Customer perspectives on demand response in Europe: a systematic review and thematic synthesis

Figures & data

Figure 1. Flowchart of search process and project selection.

Figure 2. Thematic synthesis of positive (+) and negative (-) customer perceptions toward demand response.

Table 1. Characteristics of projects included in the review.

Project name	Participating countries	Project period	Project objectives	DR type	Data collection methods	Participants	References
AnyPLACE	Austria, Belgium, Germany, Portugal	2015–2018	Enhance interaction between customers and service providers. Enable energy monitoring to allow customers to participate in DR.	Implicit	1) Survey 2) Focus groups (n = 4)	1) 20 households 2) 77 customers	(AnyPLACE Consortium 2018a, 2018b, 2018c)
FLEXICIENCY	Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, UK, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden	2015–2019	Encourage more energy efficient behavior with energy monitoring and control services.	Implicit and explicit	Surveys (n = 7)	3043 customers	(FLEXICIENCY Consortium 2018, 2019a, 2019b)
SMART-UP	France, Italy, Malta, Spain, UK	2015–2018	Encourage changes in energy-consumption habits via active use of smart meters and in-home displays. Enable customers to seize opportunities offered by DR services.	Implicit	1) Surveys (n = 2) 2) semi-structured interviews (n = 2)	1) 1280 customers 2) 15 customers and 8 project staff members	(SMART-UP Consortium 2018a, 2018b, 2018c, 2018d)
Sunshine Tariff	UK	2014–2017	Understand how customers change their energy-consumption patterns in response to a time-of-use tariff.	Implicit	1) Online surveys (n = 2) 2) structured telephone interviews	1) 85 customers 2) 10 customers	(WPD&RSW 2016, 2017)
UPGRID	France, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, UK	2015–2017	Achieve peak shaving and energy saving using real-time price signals, time-of-use tariffs, and energy-monitoring and control services.	Implicit	Surveys (n = 3)	290 customers	(UPGRID Consortium 2017)
SAVE	UK	2014–2019	Identify effective methods of customer engagement and evaluate the effectiveness of dynamic pricing.	Implicit and explicit	1) Surveys (n = 7) 2) personal interviews 3) focus groups (n = 4)	1) 12,048 customers 2) 25 customers 3) 57 customers and 2 local organizers	(SSEN 2018a, 2018b, 2019)
Energywise	UK	2014–2018	Explore customers’ willingness to engage in energy-savings campaigns and their ability to benefit from time-of-use tariffs. Identify challenges and opportunities of customer engagement.	Implicit and explicit	1) Surveys (n = 3) 2) interviews 3) focus groups (n = 8)	1) 727 customers 2) 77 customers 3) 63 customers	(UK Power Networks 2019a, 2019b, 2019c)
CLNR	UK	2011–2014	Determine to what extent customers are flexible with their energy consumption. Understand the social dimensions of customers’ energy practices.	Implicit	1) Online surveys (n = 2) 2) interviews	1) 1284 customers 2) 130 customers	(CLNR 2013, 2014)
NOBEL	Germany, Greece, Spain, Sweden	2010–2012	Develop and evaluate tools which allow customers to monitor their energy consumption and participate in energy markets.	Implicit and explicit	Online surveys (n = 2)	Not disclosed	(NOBEL 2011, 2012)
Flex4Grid	Germany, Slovenia, Slovakia	2015–2018	Develop secure energy-management systems to allow households to monitor and manage their energy consumption.	Implicit and explicit	Email surveys (n = 3)	335 customers	(Flex4Grid Consortium 2018)
e-balance	Germany, Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Spain	2013–2017	Research on the economic and social aspects of the energy efficiency obtained by distributed and decentralized energy control and management.	Explicit	1) Online surveys (n = 2) 2) individual in-depth interviews	1) 9784 customers 2) 7 customers	(E-balance Consortium 2017)
Smart Hooky	UK	2011–2013	Develop and explore customer engagement and incentive programs. Provide the community with information of the energy consumption of their village.	Explicit	Focus groups (n = 2)	20 customers	(WPD 2013)

Table 2. Quotations from project participants and authors to illustrate each theme.

Themes and subthemes	Illustrative quotations Italicized text = quote from project participant Non-italicized text = quote from authors
Motivational factors
Financial incentives	“It’s not all about the right timing. It’s also about saving money. Who doesn’t want to save money? You time yourself you make sure you have that time at the off-peak periods and then you do what you have to do” (UK Power Networks 2019c). “The financial aspect is paramount for a great part of households, but it is not the only motivating factor. There may be an environmental motivation, a desire to respond to a new social norm, that of participating in a collective effort for the common good” (SMART-UP Consortium 2018a).
Environmental issues	“The most important motivation to install an EMS [energy management system] is environmental: reduction of CO2 [carbon dioxide] emission (biospheric value) and carbon footprint reduction of Dörentrup (altruistic value); this appears to be more important than the economic benefit (egoistic value) of energy-bill reduction” (AnyPLACE Consortium 2018b). “Although this [save the planet] a fairly well known and understood global message the challenge of ‘what can I do on my own’ to make a difference to such a big and complex issue leaves many people disempowered and disengaged…The need for a cultural, rather than individual, behavior change shift is recognized’ (SSEN 2019)
Novelty	“Yes it was, I had never seen it before, no other company does it so I thought yeah” (UK Power Networks 2019a). ‘The main motivator for taking part in the project seems to have been the wish to know their (devices or household) consumption (75%) and the wish to know new technologies (75%)…Given our project is introducing new technologies, this is an expected distribution’ (Flex4Grid Consortium 2018).
Interaction with customers
Community focus	“The SAVE Project has totally transformed Shirley Warren – it has been the catalyst for action – bringing together local people to deliver positive change in their own community as well as achieve reductions in peak demand. A real win/win. We’re so glad we got involved” (SSEN 2019). “I enjoyed every part of it, the community, coming and speaking with others… knowing their views that matches up with our views. It was really nice, having that kind of family where faces become familiar” (UK Power Networks 2019c). “The involvement of the ADAM association strongly established in the district largely contributed to make this project a district project and consequently reinforced the adhesion of the inhabitants. The strong implementation of local partners is essential to gain the confidence of households and get their involvement in the project” (SMART-UP Consortium 2018c).
Face-to-face contact	“The guy was brilliant, we were talking and laughing; he was lovely, understandable, understood my concerns, took on board my issues” (UK Power Networks 2019a). “This is the first time someone has come to see us for explanations and advice, usually no one ever comes to the neighbourhood” (SMART-UP Consortium 2018c). “The most successful communication channels (question 23) were the house visits and the workshops, because the participants favored the personal contact with consortium members of the project” (AnyPLACE Consortium 2018c).
Text-based communication	“I wouldn’t have chosen to take part just on the letter; I needed to speak to someone too” (UK Power Networks 2019a). “In contrast, e-mails used to communicate with customers, about the free smart-enabled washing machines on offer to trial customers, were not successful. It would seem that this was because customers did not trust the medium and possibly perceived the email as a ‘scam’” (CLNR 2013). “Few people remembered the specifics of a message just that they received something to do with saving energy; some people did comment on how the message was common sense, they’ve heard it before or it doesn’t get through enough” (SSEN 2018b).
Mobile communication	“The aftercare telephone service was felt to have been useful by participants, though they were perceived as being less effective as the enhanced advice visit. Nevertheless, they offered households security in terms of being able to clarify points with advisors and request further information (hence ensuring they were able to continue to engage with and use their smart meter and IHD)” (SMART-UP Consortium 2018c). “Some aspects of the project have proved quite difficult to communicate over the telephone or in written communications. Feedback from the organizations involved in recruiting the customers onto the new tariffs suggested that in some cases it may be difficult to effectively communicate the new offer over the phone or in written communications, particularly when this requires a longer interaction” (UK Power Networks 2019a).
Feedback information
Types of information	“Must admit that I just go by the colors. If I haven’t got me glasses on I can’t see the rest of it. If the red comes on the alarm bells go…” (CLNR 2014). “Once residents understood peak demand they just wanted to know what simple and easy changes they could undertake that would make a difference” (SSEN 2019). “While the IHD itself is easy to read and understand in the main, with the vast majority of participants choosing to use the price based readings (rather than units of energy or CO2), many commented that it caused them confusion because the readings were hard to explain in reference to their own activities.” (CLNR 2014).
Monitoring systems	“Yes, big time. Seeing how much I was spending amazed me. Seeing how much the microwave and oven use, has made me much more aware. Me and my son (who’s five) turn off all of the lights now. We never did that before” (UK Power Networks 2019a). “It’s not caused any bother… I am aware of it because it’s in the pantry. I know if I’ve left something on so I can go back and then the light will go off. So it reminds you that you left something on that shouldn’t be on” (CLNR 2014).
Data security and privacy	“While it is obvious that time-of-use data is critical to offer tailored advice and remote diagnostics, the cohort is highly distrusting of such probes and remain guarded toward attempts to grant permissions for access to personal data” (SMART-UP Consortium 2018c). “Privacy threats are not taken into account during the decision-making process. However, the issue of privacy turns out to be important when the users become aware of it. Very often they started to think of it only when such an interview question came up” (E-balance Consortium 2017).

AnyPLACE Consortium 2018a. Environmental and Societal Impacts Assessment: Deliverable 2.2. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/646580/results.

 Google Scholar

AnyPLACE Consortium 2018b. Field Trial: Deliverable 8.2. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/646580/results.

 Google Scholar

AnyPLACE Consortium 2018c. Policy and Regulatory Recommendations: Deliverable 1.2. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/646580/results.

 Google Scholar

FLEXICIENCY Consortium 2018. Results Achieved in the Swedish Demonstration: Deliverable 8.2. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/646482/results.

 Google Scholar

FLEXICIENCY Consortium 2019a. Cross-case Analysis of the Results from the Demonstrations: Deliverable 3.2. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/646482/results.

 Google Scholar

FLEXICIENCY Consortium 2019b. Report on the Results Achieved in the Italian Demonstrations: Deliverable 5.2. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/646482/results.

 Google Scholar

SMART-UP Consortium 2018a. Final Report WP6: Deliverable 6.4. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/649669/results.

 Google Scholar

SMART-UP Consortium 2018b. Final Status of Pilot Activities: Deliverable 5.4. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/649669/results.

 Google Scholar

SMART-UP Consortium 2018c. Impact Report: Deliverable 7.8. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/649669/results.

 Google Scholar

SMART-UP Consortium 2018d. Report on the Support to Households: Deliverable 5.3. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/649669/results.

 Google Scholar

Western Power Distribution and Regen SW (WPD&RSW). 2016. Sunshine Tariff: Customer Recruitment Learning Report. Exeter: WPD&RSW. https://www.regen.co.uk/project/sunshine-tariff/.

 Google Scholar

Western Power Distribution and Regen SW (WPD&RSW). 2017. Sunshine Tariff: The Customer Response. Exeter: WPD&RSW. https://www.regen.co.uk/project/sunshine-tariff/.

 Google Scholar

UPGRID Consortium. 2017. Report of Societal Research, Socioeconomic Impact of Smart Grid, Report of Transfer Replication Strategy and Communication: Deliverable: D9.3. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/646531/results.

 Google Scholar

Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN). 2018a. Solent Achieving Value from Efficiency (SAVE): PPR June 2018. Perth: SSEN. https://save-project.co.uk/reports-and-presentations/.

 Google Scholar

Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN). 2018b. Solent Achieving Value from Efficiency (SAVE): SDRC 3.2 Improve Customer Engagement. Perth: SSEN. https://save-project.co.uk/reports-and-presentations/.

 Google Scholar

Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN). 2019. Solent Achieving Value from Efficiency (SAVE): SDRC 8.8 Community Coaching Trial Report. Perth: SSEN. https://save-project.co.uk/reports-and-presentations/.

 Google Scholar

UK Power Networks. 2019a. Energywise: SDRC 9.4 – Customer Engagement. London: UK Power Networks. https://innovation.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/projects/energywise/.

 Google Scholar

UK Power Networks. 2019b. Energywise: SDRC 9.6 – Energywise Knowledge Dissemination Report. London: UK Power Networks. https://innovation.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/projects/energywise/.

 Google Scholar

UK Power Networks. 2019c. Energywise: The Final Energy Saving Trial Report. London: UK Power Networks. https://innovation.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/projects/energywise/.

 Google Scholar

Customer-Led Network Revolution (CLNR). 2013. Project Lessons Learned from Trial Recruitment: Customer Led Network Revolution Trials. Newcastle-Upon-Tyne: CLNR. http://www.networkrevolution.co.uk/resources/project-library.

 Google Scholar

Customer-Led Network Revolution (CLNR). 2014. Durham University Social Science Research: March 2014 Report. Newcastle-Upon-Tyne: CLNR. http://www.networkrevolution.co.uk/resources/project-library.

 Google Scholar

Neighbourhood Oriented Brokerage ELectricity and monitoring system (NOBEL). 2011. Evaluation Plan: Deliverable 7.1. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/247926/reporting.

 Google Scholar

Neighbourhood Oriented Brokerage ELectricity and monitoring system (NOBEL). 2012. Evaluation and Assessment: Deliverable 7.3. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/247926/reporting.

 Google Scholar

Flex4Grid Consortium 2018. Validation of Second Pilot: Deliverable 6.6. Brussels: European Union Publications Office. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/646428/results.

 Google Scholar

E-balance Consortium. 2017. Validation of the Proposed Use Cases and Business Models: Deliverable 2.5. Frankfurt: E-balance Consortium. http://ebalance-project.eu/deliverables.

 Google Scholar

Western Power Distribution (WPD). 2013. Smart Hooky: Closedown Report. Castle Donington: WPD. https://www.westernpower.co.uk/innovation/projects/smart-hooky.

 Google Scholar