Lucas Schwarz

With the Clean Energy for all Europeans legislative package, the European Union (EU) aimed to put consumers “at the heart” of EU energy policy. The recast of the Renewable Energy Directive (RED II) acknowledged the importance of energy communities for the energy transition and introduced new provisions for renewable energy communities (RECs), empowering them to participate in the energy market. This article analyses the progress of transposing and implementing key provisions of the RED II that apply to RECs in nine European countries and focuses on timeliness and completeness of transposition. It comprises both a qualitative and quantitative assessment covering (1) the definition, rights, and market activities of RECs; (2) key elements of enabling frameworks; and (3) consideration of REC specificities in support schemes for renewable energy. The analysis shows considerable variation in transposition performance between the analysed countries. The authors investigate the reasons for this variation and relate them to findings of European implementation and compliance research. Key factors identified include actor-related and capacity-related factors, institutional fit, and characteristics of the RED II itself. Future research in this field needs multi-faceted avenues and should pay particular attention to the influence of national governments and incumbents, not only in the transposition process, but already in upstream policy formulation at the European level.

Zusammenfassung: Das komplexe Standortsuchverfahren für ein Endlager für hochradioaktive Abfälle in Deutschland befindet sich noch in seiner Anfangsphase, die laut Gesetz im Wesentlichen auf nationaler Ebene angesiedelt ist. Doch bereits jetzt lassen sich auf Länderebene, in Regionen und Kommunen die unterschiedlichsten Aktivitäten beobachten. Sie alle eint, dass sie von einem Teilgebiet betroffen sind und vermutlich günstige geologische Eigenschaften für die Endlagerung besitzen. Das Spektrum reicht von der Bildung von Bürger*inneninitiativen über die Vergabe von wissenschaftlichen Gutachten, durch die die Eignung der eigenen Region geprüft werden soll, bis zur Gründung von Koordinationsstellen zur kritischen Begleitung des Verfahrens. Betroffenheit äußert sich damit sehr divers, wird aber in der Regel stark auf die politische Skala begrenzt. Wir argumentieren, dass Betroffenheit weiter gefasst werden muss, und entwickeln dafür eine Perspektive, die politische, räumliche, soziale und zeitliche Skalen umfasst. Diese Skalenperspektive erlaubt es, Betroffenheiten in ihrer Vielfalt und Weiträumigkeit verstehen zu können. Unsere These ist, dass Handlungsweisen und Entscheidungen, die nur wenige oder einzelne Betroffenheiten berücksichtigen, im Standortsuchverfahren zu kurz begreifen. Es bedarf kooperativer politischer Arbeitsweisen, um die diffusen Betroffenheiten in Bezug zueinander setzen zu können.

Citizen energy in general and renewable energy communities (RECs) in particular are becoming key vehicles for decentralisation, but also for the democratisation of the energy system. These initiatives are now more diverse than ever and are likely to continue to act as incubators for significant projects in the transition to a renewable energy system. Beside the legal, regulatory, and financial challenges, there are several socio-economic and regulatory barriers that hinder the implementation of community energy projects. For this reason, policy learning and the dissemination of good/best practices that are transferable also to other contexts are important. This is an aspect that has not yet attracted much investigation, and only a few studies have explored the importance of transfer activities for the implementation of REC initiatives and their motives. This article aimed to address this knowledge gap by focussing on the transfer processes of best practices initiated in a particular region and discusses how these can be adapted and transferred to other contexts. We analysed the transfer case of a community renewable energy initiative, the multifunctional energy gardens, from the Netherlands to the German federal State of Thuringia, and extracted lessons with an overall validity for the transferability of drivers and success factors. We show how examples from other contexts with similar enabling conditions can represent significant foundations on which to build an effective strategy and what framework conditions are necessary to enhance the uptake of pervasive community energy initiatives in regions with low community energy development.

Intergenerational justice is an inherent component of nuclear waste management. By looking at challenges of intergenerational justice at various stages of the repository siting process, the following thesis is discussed: Current generations can anticipate notions of intergenerational justice by applying high procedural standards to enable equitable distribution between generations and thus adequately recognize the needs of future generations. Applying high standards in this context means a constantly critical, reflexive, and open process, without bias or selfishness. This requires representative bodies such as the German Council of the Young Generation (‘Rat der jungen Generation’) that act as a bridge to future generations.

Nuclear waste management is a contested challenge that lasts for decades. Especially in Germany, the history of the usage of nuclear energy is conflictive and notions of justice are therefore omnipresent in the ongoing site selection process for a nuclear waste repository. Against the background of injustices caused by the deployment of nuclear energy, such as the obligation for current generations to deal with nuclear waste, questions of how to justly deal with nuclear waste and to find a just repository site arise. By conducting a survey among people that participate in the site selection process as well as people living in or representing an area that is still considered suitable, the assessment of different aspects of justice was evaluated. The role of a science-informed site decision without any political bias is considered highly important for a just site selection. Distributional aspects, such as notions of utilitarianism, retribution, or the exemption of environmentally burdened regions are generally not approved but more detailed questions have shown that such notions cannot be dismissed at this early stage of the site selection process. The difference for general agreement can also be observed for intergenerational recognition, as the recognition of future generations is regarded as necessary, but concrete implications (retrievability or enclosure) are assessed ambiguously. Although some factors of justice are assessed more importantly than others, the analysis has shown that the interrelations between the different dimensions of justice are manifold and the argument that one dimension can be substituted for another one is too reductive.

The political and social debate on nuclear energy in Germany has been characterized for many decades by a high potential for conflict and dissatisfaction. In particular, the controversies surrounding the Gorleben salt dome achieved international attention and altered the relationship between the population and political decision makers at the local up to international levels. With the Site Selection Act from 2013 (StandAG, first revision 2017) a new approach was selected in order to find a participative, inclusive and transparent search process for the best possible site of a repository for highly radioactive waste in Germany. In connection with this a self-learning process was proclaimed, based on a white (unprejudiced) map, which aimed to give the general public an active role; however, even the first interim report of the Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Disposal (BGE) and the publication of the multicolored map, in which geologically suitable areas were extensively shown, revealed a massive potential for conflict. Many citizens and activists, who had already protested against the Gorleben salt dome, in this early phase of the process criticized the lack of transparency and opportunities to voice an opinion on possible site regions. In order to counter these criticisms, the possibilities for a web geographic information system (WebGIS) application (interactive map) as an online platform were analyzed (Walkobinger and Tauch, 2018; Brown and Kyttä, 2018). The aim was to virtualy present available geodata (Chwalisz, 2021), which enabled people to contribute to spatial information (geological, superficial) and therefore to achieve an interaction and participation option with respect to the possible site regions. For this, available geodata relevant for the site search process, such as subareas (BGE, 2020), nuclear power stations (active/inactive, research stations etc.), storage facilities (repository, central, intermediate storage etc.), historically relevant sites (sites of protest, uranium-enrichment and preparation plants etc.) and basic data on orientation were used. Based on this, two possibilities for participative interaction were analyzed: (1) the inclusion of spatially located notes that contain own experiences or local knowledge (e.g. reports, concerns, suggestions, own expert opinions) and (2) the initiation of a platform for a spatially located discussion. Against the background of transdisciplinary research, the aim was to evaluate the participative value of this application in an iterative process, in which the research process is supported by an accompanying group from civil society. For this panel we want to present our results from the transdisciplinary research process. In addition to testing the suitability of such a participation mode, we want to analyze where problems arise and which information is necessary or can lead to conflicts (Griffin, 2020). Finally, we want to gain information on how such participation modes influence the quality of the dialogue and how they contribute to an overall perception of a legally acceptable process (Rzeszewski and Kotus, 2019).

The introduction of the Site Selection Act (Standortauswahlgesetz, StandAG) marked the initiation of a new repository site-selection process as well as the elimination of injustices of past procedures. In this context, the white map of Germany served as a basis for and symbol of an unbiased search process (Hocke and Smeddinck, 2017). However, the publication of the Sub-Areas Interim Report has revealed injustices in the handling of high-level radioactive waste. For example, there is criticism that the methods used to determine the sub-areas are immature or scientifically dubious. There are still fears that rural areas with a low population density will be favored, that there are imbalances in the site-selection process between West and East Germany, or that the discrepancy in the sense of fairness between regions that drop out of the process and those that remain will lead to problems in subsequent stages of the process. All of these positions show that there is inherent injustice in the search for a repository site: at the end of the site-selection process, a single site will receive all the high-level radioactive waste of the Federal Republic of Germany and thus bear the potential risks. People at this one site will live with the uncertainties associated with dealing with high-level radioactive waste. While the debate about geological or technical factors and challenges is multifaceted and specialized, the issue of fairness in the site-selection process is rarely addressed. However, fairness is immensely important to find a socially acceptable repository site. This paper thus focuses on the following questions: What are the prevailing notions of justice among those involved in the repository site-selection process? From the perspective of the involved parties, what characterizes fairness in the site-selection process? Answering these questions should contribute to a better understanding of whether the repository site-selection process is perceived as just, and what this depends on. Starting from Rawls' theoretical perspective of justice (2005 [1971]) and Latour's contribution of the values of modern people (2014), an empirical understanding of the stakeholders' perception and understanding of justice in the site-selection process is synthesized. In the context of this work, results of an empirical survey comparing different aspects of justice, e.g., procedural, distributive, intergenerational, and interpersonal, but also justice as recognition, are presented and related to adjacent factors, such as trust, emotions, or experiences. The empirical survey is intended to provide information on whether the perception of justice is more strongly dependent on the process, on one's own affectedness, or on adjacent factors.

The political and social debate on nuclear energy in Germany has been characterized for many decades by a high potential for conflict and dissatisfaction. Especially the controversies surrounding the Gorleben salt dome gained international attention and changed the relationship between citizens and political decision-makers from the local to the national level. With the Repository Site Selection Act of 2013 (StandAG, first amendment in 2017) a new approach was chosen to implement a participative, inclusive and transparent search process for the best possible repository for high-level radioactive waste in Germany. In this context, a self-learning process was proclaimed, based on a white (unbiased) map, which should give citizens an active role. However, the first interim report of the Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Disposal and the publication of the colorful map, in which geologically suitable areas were identified on a large scale, already revealed a massive potential for conflict. Many citizens and activists who were already protesting against the Gorleben salt dome criticized in this early phase of the process, the lack of transparency and opportunities to have a say on the possible sitting regions.To address this criticism, we want to provide an interactive map as an online platform that presents existing geographic data, that enables people to contribute spatially-located information (geological, on-surface), and thus a possibility for people to interact and participate regarding the possible siting regions. Therefore, we collect existing spatial data that is relevant to the ongoing process, such as possible siting regions (declared by the Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Disposal), nuclear power plants (active/inactive, research facilities, etc.), storage facilities (on-site, central, interim, etc.), historically relevant locations (places of protest, uranium enrichment & processing facilities, etc.) as well as basic data for orientation. We implement two possibilities for participatory interaction: (1) adding spatially-located notes that contain own experiences or local knowledge (e.g. reports, concerns, suggestions) and (2) initiating a platform for a spatially-located discussion. Against the background of transdisciplinary research, in an iterative process, we want to evaluate the participatory value of this application by consulting civic as well as scientific actors. We, therefore, employ focus groups with a transdisciplinary support group of citizens beforehand and surveys after using the application. For this panel we want to present our primary results from a first test with the aforementioned focus groups.Aside from testing the suitability of such a mode of participation, we aim to analyze where problems emerge, and which information is necessary and/or might lead to conflict. Finally, we want to gain insight into how such modes of participation influence the quality of dialogue and how it contributes to the overall perception of a procedurally just process.

Zusammenfassung: Die Energiewende stellt eine grundlegende Transformation in der Erzeugungs- und Verteilstruktur des deutschen Energiesystems dar. Durch verschiedene Fördermechanismen wie das EEG konnten neue, semiprofessionelle Anlagenbetreiber in den Energiemarkt eintreten. Standortentscheidungen wurden entprofessionalisiert und die Bedeutung von behavioristischen Standortfaktoren, wie z. B. das soziale Umfeld, die Sicherung der eigenen Lebensgrundlage oder die persönliche Konstitution gewannen an Bedeutung. Dieser Wandel stellt das Voranschreiten der Energiewende vor neue Herausforderungen. Da bisher wenig Kenntnis über das Handeln und die Faktoren, die zu einer Standortentscheidung bei neuen Anlagenbetreibern führen, besteht, ist es das Ziel dieser Studie, Anlagenbetreiber von erneuerbaren Energien nach deren Standortverhalten zu klassifizieren. Dazu wurden mithilfe eines standardisierten Fragebogens Anlagenbetreiber in den Planungsregionen Augsburg (Bayern) und Lausitz-Spreewald (Brandenburg) befragt. In der nachfolgenden Clusteranalyse wurden 4 raumrelevante Betreibergruppen klassifiziert: Überregionale, Regionale, Kommunale und Kleinbäuerliche Betreiber. Diese Gruppen unterscheiden sich hinsichtlich ihres raumrelevanten Standort- und Betriebsverhaltens und weisen daher unterschiedliche Eignungen für Räume mit unterschiedlichen Eigenschaften auf. Um diese Eignung räumlich sichtbar zu machen, wurde abschließend eine GIS-Analyse durchgeführt, um am Beispiel der Planungsregion Augsburg aufzuzeigen, welche Betreibergruppe an welchem Standort am geeignetsten ist. In Augsburg können somit die Kommunalen Betreiber aufgrund ihrer hohen Ortskenntnis und starken lokalen Eingebundenheit an vielen Standorten raumverträglich Energieanlagen errichten. Der vorliegende Ansatz bietet somit das Potenzial, den Ausbau der Energiewende raum- und sozialverträglich zu gestalten.