Supporting civic engagement in German energy cooperatives – Transdisciplinary research based on the reflection of individual needs

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Research & Social Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/erss

Original research article

Supporting civic engagement in German energy cooperatives – Transdisciplinary research based on the reflection of individual needs

T

Salina Centgraf Department of Environmental Politics, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Permoserstraße 15, D-04318 Leipzig, Germany

A R T I C LE I N FO

A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Energy transition Human Scale Development Approach Energy cooperatives Transdisciplinary research

Civic engagement is currently playing a major role in the transformation of European energy systems. In Germany, citizen-driven renewable energy cooperatives (RECs) are often presented as pioneers of change and as models for the development of energy initiatives within Europe. Current research on RECs focuses mainly on entrepreneurial adaptations and innovations; what is generally missing from the research, however, is a detailed consideration of the human dimensions of this engagement. In view of this, the present paper proposes applying the needs-oriented Human Scale Development Approach (HSDA) as a means of supporting civic engagement within a transdisciplinary research framework. It is argued that the needs perspective can be helpful in developing new strategies that support initiatives in their objective to remain stable and robust over the long term. The empirical part of the paper presents three case studies of German RECs which (1) explore the challenges encountered by active members in their everyday organizational efforts, (2) describe the potential benefits from their involvement, and (3) identify factors that encourage civic engagement. The results indicate that the challenges are inhibiting factors which not only jeopardize the groups’ shared objectives but also adversely influence the emotional well-being of those who are actively involved.

1. Introduction: how can the members of renewable energy cooperatives be supported in their largely voluntary activities? It is increasingly being recognized that insufficient social acceptance may be a limiting factor in the promotion of renewable energy [1–3]. This is especially so with respect to the conversion of European energy systems, which is closely linked to political long-term objectives including a low-carbon economy, energy security and the reduction of negative impacts on the environment [1–3]. In this context, renewable energy cooperatives (RECs) run by citizens have attracted the attention of academics in many European countries in recent years [4,5]. As part of Germany’s so-called Energiewende (energy transition), the dynamics of German RECs have been described extensively, with RECs often being portrayed as pioneers of change and as models for the development of energy initiatives in Europe [6–10]. This article describes a study conducted as part of a work package within the EnGeno research project [11], in which members of RECs reflected on the challenges and potential of their own involvement, starting with their individual needs. Until now, the question has never been asked whether or not people’s personal commitment has been matched by a fulfilment of their individual needs. The study’s rationale was therefore that a needs-based perspective might contribute towards developing new strategies which help the members of RECs

E-mail address: [email protected]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.05.003 Received 1 September 2017; Received in revised form 25 April 2018; Accepted 2 May 2018 2214-6296/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

individually to meet the challenges arising from their civic engagement. Three case studies will be presented as a means of exploring the challenges experienced by the members of RECs due to the rapid development of the latter as well as the potential benefits their involvement may bring. The process of reflecting about individual needs is described in order to (1) explore the challenges active members face in their everyday organizational efforts, (2) describe the potential benefits resulting from the members’ involvement and (3) identify factors that encourage civic engagement in the case studies at hand. The nature of this research is explorative rather than claiming to build a theory of challenges and respective potential solutions for REC members – this would have required a larger dataset and have therefore gone beyond the scope of this article. Instead, then, the study utilizes a transdisciplinary framework in order (1) to begin to find answers to the questions raised and (2) to offer support to the RECs involved regarding the specific challenges they face. We regarded the transdisciplinary approach as appropriate because it enabled us to explore the views and subjective assessments of RECs members themselves while also

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

S. Centgraf

have invested 1.45 billion euros in production facilities and that they generate 0.58% of electricity from renewable sources. Despite this small amount, more than 157,000 private individuals have invested money in RECs. The bulk of RECs is managed by an honorary board and thrives on the civic engagement of citizens1 [19]. Whereas the business models are heterogeneous, the demographic characteristics of RECs’ members are fairly homogenous. Fraune [20] as well as Rauschmayer et al. [21]2 show that predominantly well-educated, male individuals aged on average over 45 and with above average incomes are involved in operating RECs. This is the case not only for ordinary members but also for the decision-making bodies. Concerning the role of the cooperatives’ members, the Cooperatives Act §1 (Genossenschaftsgesetz) states that their situation within this legal form is very special, as the primary focus of the organization – at least formally – is not to generate profits but rather to further the objectives of its members, which can be of an economic, social or cultural character [22]. A number of researchers have described the entrepreneurial potential as well as the motivation of people who commit themselves to a REC [9,18]. The upsurge of citizen-led RECs in Germany is well documented [23,17,24,25]. The start-up boom began in 2006 with 9 new registrations of RECs; by the end of 2015 there were nearly 1000 RECs in Germany [16]. Three main factors are responsible for this development: first, several cooperative associations began in 2001 to provide special start-up incentives aimed at supporting the establishment of new RECs. Second, the amendment of the Cooperatives Act in 2006 made it easier to set up a cooperative, while the elimination of the prospectus requirement (Prospektpflicht)3 also reduced the organizational effort involved. Finally, the promotion of renewable energies through the Renewable Energies Act (EEG) encouraged the formation of energy production cooperatives. With the amendment of the EEG and the Capital Investment Act (KAGB) in 2014, the conditions for such formations deteriorated again, and this is reflected in the decline of start-up activities [19]. Since then, a shift has taken place away from the cooperative model and toward the limited partnership model. This shift is characterized by an increase in onshore wind projects and a decline in photovoltaics, which up to that point had been the predominant technology installed due to its relatively easy implementation [26]. In addition to the reduced funding quotas entailed by the EEG and the capital market regulations that force RECs to professionalize their management in order to meet certain requirements, RECs face several other obstacles to their entrepreneurial success. Müller et al. [19] describe the following additional threats to RECs. First, RECs are challenged to maintain the initial motivation of the responsible board members who are mostly acting pro bono, whilst the employment of full-time staff is usually too costly. Second, progress in the energy market requires repeated adaptation of the business model being used; most RECs lack the know-how and the ability to react quickly enough. Third, RECs may lack equity capital, a factor which hampers their economic growth. Müller et al. assume market saturation, not necessarily due to a geographical diffusion of RECs but rather because most highly engaged citizens have already set up RECs. Accordingly, they identify a need to mobilize citizens who have so far not been active. Rommel et al. [27] also argue along these lines: they see the challenges in the Renewables Act and low levels of actual involvement in decision making as major challenges that threaten the existence of RECs. They also identify a lack of active participation on the part of

generating a sense of ownership among them regarding their problems and potential solutions. Although transdisciplinary research harbors several challenges (e.g. vagueness and ambiguity of results or limited case-specific solutions), a vital aspect and advantage of transdisciplinary approaches is the co-production of knowledge that is solutionoriented, socially robust, and transferable to both research and social practice [12]. The article proceeds as follows: Section 2 gives a literature review on German RECs. Section 3 introduces the transdisciplinary Human Scale Development Approach (HSDA) that was applied in the three German case studies, before presenting the cases and the research design. Section 4 provides a description of the various internal and external challenges faced by REC members, the specific stages of development they identified and how they implemented strategies to meet the challenges. Section 5 discusses the empirical results in relation to the wider research field, while Section 6 concludes and presents recommendations for further research. 2. Literature review on the rise of German RECs and their challenge of stabilization In general RECs are understood to be registered cooperatives whose main purpose is to undertake activities in the energy sector [13]. They adhere to the cooperative principles of autonomy, self-help, responsibility for one’s own affairs, democracy and regionality. Such bodies are credited with having a considerable cultural influence on the transformation of the energy system and are regarded as active participants in shaping new structures. They are a special form of commercial enterprise, being neither investor-owned companies nor non-profit organizations [4,6]. Although they are for-profit organizations, profitseeking is not their main focus. In accordance with the law of associations (Genossenschaftsgesetz GenG), their activities are focused on achieving their members’ objectives. However, Huybrechts and Mertens [6] argue that new types of cooperative such as RECs differ from traditional ones in at least two ways. First, they tend to involve multiple stakeholders (such as producers, consumers or workers) rather than a single dominant or homogeneous stakeholder. In the case of German RECs, there are completely citizenbased cooperatives as well as cooperatives in which municipalities, local banks, utilities or commercial enterprises are heavily involved. Overall, however, nearly 90% of the ordinary members of German RECs are private individuals. Second, RECs can show a stronger orientation towards general interest goals rather than focusing on the monetary interests of the cooperative’s members. Nearly all energy cooperatives state that they want to contribute to the fight of climate change and to environmental protection. Volz [14] states, for example, that the main objectives of nearly all German RECs are to provide and market renewable energy, to contribute toward efforts to combat climate change, and to offer an alternative energy concept compared to the large energy providers. Holstenkamp and Kahla [15, p. 118] confirm this finding, stressing that “investments are motivated mostly by environmental (nature conservation) and political (participation, energy transition) considerations”. For some RECs (especially those that run local heat networks), ensuring a self-sufficient energy supply is one objective among others [15]. Overall, RECs present a broadly heterogeneous picture in terms of business models, actors involved, size and operating area. Most of them (76%) have fewer than 200 members [16]. Their main sphere of activity up to now has been the production of renewable energies within the feed-in tariff system. Photovoltaic has dominated, followed by biomass, while wind and water power figure less prominently. Only a few cooperatives are engaged in operating networks or in trading [17]. Most cooperatives have a local or regional focus and seek to contribute toward supplying energy to their community. Not least because of this heterogeneity of business models, they are seen as having the potential to contribute to a decentralized energy transition initiated by citizens [18]. Müller et al. [19] estimate that German RECs

1

As far as we are aware, there is no statistical data available on volunteerism in RECs. This survey shows that members of RECs behave more environmental friendly than non-members and are more frequent members of environmental organizations. 3 The prospectus requirement is an obligation of disclosure and information that is controlled by the German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht-BaFin). Due to their compulsory membership in cooperative auditing associations cooperatives have been exempted from the prospectus requirement and hence from financial burdens. 2

113

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

S. Centgraf

Max-Neef et al. see needs – whether satisfied or unsatisfied – as entailing not just deprivation but also potential: contrary to other theories of development, this conception does not reduce needs to deprivation alone but rather emphasizes their inherent potential [29]. The matrix of needs and categories, including satisfiers, can serve as a means of identifying both the deprivation and potential of groups and thus of developing “synergetic” strategies (i.e. choosing satisfiers that satisfy several needs at the same time) for helping the community to progress in the way it wishes to: “The goal was empowering people and civil society so their endogenous potential could be unleashed and pave the way for a self-reliant development” [30]. The matrix has since been used as a theoretical framework by researchers and practitioners for desk reviews and as a tool for participatory processes in groups and communities [30–34]. HSDA was used by Jorge [35] to analyze the fulfilment of needs with respect to euthanasia, while Nangombe and Ackermann [36] used the framework to examine the need for subsistence and protection of old people in Namibia. As part of her action research projects in Spain, Peru and Norway, Guillen-Royo [30] designed workshops that lasted for several days and consisted of three stages: (1) the participants collectively create a matrix of negative/destructive factors or strategies that prevent the group/community from fulfilling its needs; (2) they then identify factors/strategies that would fulfil their needs perfectly and enter them into another matrix; in the last step (3) they develop a set of exogenous and endogenous “bridging strategies” that make a transformation from unfulfilled to fulfilled needs possible and thus have a positive influence on their quality of life. Rauschmayer et al. [33] and Pelenc [37] take up the list of needs and relate them to the capability approach developed by Sen [38] and to methods based on well-being and happiness. Spreng [39] suggests using the concept of transdisciplinary research proposed by Max-Neef [40] to reflect about the social context of energy research. The HSDA makes it possible for communities and groups to identify their specific problems and possible solutions as part of an endogenous development that unfolds as a dynamic process. In an article on ecotourism in Chile, Pacheco et al. [41] state that the collective definition and evaluation of needs and subsequent strategies within a social group may empower local communities. Socio-economic entrepreneurship based on synergetic strategies can support sustainable ways of life, the creation of new jobs and increased income. Max-Neef et al. [29] describe positive effects on participants’ private lives, social world and environment. Since the first publication of the HSDA in 1986 [29], the CEPAUR research team has been engaged in developing the HSDA into a workshop format, of which an English version was first published in 1991 [29]. The present study assumes that HSDA offers a valuable starting point to help RECs a) to explore current challenges, b) to identify developments that promote the cooperative’s goals, and that it can help c) to elaborate specific steps for achieving these goals in the selected cases. The HSDA offers a unique approach by focusing on the needs perspective. It is assumed that a developmental process which takes account of the needs of those involved will be more robust over the long term. We have not found this needs perspective in conventional programs for human resource development or in training programs for business organizations. In contrast to, for example, the capability approach [38] the theory and language of the HSDA is easy to understand and therefore easier to apply. Another possible approach would have been to run future workshops (Zukunftswerkstätten) as devised by Jungk and Müller [42]. These have a clear structure very similar to that of the HSDA. In future workshops, a first phase serves to identify a group’s problems and serves as a cathartic process for transforming any destructive energy that may be present. In a second phase, a utopian future is imagined by using creative tools such as drawing. A third phase involves identifying strategies for development. As this approach also neglects the needs perspective, we decided to modify the HSDA proposed by Max-Neef et al. [29] slightly by including the first phase of the

RECs’ members – the active board members in particular often feel the strain due to a lack of support. Another aspect they raise is the homogenous group structure of RECs. This means that marginalized groups may be excluded from participation. Volz [18] conducted quantitative research and identified future challenges for RECs. In addition to the revision of the EEG, the search for rooftops for PV installations and the objective of serving members’ interests, he lists five challenges: to achieve the shared objectives, to progress from voluntary to paid work within the cooperative, to recruit honorary board members and new members for the cooperative and, last but not least, to network with other actors in the field of renewable energy. Herbes et al. [28] conducted a study on potential new business models for RECs and identified a number of challenges, based on observations from the general meetings of 15 German RECs and on qualitative interviews. A lack of time experienced by the voluntary members of boards was identified as the strongest constraint to innovations in business models, accompanied by a lack of human resources to take on new business projects. A lack of know-how regarding setting up new business models was also mentioned. They describe perceived political and public resistance to RECs as external barriers (e.g. going into competition with municipal utilities). So far, no research has been conducted with a view to exploring practical strategies that may be suitable to meet these challenges. Thus, in the face of deteriorating numbers of newly formed cooperatives, the task will be to extend participatory processes and to develop new forms of participation in order to include those citizens who are either undecided or inexperienced regarding energy generation. A second issue that arises is how those people engaged in predominantly voluntary work, as are most active members of German RECs, can be supported and motivated in such a way that the initiatives they are involved in remain stable and robust over the long term. 3. Methods: using the Human Scale Development Approach as a methodology to assess the needs of REC members We chose a qualitative field research approach with mixed methods in order to conduct transformative research on three German RECs as case studies. Following this description of the methodology we will describe the case studies in detail. The focal points for the study were three one-and-a-half-day workshops designed according to the Human Scale Development Approach (hereafter HSDA) devised by Chilean economist Manfred Max-Neef and his colleagues [29]. In addition to the workshops, semi-structured interviews were conducted before and after the workshops. Max-Neef et al. [29] developed the needs-based HSDA in the 1980s as both a theoretical concept and a useful tool to empower societies and groups to identify their strengths and weaknesses and to shape their own (holistic) development [29]. By elaborating individual and common needs in a participatory process, the community is enabled analyze its current situation and increase its prosperity independently of economic growth [29]. Based on humanistic psychology and experiences from small Latin American communities, Max-Neef et al. define nine universal and fundamental human needs: subsistence, protection, affection, understanding, participation, leisure, creation, identity and freedom [29]. These needs are met by satisfiers that belong to the four existential categories of being, having, doing and interacting. On this basis they devised a matrix of needs (nine human needs and four categories of needs) containing socalled “satisfiers”. While needs are described here as universal and free of hierarchies, the satisfiers differ according to culture, situation, education, institution, time and space. At the same time, Max-Neef et al. emphasize that needs are abstract categories (and can thus be neither sustainable nor unsustainable). Needs cannot substitute one another, nor can they be in conflict with one another. Conflicts typically arise at the level of negotiable strategies (which may be sustainable or unsustainable). 114

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

S. Centgraf

future workshops, collecting only destructive factors (the first phase of the HSDA workshop model consists in collecting both positive and negative factors). The limits of the HSDA as we applied it will be discussed in the discussion section below. The HSDA approach was translated into German and a one-and-a-half-day workshop format (following GuillenRoyo [30]) was devised. As already mentioned, three such workshops took place. In the first section of the workshops the HSDA was introduced and Max-Neef’s nine basic human needs (subsistence, protection, participation, leisure, identity, creation, understanding, freedom and affection) were presented. After the first workshop we substituted “affection” with “community”. Following this, there was space for the participants to reflect on the factors that prevented them from fulfilling their needs and made it difficult for them to become actively involved in the cooperative. In this phase, the researcher served as a facilitator and supported the group as it filled in a matrix with all the negative factors that hindered the satisfaction of the members’ needs. As a result of this phase the most important impeding factors were identified by the group via point monitoring. In the third part of the workshops the participants were encouraged to develop their visions of how the REC should ideally be and to reflect on whether their own needs would then be optimally met. Complementary to the negative matrix, a utopian matrix was filled with all those factors that would enable the REC to development in an optimal way. The most important utopian factors were identified here too. In order to find strategies for further development, the group clustered the most important hindering and utopian satisfiers and developed four or five headings for concrete areas for action. The group used these headings to elaborate specific strategies for further development. In a final workshop slot, a SMART analysis (with specific, measurable, assignable, realistic and time-related goals) was conducted in relation to the further development of the respective cooperative. In order to improve the results achieved with the HSDA and to evaluate the success of the endeavor, complementary interviews were conducted at two stages of the study. In preparation for the workshops, semi-structured interviews were conducted with selected participants as a means of generating information about the RECs and their current situation, establishing contact with them and building up mutual trust. The interviews were conducted in a semi-structured manner and included the following issues: – – – –

and workshops were embedded in a larger research project investigating the transformative potential of RECs. On the basis of a quantitative study on the environmental behavior of REC members, we contacted 121 German RECs. In the course of this contact, we announced the possibility of running a workshop in the REC. Twelve RECs were subsequently selected, and the director of each one was called and offered the opportunity to host an HSDA workshop. In order to yield a diverse sample, we chose RECs that differed in terms of size (number of members), location (urban/rural), age and business model. We received a positive response from five RECs:

• REC A: 23 members, registered in 2014, located in a fairly large city, running photovoltaic power plants • REC B: 625 members, registered in 2008, located in a rural area, running a local heat generation network • REC C: 68 members, registered in 2009, located in a rural area, running a local heat generation network • REC D: 231 members, registered in 2009, located in a fairly large city, running photovoltaic power plants • REC F: 85 members, registered in 2011, located in a rural area, running photovoltaic power plants

The workshops with RECs D and F were organized in cooperation with the board members but then cancelled due to a lack of participants.4 This paper concentrates on the findings from RECs A, B and C, which will therefore be described in detail. REC A is a young cooperative in an eastern German city, registered in 2014. When the workshop took place, the cooperative did not yet operate its own facility but was planning its first PV installation. At that time it had 23 members, and shares in the cooperative could be bought at 100 € each (the minimum purchase being 2 shares). A total of 11 people from REC A participated in the workshop, including members of the management and supervisory board and active as well as passive members. REC B is comparatively well established. Set up in 2008, it is situated in a rural area of southern Germany. The cooperative operates a biogas plant and a solar plant and offers its members 20 cooperativeowned electric cars for car sharing. At the time of the workshop (June 2015) the cooperative had 625 members, and shares could be bought at 500 € each. No passive members of REC B took part in the workshop. The issue at hand was the expansion of the local heat network into another district; the cooperative wanted to include members of that district’s council in discussions at an early stage. The first part of the workshop took place with members of the management board and the supervisory board. On the second day four council members from the potentially new district participated. Thirteen people in all attended. Case study C took place with a REC based in a village of 800 inhabitants. Its founding was inspired by a presentation given in 2007 by representatives of the University of Göttingen about the “bioenergy village Jühnde”. The interest group “bioenergy village” was formed shortly after this presentation. As far back as 2001, as a result of storm “Lothar”, the villagers had considered how wood from the local forest could yield benefits for the village. After the presentation in 2007 the plan re-emerged to build a biogas facility, a boiler fired by woodshavings and a local heat network. On 9th November 2009 the cooperative was founded by 40 members; the project officially started in the spring of 2011, and thermal energy has actually been produced from biomass since November 2011. At the time of the workshop, the cooperative had 68 members and a share could be bought at 1500 €. REC C has three management board members and six supervisory board members. 12 people participated in the workshop. When selecting the interviewees, we ensured that they included two

important events of the past months current challenges visions for future development strategies for future development

Two or three months after the workshop, further semi-structured interviews took place with the same interviewees as before. A total of 12 follow-up interviews were held with 4 participants from each of the workshops, dealing with the following issues: – most important conclusions from the workshop – current state of implementation of the strategies developed in the workshop – changes in interactions within the cooperative Both the preparatory and the follow-up interviews were fully transcribed and evaluated using MAXQDA text analysis software [43]. The workshops were documented as audio recordings and the material that emerged from the workshops (matrix with factors that prevent fulfilment of needs, matrix with factors that would meet needs perfectly, SMART agreements and schedule) was digitalized to facilitate its analysis. Cluster analyses were used as part of this. Three RECs as case studies The case studies focused on three German RECs. Both interviews

4 In REC D we tried twice to conduct a workshop on two different dates; in both cases only 3 members including the board signed up, and so we decided to cancel the event.

115

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

S. Centgraf

members the impression that they are customers and, as such, are entitled to have certain expectations regarding the management. These latter factors hinder the satisfaction of the need for participation, creation and common identity. Because of the shortage of active members, the emotional well-being of those members who are actively involved suffers: excessive demands, stress and a sense of frustration have a highly negative influence on people’s ability to fulfil their need for subsistence and protection, while active members additionally show signs of fatigue. Another area of discussion related to the practical opportunities for participating in RECs. According to the workshop participants, these are often vague or not clearly communicated. Problems might be the unavailability of a list of tasks or a lack of written agreements and of transparency. Furthermore, communication between the board and other members is described by some as being unsatisfactory. All these factors hinder the fulfilment of participation.

members of the management or supervisory board and two active members. Given that four people from each REC were interviewed we also tried to ensure they included two men and two women. In REC A one male board member, one female supervisory board member and two active female members were interviewed; in REC B no women participated in the workshop, so two male board members and two male active members were interviewed; in REC C two male board members, one male and one female active member were interviewed. We only asked those people who had confirmed their participation in the workshop if they would be willing to be interviewed and tried to include both man and women in equal parts. The results from these 12 semi-structured interviews will be presented below. Nine interviews took place one or two weeks before the workshop and three were conducted on the first day of the respective workshop. 4. Results of the empirical analysis 4.1. Internal and external challenges that hinder people’s involvement

4.1.2. External challenges Besides the internal challenges, external ones also became evident, the most obvious being the growing pressure to professionalize: our interviewees felt that the RECs are having to deal with growing demands concerning new business models. This relates to the need for subsistence. Furthermore, the cooperatives are felt to lack a presence in supra-regional or cross-regional networks, meaning that they do not necessarily possess all the relevant up-to-date information. The needs concerned here are creation, subsistence and participation. Three more potential sources of external challenges were specified by the participants: ambiguous short-term energy policies make it difficult for the cooperatives to act, as the policy framework might change quickly and make their earlier decisions void; the entrepreneurial risk contains external challenges in itself; and, last but not least, the conduct of other companies in the energy sector can pose a challenge by undermining confidence in RECs (this was the case with the media coverage of failed companies such as “Prokon” and “windwärts”). All these uncertainties have a negative influence on the fulfilment of needs for subsistence, creation and freedom.

The three main parts of the workshop will be presented here for each case study. We begin with a description of the challenges that emerged clearly from the interviews and workshops and of their adverse influence on the needs of the active members. The challenges are divided into internal and external challenges. 4.1.1. Internal challenges Several factors pose a hindrance to people becoming involved in RECs on a voluntary basis and influence the extent to which the needs of the cooperative members are met. Some interviewees reported a lack of various resources, which renders involvement unattractive and makes it difficult to recruit new active members. These scarce resources include money (e.g. for public relations), time (for discussions and conversations among the members), and knowledge and skills among active members (e.g. with respect to accounting, taxation etc.). These factors primarily impede the need for protection and for creation. REC members additionally reported that the demands of setting up and running a project also make involvement difficult. They explained that during the founding period there had been long, challenging decision-making processes, as those involved had different views and were undecided among themselves as to the direction the cooperative should take. This complicates the development of a common identity. The volunteers also take on considerable responsibility, facing the challenge of ever increasing tasks along with potential information overload and the complexity this entails. In some cases, several projects were either in operation or being planned in parallel, and this was often experienced as excessively demanding. The desire to live up to one’s own expectations, to implement a project successfully and to feel responsible generates considerable stress. Again, the need for protection and for creation is adversely affected here. Another internal challenge mentioned by members of all three RECs is the shortage of active members. This is felt to adversely affect the need for protection, subsistence, freedom, creation and community. The workshop participants assumed that there was a lack of interest among the REC’s passive members and attributed the lack of a shared identity to the different roles of the board and the members respectively. As members of cooperatives are often also actively involved in other timeconsuming (often voluntary) activities, they face the problem of competing demands on their spare time, which limits their potential involvement; sometimes the families of very active members feel neglected due to a family member’s dedication to the cooperative. At the same time, some of the interviewees and workshop participants expressed their disappointment that co-members apparently did not see themselves as belonging to a group with shared values. One problem related to this is that of seeing the REC as an enterprise. This perception constitutes a threshold that people who are not yet involved need to cross in order to approach the cooperative; it gives some

4.2. Which utopian factors would lead to a perfect development of RECs? The factors rated most highly by the participants as being conditions for an optimal future for their REC will be described in the following. The members of the RECs were asked how they could ideally meet their needs, and this served to prompt a range of creative strategies that extend farther than the usual thinking on these issues. 4.2.1. Utopian factors associated with external conditions The members of REC A dreamed of creating a proper functioning network with other associations or clubs, or with other municipalities and cooperatives. This would meet their needs for protection, creation and understanding perfectly. In their vision of an ideal future, REC A would be well known and highly integrated in the region where they are located. This would satisfy the members’ need for identity. The members of REC B also dreamed of implementing cooperative projects together with other actors, thus satisfying their need for identity. They also envisaged integrating new citizens into the village community via the cooperative, meeting the need for community/affection. The members of REC B attach great importance to inspiring young people to get involved in order to satisfy their need for creation; they would also like to establish a forum on innovative energies so as to fulfil their need for understanding. Another element of the vision of cooperative B is to operate a shop selling local products, which would again increase the degree to which the need for community/affection would be satisfied; they dreamed of having more animals in the village (fostering identity) and of establishing some form of “ university of life”. The members of REC C dreamed of a multi-generational village: this 116

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

S. Centgraf

responsibilities. The regular meetings were to be better balanced between being a) a working meeting and b) a social/cultural event (“having a drink together”). They also planned to organize excursions in order to improve levels of information, communication and participation. Topic number four, “resilience”, generated the following ideas: in order to extend the cooperative’s lines of business new working groups should be established. Information should be sought and acted upon regarding potential financing for the first two PV installations. The chairmen of the cooperative should be relieved of part of their obligations and they should be financially rewarded. The final issue was “strategy development”. The small group that discussed possible future action in this respect came up with the idea of cooperating more closely with a well-known energy association and academic institutions. New lines of business should be developed including, specifically, a comprehensive solution for heat, electricity and a storage facility using renewable energy. They also suggested regular brainstorming sessions in the future. The members of REC A converted these intentions into a ten-point plan with clearly defined tasks and responsibilities. REC B identified four important issues: to enhance quality of life, to preserve members’ values, to serve the community (motivation) and to focus on regionality. For the participants from REC C the headings for the last part of the workshop were: infrastructure, technology, society (citizens), quality of life, and cooperative. Similar to REC A, RECs B and C developed very detailed and differentiated strategies for implementing improvements.

would be a way of securing their subsistence. Their vision of an optimal future includes nature conservation, which would meet their need for subsistence and leisure. 4.2.2. Utopian factors associated with internal conditions Concerning the internal development of REC A, the workshop participants wished for an expansion of their internal infrastructure, giving them more space for creation. At the same time their need for leisure would be satisfied by joint trips and excursions, a lively social culture, and by setting up a regular’s table at a local café or pub (informal gathering). They dreamed of an open, affectionate and considerate community, thus one characterized by freedom and community/affection. The workshop participants from REC B dreamed of a system of job rotation within the cooperative, in order to guarantee their need for subsistence. An optimal future would contain a contact point with a job service and meeting the need for freedom. This would enable members to slow down and enjoy more leisure time. The participants believed it was very important to implement good public relations in order to meet the need for understanding of both potential and passive members, and they also thought it essential to enjoy their own involvement so as to perceive it as well-spent leisure time. The workshop participants from REC C dreamed of a community in which people appreciate the value of community and thus gain understanding. They expressed the wish for common activities and projects through which to experience community/affection. They also felt it would better fulfil their need for identity if they managed to be more courageous in the future. They envisaged that being frugal and content would bring them freedom.

4.3.1. How were the strategies implemented? In the 12 semi-structured follow-up interviews mentioned above, selected workshop participants were asked about the implementation of improvements and about current developments in the cooperative. The interviewees from REC A told us that the most important points devised in the workshop had already been in the planning stage at that time and were now implemented for the most part. These were: contract negotiations for the first PV project and issues concerning its financing. It had become apparent that the systematic nature of the workshop had revealed some hidden aspects and had made possible communication on topics not usually addressed. The workshop was also seen to have been beneficial for social interaction and group dynamics within the cooperative. The realization that communication structures between members and the board needed improvement was recognized as being important. However, a redistribution of tasks and responsibilities had not yet occurred on a large scale by the time of the interviews; the person responsible still had to shoulder the main workload, but one formerly rather passive member became a board member after the workshop, and the overall willingness of the members to help had increased. With the establishment of a monthly informal gathering at a café or pub, new members had been recruited and existing members who had been rather passive up until then had been motivated to become more active. The monthly gathering made it possible for active members of the cooperative to be more approachable to other members and interested people. In addition, the board had endeavored to do more networking and had established a relationship of cooperation with an energy association and other cooperative organizations. The interviewees from REC B reported that the procedure suggested in the workshop by which to decide whether another district should be included in the local heat network would be pursued, but with some delay. They felt it had been a great success that the procedure had been devised as a group and that it was jointly supported. A town meeting would first be needed to provide clarification on whether an expansion of the heat network is wanted. The interviewees stated that it would be necessary to persuade the district’s decision makers as well as to integrate its citizens. Due to a lack of knowledge about REC B and local people’s anxiety that a “company” would change their municipality, it would be crucial to provide information on the project and to secure the

4.3. Specific stages in the development towards realizable goals As a next step – after ‘dreaming’ about the ideal state of things in their cooperative – the participants developed headings for the most important areas in which they had said they wanted to generate further specific developmental steps. To illustrate this phase of the workshop, the strategies for REC A will be presented as an example. For REC A these were the key issues: public presence, networking, information/communication/participation, resilience with regard to daily operations and strategy development regarding innovations. The participants now formed small groups and designed strategies with which to tackle these issues in answer to the questions: “How do we want to be?”, “What do we want to have?”, “What do we want to do?” and “Where do we want to be?”. In doing so they came up with strategies that included not only material resources (having) but also personal characteristics (being), choices for further action (doing) and the adjustment of the framework in which the cooperative operates (interacting). With regard to “public presence” the following strategies were considered: the members realized that it is important to be authentic, contactable, approachable and competent. They also planned to increase their use of social media, newsletters and press distribution lists and to improve their website. They considered making a short film about the cooperative, designing a flyer and making fuller use of the event-planning experience available within the cooperative. Tackling the issue of “networking”, the members of REC A said that in the future they wanted to be well-informed, efficient, optimistic, contactable and to focus on local networking partners. They planned to draw up a mind map of all previous networking partners, to actively form networks, to be visible in the life of the city and to provide meeting points for their members and potential new members. The heading “information/communication/participation” generated an aspiration among the active members to be reliable and realistic in their communication, not to be vain, and to be honest and flexible and to communicate with each other on equal terms. They intended to establish a pool of tasks and ideas and to be more willing to share 117

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

S. Centgraf

and opening up space for discussion on different understandings of needs could address this flaw. Additionally, the participants perceived the matrix of needs and satisfiers as rigid and as a constraint to creative thinking. The complexity of the approach requires trained facilitators, yet this hampers the self-empowerment of the RECs. The fact that only one workshop was conducted in each REC must be viewed critically: although the interviews after the workshops tried to evaluate the workshop results, it is unclear how long the positive effects of the interventions lasted. For further research it would therefore be advisable to consider conducting prolonged fieldwork over a longer period of time. The transdisciplinary framework using the HSDA elicited a wider range of options for action in the respective RECs. It enabled members to exchange views not only about material resources but also about the broader conditions within which they operate – their personal characteristics (being), choices for further action (doing) and the adjustment of the framework in which the cooperative operates (interacting), –and this gave them additional scope for action, thus augmenting individual and collective self-empowerment. Despite the considerable amount of time invested in the interviews and workshops, this learning experience was repeatedly referred to as a worthwhile investment. Far from succumbing to the pitfall of vagueness and ambiguity of results in transdisciplinary research (as mentioned in Section 1 above), the study has highlighted a number of clearly defined development strategies within the RECs. Being highly dependent on the political framework in terms of their actions, the REC members were able to generate strategies that lie within their own scope of action and thus experienced selfempowerment and a decline in dependency on the broader political setting. At the same time, they developed ideas about how to contribute to the creation of a political framework that is more suitable for RECs.

participation of all stakeholders in the planning process. The REC B interviewees also mentioned that it had become obvious that there had been too little internal communication within the cooperative about differing goals and potential development paths. The communication was described as being more direct now, and an additional board member was able to be enlisted. The workshop had opened up the opportunity to discuss problems. Even though this had been challenging, it had contributed to a positive advancement of the cooperative. It had become clear that part of the development of the cooperative was also to envisage the village in 30 or 50 years’ time; these visions of the future had to include more than just heating options, and it was essential to generate them collaboratively. One of the most important results of the workshop for REC C, according to the respective interviewees, was the reorganization of its working groups, which eased the burden on those who had carried most responsibility up to that point. The working group “Finances” gained two new members with considerable expertise. Additionally, action plans had been set up, enabling the upcoming workflow to be clearly planned and tasks distributed accordingly. New active members were won by addressing people directly, with a focus on young people. This effort was rewarded: the newly found active members include two younger people. When addressing volunteers, the cooperative had found that it was important to state clearly how much time would be needed for a certain task. At the same time, it was seen as a management responsibility to continue to motivate active members who have a long-standing commitment. They noted how important it was to spread the workload between more individuals, to place a time limit on voluntary work input and not to burden the active members for too long a period. One of the main aspects of successful civic engagement, according to the interviewees from REC C, is that it is fun and brings a sense of satisfaction. This can be achieved by taking time to reflect on what has been achieved, to encourage one another, to be proud of what has been achieved together, and to regularly appreciate and honor the involvement of each individual active member. Celebrations and parties also serve well to motivate people further. REC C is also seeking to achieve a greater professionalization of its processes and services. Turnover should increase to a level that enables the salary of a professional managing director to be covered. Another possible remedy for the demanding workload and the need for expertise might be to create job shares in the field of management, operation or service with adjacent cooperatives that operate local heat networks. It was felt to have been enlightening and valuable to reflect together on the current challenges in an open way. The participants reported experiencing a motivation boost by doing so and have been made aware of how important and valuable their own dedication to the work is. It also became obvious that the cooperative played an important role in helping newcomers to integrate into the village by getting involved. REC C plans to carry out regular team training sessions and brainstorming activities from now on.

5.2. Challenges and potential of active engagement in RECs Several of the challenges described in the literature that hinder people’s active engagement in RECs were mentioned by the workshop participants as well. Even though the three RECs A, B and C were at very different points in their development and the specific measures devised to develop them further were very diverse, some elements can be derived from the results that may be valid for other RECs. In the following section we discuss internal and external challenges as well as potential strategies to face them. Being based on reflection about needs, these strategies may help to encourage civic engagement in RECs − something they are likely to continue to depend upon into the future [19]. 5.2.1. What could be done to support members to overcome internal challenges? The main and existential challenge for all RECs (especially for REC A, which was still in the start-up phase) is a lack of financial resources. This is in line with what Huybrecht and Mertens [6] describe as an obstacle to setting up RECs. In addition, however, funds for hiring salaried managers are also lacking, thus impeding the growth of several RECs [8,28]. A secure and strong financial base constitutes an important precondition for fulfilling various human needs (e.g. subsistence, freedom, understanding, leisure) in the context of RECs. Related to the lack of finances, the often-repeated lack of members requires strategies for mobilizing and recruiting members in order to acquire sources of (risk) capital. Human Resource Mobilization, as Brummer et al. [44] call it, remains an important task for the continued existence and growth of RECs. The shortage of both finances and active members is a major contributor to the strain and emotional distress of those members who are actively involved: excessive demands, overwork and a sense of frustration have a highly negative influence on the capacity for fulfilling the needs of subsistence and protection. In attempts to encourage undecided or inexperienced citizens to participate and to further motivate existing members, the workshop participants understood that an awareness of qualities such as openness, curiosity,

5. Discussion: what do these results highlight and what might they mean for the development of other RECs? 5.1. Reflection on the method In the course of our analysis, several limitations concerning the application of the HSDA have become apparent and influence the interpretation of our findings. The workshop lasted one-and-a-half days, and this might have been a barrier to attend for some members. At the same time, the cancellation of three workshops due to a lack of interest almost certainly reflects the lack of engagement of ordinary members noted in the literature [14,26,28]. Participants reported that they had difficulties in understanding the concept of needs, that it remained rather abstract for them, and that they found it challenging and unfamiliar to talk about personal positions and values instead of factual issues. This confirms what Guillen-Royo [30] describes. Building trust 118

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

S. Centgraf

5.2.2. What could be done to support members to overcome external challenges? Participants in all three cases emphasized that ambiguous shortterm policy strategies on the part of politicians make it difficult for cooperatives to act, as the policy framework might change quickly and nullify their previous decisions. The workshop participants stressed that it is important to develop strategies for remaining active and operational within the existing political framework. This included efforts to overcome the lack of knowledge about RECs by investing in networking activities, to raise public awareness in order to shed light on the necessity of building favorable conditions for RECs (‘allowing lay citizens to participate in a highly complicated field of action’ as Brummer [8, p. 120] states). Some have noted that a poor level of knowledge and understanding of RECs and their benefits exists among policy makers [6]. Concerning the lack of networking activities, conversations about the individual and collective needs of all stakeholders (e.g. when networking with other cooperatives, cooperative umbrella organizations or academics) provide entry points for generating joint strategies and “qualitative change,” as Max-Neef et al. [29] put it. Martinez-Alier et al. [46] endorse cooperation between academic institutions (especially academics researching sustainability) and grassroots movements, as they might encourage local, national and international coalitions in support of these movements; in this respect RECs can be seen as actors in the field of renewable energy. (Transformative) scholarship can seek to acquire increased financial support for external consultation and supervision in order to support and strengthen the activities of RECs. Herbes et al. [28] report an increase in the active participation of ordinary members and fewer conflicts after workshops were held to formulate strategies and mission statements. They suggest making the expertise of energy consultants, planners and researchers available in order to assist RECs in formulating strategies [28]. Brummer [8] raises the obstacle of the costs of such external professionalism and suggests that experts such as academics could support RECs with few resources. In our view, it remains important to secure such funding so as to not simply displace the problem of non-salaried work. Such means will by themselves probably not be decisive for the success of RECs, but they provide a valuable entry point for supporting members of RECs. These members, usually acting in a voluntary capacity, can thus be supported in their endeavor to work toward sustainable – in the classical sense of ecological, economic and social – development.

tolerance, transparency, clarity and sympathy appears to be conducive. Establishing a regular informal gathering and hosting celebrations increases the sense of connection felt by the members toward the cooperative and helps potential new members to overcome their reservations. Promoting a joint feeling of pride about what has been achieved and appreciating the involvement of each individual member contributes to members’ motivation. Implementing strategies “borrowed” from other contexts, such as member recruitment in non-governmental organizations, has been found to be successful in RECs as well [45]. Human Resource Mobilization requires a certain investment of time, which is also a resource that is often lacking. Just as RECs’ members lack time, they also lack opportunities to reflect about their activities and to develop visions for the future beyond simply the technological development of the project. Discussing shared objectives while bearing in mind human needs, values, feelings, expectations and aims in life at the same time paves the way for the stable, long-term commitment of the cooperative’s members – and thus for the steady development of the cooperative. Another major factor that is particularly emphasized in the literature [e.g. 8,19] and was also stressed by the participants is the strategy of professionalizing processes and services. A salaried manager and staff serves to ease the burden borne by voluntary members and facilitates efforts to create new business models. The challenge of financing this transformation still exists, and participants predicted what is also stated in the literature [19]: that although it is important to create paid work, RECs still depend on voluntary work. The sense of isolation felt by ordinary members in comparison to the board members was a recurring theme in all the case studies. It is an example of the classical agency dilemma, which occurs in structures where agents (in this case the board) are allowed to make decisions on behalf of – and with impacts on – principals (ordinary REC members), and where the motivations of these two groups are not perfectly aligned. In this case, the managers of RECs have not always been perceived to be working in the interests of the members [15]. Using the HSDA and related interviews to talk about needs and interests in an open and constructive manner helped to reveal this principal-agent dilemma and to find ways of addressing it. Related to this, a lack of information and communication has been identified as a barrier to engagement as well as a trigger for conflicts. Board members in REC A and REC C resolved to be more open to the demands of the ordinary members. REC A organized a regular informal gathering in order to provide space for discussions. Brummer et al. [44] suggest that improving communication processes in RECs may help to avoid conflicts. This may also help to overcome tensions that arise over diverging goals (for instance concerning future business models) [44]. Another aspect that was raised was a lack of knowledge and skills among active members (e.g. with respect to accounting and taxation), which only worsened the perceived lack of professionalism and impeded the fulfilment of individual needs for protection and creation. The workshop participants stated their intention to invest in networking activities and training courses. On this matter, Brummer [8] states: ‘Professionalism in RECs comes from their members, who often are a rich source of experienced veterans in their respective fields, e.g. retired bank managers or lawyers. But expertise needs to be built as well, calling for regular training of management staff and interested members.’ [8, p. 120]. It became obvious that a perspective which does not focus mainly on technical aspects offers new paths for access, especially with regard to membership recruitment and the motivation of existing members to participate more actively. If an REC succeeds in communicating its tasks clearly and in a well-structured manner to those outside and if it presents itself openly and without e.g. triggering feelings of incompetence due to a possible lack of prior knowledge, then potential contributors are more likely to be welcomed at a human level, which might make getting involved a more attractive option.

6. Conclusion and avenues for future research The present research has explored the challenges encountered by active members of three German RECs in their everyday organizational efforts. It has also described the potential resulting from their involvement and has identified the factors that encourage civic engagement in the specific cases studied. Since the amendment of the Renewable Energy Act in 2014, German RECs have faced various challenges, such as capital market regulation, a lack of full-time staff and a lack of active voluntary involvement, the transformation of business models, financing and a homogeneous membership structure. These challenges raise doubts about the future avenues available to RECs. By using the HSDA and the needs perspective this study was able to demonstrate a new point of access to the field of RECs, which is usually dominated by technological issues: up to now there has been no detailed consideration of the human dimensions of civic engagement in RECs. By describing the internal and external challenges based on a consideration of needs, it became obvious that the challenges faced by German RECs (lack of members, lack of active members, lack of expertise and networks, lack of finances, uncertainty due to the volatile political framework) are inhibiting factors that not only jeopardize the cooperatives’ objectives but that also influence the emotional wellbeing of those people actively involved. Such impacts may result in frustration, helplessness and in a sense of being overwhelmed. The 119

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

S. Centgraf

everyday organizational effort required to maintain such a cooperative usually leaves little time to discuss undesirable developments or to resolve conflicts. As the focus has to be on entrepreneurial thinking, little attention is payed to human motivations or personal needs. The HSDA intervention opened up an opportunity to find out how individual members think, how they feel and what they need. On this basis the workshop participants examined the societal and personal factors that would promote a better recognition of their needs, identifying synergetic strategies to address the obstacles. The findings of this article, although based on a relatively small dataset of three workshops with RECs in Germany, may inform endeavors to support other European RECs and grassroots initiatives. Quantitative studies on voluntary active members would be important in order to gain precise data as a basis for future scientific debate. To scale up the results it would be advisable to conduct additional case studies (especially in RECs with other business models e.g. wind producing RECs). Building on our results, it would also be promising to evaluate the findings of other (transdisciplinary or action research) methods or consultancies in order to promote civic engagement in RECs – be they conflict training, visioning or classical corporate development. Finally, our findings on challenges and potential strategies for promoting development based on the satisfaction of human needs may not only inform future studies on the factors for success in processes of transformation from voluntary work to professionalized salaried management but may also illuminate how such professionalization affects the satisfaction of human needs.

[11] C. Lautermann, Transformationspotenziale von Energiegenossenschaften: Mit postfossilen Dezentralisierungsstrategien zur Energiewende (EnGeno): Schlussbericht: gemeinsamer Bericht zum BMBF-Forschungsprojekt, (2017), http:// dx.doi.org/10.2314/GBV:897037316. [12] D.J. Lang, A. Wiek, M. Bergmann, M. Stauffacher, P. Martens, P. Moll, M. Swilling, C.J. Thomas, Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges, Sustain. Sci. 7 (2012) 25–43, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s11625-011-0149-x. [13] L. Holstenkamp, J.R. Müller, Zum Stand von Energiegenossenschaften in Deutschland, (2015) Aktualisierter Überblick über Zahlen und Entwicklungen zum 31.12.2014, Lüneburg. URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/62072/1/MPRA_ paper_62072.pdf . (Accessed 22 February 2018). [14] R. Volz, Genossenschaften im Bereich erneuerbarer Energien. Status quo und Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten eines neuen Betätigungsfeldes, (2012) StuttgartHohenheim, Stuttgart. [15] L. Holstenkamp, F. Kahla, What are community energy companies trying to accomplish? An empirical investigation of investment motives in the German case, Energy Policy 97 (2016) 112–122, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.07.010. [16] DGRV-Deutscher Genossenschafts-und Raiffeisenverband, Ergebnisse der DGRVJahresumfrage zum 31.12.2015 Berlin, 2016. URL: https://www.dgrv.de/webde. nsf/272e312c8017e736c1256e31005cedff/ 5f450be165a66e4dc1257c1d004f7b51/$FILE/Umfrage.pdf. (Accessed 19 February 2018). [17] Ö. Yildiz, J. Rommel, S. Debor, L. Holstenkamp, F. Mey, J.R. Müller, J. Radtke, J. Rognli, Renewable RECs as gatekeepers or facilitators? Recent developments in Germany and a multidisciplinary research agenda, Energy Res. Soc.Sci. 6 (2015) 59–73, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.12.001. [18] R. Volz, Bedeutung und Potentiale von Energiegenossenschaften in Deutschland. Eine empirische Aufbereitung, Informationen zur Raumentwicklung 9 (10) (2012) 515–524. [19] J. Müller, D. Dorniok, B. Flieger, L. Holstenkamp, F. Mey, J. Radtke, Energiegenossenschaften – das Erfolgsmodell braucht neue Dynamik, GAIA 24 (2) (2015) 96–101. [20] C. Fraune, Gender matters: women, renewable energy, and citizen participation in Germany, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 7 (2015) 55–65, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss. 2015.02.005. [21] F. Rauschmayer, S. Centgraf, T. Masson, Ergebnisse der EnGeno Mitgliederbefragung von Energiegenossenschaften, Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung GmbH–UFZ, Broschüre Herausgeber, 2015 URL: http://engeno. net/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/EnGeno_Broschuere_Mitgliederbefragung.pdf . (Accessed 19 February 2018). [22] Genossenschaftsgesetz §1. URL: http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/geng/__1.html. (Accessed 22 February 2018). [23] L. Holstenkamp, J.R. Müller, Zum Stand von Energiegenossenschaften in Deutschland, (2013) Ein statistischer Überblick zum 31.12.2012, Lüneburg. URL: http://www.leuphana.de/fileadmin/user_upload/PERSONALPAGES/_ijkl/janner_ steve/Homepage_Master/wpbl_14.pdf . (Accessed 19 February 2018). [24] S. Debor, The Socio-Economic Power of Renewable Energy Production Cooperatives in Germany. Results of an Empirical Assessment, (2014) Wuppertal Paper, 184, Wuppertal. URL: https://wupperinst.org/a/wi/a/s/ad/2594/ . (Accessed 19 February 2018). [25] L. Holstenkamp, Ansätze einer Systematisierung von Energiegenossenschaften, (2012) Lüneburg. URL: http://www.leuphana.de/fileadmin/user_upload/ Forschungseinrichtungen/professuren/finanzierung-finanzwirtschaft/files/ Arbeitspapiere/typ-energiegeno_120629.pdf . (Accessed 19 February 2018). [26] F. Kahla, L. Holstenkamp, J.R. Müller, H. Degenhart, Development and State of Community Energy Companies and Energy Cooperatives in Germany. MPRA Paper No. 81261, (2017) URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/81261/ . (Accessed 19 February 2018). [27] J. Rommel, J. Radtke, G. von Jorck, F. Mey, Ö. Yildiz, Community renewable energy at a crossroads: a think piece on degrowth, technology, and the democratization of the German energy system, J. Clean. Prod. xxx (2016) 1–8, http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.114. [28] C. Herbes, V. Brummer, J. Rognli, S. Blazejewski, N. Gericke, Responding to policy change: new business models for renewable energy cooperatives – barriers perceived by cooperatives’ members, Energy Policy 109 (2017) 82–95, http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.051. [29] M. Max-Neef, H.A. Elizalde, M. Hopenhayn, Desarrollo a Escala Humana. Development Dialogue, 1986, 1991, 1994. [30] M. Guillen-Royo, Sustainability and Wellbeing. Human-Scale Development in Practice, Routledge, London, 2016. [31] F. Rauschmayer, I. Omann, Well-being in sustainability transitions – making use of needs, in: K.L. Syse, M.L. Mueller (Eds.), Sustainable Consumption and the Good Life – Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Routledge, Milton Park; New York, 2015, pp. 111–125. [32] C. Jolibert, M. Max-Neef, F. Rauschmayer, J. Paavola, Should we care about the needs of non- humans? Needs assessment: a tool for environmental conflict resolution and sustainable organization of living beings, Environ. Policy Gov. 21 (2011) 259–269, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eet.578. [33] F. Rauschmayer, I. Omann, J. Frühmann, Needs, capabilities, and quality of life. Reconceptualizing Sustainable Development, in: F. Rauschmayer, I. Omann, J. Frühmann (Eds.), Sustainable Development: Capabilities, Needs, and Well-Being, Routledge, London, 2011, pp. 1–24. [34] M. Guillen-Royo, Realising the ‘wellbeing dividend’. An exploratory study using the Human Scale Development approach, Ecol. Econ. 4 (1) (2010) s1, http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.09.010.

Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank Dr. Felix Rauschmayer for the substantial support of this work. I am grateful to the members of cooperatives who contributed to our studies and for the support provided by the research project ‘EnGeno: transformation potentials of energy cooperatives’ (www.engeno.net). EnGeno is a three-year project (2013–2016) funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research as part of the funding program ‘Transformation of the Energy system’ (FKZ 03SF0458C). I also thank two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on earlier drafts, which have greatly improved the manuscript. References [1] K.A. Parkhill, C. Demski, C. Butler, A. Spence, N. Pidgeon, Transforming the UK Energy System: Public Values, Attitudes and Acceptability – Synthesis Report, UKERC, London, 2013 URL: http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/asset/ 835A77F5%2D62DA%2D4062%2D925917DF4D288372/ . (Accessed 22 February 2018). [2] C. Gross, Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia. The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance, Energy Policy 35 (5) (2007) 2727–2736, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.013. [3] R. Wüstenhagen, M. Wolsink, M.J. Bürer, Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation. An introduction to the concept, Energy Policy 35 (2007) 2683–2691, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.001. [4] E. Viardot, T. Wierenga, B. Friedrich, The role of cooperatives in overcoming the barriers to adoption of renewable energy, Energy Policy 63 (2013) 756–764, http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.034. [5] T. Bauwens, N. Eyre, Exploring the links between community-based governance and sustainable energy use: quantitative evidence from Flanders, Ecol. Econ. 137 (2017) 163–172, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.03.006. [6] B. Huybrechts, S. Mertens, The relevance of the cooperative model in the field of renewable energy, Ann. Public Cooperative Econ. 85 (2) (2014) 193–212, http:// dx.doi.org/10.1111/apce.12038. [7] Ö. Yildiz, Financing renewable energy infrastructures via financial citizen participa tion–the case of Germany, Renew. Energy 68 (2014) 677–685, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.renene.2014.02.038. [8] V. Brummer, Of expertise, social capital, and democracy: assessing the organizational governance and decision-making in German Renewable Energy Cooperatives, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 37 (2018) 111–121, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017. 09.039. [9] J. Radtke, Bürgerenergie in Deutschland. Partizipation zwischen Gemeinwohl und Rendite, Springer Vieweg, Wiesbaden, 2016. [10] G. Walker, P. Devine-Wright, Community renewable energy. What should it mean? Energy Policy 36 (2008) 497–500, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.10.019.

120

Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018) 112–121

S. Centgraf

[35] M. Jorge, Patients’ needs and satisfiers: applying human scale development theory on end-of-life care, Curr. Opin. Support. Palliat. Care 4 (3) (2010) 163–169, http:// dx.doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0b013e32833b286d. [36] H. Nangombe, L. Ackermann, Subsistence and protection needs of the elderly living in Katutura, Windhoek (Namibia), Res. Aging 35 (2) (2012) 182–200, http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0164027512439071. [37] J. Pelenc, Combining capabilities and fundamental human needs: a case study with vulnerable teenagers in France, Soc. Indic. Res. (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s11205-016-1399-x. [38] A. Sen, Development as Freedom, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999. [39] D. Spreng, Transdisciplinary energy research – reflecting the context, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 1 (2014) 65–73, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.02.005. [40] M. Max-Neef, Foundations of transdisciplinarity, Ecol. Econ. 5 (2005) 5–16, http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.01.014. [41] H.G. Pacheco, Z.C. Henríquez, C.A. Sampaio, M.E. Oyarzún, Encadenamientos socioproductivos y ecosocioeconomia de las organizaciones. Anílisis propositivo para

[42] [43] [44]

[45]

[46]

121

el Turismo de Intereses Especiales (TIE) en el territorio lacustre de la regiún de la Araucanáa, Gestiún Turástica 16 (2011) 49–68. R. Jungk, N. Müller, Future Workshops: How to Create Desirable Futures, Institute of Social Inventions, London, 1987. U. Kuckartz, Qualitative Text Analysis. A Guide to Methods, Practice and Using Software, Sage, London, 2014. V. Brummer, C. Herbes, N. Gericke, Conflict handling in renewable energy cooperatives (RECs): organizational effects and member well-being, Ann. Public Cooperative Econ. 88 (2) (2017) 179–202. T.A. Martinez, S.L. McMullin, Factors affecting decisions to volunteer in nongovernmental organizations, Environ. Behav. 36 (1) (2004) 2004, http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0013916503256642. J. Martínez-Alier, U. Pascual, F.-D. Vivien, E. Zacchai, Sustainable de-growth: mapping the context, criticisms and future prospects of an emergent paradigm, Ecol. Econ. 69 (2010) 1741–1747, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.04. 017.