaced as they were built during the German Democratic Republic. Therefore, local residents decided to replace it with a local network of biogas heating (Feldheim. Biogas; Interview 1). However, there was no straightforward way to do this. The mayor played a crucial role in this stage of the project, enabling the achievement of the ultimate outcome of self-sufficient 100% RE community. In the answers to questions posed to the mayor's office, Mr. Knape explained that to finalize the project with the two separate grids, there were no legal grounds to “permit” or “forbid” the project itself. Thus, a “legal loophole” was used in the interest of realizing the project. Because of this loophole, an individual decision by the responsible minister was required. To get this decision, several intensive talks with the Minister of Trade and Commerce and his Secretary of State were necessary. The mayor ultimately convinced the Minister and his Secretary to visit Feldheim to get the first-hand impression of the project and the plan. In addition, according to Mr. Knape, he managed to convince other politicians of the ruling and opposition parties to visit Feldheim with the intention to increase “the soft pressure” on the government. During the visit they were introduced to its legal and economic concept and the extensive, active involvement and participation of the Feldheim citizens in the project. Therefore, the responsible minister decided to approve the plan for this experimental project. Answering the question about local acceptance, Mr. Knape pointed out that the acceptance of the project is secured through the direct involvement

121

of the citizens through the Local Advisory Council. Again, there is a close connection to the citizens of Feldheim. The members of the Local Advisory Council discuss the development in an open manner (Written response from the Mayor's office, 2015; Interview 6). In one of his interviews to Spiegel Mr. Knape said: “… Feldheim had to go up against Germany's major public utility companies and energy regulators to create its network. While no laws strictly prohibit the move, the initial reaction of administrators was against the project. They had to be convinced that the local grid would exceed the standards of public utilities. For example, Feldheim had to guarantee that the energy supply must be uninterrupted, an important rule for big factories, but unimportant for households which would barely notice a one second break in electricity”. (Spiegel, 2012). As a result of mayor's efforts, the separate grids for local heating and power supply were built in Feldheim. Through these two grids, locally-produced heat and electricity are fed straight to consumers. This saves costs and achieves independence from the grids of conventional power utility companies. The owner of the local heating grid is Feldheim Energie GmbH & Co. KG, a limited partnership formed by the connected households, enterprises and the municipality of Treuenbrietzen (Stadt Treuenbrietzen, Energie und Klima), while the owner of the separate power grid for supplying electricity to the connected consumers is Energiequelle GmbH and Co. WP Feldheim 2006 KG (Energiequelle, The energy self-sufficient village Feldheim; Interview 1, 5, 6). The owners of the thirty-five homes on the grid paid a one-time connection fee of V1500 for heat and electricity separately. Their heating costs have been around 7.5 euro cent per kWh. More importantly, most of the money that residents pay for heat stays in the village, and heating costs are largely independent of fossil fuel prices. Also, they benefit from much cheaper electricity, paying 16.6 euro cents per kWh, which is around one-third less than other German communities. The local heating system was custom-built in 2009, and the electricity micro-grid was put in place in 2010 (Interview 1, 5, 6; Green Building Advisor, Dey, 2014). Electricity produced by the plant (4M kWh/y) is fed into public grid. The electricity from the biogas system comes in during the 10% of the time when the wind turbines are not producing electricity. Since the wind turbines produce electricity more cheaply, there is a system in place where a “smiley face” located in the homes shows when electricity is coming from wind power or alternatively a “frowning face” appears when power is coming from biogas. Thus, householders can control the use of large appliances when the electricity is coming from the cheaper source (Feldheim. Biogas; Interview 3). Heat produced during the generation of electricity is fed into separate local heating grid. The households, the livestock enclosures and businesses are supplied with heating this way. This makes community of Feldheim self-sufficient in terms of heating energy (Interview 1; Green Building Advisor, Dey, 2014). For most of the year, the 400 kW of heat supplied by the cogeneration plant is fully sufficient. However, to supplement the heating in the coldest days, Feldheim has a back-up plan, a woodchip plant of additional 400 kW of available capacity. The plant uses waste wood from the local forestry sector, owned by local cooperative, which is an attractive solution from the environmental perspective. The use of bioenergy, such as heat from biomass heating plants, is fostered with grant support under laws such as the Renewable Energy Heating Act (Feldheim. Biogas; Interview 3). Complete independence was reached in 2015 with the installation of a 10 MW lithium storage battery. In June 2014, the investor

122

J. Young, M. Brans / Journal of Cleaner Production 169 (2017) 117e124

(Interview 3, 5), received the official note for the support for Feldheim storage project from the State of Brandenburg Minister for Economic Affairs. The total investment of V12.8 M is a combination of financial assistance from the Ministry, the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and funds from the State of Brandenburg (Energiequelle, 2014). The battery is used to store the electricity to supply the village in the unlikely scenario where the wind levels drops for a sustained period of time. The battery gives the village a 48 h emergency supply and will be rented to a regional power company as a way to balance the natural fluctuations in wind power production (Feldheim, The energy self-sufficient village; Interview 1, 5, 6). This demonstrates that recognized and reliable partnership combined with the policy entrepreneurship and determination for innovative projects is capable to mobilize available technology and financial resources. The mayor who was acting as a policy entrepreneur, the element identified in our operational framework, was crucial for the outcome at this stage. Referring to the case of Feldheim and the municipality of Treuinbrietzen the mayor Knape pointed out: “In my own opinion, there were three important factors that stand as indicators of success. First is the strong, genuine integration of citizens into building renewable energy (RE) projects, and their acceptance of the projects as our primary source of energy supply. Second is our ability to build a clear consensus to assure the supply of energy is pushed to RE-based 100% in the future. Finally, the integration of the local business community, which enabled the creation of a virtuous economic cycle based on RE e in turn, fostering a local accumulation of natural resources and their optimal utilization. The overarching dimension of our city's success is the reliance on our own human, technological and natural resources, and not those from the outside”. (Socdem Asia Quaterly, 2014. p. 8).

4. Discussion Through a brief discussion that follows we address our research question: “What factors play a critical role in a shift of a local energy system towards a 100% renewable energy system”? The process tracing of key stages reveals that this local experiment has not started with any clear idea of how it will evolve over time. It is the case of local innovation that turned out to be successful through succeeding experimental stages (Written response from the Mayor's office, 2015). This is in line with the Geels and Schot (2007) proposition that no change is planned from the very beginning. The first key stage and initial investor's interest in wind energy development was triggered by an invigorated renewable energy policy that promoted wind energy, as well as favorable landscape conditions at the case location that is wind abundant (Bechberger and Reiche, 2004). The other key stages of the case development also coincide with enabling policy instruments at the national level. For example, after the adoption of the EEG in 2000 and its first revision in 2004 that offered attractive incentives for renewable energy we observe two new waves in the case development. In the second key stage a big number of wind turbines was installed, and in the third key stage solar and biogas plant were added to the renewable energy portfolio of this local community. This timeline suggests the correlation between enabling policy instruments at the national level ant the key stages of the case development. However, observations gathered through in-depth case study suggest that the enabling national policy might be a necessary but not sufficient factor that produced the outcome. The achieved

outcome of local self-sufficient 100% renewable energy system goes beyond favorable policy instruments and technological innovation. While the regime conditions the actors' roles, functions and performance, at the same time the agency and networks of individual or institutional actors shape the regime in an interactive and continuous way (Smith et al., 2005). In this case a number of factors with a cascading effect combined to produce this result. As our operational framework is anchored to the MLP we will briefly present the relevance of this aspect and highlight the governance related findings and the specific role of actors. The innovation first developed as a niche in the existing regime and landscape, while “network of dedicated actors” (Geels and Schot, 2007, p. 400) supported the niche and engaged in experiments to advance it and finally reach the outcome. At the very beginning tangible economic interests could not solely drive the decision of the investor. The first stage was rather driven by the entrepreneurial spirit of the investor and his belief in investing in something innovative and promising (Interviews 1e3, 5). This resembles innovative niches coined by Geels (2006). This supports the claim of Geels and Schot (2007) that the agency is existent in the MLP and its role becomes clear in detailed single case studies of local change. The presented stages where the niche-innovations, enabling policy environment and challenges of the existing regime that create the windows of opportunity (for example the need to replace the local heating grid, revitalize agricultural sector) coincide, suggest that there has been an interaction between the processes at each stage and innovative approach resulting in a model where wind, solar energy and biomass complement one another. In the breakthrough phase the innovative technologies took over the incumbent regime that provided opportunities for synergies among agricultural, forestry and energy sector. The alignments of processes at several levels and the case dynamics resemble the expectations of the MLP propositions that the transitions occur when niche-internal pressures link up with ongoing processes at the regime and landscape level. In this respect incumbent regime provided the opportunity for change (Geels, 2006, 2004). The governance features based on horizontal decision making and “self-steering” and the role of actors played a significant role in the outcome (Wurzel et al., 2013). The local residents through the support of local decision-makers became participants and partners in this endeavor and played a central role in this intervention as proposed in the literature (Kostevsek et al., 2013; Rutherford and Coutard, 2014; Sovacool, 2014; Stoker, 2010). The support of local residents was secured through their early direct involvement and the open decision-making process. This innovative approach to citizen's participation is uniquely focused on the welfare and interests of both the investor and local community (Interview 1, 3). This turned local citizens into the co-owners of the process and the new initiative. Local residents also own one turbine, and the land that they lease for the wind farm. The local agricultural cooperative jointly owns the biogas plant with the company Energiequelle, while local residents partner in the limited partnership that owns the local heating grid (Interview 1, 2). In addition, there are other benefits including creation of jobs, environmental benefits, financial gains of cheaper electricity and heat, and energy security. The implementation was enhanced by the alignment of environmental, economic and landscape interests at the local level (Breukers and Wolsink, 2007). Finally, the mayor's role of policy entrepreneur is a crucial factor in the last stages in which the Feldheim community transited to local 100% renewable energy system with separate local grids. The initial local partnership was broadened through the supportive role of the entrepreneurial mayor that resulted in a strong cooperation between the municipality, the local residents and the investor (Energiequelle, The energy self-sufficient village Feldheim). After

J. Young, M. Brans / Journal of Cleaner Production 169 (2017) 117e124

the mayor came into power in 2002, he provided a fundamental push to the ongoing innovation, improved implementation process and embedded the innovation in his daily activities. He became the ambassador of this initiative promoting it nationally and beyond. The mayor pooled all the resources to produce a favored outcome. He relied on the influence of these innovative ideas and the ability to convince others to embrace his ideas. To finalize the project with the two separate grids, the mayor used a “legal loophole” in the interest of realizing the project, convinced the regional minister to use his discretionary power to permit the experimental project of two local mini grids, and raise the necessary funds (BBC, 2013; Interview 2; Socdem Asia Quarterly, 2014). The observed role of the mayor in this case match the propositions in the operational framework found in the literature on policy entrepreneurship (Arnold, 2015; Etzioni, 1987; Garud et al., 2010; Mintrom and Norman, 2009; Roberts and King, 1991; Zahariadis, 2007). The case study findings suggest that the employed operational framework to a large extent identified the salient features of the case. However, as found through the key stages of the case development different factors listed in the framework played a different role in the development of each stage. In the first stage the most critical factors were the direct involvement of the local residents in the open decision-making process and the promotion of the process ownership among the local residents; in the second stage it was trust and partnership dimension while in the final stages it was policy entrepreneurship that built on the previous elements and achievements. 5. Conclusion We conclude that the political and policy conditions in Germany are such that renewable energy development is encouraged. Instrumental conditions related to investor security are met in the Feldheim case by the policy schemes for wind, PV and biomass power. Landscape conditions are also favorable, especially for the wind and bioenergy. However, these factors were not sufficient for the final outcome. Our findings suggest that the outcome is the result of interaction of factors embedded in the governance mode, horizontal “selfsteering”, democratic participation of local community in the open decision making process through which they became partners and co-owners of the process and the role of mayor as a policy entrepreneur. This case suggests that reliable partnership consisted of key local actors combined with the policy entrepreneurship and determination for innovative projects is capable to mobilize available technology and financial resources at the national and the EU level. Finally, we would like to emphasize that this case suffers from the known limitations of single case studies - generalizability. In that respect future research needs to take these findings further by analysing other cases of local communities that achieved a high percentage of RE in their local energy system through comparative approach with a framework that includes the factors that played a critical role in the development of this case. Another suggestion is to asses the potential for replication of this case to other communities that are committed to the same outcome. References Araújo, K., 2014. The emerging field of energy transitions: progress, challenges, and opportunities. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 1, 112e121. Arnold, G., 2015. Street-level policy entrepreneurship. Public Manag. Rev. 17 (3), 307e327. Bechberger, M., Reiche, D., 2004. Renewable energy policy in Germany. Pioneer. Exemplary Regul. VIII (1), 25e35. Bennett, A., Checkel, J.T., 2014. Process tracing: from philosophical roots to best

123

practices. Process Tracing Metaphor Anal. Tool 21. Forthcoming. Bennett, A., Elman, C., 2007. Case study methods in the international relations subfield. Comp. Polit. Stud. 40 (2), 170e195. Breukers, S., Wolsink, M., 2007. Wind power implementation in changing institutional landscapes: an international comparison. Energy Policy 35 (5), 2737e2750. Busch, H., McCormick, K., 2014. Local power: exploring the motivations of mayors and key success factors for local municipalities to go 100% renewable energy. Energy Sustain. Soc. 4 (5). Collier, D., 2011. Understanding process tracing. PS Polit. Sci. Polit. 44 (4), 823e830. Etzioni, A., 1987. Entrepreneurship, adaptation and legitimation. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 8 (2), 175e189. Florini, Sovacool, B.K., 2009. Who governs energy? The challenges facing global energy governance. Energy Policy 37 (12), 5239e5248. Gailing, L., Rohring, A., 2016. Germany's energiewende and the spatial reconfi guration of an energy system. In: Gailing, L., Moss, T. (Eds.), Conceptualizing Germany's Energy Transition. Mcmillan, Palgrave. Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., Karnøe, P., 2010. Path dependence or path creation? J. Manag. Stud. 47 (4), 760e774. Geels, F.W., 2002. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 31 (8), 1257e1274. Geels, F.W., 2004. From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Res. Policy 33 (6e7), 897e920. Geels, F.W., 2006. Co-evolutionary and multi-level dynamics in transitions: the transformation of aviation systems and the shift from propeller to turbojet (1930-1970). Technovation 26 (9), 999e1016. Geels, F.W., Schot, J., 2007. Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res. Policy 36 (3), 399e417. Gerring, J., 2004. What is a case study and what is it good for? Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 98 (2), 341e354. Green, D.P., Gerber, A.S., 2003. The underprovision of experiments in political science. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 589, 94e112. Kern, F., Smith, A., Shaw, C., Raven, R., Verhees, B., 2014. From laggard to leader: explaining offshore wind developments in the UK. Energy Policy 69, 635e646. King, P.J., Roberts, N.C., 1992. An investigation into the personality profile of policy entrepreneurs. Public Prod. Manag. Rev. 16 (2), 173e190. Knill, C., Heichel, S., Arndt, D., 2012. Really a front-runner, really a Straggler? Of environmental leaders and laggards in the European Union and beyond d a quantitative policy perspective. Energy Policy 48, 36e45. Kostevsek, A., Cizelj, L., Petek, J., Pivec, A., 2013. A novel concept for a renewable network within municipal energy systems. Renew. Energy 60, 79e87. Mahoney, J., 2010. AFTER KKV: the new methodology of qualitative research. World Polit. 62 (1), 120eII. Markard, J., Raven, R., Truffer, B., 2012. Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects. Res. Policy 41 (6), 955e967. Mintrom, M., 1997. Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 41 (3), 738e770. Mintrom, M., Norman, P., 2009. Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. Policy Stud. J. 37 (4), 649e667. Moss, T., Gailing, L., 2016. Conceptualizing Germany’S Energy Transition: Institutions, Materiality, Power and Space. Macmillan, Palgrave. Moss, T., Becker, S., Naumann, M., 2015. Whose energy transition is it, anyway? Organisation and ownership of the Energiewende in villages, cities and regions. Local Environ. 20 (12), 1547e1563 h. Reiche, D., Bechberger, M., 2004. Policy differences in the promotion of renewable energies in the EU member states. Energy Policy 32 (7), 843e849. Roberts, N.C., King, P.J., 1991. Policy entrepreneurs: their activity structure and function in the policy process. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 1, 147e175. Rutherford, J., Coutard, O., 2014. Urban energy transitions: places, processes and politics of socio-technical change. Urban Stud. 51 (7), 1353e1377. Sabel, C.F., Zeitlin, J., 2012. Experimentalist governance. In: Levi-Faur, D. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Governance. Oxford University Press, pp. 169e183. Schot, J., 1998. The usefulness of evolutionary models for explaining innovation. The case of The Netherlands in the nineteenth century. Hist. Technol. 14 (3), 173e200. Sijm, M., 2002. The Performance of Feed-in Tariffs to Promote Renewable Electricity in European Countries. Ecn, ECN-Ce02-(November), ECN-C-083. Smith, A., Stirling, A., 2007. Moving outside or Inside? Objectification and reflexivity in the governance of socio-technical systems. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 9 (3e4), 351e373. Smith, A., Stirling, A., Berkhout, F., 2005. The governance of sustainable sociotechnical transitions. Res. Policy 34 (10), 1491e1510. Smith, A., Voß, J.P., Grin, J., 2010. Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: the allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges. Res. Policy 39 (4), 435e448. Socdem Asia Quarterly, 2014. Interview with Mayor Michael Knape of Treuenbrietzen/Feldheim Germany, Vol. 1(3). January 2013. Sovacool, B.K., 2014. What are we doing here? Analyzing fifteen years of energy scholarship and proposing a social science research agenda. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 1, 1e29. Stoker, G., 2010. Translating experiments into policy. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 628 (1), 47e58. Strunz, S., 2014. The German energy transition as a regime shift. Ecol. Econ. 100,

124

J. Young, M. Brans / Journal of Cleaner Production 169 (2017) 117e124

150e158. Ulli-Beer, S., 2005. Dynamic Governance of Energy Technology Change. Springer. Van Driel, H., Schot, J., 2005. Radical innovations as a multi-level process: introducing floating grain elevators in the port of Rotterdam. Technol. Cult. 51e76, 46(1), 51(1). Wurzel, K.W.R., Zito, R.A., Jordan, J.A., 2013. Environmental Governances in Europe. A Comparative Analysis of New Environmental Policy Instruments. Edward Elgar. Wüstenhagen, R., Wolsink, M., Bürer, M.J., 2007. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 35 (5), 2683e2691. Zahariadis, N., 2007. The Multiple Streams Framework. Theories of the Policy Process, pp. 65e92.

Internet sources ABC News, 2014. German Village Feldheim the Country's First Community to Become Energy Self-sufficient by Emily Stewart for the Business 11 Nov 2014. Available at: www.solar.org/s/eb9aeb1/. (Accessed 20 January 2015). AGECC, 2010. Advisory Group on Energy and Climate Change. Energy for a Sustainable Future: Summary Report and Recommendations. The UN Secretarygeneral’s Advisory Group on Energy and Climate Change, New York. Available at: www.se4all.org/sites/default/files/l/2013/09/AGECC-summary-report1.pdf. (Accessed 23 February 2015). BBC, 2013. Costing the Earth. Berlin's Big Gamble. January 13, 2013. Available at: www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01q8mqh. (Accessed 5 February 2015). Business Insider, Zeller, F., 2014. Off-grid German Village Banks on Wind, Sun, Pig Manure by Zeller Frank, AFP. OCT. 26, 2014. Available at: www.businessinsider. com/afp-off-grid-german-village-banks-on-wind-sun-pig-manure-201410#ixzz3RXSlJrGc. (Accessed 5 February 2015). Energiequelle, 2014. 16.06.2014 10-MW Battery for Storing Balancing Power Can Be Built. Grant Support for Feldheim Storage Project Officially Awarded Important Contribution to Testing of Storage Technologies. Press. Available at: www. energiequelle.de/index.php/en/presse. (Accessed 3 February 2015). Energiequelle. The energy self-sufficient village Feldheim. Available at: www. energiequelle.de/index.php/en/our-flagship-projects/248-energieautarkesdorf-feldheim-e, Accessed, February 15, 2015. Europa Summaries of EU Legislation. Renewable energy: White Paper laying down a Community strategy and action plan. Available at: http://europa.eu/ legislation_summaries/other/l27023_en.htm, (Accessed 3 February 2015). EU, 2011. Energy Roadmap 2050. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Energy Roadmap 2050/* COM/2011/ 0885 final */. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/ALL/; ELX_SESSIONID¼pXNYJKSFbLwdq5JBWQ9CvYWyJxD9RF4mnS3ctywT2xXmFY hlnlW1!-868768807?uri¼CELEX:52011DC0885. (Accessed 23 February 2015). Feldheim Biogas. Available at: www.neue-energien-forum-feldheim.de/index.php/

self-sufficient-village/biogas, (Accessed 2 February 2015). Feldheim Photovoltaics. Available at: www.neue-energien-forum-feldheim.de/ index.php/self-sufficient-village/photovoltaics, (Accessed 2 February 2015). Feldheim. The energy self-sufficient village. Available at: www.neue-energien-forumfeldheim.de/index.php/self-sufficient-village, (Accessed 2 February 2015). Go 100% Renewable Energy. Projects in Europe. Available at: www.go100percent. org/cms/index.php?id¼19, (Accessed 29 November 2014). Green Building Advisor, Dey, A., 2014. An Energy-self-sufficient Community by Andrew Dey, Jun 24 2014. Available at: www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/ dept/guest-blogs/energy-self-sufficient-community. (Accessed 5 February 2015). IEA, 2014. IEA/IRENA. Policies and Measures Database. Available at: www.iea.org/ policiesandmeasures/renewableenergy/?country¼Germany. (Accessed 17 February 2015). Spiegel, 2012. Spiegel Online International a Power Grid of Their Own: German Village Becomes Model for Renewable Energy by March 09, 2012. Available at: www.spiegel.de/international/germany/a-power-grid-of-their-own-germanvillage-becomes-model-for-renewable-energy-a-820369.html. (Accessed 20 January 2015). Stadt Treuenbrietzen Energie und Klima. Bioenergiedorf Feldheim, Available at: www.treuenbrietzen.de/front_content.php?idcat¼23, (Accessed 22 February 2015).

Interviews and e-mail communication Interview 1, local resident (24.02.2015). Interview 2, Anonymous (25.02.2015). Interview 3, Anonymous (10. 03. 2015). Interview 4, Green party MP (12.10.2014). Interview 5, Energieguelle, Werner Frohwhiter (15.03.2015). Interview 6, Mr. Hoyer, municipality of Treuenbrietzen (4.03.2015). Written response from the Mayor's office, 2015 (April, 2015).

Legal documents EEG, 2014. Act on the Development of Renewable Energy Sources (Renewable Energy Sources Act - RES Act 2014) Unofficial Translation of the RES Act in the Version in Force as of 1 August 2014. Available at: www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/ EN/Downloads/renewable-energy-sources-act-eeg-2014.html. (Accessed 12 April 2015).

E-books Bruns, E., Ohlhorst, D., Wenzel, B., Koppel, J., 2011. Renewable Energies in Germany's Electricity Market. A Biography of the Innovation Process. Springer.