“We are not in this to save the polar bears!” – the link between community renewable energy development and ecological citizenship

Abstract

The transition from a fossil fuel-based energy system to a renewable one has emerged as a priority for many governments. This, in turn, has facilitated a rapid increase in renewable energy investments. However, this development raises important questions about the sustainability of energy governance when it comes to access and control of energy, public participation and transparency. In this article, decentralized renewable energy production is presented as one of the pathways towards more participation in sustainable energy development. Community renewable energy projects help to enable communities to act as citizens, rather than consumers. In this article, we aim to understand the interactions between community renewable energy transition and collective practices of citizenship. We investigate collective practices in energy development within the ecological citizenship framework by addressing the extent to which each community’s energy project displays the characteristics of ecological citizenship, in terms of how their collectivity is organized, articulated and shaped the future goals and vision. Based on the empirical data collected in Feldheim (Germany) and Samsø (Denmark), we find out that when collectivity is embedded in community renewable energy development, it resonates with the particularities of communitarian ecological citizenship that has a local focus rather than a political focus, and primarily prioritizes the cohesiveness and interests of the community (i.e. economic development) rather than the global commitment to sustainability discourses (i.e. climate change). This article also raises questions about the importance of intentionality in bringing about ecological outcomes of renewable energy transitions.

Keywords:

• ecological citizenship
• energy commons
• local renewable energy
• communal energy
• energy transition
• collective identity
• Samsø
• Feldheim

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank our interviewees in Samsø and Feldheim for sharing their insights with us. We would like to acknowledge Irina Papazu for informing the earlier stages of this research and Ellen Redford for her constructive suggestions.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflict of interests.

ORCID

Mine Islar http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9479-4734

Henner Busch http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0468-2155

Notes

1. Although there are multiple definitions for the concept of trust (e.g. Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman 1995; Rousseau et al. 1998; Huijts, Molin, and Steg 2012) due to various disciplinary approaches, we have chosen to limit our focus on trust to the Kenis’ framework which is developed within the social movements and political science literature.

2. For example, a report for a state-TV programme, available under: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9btyeuTG8c and a documentary on the village, available under: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg5bI8oWVK8.

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by the Linneus Centre LUCID (Lund University Centre of Excellence for the Integration of Social and Natural Dimensions of Sustainability) funded by the Swedish Research Council Formas [grant number 259-2008-1718]; and the Swedish Research Council Vetenskaprådet mobility grant [grant number 437-2014-208].