Making the most of community energies:Three perspectives on grassroots innovation

Grassroots innovations for sustainability are attracting increasing policy attention. Drawing upon a wide range of empirical research into community energy in the UK, and taking recent support from national government as a case study, we apply three distinct analytical perspectives: strategic niche management; niche policy advocacy; and critical niches. Whilst the first and second perspectives appear to explain policy influence in grassroots innovation adequately, each also shuts out more transformational possibilities. We therefore argue that, if grassroots innovation is to realise its full potential, then we need to also pursue a third, critical niches perspective, and open up debate about more socially transformative pathways to sustainability

Monitoring and evaluation in UK low-carbon community groups: benefits, barriers and the politics of the local

In the UK, there now exist hundreds of low-carbon community groups (LCCGs) that aim to decrease collective resource consumption and/or generate renewable energy through diverse social and environmental interventions. These groups have in recent years become the subject of political attention and funding schemes, underpinned by beliefs that LCCGs are key to fostering resilience to climate change and meeting national-level greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. While previous research into LCCGs has focused on drivers, barriers and outcomes of LCCG action, there is now growing policy and academic interest in groups' capacities for, and uses of, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) processes and tools. However, little is known about the experiences, opportunities and potential challenges for LCCGs undertaking M&E. In response, this paper draws on a Knowledge Exchange project that explored M&E processes and tools with a sample of UK LCCGs. It outlines the benefits and drawbacks of groups' attempts to achieve change and to account for their outcomes and/or impacts, individually, and as part of a wider movement. It argues that, while M&E could be one way for groups to “scale up” their impact without losing their grounding in place and community, issues of capacity, resources and utility remain paramoun

Beckton Sustainable Living Initiative, Working Paper 4.

This working paper reflects the authors’ involvement with a civic engagement project funded by the University of East London’s (UEL) Institute for Civic Engagement. It was a collaborative initiative between the Centre for Social Justice and Change, School of Social Sciences, and UEL’s Sustainability Research Institute. The initiative commenced in November 2015 and was completed in July 2016. The civic engagement project is part of an ongoing sustainable living project in Beckton. Situated in the hinterland of UEL’s Docklands campus in the London Borough of Newham this initiative provided an opportunity to work with communities local to UEL. Our involvement in a civic engagement initiative raised issues about what our role as students representing a University might involve, how we may contribute rather than replicate or duplicate ongoing local activities, and what additional skills we could bring to make a positive contribution. Our project was about taking practical actions; by completing a communal garden in a local park and distributing water-saving devices to enable households to reduce their expenditure and contribute towards sustainable living. Research findings informed these practical actions and we were able to use our knowledge concerning environmental sustainability and research in discussions with residents and local agencies. Our experience also raised issues about how best to do research that can be used to inform and facilitate social action. This is particularly challenging in local communities which are ethnically diverse and culturally fragmented. This working paper describes our experiences and reflections

Can We Retain the Economy-Wide Benefits of Energy Efficiency While Reducing the Energy Rebound?

Economy-wide rebound is often presented as a necessary ‘evil’ accompanying economic expansion triggered by energy efficiency improvements. We challenge this position in two, inter-related ways. First, we question the emphasis on potential technical energy savings and losses due to rebound in energy efficiency policy evaluation. This abstracts from the wider economic and societal impacts of energy efficiency improvements that are often positive and valuable to policy makers. Second, we propose that economic expansion and economy-wide rebound need not be highly correlated. We argue that energy efficiency actions targeted at improving the competitiveness of less energy-intensive means of providing services, such as heat and transport, may provide opportunities to boost economic activity while minimising rebound effects. This perspective involves a change in current policy and research thinking, particularly in terms of the type of substitution possibilities that we should focus on in enhancing energy efficiency, economic expansion and rebound relations

Energy feedback to domestic consumers: An evidence review for the Smart Energy Research Lab

The purpose of this evidence review is to inform a future energy advice service for domestic consumers (likely to be delivered as part of the Smart Energy Research Lab (SERL)) about what types of feedback have been trialled in the past, and what can be learned from these trials. Preliminary recommendations are offered in the next section in the executive summary, ahead of the more detailed review of different aspects of energy feedback and advice

FLEET FUEL EFFICIENCY: A WIN-WIN OPPORTUNITY

ABSTRACT This paper summarizes the findings of New Zealand-based research carried out during 2008 on overcoming the barriers to transport fleets adopting fuel saving measures. This research included: a review of overseas best practice; a fuel efficiency trial involving car, bus and truck fleets; surveys of industry awareness and an analysis of the barriers to adopting fuel saving measures. The trial confirmed overseas experience that has found that fuel savings of 10% or more are achievable through improved fleet management systems, driver training, vehicle maintenance, and other well established practices. However, most fleets do not have the skills or knowledge required to realise these savings resulting in a low level of uptake. Saving fuel is a win-win opportunity for transport fleets. Saving fuel: reduces transport costs, which increases fleet profitability, improves productivity and benefits the economy through lower overseas expenditure in a way that does not affect NZ jobs, benefits the environment through less CO 2 and other emissions improves road safety because of the synergies between fuel efficiency and road safety measures (reducing speed, anticipating the situation ahead, improving vehicle maintenance etc). has very little effect on travel tim

Community energy business model evolution:a review of solar photovoltaic developments in England

The ongoing energy system transformation process is placing citizens and communities at the heart of future energy systems. To date, their participation has focused on the ownership and control of renewable energy installations facilitated by supportive national policies. Yet across many European countries, policies that have previously supported the deployment of small-scale renewable projects are being withdrawn. Social innovation and the evolution of business models are needed if citizen participation is to continue and succeed in this new policy landscape. At the same time, few business models stand still. This paper reviews the evolution of community energy business models in England to provide insights into the potential of community participation in the energy system post subsidies. Concentrating on community solar photovoltaic projects as the cornerstone technology, this review identifies and critique three archetypal business models as sequentially dominating English community renewable energy to date. Using insights from both Science and Technology Studies and Transaction Cost Economics, it explores the drivers and origin of these models as well as resulting community benefits. Looking forwards and by reviewing current activity, this paper identifies new intermediary actors as playing a key role in facilitating and brokering new, increasingly complicated and commercial community energy business models. We argue that this marks a significant break from the past and may, in time, offer more opportunities for community participation in energy system transformation. Moreover, it offers some communities the possibility of staying small and retaining their more radical potential