Community Power - Participation vs Ownership

Over the last few posts, I introduced some basic concepts of community power with a couple of contemporary examples particularly in energy sector. Today, I would like to cast a light upon the argument that 'community ownership of the shared equity/facility is not necessarily a prerequisite in sustainable management of the projects whereas participation is' (Nolden, 2013; Harvey and Reed, 2007).

First and foremost, it is important to provide a clear definition of the two terms I have just mentioned. 'Ownership' in this context refers to legitimate rights to own the capital on which communities invest, such as wind turbines and solar PV. 'Participation', on the other hand, is a form of commitment/engagement through which communities influence how the capital is developed and is managed in long-term. For example, farmers may want to lease their land to utility companies to develop a wind farm, or a community may also want to financially invest in the construction of solar PV panels and receive shares (Nolden, 2013). 

Figure.1. A photo of wind turbines in Grange Farm Wind Farm (Reference: Bulkington Wiltshire, 2015)

Indeed, Harvey and Reed, 2007 suggest in their study that fostering 'a sense of responsibility' for financially supporting the facility may be a more viable measure to achieve sustainability than achieving community ownership itself. Basically, if a community owns the capital it has a full responsibility for all aspects of management including application forms to local authority, financial planning and maintenance. In particular, the planning requirements for small scale feed-in-tariff in the UK are full of meticulous work because of their local regulation which primarily intends to avoid from any big company exploiting the local community (Nolden, 2013). 

In addition, communities must apply to the Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MOS) for the total installed capacity below 50kW or Ofgem for ROO-FIT accredition above in order to become an eligible installer/producer of any renewable energy (Ofgem, 2015). Given the lack of technical knowledge and experience of community members in energy sector, the above logistics cost and time to spend can easily discourage them from initiating community-owned renewable energy development. Therefore, ownership of community-led projects does not always turn out to be a successful manner.

'Participation', by contrast, is regarded as an indispensable element of community projects. It takes a variety of forms such as an intra-community outreach programme to promote renewable energy through educational activities and public open discussion, community investment including a land lease and the purchase of shares in energy companies developing on-site renewable energy production (Nolden, 2013). This is a type of social and institutional arrangement that helps a community feel responsible for their shared equity with much less financial and management risks being involved compared to when they actually own the capital.

Figure.2. A photograph showing a community projects for renewable energy at Ostrod Primary School in Norway(Reference: The Guardian, 2015)

Nevertheless, it does not to say that ownership is always a failure. There are a number of successful stories in community-owned projects across the world. Germany, for example, is a well-known country for its prevailing renewable energy through community initiatives. Currently, Germany's share of electricity by renewable energy is about 20% (53GW), 51% out of which is owned by citizens (BNU, 2012b in Nolden, 2013). The number is significant considering economies of scale that both benefits and encourages large utility companies to install a generator in greater capacity.

So, what makes community-owned projects become prosperous like in Germany? That's a question I would seek to address in the upcoming posts. Any ideas or questions are welcome as always. :)