Urban Arena Wiki - User contributions [en]

Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups

2021-03-15T10:40:05Z

Nadia Ali:

<embedvideo service="youtube" alignment="right" dimensions="480">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Br1bc_5uvlw</embedvideo>

[[File:3 Build bridges.jpg.jpeg|400x400x|thumb|Build Bridges between Separate Stakeholder Groups]]

== General ambition ==

Metaphorically building bridges between separate groups of stakeholders often requires the establishment of formal or informal roles (institutionalisation) for individuals or organisations to intermediate, broker information and translate language between different stakeholders of a project. Such “intermediaries” play a crucial role by translating and enabling communication e.g. between civil society groups and governmental actors in order to realize a joint project. They have to be recognised in a way that both civil society groups and institutional/municipal actors feel heard and valued and thus build trust in stakeholders which follow different rationales and have developed different cultures of interaction. More important than how exactly the intermediary operates is its function, which at its core is often about enabling communication and furthering democratic participation on a decentralised, local level. Therefore an intermediary can be of different nature e.g a single project manager, a committee/platform, an open-meeting space, a dedicated organisation or even a well respected community member. In some cases, like in the fourth example below from London, local governments can also serve and work as an intermediary between different stakeholders. Such bridging roles are not exclusively found between institutional actors and citizens. Connecting/ translating language/ and intermediating between interests of different departments within a municipality can be equally important (to break up ‘silos’ or to counter ‘compartmentalization’).

== Examples ==

''' ''Anti-gentrification resistance'', Rome '''

The role of anti-eviction platforms was crucial as they contributed to voice the claim and to represent the interests of evicted/targeted citizens. The anti-eviction platforms liaised between them and the municipality as well as the Housing Authority. However, they did not have a formal role in influencing policy making [[Bottom-up resistance against gentrification in Rome#13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.|(Q13)]].

Learn more about this intervention:
* Take a look at the detailed [[Bottom-up resistance against gentrification in Rome]]
* Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Countering Gentrification: Community Based and Collaborative Methods]]

''' ''Vauban neighborhood'', Freiburg'''

The “Vauban city planning council” was a consultative committee consisting of municipal actors, local parliamentarians and citizens. It can be considered as an intermediary as it was a place for discussion and mediation between stakeholders [[Co-creation of a sustainable neighborhood in Freiburg#15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?|(Q15)]].

Learn more about this intervention:
* Take a look at the detailed [[Co-creation of a sustainable neighborhood in Freiburg]]
* Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Collaborating Across Institutional Boundaries: Co-Creating Sustainable Neighborhoods]]

''' ''Bürger Energie Berlin'', Berlin'''

There have been changes in terms of changing how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. Political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin gives particular attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. Now there is also legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models which the citizen energy movement has contributed to (Interview with a BEB representative on Sep. 9,2020).

Learn more about this intervention:
* Take a look at the detailed [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy]]
* Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation]]

''' ''Repowering'', London'''

The local government, Lambeth Council, which had a small group running a Low Carbon Zone served as an intermediary organization in the beginning which helped the team organize themselves and contact other relevant groups. The enabling configuration is the connectedness of this Council to various groups in the area. However, this group was small and had minimal capacity [[Inner-city community energy in London#13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.|(Q13)]].

Learn more about this intervention:
* Take a look at the detailed [[Inner-city community energy in London]]
* Check out the brief governance scenario called [[From Electricity to Empowerment: Democratizing Urban Energy Systems]]

''' ''Community Land Trust Models'', Brussels'''

The Community Land Trust in Brussels is a social real estate developer that builds affordable housing projects on collectively-owned land in Brussels for people with limited means. Collaboration between separate stakeholder groups is integral to the project as its managing board consists of civil society/housing organisations, private firms, social enterprises and the local government [[Community led affordable housing in Brussels#5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see Appendix 1: Three modes of governance)|(Q5)]].

Learn more about this intervention:
*Take a look at the detailed [[Community led affordable housing in Brussels]]
*Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Reimagining Affordable Housing from the Ground Up: Community Land Trust Models]]

''' ''Superblocks'', Barcelona'''

In several neighbourhoods, multi-stakeholder decision making processes have been formalized in local, regular working groups that are steering the design for their Superblocks. This was a result of the lack of participation processes in Poblenou and the municipality retroactively realizing that individual Superblocks have to be adapted to local particularities. The working groups also serve promotional purposes e.g, presenting the Municipal Action Plan to residents and engaging citizens, local associations, and local economy. They also try to find agreements between different voices and stakeholder interests [[Dealing flexibly with and learning from resistance in Barcelona#13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.|(Q13)]].

Learn more about this intervention:
*Take a look at the detailed [[Dealing flexibly with and learning from resistance in Barcelona]]
*Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Reclaiming Street Space: Cooperation for Neighbourhood Transformation]]

== Relation to justice in urban sustainability governance ==

This enabling governance arrangement tries to overcome injustices caused mostly by the [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities]] as well as [[Unfit institutional structures]].

Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities as a driver of injustice refers to the ways in which (access to) useful information and know-how around sustainable urban interventions, and their benefits, is not shared effectively or equally among social groups, sectors or disciplines and thus constrain the potential for both sustainability and justice. Creating bridging roles can help in overcoming barriers that certain disadvantaged groups might have, especially concerning the access to useful information of urban development projects around sustainability and justice. By translating language of practitioners/academia to one that disadvantaged groups can connect to in a better way, they can also express their needs and potential fears around these projects furthering especially procedural justice as well as justice as recognition.

Unfit institutional structures as a driver of injustice refers to those aspects or functions of organizations, public offices, administrations and authorities that deal with urban governance and stand in the way of achieving just outcomes in urban sustainability.
Trying to bridge between e.g different municipal departments is key to overcoming silo-thinking and for the development of projects that integrate justice in urban sustainability governance. Institutionalising a role to translate language between municipal actors and underrepresented groups is also central when trying to commit to a meaningful participatory process.

== Critical reflection ==

As mentioned, intermediaries have to meaningfully consider voices of all involved stakeholders of a project. They therefore possess a very powerful role, as they can steer the project in certain directions by favoring some voices over others. This is especially important in justice oriented sustainability governance as the past decades have shown that certain entrenched interests (economic, class-based, race-based...) have been given priority in urban governance. This means that intermediaries have to know about types of barriers that different groups of underrepresented citizens might face. These barriers can be very unique for e.g women, children, undereducated/poor residents or people who are underrepresented because of their race. Sometimes, exclusion of underrepresented voices may therefore even happen with intermediaries that are supposed to include very different groups of citizens, as it is very difficult to recognise these barriers if you come from a position of power yourself. Intermediators may also play a highly problematic role if they disguise or downplay actual differences in objectives between different actors (e.g. achieving ‘green growth’ vs. ‘overcoming capitalism’) for the sake of harmony, a feeling of common purpose or the success of tangible projects.
Furthermore, intermediaries are not always neutral/impartial. They might be biased toward one type of institutional logic (or a way of doing things) or toward the priorities of the intermediary host (or "bridging platform"). This may cause conflict and undermine the bridging efforts.
Finally, a general issue that stands in the way of more just and sustainable cities is the project by project basis on which municipalities operate. This prevents long-term improvement of projects and leads to the repetition of similar mistakes, also related to stakeholder communication processes. Intermediaries, which are exposed to a variety of voices inside their cities, need to outlive singular projects and act as the long-term memory of the city, possibly as an institutionalised entity. This would truly improve not only communication between citizens and municipalities, but also between different departments inside the municipality itself - breaking up compartmentalization.

==Examples==

''' ''Holistic Neighborhood Development'', Augustenborg'''

In Malmö, each department has its own unit designed for community engagement (e.g the Highway and Parks department, the Culture department…). On a city level, these units can be brought together through an intermediary organization connecting neighbours, the city, housing companies, local companies. These departments could then become the core of long-term structured development processes, acting as an institutionalized intermediary and memory while transferring knowledge in and between cities [[Holistic neighbourhood development Augustenborg#31. Suggestions regarding transferability.|(Q31)]].

Learn more about this intervention:
*Take a look at the detailed [[Holistic neighbourhood development Augustenborg]]
*Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Overcoming Silos in Urban Regeneration Projects: Holistic Neighbourhood Design]]

''' ''Vauban neighborhood'', Freiburg'''

The collaboration between citizens and the municipality was not always easy because each group had to adapt to the institutional logic of the others. For instance, when the GRAG invited a representative of Forum Vauban to take over a permanent seat in a consulting role, “Forum Vauban welcomed this decision of the city as a step towards them. Nevertheless they were not always satisfied, because the citizens were expected to adapt to the logic of urban planning which already existed in the city bureaucracy [[Co-creation of a sustainable neighborhood in Freiburg#23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:|(Q23)]].

Learn more about this intervention:
* Take a look at the detailed [[Co-creation of a sustainable neighborhood in Freiburg]]
* Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Collaborating Across Institutional Boundaries: Co-Creating Sustainable Neighborhoods]]

== Covid-19 connection/How does this enabling arrangement play out under the conditions of a pandemic? ==

Institutions and processes that rely on different people to meet are facing restrictions concerning the number of people that can participate or even making meetings impossible at all. Purely switching to online formats does not seem feasible here as these bridging organizations build on low-entry barriers. Online meetings/formats could be a higher hurdle especially for older or less educated people as well as people who do not speak the language properly making the work of bridging roles more difficult.

Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park

2021-02-08T12:05:20Z

Nadia Ali: /* e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation */

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs]]

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

'''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (neighborhood in capital city)”]'''

Peri-urban Natural Park of Collserola (Serra de Collserola Natural Park) in Barcelona (Naturvation_08).

'''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in ? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''

Green Space for biodiversity protection, ecosystem services provision, and Nature-Based Solution (NBS).

'''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''

The intervention aims to protect Barcelona's fragile Peri-Urban ecosystems for both social and ecological functions while preserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services to nearby residents (Naturvation_08). Since the enactment of the special plan for planning and protection of the natural environment in 1987, the park has become an area for recreation and connection to nature, promotion of the cultural and environmental values of the local population, and protection of an area of great ecological value (Naturvation_09).
Barcelona is a highly populated and dense city with relatively a few available green spaces. Collserola Park enhances the quality of life in the city, in particular through the forests' contribution to air pollution removal and urban cooling (Naturvation_08).

'''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''

The park’s new management activities started in 2010 and are still ongoing. The intervention was studied in the context of the NATURVATION project during the period 2016 - 2020 (Naturvation_08).

'''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''

Government-led (Naturvation_08).

'''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>

This intervention meets the WP5 criteria for a case selection/study criteria by highlighting the governance challenges associated with the addressing the need for green spaces for both recreational activities and biodiversity protection. In particular, maintaining a balance between different stakeholders' visions for the park and ensuring local citizens participate in the park’s planning and management (given the geographical scale of the intervention and the traditionally hierarchical governance mode of the actors) are noteworthy challenges.

'''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place-specific) governance intervention?'''

Naturvation Deliverables
*Urban Nature Atlas: A database of nature-based solutions across 100 European cities, 2018 (Naturvation_07)
*Taking action for urban nature - citizens engagement handbook, 2019 (Naturvation_01)
*International comparison of nature-based solutions project report, 2019 (Naturvation_06)

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

'''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

The intervention was studied by NATURVATION with funding by the European Union’s HORIZON 2020 Programme (Naturvation_08).
https://naturvation.eu/nbs/barcelona/peri-urban-natural-park-collserola

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

The intervention best fits under the “Nature-Based Solutions” approach. It has been studied under the NATURVATION project, which is mentioned as an example in the database of approaches.

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes, the four deliverables mentioned above (Q. 7).

'''9. Problematization and priority:'''

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Collserola Park is the largest green space in the metropolitan area of Barcelona, an area that is under significant demographic pressure (Naturvation_09). Rapid urbanization was seen as a potential threat to fragile peri-urban ecosystems and consequently to biodiversity protection, ecosystem services, and access to nature. Additionally, uneven representation of different visions - biodiversity protection vs. recreation - between different groups reflect wider tensions and inequalities that local citizens had problematized in the park's existing management (Naturvation_06:82).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Striking a balance between dual goals of biodiversity protection and fulfilling local citizens' demand for greater access to green spaces and recreational activities is the major motivation behind the intervention (Naturvation_08).
The Special Plan for the Protection of the Natural Environment and Landscape of Collserola Mountain (PepNat) was devised to address Collserola’s new status as a NATURA 2000 site, responding to the challenge of preserving biodiversity while providing much needed recreational ecosystem services, especially in relation to the high density of population in surrounding areas (Naturvation_06:19).

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
| Yes
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

'''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''

The intervention was initiated and is now jointly managed by the Park Consortium, composed of members from the Catalan government (Generalitat de Catalunya), the Barcelona Provincial Council (Diputació de Barcelona), the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona (AMB), and the adjacent nine municipalities (within the territory of the Park): El Papiol, Molins de Rei, Sant Feliu de Llobregat, Sant Just Desvern, Esplugues de Llobregat, Barcelona, Montcada i Reixac, Cerdanyola Del Vallès and Sant Cugat del Vallè (Naturvation_08).

'''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''

Park visitors and local citizens. Park visitors could be outsiders e.g. tourists or scientists. Local citizens not only benefit from visits but also from the ecosystem services that the park provides, such as moderating atmospheric temperature.

'''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| as part of consultative and scientific committees, see Q15
|-
| Religious organizations
| Yes
| as part of consultative and scientific committees, see Q15
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
| as part of consultative and scientific committees, see Q15
|-
| Social movements
|
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
|
|
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
|
|
|-
| For profit entreprises
|
|
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| The park consortium (see Q10) is responsible for the management and development of the Special Plan for the Ordering and Protection of the Natural Environment of the Parc de Collserola (Naturvation_08).
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
|
|
|}

'''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''

The interactions within the initiating consortium, i.e. between the Catalan government (Generalitat de Catalunya), the Barcelona Provincial Council (Diputació de Barcelona), the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona, and the nine adjacent municipalities (Naturvation_06:19).

'''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''

Citizens and visitors to the park are encouraged to leave suggestions for the park’s improvement at the information centre (Naturvation_07:59). Citizens are also asked for their feedback on the Park’s management plan (Naturvation_01:11). However, according to the NATURVATION project documentation, the Collserola Park's management plans are often only shared with the public at an advanced stage of development and in formats that are not easy to understand. According to NATURVATION’s informants, citizens in Barcelona were invited to comment on initial park management drafts where, despite the inclusive small group format, the discussion topics were pre-decided by the organizers, which obstructed effective participation (Naturvation_06:24).

'''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''

In terms of inclusive decision-making, the park's governance system is comparatively advanced and informed (Interview, 08.06.2020).
The Serra de Collserola Natural Park is governed by the following bodies:
*General assembly
The General Assembly is the Consortium’s supreme deliberation and decision-making body. It is made up of 10 members from Barcelona Diputació, 10 members from Barcelona Metropolitan Area, four members from the Government of Catalonia (Generalitat), one member from each city or town council affiliated to the Consortium and one member from an invited entity.
*Executive committee
The Executive Committee is an operational body established to monitor and develop mechanisms for the implementation of decisions taken in the General Assembly. The Executive Committee comprises of twenty-one members, of which at least three are representatives of Barcelona Diputació, three Barcelona Metropolitan Area, and three from the Government of Catalonia.
*Consultative committee
The Consultative Committee is the advisory body that brings together the social, academic, cultural, professional, and economic sectors, alongside private non-profit organizations that pursue goals of general interest that coincide with those of the Consortium.
*Scientific advisory committee
The aim of the Scientific Advisory Committee is to provide advice based on scientific knowledge to the governing and management bodies of the Natural Park in regards to particular action items. Its creation is pursuant to Article 13 of Decree 146/2010, of a declaration of the Natural Park of the Serra de Collserola (Naturvation_10).

'''16. Exclusion:'''

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

The Naturvation project reported the tokenized participation of local citizens in the Parks management and planning (Naturvation_06:24).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The analysis conducted by NATURVATION project lists following constraints to citizens’ participation::
*Park managers fear that the citizens' engagement (or inclusion) in the park’s planning could weaken their vision for longterm sustainability and biodiversity protection (Interview).
*Citizens' engagement in park management often depends on the interest and goodwill of individuals coordinating the plan.
*Lack of trust sometimes makes municipalities reluctant to genuinely engage with civil groups.
*A perceived sense among the citizens that the proposed plan would proceed regardless of consultation responses has also impeded public participation in the management of the Park.
*The contextual distance between civil groups and municipalities and any pre-existing contestations has influenced the participation process.
*Low turn-out rate is a factor of privilege: only those who could afford to volunteer or participate affected who could be present in NBS consultations and management planning (Naturvation_06:24).

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

'''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''

The EU directive 92/43 / EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora provided context for the creation of Natrua 2000: a European ecological network of special areas for conservation. Under this directive, the Agreement of the Government of the Generalitat de Catalunya of September 5, 2006 approved the proposal detailing places of community importance. This included the Serra de Collserola, which corresponds to the totality of the "Space included in the Plan of Areas of Natural Interest".
This territory has been managed since 1987 within the framework of a special protection plan. Its environmental protection dimension was then consolidated with the declaration of the Natural Park in 2010 (Naturvation_08).

'''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''

As already stated above (Q. 17), the EU Policy NATURA 2000 joins national implementation in local territories with multiple levels of regional, local, and municipal government agencies.

'''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''

On basis of the constitutional responsibilities (as prescribed by Spain’s constitution from 1978), regional and local government bodies have been involved in the implementation of the (European) NATURA 2000 policy within the context of the park's management:
Part VIII Territorial Organization of State:
*Section 140: Autonomy of municipalities
*Section 141: … a provincial government comprised of municipalities is designed to carry out the activities of the state.
*Section 142: local treasuries must have sufficient funds available in order to perform the tasks assigned by the law.
Chapter 3: Principles Governing Economic and Social Policy
*Section 45: Everyone has the right to enjoy an environment suitable for the development of the person, as well as the duty to preserve it.
*Section 45: The public authorities shall watch over a rational use of all natural resources with a view to protecting and improving the quality of life and preserving and restoring the environment…

'''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''

According to NATURVATION project documentation (Naturvation_06), constant coordination and collaboration between municipalities and regional bodies were very important to the success of the intervention - for instance, in overcoming differences in interests.

'''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''

The Diputació de Barcelona and the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona provide the annual budget to support the program of actions (Naturvation_08).

'''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''

The Naturvation project has documented that the park consortium adopted new and improved methods for engaging citizens in planning and managing the park (Naturvation_01:59).

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

'''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

The NATURVATION project has reported some controversies during the development of the Collserola Management Plan (PepNat) specifically focused on whether or not an urban park - highly accessible and with considerable grey infrastructure - should be subject to a stricter (biodiversity) protection regime.
Similarly, an interviewee for the study highlighted that there were conflicts between visions for the park from major park management entities i.e. the regional government, park authority, and the AMB. The regional government and the park authority favored more biodiversity protection for long-term sustainability, whereas the AMB favored fulfilling the demand for recreation and thus shorter-term social justice goals (given the small number of green spaces in the highly-dense and populated city of Barcelona).
The interviewee further flagged tensions around the central authority of the park. Collserola was first under the direct control of the regional government, but due to some political power influences, the park’s authority shifted from the regional to local government.
Finally, the NATURVATION project has also documented that the Collserola Management Plan (2019) left some issues unaddressed, such as the possibility of gentrification in the Park’s surrounding areas and illegal housing within the park's premises (Naturvation_06:26).

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The Naturvation project has documented the obscured socio-economic impacts of the Park’s management plans. The plans had gained popularity by promising multiple benefits, yet remained imprecise and neglected difficulties or discrepancies with implementing such measures (Naturvation_06:26).

*'''c. Public awareness'''

The proposal for adaptive management in Collserola’s PepNat introduced new concepts and ideas about park management that were too technical to understand by all stakeholders, giving rise to questions and contestation about their implementation and impacts (Naturvation_06:24).

*'''d. Finances'''

According to an interviewee, the park is the best financially-equipped park in the region.

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

We found no references to other types of obstacles

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

'''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Contestations around different visions for the park: biodiversity protection vs. recreation
| Stakeholder negotiations and park planning to strike a balance between both visions.
On the ground, the park managers are trying to reduce the number of trails, adopt a regulative approach, and restrict zones for bikers (additional signage) (WP5 Interview on 08.06.202).
|-
| 2. Questionable social benefits
| The Park Consortium designed more recreational activities for the Park’s visitors (Naturvation_09).
|-
| 3.Poor public participation and lack of awareness
| The regional and park authorities initiated a variety of public participation methods – incorporating discussions that were similar to round tables in order to debate and discuss its planning drafts with citizens.
The initiative benefited from numerous public meetings and workshops held on municipal premises adjacent to the park. However, it was found difficult to provide sufficient information for citizens to develop an informed perspective (Naturvation_01:11).
|-
| 4.
|
|-
| 5.
|
|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

'''25. What are reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''

The park currently hosts several plant and animal species; a large number of visitors are attracted every year (almost 30.000 in 2015); and programs several environmental education activities. The intervention is ongoing, below are expected impacts:
*Green space, habitats and biodiversity (SDG 15)
*Regeneration, land-use and urban development
*Inclusive and effective governance (SDG 16)
*Health and well-being (SDG 3) (Naturvation_08).

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

'''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

Not reported.

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

Not reported.

=== Learning content ===

'''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

The Park has adopted a lot of guidance from the region. The park authority was involved in various European networks for learning and knowledge exchange with other parks. In general, its management/governance system composed of various bodies has greater capacity for learning and exchange (https://www.europarc.org/case-studies/transition-agroecology-collserola-nature-park-enhanced-participatory-process) (Interview, 08.06.20).

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

Answered above under question number 27.

*'''c. from other knowledge gathering/research'''

The parks’ governance body has a scientific advisory committee that makes decisions for the park on the basis of scientific research (Interview, 08.06.20).

=== Learning process ===

'''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''

Not reported.

'''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''

According to the NATURVATION project, the park consortium has adopted new ways of citizens engagement in the park’s management planning. However, the issue is not yet fully addressed (6).

'''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''

It can be assumed that the numerous citizen engagement meetings and workshops organized in municipal premises by the park consortium (as recorded by Naturvation) added to the learning process (Naturvation_01).

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

'''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

The intervention could be replicated in other places in Spain or Catalonia. Interestingly, according to an interviewee, southern countries are not often exemplary in terms of sustainability governance and are rather replicating interventions from northern European countries i.e. Scandinavia, Germany, the Netherlands etc. This may change, as Italy especially has shown some interest in Catalonian sustainability interventions.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Other cities in Spain.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Johannes Langemeyer, Established Researcher, ICTA - UAB as a passive observer of the Collserola National Park on June 10, 2020, has made the claim of potential transferability of the intervention.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

'''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>

Some learnings from the intervention have been recorded by the NATURVATION project and are hence accessible via the respective website.

'''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''

Not reported.

== j) Structural learning ==

'''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

None

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

'''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''
This is a purely government-led intervention that benefitted from trans-organisational cooperation, but was challenged by a lack of effective citizens’ participation.

WP5 Interviewee (Johannes Langemeyer) on June 08, 2020: The biggest takeaway from this intervention in terms of governance arrangements is how bringing together different legitimate views, especially in combining long-term vision (from the province and with a view to protect a natural area) and short-term vision (from the municipality to mitigate the lack of natural areas and provide residents with a recreational area), could be a challenge.

'''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favorable (or unfavorable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurements. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs

2021-01-27T14:37:01Z

Nadia Ali: /* Do you want to learn more about this scenario? */

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park |real world case]].

[[File:Barcelona park picture.jpg|500px]]

'''Imagine your city where rapid urbanization and increasing density necessitates both protection of biodiversity and provision of green spaces for locals by means of a natural park.'''

'''How might this become a reality?'''

To address the potential threats of decreasing green spaces and biodiversity loss (Q3), municipalities and local and regional governments may come together to actively take measures for the protection of urban ecosystems. These ecosystems could be demarcated and managed for their best use, both for long-term sustainability by protecting the ecosystem and its species, and for immediate social needs (i.e. recreation and health) of the local people (Q10).

'''What potential policies and laws can support the cause?'''

The formation of a natural park in a highly dense city can be shaped and supported by some national and EU policies e.g. NATURA 2000 (Q18). It can be further upheld by the constitutional rights of citizens (to a healthy environment) and the responsibilities of governments at multiple scales to provide those services for the citizens (Q19).

'''How critical is balancing the interests of diverse stakeholders engaged in project management?'''

For the successful implementation of the intervention, the formation of a governance body comprised of multi-level government agencies and scientific, advisory, and consultative groups (engaging the members of civil society, research institutes, NGOs, and academia) would be crucial (Q9). Yet, striking a balance between different stakeholder visions for the park, particularly, biodiversity protection (for next generations/long term outcome) and social benefits (recreation and green space for present generation) could be a great challenge. It is possible that one vision overshadows the other due to exclusion of some actors at various stages of the park’s management planning process. As in many cases, park managers or other main stakeholders may avoid local citizens’ participation, fearing further complexity of the planning process. However, to avoid exclusion and to promote legitimacy and equality, effective, non-tokenistic participation of all stakeholders during all stages of the park’s management planning should be ensured (Q23).

'''What methods can ensure effective and productive stakeholders engagement throughout the process?'''

The park management team may maintain continuous communication about the park’s affairs by holding meetings and workshops, ensuring that the content is comprehensible for all stakeholders. For better decision-making, park authorities can create a network for learning and knowledge exchange between parks within and across regions/urban contexts. Further, learning and knowledge exchange across parks in Europe may help to overcome challenges and adopt more inclusive planning methods to achieve long-term sustainability and short-term social justice goals (Q25).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==
The scenario is based on a Peri-urban Natural Park of Collserola (Serra de Collserola Natural Park) in Barcelona. Barcelona is a highly populated and dense city with relatively few available green spaces. The intervention aims to protect Barcelona's fragile Peri-Urban ecosystems for both social and ecological functions while preserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services to nearby residents. Specifically, the challenge being addressed here is maintaining a balance between the use of the park for short-term social needs such as recreation and long-term sustainability needs such as biodiversity protection. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. To learn more, check out their website (https://www.catalunya.com/en/catalunya-convention-bureau-ccb) and a study conducted by Naturvation (https://naturvation.eu/nbs/barcelona/peri-urban-natural-park-collserola).

This scenario relates to an '''enabling governance arrangement:'''
*[[3) Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups]]: Constant coordination and collaboration between municipalities and regional bodies including scientific and consultative committees were very important to the success of the Collserola Natural Park - for instance, in overcoming differences in interests of biodiversity protection vs. recreational activities.

This scenario fits under the '''approach''':
*[[Nature-based solutions]]

It addresses some '''drivers of injustice''':
*[[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
*[[Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
*[[Unfit institutional structures]]

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs

2021-01-27T14:36:32Z

Nadia Ali: /* Do you want to learn more about this scenario? */

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park |real world case]].

[[File:Barcelona park picture.jpg|500px]]

'''Imagine your city where rapid urbanization and increasing density necessitates both protection of biodiversity and provision of green spaces for locals by means of a natural park.'''

'''How might this become a reality?'''

To address the potential threats of decreasing green spaces and biodiversity loss (Q3), municipalities and local and regional governments may come together to actively take measures for the protection of urban ecosystems. These ecosystems could be demarcated and managed for their best use, both for long-term sustainability by protecting the ecosystem and its species, and for immediate social needs (i.e. recreation and health) of the local people (Q10).

'''What potential policies and laws can support the cause?'''

The formation of a natural park in a highly dense city can be shaped and supported by some national and EU policies e.g. NATURA 2000 (Q18). It can be further upheld by the constitutional rights of citizens (to a healthy environment) and the responsibilities of governments at multiple scales to provide those services for the citizens (Q19).

'''How critical is balancing the interests of diverse stakeholders engaged in project management?'''

For the successful implementation of the intervention, the formation of a governance body comprised of multi-level government agencies and scientific, advisory, and consultative groups (engaging the members of civil society, research institutes, NGOs, and academia) would be crucial (Q9). Yet, striking a balance between different stakeholder visions for the park, particularly, biodiversity protection (for next generations/long term outcome) and social benefits (recreation and green space for present generation) could be a great challenge. It is possible that one vision overshadows the other due to exclusion of some actors at various stages of the park’s management planning process. As in many cases, park managers or other main stakeholders may avoid local citizens’ participation, fearing further complexity of the planning process. However, to avoid exclusion and to promote legitimacy and equality, effective, non-tokenistic participation of all stakeholders during all stages of the park’s management planning should be ensured (Q23).

'''What methods can ensure effective and productive stakeholders engagement throughout the process?'''

The park management team may maintain continuous communication about the park’s affairs by holding meetings and workshops, ensuring that the content is comprehensible for all stakeholders. For better decision-making, park authorities can create a network for learning and knowledge exchange between parks within and across regions/urban contexts. Further, learning and knowledge exchange across parks in Europe may help to overcome challenges and adopt more inclusive planning methods to achieve long-term sustainability and short-term social justice goals (Q25).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==
The scenario is based on a Peri-urban Natural Park of Collserola (Serra de Collserola Natural Park) in Barcelona. Barcelona is a highly populated and dense city with relatively few available green spaces. The intervention aims to protect Barcelona's fragile Peri-Urban ecosystems for both social and ecological functions while preserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services to nearby residents. Specifically, the challenge being addressed here is maintaining a balance between the use of the park for short-term social needs such as recreation and long-term sustainability needs such as biodiversity protection. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. To learn more, check out their website (https://www.catalunya.com/en/catalunya-convention-bureau-ccb) and a study conducted by Naturvation (https://naturvation.eu/nbs/barcelona/peri-urban-natural-park-collserola).

This scenario relates to an '''enabling governance arrangements'''
*[[3) Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups]]: Constant coordination and collaboration between municipalities and regional bodies including scientific and consultative committees were very important to the success of the Collserola Natural Park - for instance, in overcoming differences in interests of biodiversity protection vs. recreational activities.

This scenario fits under the '''approach''':
*[[Nature-based solutions]]

It addresses some '''drivers of injustice''':
*[[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
*[[Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
*[[Unfit institutional structures]]

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Make space for adaptation and experimentation

2021-01-16T12:29:41Z

Nadia Ali:

Examples from real world governance interventions:

*[[Regeneration of a deprived neighborhood in Rotterdam]]
*[[Holistic neighbourhood development Augustenborg]]
*[[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy]]
*[[Community led affordable housing in Brussels]]

== General ambition ==

Adaptability within initiatives for sustainable and just cities means leaving space for careful modifications and detours along their path to fulfilling overarching visions. In other words, initiatives may benefit from continuously and collectively deciding how much they are willing to adapt their plans based on new information and circumstances. Therefore, adaptability requires regular internal reflection amongst initiative proponents on shifting political, social, ecological and economic conditions, as well as on new developments and knowledge from within the project.
Openness to adaptation entails striking a balance between unresponsive devotion to pre-set agendas and a lack of persistence with decisions that have been made. A reflexive approach to adaptability can support initiatives’ efforts to remain viable, gain influence, and stick to their transformative ideas.
In many cases, a rudimentary level of adaptability is required to keep initiatives afloat amongst disadvantageous circumstances, such as the removal of important subsidies. In others, flexibility in short-term agendas may allow initiatives to take advantage of beneficial windows of opportunity. While this type of adaptability is reactive, many innovative experiences benefit from proactively adopting an experimental approach to project design and implementation. An experimental mindset uses a “probe and learn” approach and allows room for mistakes and new developments, while still working towards long-term visions. A critical mass of initiative proponents who uphold an experimental ethos will allow for more learning opportunities and creative ways to tackle seemingly unchangeable injustices and unsustainable practices.

''' ''Regeneration of a deprived neighborhood in Rotterdam'', Rotterdam'''

Project proponents (mostly local organizations) had an overall vision of the project development but it was not set in stone. The idea was to translate an existing methodology about transition management and to make it custom fit to the local context. For instance, the creation of a community center was not planned in advance and was envisioned and initiated by local stakeholders (Q.27 & 28). The project consortium was given a “carte blanche” for developing and experimenting the Resilience Lab. Whereas most funded projects are predefined and have to follow a pre-established framework, the freedom given to the consortium partners enabled them to progressively develop and adapt their methodology to the local context. This freedom was crucial to the success of the Reliance Lab. (Q13) The Resilience Lab - was a “test bed for new methodologies and innovative practices” (Q17)

Learn more about this intervention:
* Take a look at the detailed [[Regeneration of a deprived neighborhood in Rotterdam]]
* Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Nurturing Trust in Community-Driven Regeneration: Continuity amidst Institutional Uncertainty]].

''' ''Holistic neighbourhood development Augustenborg'', Augustenborg'''

An experimental approach was crucial; not being too uptight and learning from mistakes. This allowed for a lot of adaptivity in the project (Q20).
In the beginning of the project, a lot of people shared this experimental mindset. But when certain people were no longer involved in the project (e.g due to changes in department heads) and were replaced by others without this mentality, flexibility and adaptivity started to get lost in the chain of command. Flexibility in project implementation thus disappeared when the critical mass of people no longer adopted a shared sense of responsibility and were more afraid of making mistakes (Q20).

Learn more about this intervention:
* Take a look at the detailed [[Holistic neighbourhood development Augustenborg]]
* Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Overcoming Silos in Urban Regeneration Projects: Holistic Neighbourhood Design]].

''' ''Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy'', Berlin'''

when Vattenfall filed a lawsuit against the government's decision on remunicipalisation, there were high chances of the situation disfavouring BEB. Thus, to stay relevant and for achieving their overarching goal of green electricity production and provision, BEB is reinventing itself and working on numerous other projects including solar energy production. A BEB representative in an interview stated,
‘...adapting to the circumstances is very important because overtime ... circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly reflect whether your vision is still relevant and up to date and do we need to adapt and can we carry on' (Q25).

Learn more about this intervention:
* Take a look at the detailed [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy]]
* Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation]].

''' ''Community led affordable housing in Brussels'', Brussels'''

“We are constantly reflecting on things, perhaps too much! … For every part of the operation we regularly rethink how to do it. This happens at the level of the team, and also on the level of our working groups, partner associations, experts and other stakeholders, and the level of our board." (De Pauw interview) (Q26a)

Learn more about this intervention:
* Take a look at the detailed [[Community led affordable housing in Brussels]]
* Check out the brief governance scenario called [[Reimagining Affordable Housing from the Ground Up: Community Land Trust Models]].

== Relation to justice in urban sustainability governance ==

Adaptability in project design and implementation allows for responsiveness to changing social and economic conditions and better-positions initiatives to meet the shifting needs of those it serves. This governance arrangement attempts to address [[unfit institutional structures]]. The “unfit institutional structures” that were identified as a ‘driver of injustice’ refer to the strict top-down approaches which limit knowledge generation and exchange, and to rigid bureaucracies and regulatory barriers which often result in sustainability policies that fail to address the realities of vulnerable residents. Furthermore, experimental mindsets may allow for more innovative thinking around how to tackle injustice, based on ideas from various actors, including local residents. This could help in finding solutions which would not arise from more risk/mistake-averse approaches to project design and implementation.

== Critical reflection ==

When initiatives adapt too well to an environment that is structurally unsustainable and unjust, they risk to lose their transformative potential and integrity, e.g. as a ‘counter model’. Calls for adaptability can also help to pursue other agendas under the disguise of vague commitments to sustainability and justice. Due to flexibility in the design and implementation also unanticipated costs and challenges may incur.
It is rare that initiatives receive funding with “no-strings attached”, and instead most funded projects are predefined and have to follow a pre-established framework, consequently limiting adaptability. Therefore, funding may be contingent on measurement of progress with regards to reaching predefined goals. While stoically sticking to a preset agenda might limit creative opportunities for overcoming problems, being “too flexible” could give an impression of incompetence and disarray, therefore reducing stakeholder confidence and commitment to the project.

== Covid-19 connection/How does this enabling arrangement play out under the conditions of a pandemic? ==

This governance arrangement is essential for initiatives operating in the context of COVID-19 – a time of great economic and social uncertainty. The global pandemic necessitates a basic level of flexibility, as adaptation of many aspects, from daily activities to long-term strategic planning, may be essential for a project’s survival. Going forward, this situation presents a strong case for “building-in” opportunities for flexibility by leaving space for contingency plans, and encourages an experimental mindset to explore new ways of flourishing under vastly different circumstances.

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2021-01-16T12:01:00Z

Nadia Ali: /* 25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc. */

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation]]

==a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire a share in the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>'''====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Energy and Mobility Solutions
Governance and Participation Processes
Co=learning and Knowledge Brokerage

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31)yet there is the possibility for participation as a volunteer.

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin (TESS 4.pg. 15).
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB is now closer to its goal than ever. In 2019 the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure which is a victory on the way to remunicipalisation. After trying to fight this with a lawsuit and even winning its case before the regional court, Vattenfall dropped the lawsuit in 2020, as they fear that the legal process could drag on for years. This opens the possibility for BEB to resume negotiations with the country of Berlin about the operation of the grid. At the moment, the country is negotiating the price of the grid and the subsidiary company of Vattenfall which will influence future involvement of BEB.
The government’s decision on remunicipalisation and Vattenfall’s willingness to sell the energy network favors BEB, although previously, when Vattenfall filed a lawsuit against the government's decision on remunicipalisation, there were high chances of the situation disfavouring BEB. Thus, to stay relevant and for achieving their overarching goal of green electricity production and provision, BEB is reinventing itself and working on numerous other projects including solar energy production.
A BEB representative in an interview stated,
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*its campaigns work, and having started an important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increase in the rate of membership (therefore funding too), campaigns sponsorships, number of volunteers and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
Success in the future would mean to be a shareholder of the energy grid in Berlin or at a cooperation partner, supplying renewable energy (TESS 5, pg. 16).

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>'''====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2021-01-16T11:40:51Z

Nadia Ali: /* 17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?) */

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation]]

==a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire a share in the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>'''====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Energy and Mobility Solutions
Governance and Participation Processes
Co=learning and Knowledge Brokerage

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31)yet there is the possibility for participation as a volunteer.

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin (TESS 4.pg. 15).
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid yet, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>'''====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2021-01-14T13:33:31Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation]]

==a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire a share in the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>'''====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Energy and Mobility Solutions
Governance and Participation Processes
Co=learning and Knowledge Brokerage

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31)yet there is the possibility for participation as a volunteer.

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid yet, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>'''====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation

2021-01-14T13:20:38Z

Nadia Ali:

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy |real world case]].

[[File:BEB.jpg]]

'''Poto: Rupert Richter'''

'''Imagine your city where a group of highly motivated citizens with diverse expertise comes together as a cooperative to flag their concerns about unsustainable practices in a metropolitan energy system.'''

'''Can such a citizen-led cooperative challenge the neoliberal growth paradigm in the energy market?'''

It seems that the present energy market has various social and ecological disadvantages that are inflicted by the profit-oriented monopolized private energy market. This has spurred the engagement of citizens who are increasingly aware of their needs, capabilities, and political landscapes. Can they govern local energy systems themselves in ways that are inclusive, accessible, and sustainable in the long run? (Q9)

'''How can financial and human resources be generated for executing a citizen-based initiative?'''

Such citizen-led cooperatives can be extended and strengthened by acquiring financial and in-kind support from businesses, research institutes, NGOs, students and media (Q12). Cooperatives may also profit from inviting experts with experience in establishing similar interventions for guidance, which may be especially important during the early stages of the process (Q13). Furthermore, awareness campaigns with the help of the media can sensitize the general public and help to earn trust and support from political leaders (Q32).

'''What major policies and management approaches can keep an intervention relevant and alive?'''

Supportive EU directives such as the EU Renewable Energy Directive as well as national policies and constitutional rights (for example right to hold plebiscites, right to assembly, and right to form cooperatives) can provide an enabling environment for such interventions (Q19). Moreover, a flexible project management approach (changing with on-the-ground circumstances) without compromising on the fundamental vision and goal of an intervention can keep the intervention relevant and alive.

'''What actor constellations can be crucial for effective participation, governance, and decision-making?'''

Governing energy systems as a cooperative could allow for wide participation among the membership. It can have volunteers and cooperative members working in different capacities. General assemblies of the cooperative can allow for the participation of all members at different levels of the decision-making process. However, to ensure accountability, a supervisory board consisting of founders and highly engaged individuals could develop strategic plans and take action (Q15).

'''How can a citizen-based initiative cope with potential governance, financial, and political challenges?'''

The intervention may be confronted with various challenges, especially those related to financial arrangements, political culture, and regulatory procedures. Financial challenges could be tackled partly with shareholder/membership fees and partly by attracting donors and sponsors. Political and general public’s opinion can be influenced by running awareness campaigns, engaging with the media, and through outreach to individuals (Q23).
Introducing a citizen-driven management partner in the arena of public vs. private management could be highly challenging. However, different paths and approaches can be adopted to realize the overarching goals of an intervention while carefully aligning various stakeholders and securing wide public support (Q32).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

The scenario is based on citizen-driven intervention known as BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level. BEB aims to acquire a share in the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. Check out their website to learn more: https://www.buerger-energie-berlin.de/

This scenario relates to some '''enabling governance arrangements''':
*[[2) Make space for adaptation and experimentation|Make space for adaptation and experimentation]]: BEB applied for a Berlin grid concession directly. However, the government decided to provide the license to a city-owned public utility and a court case is pending. Consequently, BEB reinvented its plans for achieving a sustainable energy system in Berlin. They have, for example, started implementing solar power projects.
*[[3) Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups|Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups]]: There have been changes in terms of changing how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. Political documents, for example, the coalition agreement in Berlin have some changes, particular attention has been given to citizens’ participation in the energy sector.
*[[4) Commit to a meaningful participation process|Commit to a meaningful participation process]]: BEB would not have been able to establish and grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retirees who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
*[[5) Tap into existing community networks|Tap into existing community networks]]: BEB is supported by a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded fast in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics.

This scenario fits under the '''approaches''':
*[[Energy and Mobility solutions]]
*[[Governance and participation processes]]
*[[Co-learning and knowledge brokerage]]

It addresses a '''driver of injustice''':
*[[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism]]

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation

2021-01-14T12:57:46Z

Nadia Ali:

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy |real world case]].

[[File:BEB.jpg]]

'''Poto: Rupert Richter'''

'''Imagine your city where a group of highly motivated citizens with diverse expertise comes together as a cooperative to flag their concerns about unsustainable practices in a metropolitan energy system.'''

'''Can such a citizen-led cooperative challenge the neoliberal growth paradigm in the energy market?'''

It seems that the present energy market has various social and ecological disadvantages that are inflicted by the profit-oriented monopolized private energy market. This has spurred the engagement of citizens who are increasingly aware of their needs, capabilities, and political landscapes. Can they govern local energy systems themselves in ways that are inclusive, accessible, and sustainable in the long run? (Q9)

'''How can financial and human resources be generated for executing a citizen-based initiative?'''

Such citizen-led cooperatives can be extended and strengthened by acquiring financial and in-kind support from businesses, research institutes, NGOs, students and media (Q12). Cooperatives may also profit from inviting experts with experience in establishing similar interventions for guidance, which may be especially important during the early stages of the process (Q13). Furthermore, awareness campaigns with the help of the media can sensitize the general public and help to earn trust and support from political leaders (Q32).

'''What major policies and management approaches can keep an intervention relevant and alive?'''

Supportive EU directives such as the EU Renewable Energy Directive as well as national policies and constitutional rights (for example right to hold plebiscites, right to assembly, and right to form cooperatives) can provide an enabling environment for such interventions (Q19). Moreover, a flexible project management approach (changing with on-the-ground circumstances) without compromising on the fundamental vision and goal of an intervention can keep the intervention relevant and alive.

'''What actor constellations can be crucial for effective participation, governance, and decision-making?'''

Governing energy systems as a cooperative could allow for wide participation among the membership. It can have volunteers and cooperative members working in different capacities. General assemblies of the cooperative can allow for the participation of all members at different levels of the decision-making process. However, to ensure accountability, a supervisory board consisting of founders and highly engaged individuals could develop strategic plans and take action (Q15).

'''How can a citizen-based initiative cope with potential governance, financial, and political challenges?'''

The intervention may be confronted with various challenges, especially those related to financial arrangements, political culture, and regulatory procedures. Financial challenges could be tackled partly with shareholder/membership fees and partly by attracting donors and sponsors. Political and general public’s opinion can be influenced by running awareness campaigns, engaging with the media, and through outreach to individuals (Q23).
Introducing a citizen-driven management partner in the arena of public vs. private management could be highly challenging. However, different paths and approaches can be adopted to realize the overarching goals of an intervention while carefully aligning various stakeholders and securing wide public support (Q32).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

The scenario is based on citizen-driven intervention known as BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level. BEB aims to acquire a share in the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. Check out their website to learn more: https://www.buerger-energie-berlin.de/

This scenario relates to some '''enabling governance arrangements''':
*[[2) Make space for adaptation and experimentation|Make space for adaptation and experimentation]]: BEB applied for a Berlin grid concession directly. However, the government decided to provide the license to a city-owned public utility and a court case is pending. Consequently, BEB reinvented its plans for achieving a sustainable energy system in Berlin. They have, for example, started implementing solar power projects.
*[[3) Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups|Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups]]: There have been changes in terms of changing how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. Political documents, for example, the coalition agreement in Berlin have some changes, particular attention has been given to citizens’ participation in the energy sector.
*[[4) Commit to a meaningful participation process|Commit to a meaningful participation process]]: BEB would not have been able to establish and grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retirees who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
*[[5) Tap into existing community networks|Tap into existing community networks]]: BEB is supported by a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded fast in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics.

This scenario fits under the '''approaches''':
*[[Civil disobedience (YOU ARE WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PAGE!)| Civil disobedience]]
*[[Energy and Mobility solutions]]

It addresses a '''driver of injustice''':
*[[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism]]

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

File:BEB.jpg

2021-01-14T12:42:10Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali uploaded a new version of File:BEB.jpg

File:BEB.jpg

2021-01-14T12:41:11Z

Nadia Ali: /* Summary */

File:BEB.jpg

2021-01-14T12:33:52Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali uploaded a new version of File:BEB.jpg

== Summary ==
Poto: Rupert Richter

File:BEB.jpg

2021-01-14T12:33:32Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali uploaded a new version of File:BEB.jpg

== Summary ==
Poto: Rupert Richter

Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation

2021-01-14T12:26:58Z

Nadia Ali:

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy |real world case]].

[[File:BEB.jpg]]

'''Imagine your city where a group of highly motivated citizens with diverse expertise comes together as a cooperative to flag their concerns about unsustainable practices in a metropolitan energy system.'''

'''Can such a citizen-led cooperative challenge the neoliberal growth paradigm in the energy market?'''

It seems that the present energy market has various social and ecological disadvantages that are inflicted by the profit-oriented monopolized private energy market. This has spurred the engagement of citizens who are increasingly aware of their needs, capabilities, and political landscapes. Can they govern local energy systems themselves in ways that are inclusive, accessible, and sustainable in the long run? (Q9)

'''How can financial and human resources be generated for executing a citizen-based initiative?'''

Such citizen-led cooperatives can be extended and strengthened by acquiring financial and in-kind support from businesses, research institutes, NGOs, students and media (Q12). Cooperatives may also profit from inviting experts with experience in establishing similar interventions for guidance, which may be especially important during the early stages of the process (Q13). Furthermore, awareness campaigns with the help of the media can sensitize the general public and help to earn trust and support from political leaders (Q32).

'''What major policies and management approaches can keep an intervention relevant and alive?'''

Supportive EU directives such as the EU Renewable Energy Directive as well as national policies and constitutional rights (for example right to hold plebiscites, right to assembly, and right to form cooperatives) can provide an enabling environment for such interventions (Q19). Moreover, a flexible project management approach (changing with on-the-ground circumstances) without compromising on the fundamental vision and goal of an intervention can keep the intervention relevant and alive.

'''What actor constellations can be crucial for effective participation, governance, and decision-making?'''

Governing energy systems as a cooperative could allow for wide participation among the membership. It can have volunteers and cooperative members working in different capacities. General assemblies of the cooperative can allow for the participation of all members at different levels of the decision-making process. However, to ensure accountability, a supervisory board consisting of founders and highly engaged individuals could develop strategic plans and take action (Q15).

'''How can a citizen-based initiative cope with potential governance, financial, and political challenges?'''

The intervention may be confronted with various challenges, especially those related to financial arrangements, political culture, and regulatory procedures. Financial challenges could be tackled partly with shareholder/membership fees and partly by attracting donors and sponsors. Political and general public’s opinion can be influenced by running awareness campaigns, engaging with the media, and through outreach to individuals (Q23).
Introducing a citizen-driven management partner in the arena of public vs. private management could be highly challenging. However, different paths and approaches can be adopted to realize the overarching goals of an intervention while carefully aligning various stakeholders and securing wide public support (Q32).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

The scenario is based on citizen-driven intervention known as BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level. BEB aims to acquire a share in the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. Check out their website to learn more: https://www.buerger-energie-berlin.de/

This scenario relates to some '''enabling governance arrangements''':
*[[2) Make space for adaptation and experimentation|Make space for adaptation and experimentation]]: BEB applied for a Berlin grid concession directly. However, the government decided to provide the license to a city-owned public utility and a court case is pending. Consequently, BEB reinvented its plans for achieving a sustainable energy system in Berlin. They have, for example, started implementing solar power projects.
*[[3) Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups|Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups]]: There have been changes in terms of changing how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. Political documents, for example, the coalition agreement in Berlin have some changes, particular attention has been given to citizens’ participation in the energy sector.
*[[4) Commit to a meaningful participation process|Commit to a meaningful participation process]]: BEB would not have been able to establish and grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retirees who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
*[[5) Tap into existing community networks|Tap into existing community networks]]: BEB is supported by a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded fast in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics.

This scenario fits under the '''approaches''':
*[[Civil disobedience (YOU ARE WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PAGE!)| Civil disobedience]]
*[[Energy and Mobility solutions]]

It addresses a '''driver of injustice''':
*[[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism]]

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

File:BEB.jpg

2021-01-14T12:23:57Z

Nadia Ali: Poto: Rupert Richter

== Summary ==
Poto: Rupert Richter

Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation

2021-01-05T12:59:06Z

Nadia Ali:

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy |real-world case]].

[[File:BBerlin picture.jpg | 500px]]

'''Imagine your city where a group of highly motivated citizens with diverse expertise come together as a cooperative to flag their concerns about unsustainable practices in a metropolitan energy system.'''

'''Can such a citizen-led cooperative challenge the neoliberal growth paradigm in the energy market?'''

It seems that the present energy market has various social and ecological disadvantages that are inflicted by the profit-oriented monopolized private energy market. This has spurred the engagement of citizens who are increasingly aware their needs, capabilities, and political landscapes. Can they govern local energy systems themselves in ways that are inclusive, accessible and sustainable in the long run? (Q9).

'''How financial and human resources can be generated for executing a citizen-based initiative?'''

Such citizen-led cooperatives can be extended and strengthened by acquiring financial and in-kind support from businesses, research institutes, NGOs, students and media (Q12). Cooperatives may also profit from inviting experts with experience in establishing similar interventions for guidance, which may be especially important during the early stages of the process (Q13). Furthermore, awareness campaigns with the help of the media can sensitize the general public and help earning trust and support from political leaders (Q32).

'''What major policies and management approaches can keep an intervention relevant and alive?'''

Supportive EU directives such as the EU Renewable Energy Directive and national policies and constitutional rights (for example right to hold plebiscites, right to assembly, and right to form cooperatives) can provide an enabling environment for such interventions (Q19). Moreover, a flexible project management approach (changing with on-the-ground circumstances) without compromising on the fundamental vision and goal of an intervention can keep the intervention relevant and alive.

'''What actor constellations can be crucial for effective participation and good governance and decision-making?'''

Governing energy systems as a cooperative could allow for wide participation among the membership. It can have volunteers and cooperative members working in different capacities. General assemblies of the cooperative can allow for the participation of all members at different levels of the decision-making process. However, to ensure accountability, a supervisory board consisting of founders and highly engaged individuals could develop strategic plans and take action (Q15).

'''How a citizen-based initiative can cope with potential governance, financial, and political challenges?'''

The intervention may be confronted with various challenges, especially those related to financial arrangements, political culture, and regulatory procedures. Financial challenges could be tackled partly with shareholder/membership fees and partly by attracting donors and sponsors. Political and general public’s opinion can be influenced by running awareness campaigns, engaging with the media and reaching out to individuals (Q23).
Introducing a citizen-driven management partner in the arena of public vs. private management could be highly challenging. However, different paths and approaches can be adopted to realize the overarching goals of an intervention while carefully aligning various stakeholders and securing wide public support (Q32).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

The scenario is based on citizen-driven intervention known as BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level. BEB aims to acquire a share in the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. Check out their website to learn more: https://www.buerger-energie-berlin.de/

This scenario relates to some '''enabling governance arrangements''':
*[[B) Make space for adaptation and experimentation]]: BEB applied for a Berlin grid concession directly. However, the government decided to provide the license to a city-owned public utility and a court case is pending. Consequently, BEB reinvented its plans for achieving a sustainable energy system in Berlin. They have, for example, started implementing solar power projects.
*[[C) Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups]]: There have been changes in terms of changing how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. Political documents, for example, the coalition agreement in Berlin have some changes, particular attention has been given to citizens’ participation in the energy sector.
*[[D) Commit to a meaningful participation process]]: BEB would not have been able to establish and grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retirees who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
*[[E) Tap into existing community networks]]: BEB is supported by a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded fast in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics.

This scenario fits under the '''approaches''':
*[[Civil disobedience (YOU ARE WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PAGE!)| Civil disobedience]]
*[[Energy and Mobility solutions]]

It addresses a '''driver of injustice''':
*[[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism]]

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2021-01-05T12:43:11Z

Nadia Ali: /* 3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference] */

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system - a citizen-driven transformation]]

==a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire a share in the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>'''====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Civil disobedience and Energy & Mobility

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
BEB members who have financially contributed to the project by purchasing a minimum share of 500€ are more influential. The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>'''====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs

2021-01-05T12:37:08Z

Nadia Ali: /* Do you want to learn more about this scenario? */

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park |real-world case]].

[[File:Barcelona park picture.jpg|500px]]

'''Imagine your city where rapid urbanization and increasing density necessitates both protection of biodiversity and provision of green spaces for locals by means of a natural park.'''

'''How might this become a reality?'''

To address the potential threats of decreasing green spaces and biodiversity loss (Q3), municipalities and local and regional governments may come together to actively take measures for the protection of urban ecosystems. These ecosystems could be demarcated and managed for their best use, both for long-term sustainability by protecting the ecosystem and its species, and for immediate social needs (i.e. recreation and health) of the local people (Q10).

'''What potential policies and laws can support the cause?'''

The formation of a natural park in a highly dense city can be shaped and supported by some national and EU policies e.g. NATURA 2000 (Q18). It can be further upheld by the constitutional rights of citizens (to a healthy environment) and the responsibilities of governments at multiple scales to provide those services for the citizens (Q19).

'''How critical is balancing the interests of diverse stakeholders engaged in project management?'''

For the successful implementation of the intervention, the formation of a governance body comprised of multi-level government agencies and scientific, advisory, and consultative groups (engaging the members of civil society, research institutes, NGOs, and academia) would be crucial (Q9). Yet, striking a balance between different stakeholder visions for the park, particularly, biodiversity protection (for next generations/long term outcome) and social benefits (recreation and green space for present generation) could be a great challenge. It is possible that one vision overshadows the other due to exclusion of some actors at various stages of the park’s management planning process. As in many cases, park managers or other main stakeholders may avoid local citizens’ participation, fearing further complexity of the planning process. However, to avoid exclusion and to promote legitimacy and equality, effective, non-tokenistic participation of all stakeholders during all stages of the park’s management planning should be ensured (Q23).

'''What methods can ensure effective and productive stakeholders engagement throughout the process?'''
The park management team may maintain continuous communication about the park’s affairs by holding meetings and workshops, ensuring that the content is comprehensible for all stakeholders. For better decision-making, park authorities can create a network for learning and knowledge exchange between parks within and across regions/urban contexts. Further, learning and knowledge exchange across parks in Europe may help to overcome challenges and adopt more inclusive planning methods to achieve long-term sustainability and short-term social justice goals (Q25).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==
The scenario is based on a Peri-urban Natural Park of Collserola (Serra de Collserola Natural Park) in Barcelona. Barcelona is a highly populated and dense city with relatively few available green spaces. The intervention aims to protect Barcelona's fragile Peri-Urban ecosystems for both social and ecological functions while preserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services to nearby residents. Specifically, the challenge being addressed here is maintaining a balance between the use of the park for short-term social needs such as recreation and long-term sustainability needs such as biodiversity protection. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. To learn more, check out their website (https://www.catalunya.com/en/catalunya-convention-bureau-ccb) and a study conducted by Naturvation (https://naturvation.eu/nbs/barcelona/peri-urban-natural-park-collserola).

This scenario fits under the '''approach''':
*[[Nature-based solutions]]

It addresses some '''drivers of injustice''':
*[[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
*[[Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
*[[Unfit institutional structures]]

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs

2021-01-05T12:30:17Z

Nadia Ali:

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park |real-world case]].

[[File:Barcelona park picture.jpg|500px]]

'''Imagine your city where rapid urbanization and increasing density necessitates both protection of biodiversity and provision of green spaces for locals by means of a natural park.'''

'''How might this become a reality?'''

To address the potential threats of decreasing green spaces and biodiversity loss (Q3), municipalities and local and regional governments may come together to actively take measures for the protection of urban ecosystems. These ecosystems could be demarcated and managed for their best use, both for long-term sustainability by protecting the ecosystem and its species, and for immediate social needs (i.e. recreation and health) of the local people (Q10).

'''What potential policies and laws can support the cause?'''

The formation of a natural park in a highly dense city can be shaped and supported by some national and EU policies e.g. NATURA 2000 (Q18). It can be further upheld by the constitutional rights of citizens (to a healthy environment) and the responsibilities of governments at multiple scales to provide those services for the citizens (Q19).

'''How critical is balancing the interests of diverse stakeholders engaged in project management?'''

For the successful implementation of the intervention, the formation of a governance body comprised of multi-level government agencies and scientific, advisory, and consultative groups (engaging the members of civil society, research institutes, NGOs, and academia) would be crucial (Q9). Yet, striking a balance between different stakeholder visions for the park, particularly, biodiversity protection (for next generations/long term outcome) and social benefits (recreation and green space for present generation) could be a great challenge. It is possible that one vision overshadows the other due to exclusion of some actors at various stages of the park’s management planning process. As in many cases, park managers or other main stakeholders may avoid local citizens’ participation, fearing further complexity of the planning process. However, to avoid exclusion and to promote legitimacy and equality, effective, non-tokenistic participation of all stakeholders during all stages of the park’s management planning should be ensured (Q23).

'''What methods can ensure effective and productive stakeholders engagement throughout the process?'''
The park management team may maintain continuous communication about the park’s affairs by holding meetings and workshops, ensuring that the content is comprehensible for all stakeholders. For better decision-making, park authorities can create a network for learning and knowledge exchange between parks within and across regions/urban contexts. Further, learning and knowledge exchange across parks in Europe may help to overcome challenges and adopt more inclusive planning methods to achieve long-term sustainability and short-term social justice goals (Q25).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==
The scenario is based on a Peri-urban Natural Park of Collserola (Serra de Collserola Natural Park) in Barcelona. Barcelona is a highly populated and dense city with relatively few available green spaces. The intervention aims to protect Barcelona's fragile Peri-Urban ecosystems for both social and ecological functions while preserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services to nearby residents. Specifically, the challenge being addressed here is maintaining a balance between the use of the park for short-term social needs such as recreation and long-term sustainability needs such as biodiversity protection. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. To learn more, check out their website (https://www.catalunya.com/en/catalunya-convention-bureau-ccb) and a study conducted by Naturvation (https://naturvation.eu/nbs/barcelona/peri-urban-natural-park-collserola).

This scenario relates to some enabling governance arrangements:

This scenario fits under the '''approach''':
*[[Nature-based solutions]]

It addresses some '''drivers of injustice''':
*[[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
*[[Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
*[[Unfit institutional structures]]

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs

2021-01-05T12:29:33Z

Nadia Ali: /* Do you want to learn more about this scenario? */

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park |real-world case]].

[[File:Barcelona park picture.jpg|500px]]

'''Imagine your city where rapid urbanization and increasing density necessitates both protection of biodiversity and provision of green spaces for locals by means of a natural park.'''

'''How might this become a reality?'''

To address the potential threats of decreasing green spaces and biodiversity loss (Q3), municipalities and local and regional governments may come together to actively take measures for the protection of urban ecosystems. These ecosystems could be demarcated and managed for their best use, both for long-term sustainability by protecting the ecosystem and its species, and for immediate social needs (i.e. recreation and health) of the local people (Q10).

'''What potential policies and laws can support the cause?'''

The formation of a natural park in a highly dense city can be shaped and supported by some national and EU policies e.g. NATURA 2000 (Q18). It can be further upheld by the constitutional rights of citizens (to a healthy environment) and the responsibilities of governments at multiple scales to provide those services for the citizens (Q19).

'''How critical is balancing the interests of diverse stakeholders engaged in project management?'''

For the successful implementation of the intervention, the formation of a governance body comprised of multi-level government agencies and scientific, advisory, and consultative groups (engaging the members of civil society, research institutes, NGOs, and academia) would be crucial (Q9). Yet, striking a balance between different stakeholder visions for the park, particularly, biodiversity protection (for next generations/long term outcome) and social benefits (recreation and green space for present generation) could be a great challenge. It is possible that one vision overshadows the other due to exclusion of some actors at various stages of the park’s management planning process. As in many cases, park managers or other main stakeholders may avoid local citizens’ participation, fearing further complexity of the planning process. However, to avoid exclusion and to promote legitimacy and equality, effective, non-tokenistic participation of all stakeholders during all stages of the park’s management planning should be ensured (Q23).

'''What methods can ensure effective and productive stakeholders engagement throughout the process?'''
The park management team may maintain continuous communication about the park’s affairs by holding meetings and workshops, ensuring that the content is comprehensible for all stakeholders. For better decision-making, park authorities can create a network for learning and knowledge exchange between parks within and across regions/urban contexts. Further, learning and knowledge exchange across parks in Europe may help to overcome challenges and adopt more inclusive planning methods to achieve long-term sustainability and short-term social justice goals (Q25).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==
The scenario is based on a Peri-urban Natural Park of Collserola (Serra de Collserola Natural Park) in Barcelona. Barcelona is a highly populated and dense city with relatively few available green spaces. The intervention aims to protect Barcelona's fragile Peri-Urban ecosystems for both social and ecological functions while preserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services to nearby residents. Specifically, the challenge being addressed here is maintaining a balance between the use of the park for short-term social needs such as recreation and long-term sustainability needs such as biodiversity protection. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. To learn more, check out their website (https://www.catalunya.com/en/catalunya-convention-bureau-ccb) and a study conducted by Naturvation (https://naturvation.eu/nbs/barcelona/peri-urban-natural-park-collserola).

This scenario relates to some enabling governance arrangements:

This scenario fits under the '''approach''':
*[[Nature-based solutions]].

It addresses some '''drivers of injustice''':
*[[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]].
*[[Limited citizen participation in urban planning]].
*[[Unfit institutional structures]].

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs

2021-01-05T12:28:41Z

Nadia Ali: /* Do you want to learn more about this scenario? */

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park |real-world case]].

[[File:Barcelona park picture.jpg|500px]]

'''Imagine your city where rapid urbanization and increasing density necessitates both protection of biodiversity and provision of green spaces for locals by means of a natural park.'''

'''How might this become a reality?'''

To address the potential threats of decreasing green spaces and biodiversity loss (Q3), municipalities and local and regional governments may come together to actively take measures for the protection of urban ecosystems. These ecosystems could be demarcated and managed for their best use, both for long-term sustainability by protecting the ecosystem and its species, and for immediate social needs (i.e. recreation and health) of the local people (Q10).

'''What potential policies and laws can support the cause?'''

The formation of a natural park in a highly dense city can be shaped and supported by some national and EU policies e.g. NATURA 2000 (Q18). It can be further upheld by the constitutional rights of citizens (to a healthy environment) and the responsibilities of governments at multiple scales to provide those services for the citizens (Q19).

'''How critical is balancing the interests of diverse stakeholders engaged in project management?'''

For the successful implementation of the intervention, the formation of a governance body comprised of multi-level government agencies and scientific, advisory, and consultative groups (engaging the members of civil society, research institutes, NGOs, and academia) would be crucial (Q9). Yet, striking a balance between different stakeholder visions for the park, particularly, biodiversity protection (for next generations/long term outcome) and social benefits (recreation and green space for present generation) could be a great challenge. It is possible that one vision overshadows the other due to exclusion of some actors at various stages of the park’s management planning process. As in many cases, park managers or other main stakeholders may avoid local citizens’ participation, fearing further complexity of the planning process. However, to avoid exclusion and to promote legitimacy and equality, effective, non-tokenistic participation of all stakeholders during all stages of the park’s management planning should be ensured (Q23).

'''What methods can ensure effective and productive stakeholders engagement throughout the process?'''
The park management team may maintain continuous communication about the park’s affairs by holding meetings and workshops, ensuring that the content is comprehensible for all stakeholders. For better decision-making, park authorities can create a network for learning and knowledge exchange between parks within and across regions/urban contexts. Further, learning and knowledge exchange across parks in Europe may help to overcome challenges and adopt more inclusive planning methods to achieve long-term sustainability and short-term social justice goals (Q25).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==
The scenario is based on a Peri-urban Natural Park of Collserola (Serra de Collserola Natural Park) in Barcelona. Barcelona is a highly populated and dense city with relatively few available green spaces. The intervention aims to protect Barcelona's fragile Peri-Urban ecosystems for both social and ecological functions while preserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services to nearby residents. Specifically, the challenge being addressed here is maintaining a balance between the use of the park for short-term social needs such as recreation and long-term sustainability needs such as biodiversity protection. If you are interested in how obstacles have been overcome in this case, see Q24. To learn more, check out their website (https://www.catalunya.com/en/catalunya-convention-bureau-ccb) and a study conducted by Naturvation (https://naturvation.eu/nbs/barcelona/peri-urban-natural-park-collserola).

This scenario relates to some enabling governance arrangements:

This scenario fits under the '''approach''':
*[[Nature-based solutions]]. This approach refers to solutions for urban sustainability that are inspired and supported by nature, which are cost-effective, simultaneously provide environmental, social, and economic benefits and help build resilience.

It addresses some '''drivers of injustice''':
*[[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]].
*[[Limited citizen participation in urban planning]].
*[[Unfit institutional structures]].

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2020-12-23T16:27:12Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system - a citizen-driven transformation]]

==a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.
===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>'''====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Civil disobedience and Energy & Mobility

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
BEB members who have financially contributed to the project by purchasing a minimum share of 500€ are more influential. The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>'''====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2020-12-22T23:20:11Z

Nadia Ali: /* a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention */

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system - a citizen-driven transformation]]

==a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.
===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref> ====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Civil disobedience and Energy & Mobility

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
BEB members who have financially contributed to the project by purchasing a minimum share of 500€ are more influential. The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2020-12-22T23:16:38Z

Nadia Ali: /* a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention */

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system - a citizen-driven transformation]]

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

==='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''===

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

==='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''===

Energy

==='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''===

BEB aims to acquire the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref> ====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Civil disobedience and Energy & Mobility

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
BEB members who have financially contributed to the project by purchasing a minimum share of 500€ are more influential. The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Database of governance arrangements

2020-12-22T23:12:35Z

Nadia Ali:

Across Europe there is an inspiring array of experimentation with local governance arrangements for just and sustainable cities.

What is '''governance'''? It can be broadly understood as all formal and informal political processes (involving state and non-state actors) that lead to collective action.

On this database, you will find the summaries of results of a study on fruitful governance interventions for sustainable and just cities.

Would you like to get involved? We've asked some questions in the following sections, and you can share your suggestions with us via email to [[User:Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]]. If you haven't already, please feel free to join the [[UrbanA Community of Practice]].

<span style="color: red;"> '''DISCLAIMER: This page is currently under review! More detail to follow shortly.'''</span>

== Enabling governance arrangements ==

Enabling governance arrangements are combinations of actor constellations and institutional settings that have proven a potential to support urban governance towards just and sustainable cities in several cases of real-world (Governance Interventions)

Looking at a selection of eleven situated governance interventions for sustainable and just cities (as summarized in our scenarios), we asked:

''What key elements of governance arrangements enabled those interventions to come to fruition?''

You can find background information on eleven original, real-world governance interventions, our empirical basis, in our database of rich descriptions (for more information, please refer to the section methodology).

You will see references to these interventions in the form of brief examples to illustrate each enabling governance arrangement. The question numbers accompanying the examples, like ''“(Q18)”'', will lead you to the pertinent section of the respective description of a real world governance intervention.

We assume that the enabling governance arrangements were aimed at sustainable and just outcomes, which makes it likely that they can be useful for interventions with similar goals in other instances as well. However, we do not claim that these enabling arrangements are the sole factors for bringing interventions to fruition, as the latter will always be embedded in local contexts with place-based factors being important as well.

When clicking on one of the enabling governance arrangement A) - D) below, you will learn about the ambition this each enabling governance arrangement as well as about the scenarios and detailed descriptions of governance experiments it relates.

[[A) Create a comprehensive vision of change]]

[[B) Embrace flexibility in project design and implementation]]

[[C) Build bridges between separate stakeholder groups]]

[[D) Commit to a meaningful participation process]]

[[E) Tap into existing community networks]]

[[F) Develop resilient, and self-sufficient financing arrangements]]

Which further enabling governance arrangement do you consider crucial on the way towards governance for sustainability AND justice in cities?

== Governance interventions ==

We have selected eleven real-word experiments (mostly within EU-funded projects) and developed '''detailed descriptions''' which detail their governance variables and processes. We have also created a brief '''governance scenario''' per case studied. These scenarios share general insights in a narrative style, and we hope that they pique your interest and provide inspiration about what could be possible in your city!

We stress that the interventions presented below (the detailed descriptions and the corresponding scenarios) - '''are not exemplary “successful interventions”'''. Rather, they are regarded as '''general inspiration''' and real-world cases for testing out how to enable translocal learning.

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center; background-color:#efefef;"
! Detailed governance intervention descriptions
! Brief governance scenarios
|-
| 1.[[Bottom-up resistance against gentrification in Rome]]
| 1.[[Learning from successful community-based actions against gentrification]]
|-
| 2.[[Citizens rescuing and sharing food in Berlin]]
| 2.[[Expanding effective practices for food rescuing and sharing among cities]]
|-
| 3.[[Community led affordable housing in Brussels]]
| 3.[[A new take on affordable housing through community owned and developed dwellings]]
|-
| 4.[[Dealing flexibly with and learning from resistance in Barcelona]]
| 4.[[Inviting citizens to a transformation of street space - flexibly dealing with resistance]]
|-
| 5.[[Biodiversity protection and social justice in the Barcelona Natural Park]]
| 5.[[Negotiating green space development: balancing long-term sustainability and short-term social needs]]
|-
| 6.[[Co-creation of a sustainable neighborhood in Freiburg]]
| 6.[[Envisioning and co-creating sustainable urban neighborhoods by reaching across institutional boundaries]]
|-
| 7.[[Public-private partnerships for sustainability infrastructure in Athens]]
| 7.[[Bringing sustainable infrastructure to all - carefully engaging in public-private partnerships]]
|-
| 8.[[Inner-city community energy in London]]
| 8.[[From electricity to empowerment, community energy growing out of the inner-city]]
|-
| 9.[[Holistic neighbourhood development Augustenborg]]
| 9.[[Overcoming compartmentalization in urban regeneration projects for inclusive sustainability and resilience]]
|-
| 10.[[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy]]
| 10.[[Creating a sustainable energy system - a citizen-driven transformation]]
|-
| 11.[[Regeneration of a deprived neighborhood in Rotterdam]]
| 11.[[Trusting civil society and residents to co-shape regeneration projects in deprived neighborhoods]]
|}

Template for developing further descriptions: [[Rich description template]]

== Methodology ==

''(Coming soon)''

Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation

2020-12-22T23:09:45Z

Nadia Ali:

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy |real-world case]].

'''Imagine your city where a group of highly motivated and dedicated citizens with diverse expertise and knowledge come together as a cooperative to flag their concerns about unsustainable practices in a metropolitan energy system.'''

'''Can such a citizen-led cooperative challenge the neoliberal growth paradigm in the energy market?'''

It seems that the present energy market has various social and ecological disadvantages that are not well tackled by the profit-oriented monopolized private energy market. This leads to the engagement of citizens who are increasingly aware of political landscapes, their needs and capabilities. Can they aspire to govern local energy systems themselves, in ways that are inclusive, accessible and sustainable in the long run? (Q9).

'''How financial and human resources can be generated for executing a citizen-based initiative?'''

Such citizen-led cooperatives can extend and strengthen by acquiring financial and in-kind support from businesses, research institutes, NGOs, students and media (Q12). Cooperatives may also profit from inviting experts with experience in establishing similar interventions for guidance throughout the process especially at the early stages (Q13). Furthermore, awareness campaigns with the help of the media can sensitize the general public and help earning trust and support from political leaders (Q32).

'''What major policies and management approaches can keep an intervention relevant and alive?'''

Supportive EU directives such as the EU Renewable Energy Directive, national policies and constitutional rights (for example right to hold plebiscites, right to assembly and right to form cooperatives) can provide an enabling environment for such interventions (Q19). Moreover, a flexible project management approach (as per changing on ground circumstances) without compromising on the fundamental vision and goal of an intervention can keep the intervention relevant and alive.

'''What actor constellations can be crucial for effective participation and good governance and decision-making?'''

Governing energy systems as a cooperative could allow for wide participation among the membership. It can have volunteers and cooperative members working in different capacities. General assemblies of the cooperative can allow for the participation of all members at different levels of the decision-making process. However, to ensure accountability, a supervisory board consisting of founders and highly engaged individuals could develop strategic plans and take actions (Q15).

'''How a citizen-based initiative can cope with potential governance, financial and political challenges?'''

The intervention may confront various challenges especially related to financial arrangements, political culture, and regulatory procedures. Financial challenges could be tackled partly with shareholder/membership fees and partly by attracting donors and sponsors. Political and general public’s opinion can be influenced by running awareness campaigns, engaging with the media and reaching out to individuals (Q23).
Introducing a citizen-driven management partner in the arena of public vs. private management could be highly challenging. However, different paths and approaches can be adopted to realize the overarching goals of an intervention while carefully aligning various stakeholders and securing wide public support (Q32).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

Take a look at the detailed description of [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy]] that has inspired this scenario.

This scenario fits under the '''approaches''':
*[[Civil disobedience (YOU ARE WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PAGE!)| Civil disobedience]]. This approach refers to a public, non-violent and conscientious breach of law undertaken with the aim of bringing about a change in laws or government policies.
*[[Energy and Mobility solutions]]. This approach cluster addresses technological interventions that can support the transition to a low-carbon society.

It addresses a '''driver of injustice''':
*[[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism]]. This driver refers to processes of privatization, commercialization, budget cuts and state withdrawal from various sectors and how they can undermine urban sustainability, guided by an ideology of unfettered economic growth which often aligns with austerity policies.

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation

2020-12-22T23:06:17Z

Nadia Ali:

'''Imagine your city where a group of highly motivated and dedicated citizens with diverse expertise and knowledge come together as a cooperative to flag their concerns about unsustainable practices in a metropolitan energy system.'''

'''Can such a citizen-led cooperative challenge the neoliberal growth paradigm in the energy market?'''

It seems that the present energy market has various social and ecological disadvantages that are not well tackled by the profit-oriented monopolized private energy market. This leads to the engagement of citizens who are increasingly aware of political landscapes, their needs and capabilities. Can they aspire to govern local energy systems themselves, in ways that are inclusive, accessible and sustainable in the long run? (Q9).

'''How financial and human resources can be generated for executing a citizen-based initiative?'''

Such citizen-led cooperatives can extend and strengthen by acquiring financial and in-kind support from businesses, research institutes, NGOs, students and media (Q12). Cooperatives may also profit from inviting experts with experience in establishing similar interventions for guidance throughout the process especially at the early stages (Q13). Furthermore, awareness campaigns with the help of the media can sensitize the general public and help earning trust and support from political leaders (Q32).

'''What major policies and management approaches can keep an intervention relevant and alive?'''

Supportive EU directives such as the EU Renewable Energy Directive, national policies and constitutional rights (for example right to hold plebiscites, right to assembly and right to form cooperatives) can provide an enabling environment for such interventions (Q19). Moreover, a flexible project management approach (as per changing on ground circumstances) without compromising on the fundamental vision and goal of an intervention can keep the intervention relevant and alive.

'''What actor constellations can be crucial for effective participation and good governance and decision-making?'''

Governing energy systems as a cooperative could allow for wide participation among the membership. It can have volunteers and cooperative members working in different capacities. General assemblies of the cooperative can allow for the participation of all members at different levels of the decision-making process. However, to ensure accountability, a supervisory board consisting of founders and highly engaged individuals could develop strategic plans and take actions (Q15).

'''How a citizen-based initiative can cope with potential governance, financial and political challenges?'''

The intervention may confront various challenges especially related to financial arrangements, political culture, and regulatory procedures. Financial challenges could be tackled partly with shareholder/membership fees and partly by attracting donors and sponsors. Political and general public’s opinion can be influenced by running awareness campaigns, engaging with the media and reaching out to individuals (Q23).
Introducing a citizen-driven management partner in the arena of public vs. private management could be highly challenging. However, different paths and approaches can be adopted to realize the overarching goals of an intervention while carefully aligning various stakeholders and securing wide public support (Q32).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

Take a look at the detailed description of [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy]] that has inspired this scenario.

This scenario fits under the '''approaches''':
*[[Civil disobedience (YOU ARE WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PAGE!)| Civil disobedience]]. This approach refers to a public, non-violent and conscientious breach of law undertaken with the aim of bringing about a change in laws or government policies.
*[[Energy and Mobility solutions]]. This approach cluster addresses technological interventions that can support the transition to a low-carbon society.

It addresses a '''driver of injustice''':
*[[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism]]. This driver refers to processes of privatization, commercialization, budget cuts and state withdrawal from various sectors and how they can undermine urban sustainability, guided by an ideology of unfettered economic growth which often aligns with austerity policies.

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2020-12-22T23:00:02Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system - a citizen-driven transformation]]

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref> ====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Civil disobedience and Energy & Mobility

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
BEB members who have financially contributed to the project by purchasing a minimum share of 500€ are more influential. The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation.

2020-12-22T22:59:19Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali moved page Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation. to Creating a sustainable energy system - a citizen-driven transformation

#REDIRECT [[Creating a sustainable energy system - a citizen-driven transformation]]

Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation

2020-12-22T22:59:19Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali moved page Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation. to Creating a sustainable energy system - a citizen-driven transformation

'''Let us imagine a group of highly motivated and dedicated citizens with diverse expertise and knowledge coming together as a cooperative to flag their concerns about unsustainable practices in a metropolitan energy system. Can such a citizen-led cooperative even challenge the neoliberal growth paradigm in the energy market?'''

It seems that the present energy market has various social and ecological disadvantages that are not well tackled by the profit-oriented monopolized private energy market. This leads to the engagement of citizens who are increasingly aware of political landscapes, their needs, and their capabilities. Can they aspire to govern local energy systems themselves, in ways that are inclusive, accessible, and sustainable in the long run?

Such citizen-led cooperatives can extend and strengthen by acquiring financial and in-kind support from businesses, research institutes, NGOs, students, and media. Cooperatives may also profit from inviting experts with experience in establishing similar interventions for guidance throughout the process, especially at the early stages. Furthermore, awareness campaigns with the help of the media can sensitize the general public and help to earn trust and support from political leaders.

A flexible project management approach (as per changing on ground circumstances) without compromising on the fundamental vision and goal of intervention can keep the intervention relevant and alive. In addition to this, supportive EU directives such as the EU Renewable Energy Directive, national policies, and constitutional rights (for example right to hold plebiscites, right to assembly, and right to form cooperatives) can provide an enabling environment for such interventions.

Governing energy systems as a cooperative could allow for wide participation among the membership. However, to ensure accountability, a supervisory board consisting of founders and highly engaged individuals could develop strategic plans and take action. Yet, the intervention may confront various challenges especially related to financial arrangements, political culture, and regulatory procedures. Financial challenges could be tackled partly with shareholder/membership fees and partly by attracting donors and sponsors. Political and general public opinion can be influenced by running awareness campaigns, engaging with the media, and reaching out to individuals.

Introducing a citizen-driven management partner, thus overcoming the dichotomy of public vs. private management, could be highly challenging. However, different paths and approaches can be adopted to realize the overarching goals of intervention while carefully aligning various stakeholders and securing wide public support.

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

Take a look at the detailed description of [[Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy]] that has inspired this scenario.

This scenario fits under the '''approaches''':
*[[Civil disobedience (YOU ARE WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PAGE!)| Civil disobedience]]. This approach refers to a public, non-violent and conscientious breach of law undertaken with the aim of bringing about a change in laws or government policies.
*[[Energy and Mobility solutions]]. This approach cluster addresses technological interventions that can support the transition to a low-carbon society.

It addresses a '''driver of injustice''':
*[[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism]]. This driver refers to processes of privatization, commercialization, budget cuts and state withdrawal from various sectors and how they can undermine urban sustainability, guided by an ideology of unfettered economic growth which often aligns with austerity policies.

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2020-12-22T22:46:41Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation.]]

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref> ====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Civil disobedience and Energy & Mobility

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
BEB members who have financially contributed to the project by purchasing a minimum share of 500€ are more influential. The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Bottom-up resistance against gentrification in Rome

2020-12-22T22:44:48Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Learning from successful community-based actions against gentrification]].

== Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (neighborhood in capital city)”]'''====

The selected intervention refers to anti-gentrification resistances in Rome (Italy) with a particular focus on a district called Trastevere. Located at the heart of the city, the district is going through a long-lasting process of gentrification which also applies to the whole city centre of Rome. As a result of the increasing evictions, citizens have started to resist displacement, namely to “stay put” (AGAPE_01: 1)
The intervention has been primarily developed at the local level but tackles different scales. Organized resistances started in neighbourhoods (i.e. by tenant’s union, individual squatters occupying buildings). Anti-eviction platforms voice and convey these claims at the level of the district ( Trastevere district). These multiple pressures on public authorities (from the public housing authority, the municipality of Rome, the Lazio region) result in the implementation of regulatory policies at the municipal or the regional level (e.g. sanatoria to regularize squatters).

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in ? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

This intervention is implemented in the fields of housing policies and urban social policies, specifically in a context of austerity policies.

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference'''====

The district Trastevere is facing a gentrification process resulting from a roll-back of the state which does not protect the housing stock anymore and privatizes public housing. As a result, the prices of tenancies dramatically increased leading to a severe housing crisis and to the evictions of dwellers by the police forces. In this context, anti-gentrification resistances emerged from the civil society as a call for the right of local residents to remain in the district. The resistances address social justice in the following terms:
*Call for regularizing informal housing such as squatting in public housing estates.
*Tenant’s request of becoming owners of the public housing.
*Call to freeze and stabilize the prices of tenancies in public housing.

The sustainability issue is not directly addressed by the residents of the district. AGAPE addresses sustainability with respect to social justice in terms of “social sustainability”. The latter refers to the fight of low income and marginalized people struggling to survive day to day and to their right to “stay put” i.e. to remain in their homes.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

In Rome, anti-gentrification resistance progressively emerged in line with the gentrification process. This latter started from the 1990’s with a national law abolishing the rent control (i.e. guaranteeing moderate price rental) (AGAPE_01: 5) up to now. Specifically, AGAPE project focuses on ongoing resistances from 2014 (when the project started) up to now.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

The intervention is firstly characterized by non-government led governance mode and progressively turned to a co-governed or hybrid governance mode as soon as public actors engaged in the intervention.

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?'''<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref> ====

The case of Trastevere district is interesting because it specifically focuses on urban social (in)justices (i.e. participation, exclusion). It sheds light on the governance arrangements emerging from anti-gentrification practices in a specific context of crisis and austerity in southern European countries (SECs).

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

Primarily:
*AGAPE_01_Everyday resistances in gentrifying contexts_ANNUNZIATA_2019
*AGAPE_02_Garbatella. Heritage, Gentrification, and Public Policies in Rome, Italy_ANNUNZIATA_2019
*AGAPE_03_Resisting ‘Austerity Gentrification’ and Displacement in Southern Europe_ANNUZIATE_et_LEES_2016
*AGAPE_05_Philipp Katsinas reviews anti-gentrification workshop, ‘Staying Put’_KATSINAS_2017

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

The intervention has been developed in the framework of the EU-funded project AGAPE (2014-16).<ref>AGAPE project on the Cordis portal. Last view on: 10/02/20: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/625691.</ref> The project aims at exploring the development of anti-gentrification practices in three Southern European cities (SECs) (i.e. Rome, Madrid and Athens) in the context of the post-2008 economic crisis. Specifically, the project seeks to determine the repertoire of collective actions to “stay put” (AGAPE_01) and to resist displacement as well as to contribute to gentrification resistance theories.

Gentrification refers to “a process involving a change in the population of land users such that the new users are of a higher socioeconomic status than the previous users, together with an associated change in the built environment through a reinvestment in fixed capital” (Clark 2005: 263, in AGAPE 01: 3).

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

The intervention best fits under the [[Reconceptualising urban justice and sustainability]] and the [[Right to housing]]approaches. The project is explicitly mentioned in the database under these two approaches.

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes: AGAPE_01_Everyday resistances in gentrifying contexts_ANNUNZIATA_2019

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

In the case of the gentrification process in Trastevere, inequality and exclusion have been problematized by local inhabitants as well as researchers (from AGAPE project). They refer to the exclusions of lower income residents from Rome’s city center due to the privatization of public housing and the correlated gentrification process. Here, gentrification consists in a subtle transformation of the residential tenures and retails oriented to tourism and the eviction of the former working-class dwellers.

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

The achievement of justice has been named as a major motivation behind the intervention. The project AGAPE seeks to draw attention to anti-gentrification practices in Southern European cities (SECs) “with a particular focus on their incorporation into - and capabilities to inform - local policy makings”. Hence, the goal is to support and voice anti-gentrification practices and policies in order to counter “urban inequality” as well as to set up a “post-crisis urban agenda aimed at achieving social justice”. The intervention in Trastevere district in Rome has been selected because it sheds on social injustices but also because the intervention has a potential for informing about resistances and “alternative narratives” on counter-gentrification practices.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
| X
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
| X
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
| X
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
| X
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
| X
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

The intervention was initiated by some citizens in Rome, especially the local inhabitants directly targeted by the gentrification process and the evictions. Resisting gentrification includes a set of practices from “everyday” and individual to “collectively organized” actions i.e. within groups created for this purpose such as neighborhood organizations, community groups and tenants’ unions (e.g. The Comitato di Lotta per la casa del Centro Storico or the Network of San Saba) (AGAPE_01: 7). It is primarily a bottom-up intervention.

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

The benefiters of the intervention are the local residents themselves (i.e. people used to live in Trastevere district) who “stay put” and might have a chance to remain in the district. Scaling up, the intervention also benefits other low income and marginalized residents of Rome potentially targeted by gentrification and austerity and housing policies. Generally, counter this process will benefit everyone concerned by social justice.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
|
|
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
| X
| Organized anti-eviction platforms (i.e. platforms are citizens’ organizations including local tenants’ unions as well as anti-gentrification activists). They support and help targeted residents and voice their claim to fight evictions. They also advocate for social justice and housing solutions as well as pressure the Housing Authority and the municipality (AGAPE_01: 9).
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
|
|
|-
| Social movements
|
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
|
|
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
|
|
|-
| For profit entreprises
|
|
|-
| Local/regional government
| X
|
*The municipality of Rome. Its role is ambivalent. At first, it launched policies of public housing privatisation including the abolishment of rent control. Then, as a result of citizens’ protests, it started to mitigate the effect of gentrification by securing some public housing from privatisation.
*The Lazio region. Same as the municipality. After it had launched privatisation policies (e.g. allowing the municipality of Rome to sell 70% of its public housing), it started to mitigate those effects and regularised some informal housing.
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
| X
| National government enforced in the 1990s the right-to-buy legislation that regulates the alienation of and the privatization of public properties (AGAPE_02: 6).
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| X
| The Housing Authority of Rome. It is responsible for allocating and administering social housing. It enforced the rental-homeownership conversion (i.e. according to the right-to-buy national law) which consists in offering tenants of public housing to buy (at moderate price) their housing.
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

'''''(Please, note that italicized sections are speculative)'''''

''The residents organize themselves locally, especially within anti-eviction platforms that are responsible for helping residents in distress but also voicing their claim to the public authorities. Anti-eviction platforms are crucial mediators because they convey the claims of the most deprived inhabitants (e.g. isolated persons, squatters) as well as of the neighbourhood groups or tenant’s unions and are the identified interlocutors of the municipality and the Housing Authority. They perform this back-and-forth work.''

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

This intervention is based on and driven by citizens. The anti-eviction platforms as well as the community groups (e.g. of squatters) are the results of grassroot initiatives. The intervention of public actors (i.e. the housing authority and the municipality) to alleviate evictions or of external supporters (i.e. activists or researchers in the framework of AGAPE project) voicing the claims add to the already existing grassroot resistances.

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====
n/a

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Migrants (and to some extent gipsies) are excluded from the intervention. Although many are living in informal housing and are more likely to be targeted by evictions (as recalls the example of a massive and brutal eviction in the via Curatone which took place in August 2017) (AGAPE_01: 12), they are not included in resistance groups and are not voiced.

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The intervention is mainly implemented by community groups framed as neighbourhoods. The neighbourliness as understood and mobilized by local inhabitants is ambiguous. It recalls the idea of “‘popular’ neighbourhood” (AGAPE_01: 7) but without being really altruistic and supportive towards other social groups. As a consequence, neighbourliness might be exclusive in particular towards migrants who are not parts of this “historical working-class narrative” (which in this context is also related to collective memories of solidarity and resistance during the German occupation and to anti-fasciste pride) (AGAPE_01: 7).

The exclusion of some social groups remaining voiceless (i.e. migrants, gypsies) potentially breaks down solidarity among resistants. It also weakens and reduces the impact of anti-gentrification resistances since they only benefit (i.e. long-time local inhabitants sharing this “working class” narrative) and neglect specific social groups even more likely to face evictions.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

The intervention takes place in a context of economic crisis and austerity (post 2008 crisis) that reinforced the running process of housing shortages that started in the 1990's. The gentrification process fostered by the enforcement of neo-liberal housing policies (e.g. the abolishment of the rent control) and the multiplication of the evictions were the catalysts of the citizens resistances.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

The intervention is framed by urban social policies and housing policies. It addresses regulatory policies enforced both at the local level, specifically the abolishment of rent control (1992-1998) (i.e. referring to the abolishment of a housing price ceiling guarantee by the municipality), and at the national level, specifically the sale at moderate price of publicly owned residential stock (i.e. the right-to-buy national law, december 21, 1993, no. 560) (AGAPE_01, AGAPE_02: 1). In the framework of the right-to-buy national legislation, the local government established the rental-home ownership conversion that offers a cheaper buying price than the normal market and only applies to tenants.

These refer to economic policies because they provide favorable economic conditions for targeted actors (i.e. tourists, multinational companies and wealthy people) while they are economically detrimental for others (i.e. low income inhabitants).

Before the enforcement of the right-to-buy legislation, public housing was nationally administered by a public autonomous body called the Istituto Case Popolari (ICP)<ref>The ICP was created in 1903 to provide decent housing to the working-class and with a view to better control it (AGAPE_ 02).</ref>(AGAPE_02: 1). Entitlement to public housing was conferred in perpetuity to tenants which prevented them from being evicted. This system of tenure prevented the sell of units for profits (Annunziata 2019_AGAPE 02).

However, the privatization of public estates started in 1993 and was enforced in a national law. The denationalization of public assets was fostered in 2001 to solve the public debt (decreto Legislativo, september 25, 2001, no.351). “In 2006 the Lazio region, in charge of Rome’s building and planning regulations, approved legislation requiring that the city sell up to 70 percent of its public housing” and in 2007 a list of public properties to be sold was issued by the municipality (AGAPE_02: 7).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The privatisation of public residential property since 1993 was established in accordance with constitutional norms, in particular the art. 47 of the constitution. The national law of december 24, 1993, no. 560 defines the framework of the privatization of public estate. It gives regional governments the power to administer the alienation of parts of the public property (between 50 and 75 percent of it) (AGAPE_02: 12). Starting from a national impulse, the privatization of public housing is enforced in the regional (i.e. Lazio region) and municipal (i.e. Rome) legislation.

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policy makers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation etc.)'''====

The views of actors on the framework regulating the intervention is ambivalent from both sides (i.e. citizens and public actors). On the one hand, while citizens/ local inhabitants strongly denounce privatisation policies, some of those who can afford to buy (at moderate price) their (public) housing are likely to do it. On the other hand, although the municipality and the Housing Authorities implement privatisation policies, they are to some extent responsive to citizens claims and negotiate some sort of rental tenure (e.g. the regularization of informal housing or the re-housing of evicted inhabitants). These formal/ informal negotiations and mutual pressures between public actors and citizens result in a nexus of ordinary and collective resistances (AGAPE_01: 5).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

n/a

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

n/a

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

The above mentioned (Q.18) regulatory framework of privatization of public housing is detrimental for those who resist gentrification. In addition, the negotiated agreements between public actors and citizens can also hinder the resistance. For instance, the rental-home ownership conversion accepted by some tenants creates disagreement between citizens (between those who accept and those who decline) and contributes to weaken civil society resistances to gentrification.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

Legitimacy obstacles arise from public actors narratives. Moralizing and criminalizing illegal housing (AGAPE_01: 6) are the counterparts of the spatial cleansing (i.e. privatization and eviction) they perform. The stigmatisation of squatting practices is used to justify the eviction of illegal occupants of public housing.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

n/a

*'''d. Finances'''

For some inhabitants, staying put and anti-gentrification resistance consists in accepting the rental-home ownership conversion (i.e. according to the right-to-buy legislation) offered by the Housing Authority. However, only middle class tenants can afford to buy (even at moderate price) their own housing while people of lower means cannot even afford it (AGAPE_01: 8).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

The rental-home ownership conversion creates a solidarity break down among community groups. Buying their own housing represents a “deep cultural aspiration” (AGAPE_01: 11) for some tenants and will also prevent them from being evicted. A large number of them stand for it, especially middle class people who can afford to buy it. However, this standpoint is not shared by everyone. Specifically, those who cannot afford to buy - even at moderate price - their housing (i.e. people of lower means) or are not offered it by the Housing Authority (tenders are rather arbitrary) are very reluctant to the rental-homeownership conversion. As recalls S. Annunziata and C. Rivas Alonso, the right-to-buy at moderate price in prestigious locations (the city center of Rome) reduces the stock of housing available as well as “reduces future allocation and results in an individual appropriation of the value gap produced by de-commodified assets now solving social needs”(AGAPE_01: 11). The right-to-buy legislation is controversial because it breaks down solidarity among social groups and fosters gentrification rather than resolves it.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| Displacement and eviction of some illegal occupiers of the public housing.
| To (partly) curb the gentrification process and react to citizens' claims, public actors negotiated with community groups to find solutions against displacement. This includes the re-location of former residents in public housing or the regularization of illegal occupiers (i.e. in the framework of a sanatoria). The latter results from the call for anti-eviction moratoria issued by the anti-eviction platform as a way “to recognize the chronic housing deficit and the inadequacy of the public housing authority to act promptly in case of housing deprivation” (AGAPE_01: 9).
|-
| Eviction and public narrative criminalizing squatting practices.
| To fight eviction and pressure public authorities, anti-eviction platforms and other organized groups try to draw public attention to the housing issue. Inviting more actors to join the resistance and make it visible increases the critical mass and puts a greater pressure on public authorities. As an example, one anti-eviction platform (one of the most influential in Rome) asked the informal squatter to participate in a strike and to be actively a part of the collective struggle for housing. As a result, the request for housing is also voiced by those directly concerned as well as “ scandalize the housing authority for not being capable of providing responses” (AGAPE_0: 91).
|
|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

'''''(Please, note that italicized sections are speculative)'''''

''The asserted economic outcomes (not observed up to now ) are to stabilize and freeze the prices of tenancies in public housing in the city center of Rome, especially in public housing and to protect the latter from being privatized.''

The intervention aims at setting “social sustainability” (i.e. the right for local inhabitants to “stay put’) in cities in the policy agenda and at drawing attention to the detriment effects of the privatization of the public housing stock on low income communities. In Rome, it seems that negotiations started between anti-gentrification resistants/ activists and public authorities. However, no tangible outcomes are so far accessed (this is also related to the fact that AGAPE project is not yet disseminated to policy makers. Due to some constraints, the project is not yet over).

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

n/a

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

Anti-gentrification resistors in Rome did not reportedly learn from experiences elsewhere. However, researchers from the AGAPE project learnt from the cases of anti-gentrification resistances in the cities of Rome, Madrid and Athens (AGAPE_05).

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

n/a

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

n/a

*'''c. from other knowledge gathering/research'''

Yes, knowledge was acquired during a workshop organised in the framework of AGAPE. Held at Roma Tre University in Italy in October 2017, the gathering enabled activists from different resistances groups from Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece to meet and to exchange about their local experiences of gentrification and their ways to resist it: “activist groups analysed their campaigns, illustrating the varied experience of evictions and struggles in different states and the potential for cross-border synergies” (AGAPE_05).

Examples include among others “principles of assembly-ism, horizontalism, and non-party politics ” in resistance groups in Spain as well as “their campaign of escraches putting pressure on politicians, and their popular legislative initiatives to change the law regarding evictions by collecting signatures” ; or the “anti-eviction activism through the physical blockade of court proceedings” in Greece(AGAPE_05).

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

n/a

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

The obstacles (which were not really overcome) contributed to raise awareness especially among policy makers and public actors about the issue of gentrification and its consequences on the local population. This awareness allowed countervailing legal measures to be taken (as mentioned in Q.24).

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

*Workshops organized in the framework of AGAPE
*Mediated discussions between citizens and policy makers.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

The transferability of the intervention in a core element of AGAPE project. Indeed, the latter aims at issuing an “Anti-gentrification Toolkit for Southern European cities” (AGAPE_05) based on the fieldwork conducted in the three case study cities (including Rome’s experience). The toolkit consists of a framework of prevention, mitigation and civil disobedience experiences which occurred elsewhere. It provides tools and examples of good practices for local communities, activists and collectives to fight evictions and gentrification. It also addresses policy makers by providing them concrete ideas. Thus, transferability is central to the project but does not consist in transferring the “same” intervervention but rather to “providing the basic tools that local communities can draw on to fight gentrification and concrete ideas for policy makers” depending on local contexts.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability is primarily suggested in Southern European cities context because it is what the project is about. There is a form of unity in the gentrification process in SECs which is exacerbated by the debt crisis and the consequential austerity behaviors of nation states. Thus, the framework of AGAPE project including fieldwork and theoretical research as well as practical tools against gentrification process addresses primarily this particular kind of context. However, according to Prof. Loretta Lees, these learning experiences can apply to any urban context.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

The claim of transferability is included in the project call and has also been pointed out by the project leader.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

n/a

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>'''====

The findings and knowledge resulting from the project will be disseminated to city makers in the form of the Anti-gentrification toolkit.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

n/a

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

n/a

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

n/a

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

The findings and knowledge resulting from the project will be disseminated to city makers in the form of the Anti-gentrification toolkit.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2020-12-22T22:42:15Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation]]

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas include green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref> ====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community-based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Civil disobedience and Energy & Mobility

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
BEB members who have financially contributed to the project by purchasing a minimum share of 500€ are more influential. The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time-intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2020-12-22T22:19:55Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation]]

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

===='''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''====

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

===='''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''====

Energy

===='''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''====

BEB aims to acquire the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas includes green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

===='''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''====

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

===='''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''====

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

===='''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>====

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

===='''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''====

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

===='''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''====

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Civil disobedience and Energy & Mobility

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

===='''9. Problematization and priority:'''====

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

===='''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''====

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

===='''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''====

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

===='''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

===='''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''====

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

===='''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''====

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

===='''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''====

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

===='''16. Exclusion:'''====

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
BEB members who have financially contributed to the project by purchasing a minimum share of 500€ are more influential. The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

===='''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''====

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization that campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

===='''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''====

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

===='''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''====

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

===='''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''====

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

===='''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''====

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

===='''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''====

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

===='''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''====

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

===='''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''====

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

===='''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''====

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

===='''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''====

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

===='''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''====

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

===='''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''====

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

===='''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''====

Not reported

===='''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''====

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

===='''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''====

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

===='''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>====

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

===='''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''====

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

===='''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''====

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

===='''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''====

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

===='''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''====

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Citizens share in Berlin Energy Grid for sustainable energy

2020-12-22T21:56:44Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation]]

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

'''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (a neighborhood in the capital city)”]'''

The intervention is called BürgerEnergie Berlin (BEB). It is a cooperative that unites citizens in Berlin - the capital and a city-state of Germany - to work together for a sustainable, climate-friendly, and citizen-owned energy system. The intervention is based at the city level.

'''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''

Energy

'''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''

BEB aims to acquire the energy grid of Berlin and change the energy mix towards renewable energy. It intends to promote and support members economically and build a socially and environmentally compatible, decentralized, inexpensive, and nuclear-free sustainable energy system.
BEB advocates for a climate-friendly, democratic, and solitary energy supply, and the necessary energy policy to promote this, in Berlin. Focus areas includes green electricity, energy-saving, citizen power plants, and the Berlin power grid purchase.

In an interview, a BEB member stated,
''“One of our major aims has been to bring back the Grid in public ownership with the participation of a cooperative which is us. This is a tool to reach our overarching objective of having a sustainable and fair energy system in Berlin. We have approached this by putting a bid for the license of the grid”''.

'''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''

BEB was founded in December 2011 and is registered in Berlin's cooperative register of the district court under the number GnR 734. It formally started its groundwork in 2012. BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions.

'''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''

BEB could be categorized as a voluntary governance system - commitment or action beyond legal requirements is undertaken by private actors or non-governmental organizations (TESS 4, pg. 25).

'''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>

This is an interesting case in which citizens are empowered to be better providers of public services, i.e. providing renewable energy services at fair prices.
The intervention is a citizen-based initiative that recommends a hybrid system of governance, where citizens have equal voice and a significant share in profit.

'''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''

TESS Project:
*Deliverable 3.2: Analysis of success factors - summary reports on case study findings.
*Booklet - Community Climate Action across Europe.

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

'''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

BEB has been studied by a European project called Towards European Societal Sustainability (TESS). TESS was funded by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant number 603705 from 2013 to 2016. The project explored the role of community based initiatives (CBIs) in transitioning to a sustainable and low-carbon Europe.

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Civil disobedience and Energy & Mobility

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes

'''9. Problematization and priority:'''

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Privatization of energy markets, monopoly of a few private organizations over Berlin’s energy grid, and consequent unfair electricity prices in the city are challenged by this intervention, which brings instead an alternative democratic, citizen-centered, and decentralized energy governance system (TESS 4).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Yes, an explicit motivation of this intervention is to pursue justice by offering fair tariffs and distributing profits among communities, rather than profits centered in one big company.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
|
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

'''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''

This initiative was started in 2011 by a group of active citizens who sought to bring the energy grid under the management of the people, with a particular focus on the need for to transition to renewable sources of energy (BEB). BEB is still fighting against a concession to Vattenfall, and is working toward buying a share in the future concessions (TESS 4, pg. 15).

'''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''

Cooperative members are the immediate beneficiaries, whereas wider beneficiaries from fair electricity prices and green energy could include the citizens of Berlin.

'''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| Students of the field of renewable energy as volunteers in their free time
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
|
|-
| Social movements
| Yes
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
| Yes
| NetzGipfel
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
| Yes
| Naturstrom, EMobility, EWS Schönau
|-
| For profit entreprises
| Yes
| Supermarkets, StadtwerkeSchwäbisch-Hall
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| Local Municipality
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| Yes
| Volunteers, shareholders, and local citizens as part of campaigns
|}

'''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''

BEB has a large number of alliances including cooperatives, ethical banks, and renewable energy companies. The cooperative expanded quickly in numbers and donations through synergies with the networks established by other energy cooperatives and movements in the field of energy and politics. Schönau Cooperative has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. In order to reach out to people and inform them about the cooperative, they worked together with a media network summit called “NetzGipfel” and took part in demonstrations and other events to inform people about their initiative and thus recruit more participants (TESS 4, pg. 113). BEB would not have been able to establish itself nor grow the way it did without the contribution of volunteers. Most of them are students, mainly graduates from the field of renewable energies, but there are also retired people who want to use their free time to help the cooperative.
According to an interviewee working at BEB as a volunteer,
''“Among the most important factors for the cooperative being alive and working to realize its goals is that we have a lot of people as volunteers giving their time and putting in their efforts for instance, myself and other team members, although, their duties are being managed paid positions - two general managers – in BEB. The two general managers are essentially doing what needs to be done from coordinating all the activities to implementing new ideas and doing all the nitty gritty and everything. However, that wouldn’t have been possible without the larger membership base that is gradually increasing”''.

'''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''

Citizens have been the founders and drivers. The BEB works on the notion of democratic participation. Any citizen, including citizens from other parts of Germany and even other countries in the EU, could be the members of BEB with amounts starting at 100 euros (TESS 4, pg.17)

'''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''

BEB has a pyramid structure with only a few people on the top, consisting of founders and highly engaged people, and a broad base of members involved in the daily work. It has groups of volunteers and general assemblies, allowing for the participation of all members. However, it also has some key individuals who are driving the evolution of the organization through careful planning and more strategic actions.
Every member of the cooperative has votes for different levels of decision-making, depending on the number of shares purchased. BEB’s cooperative's supervisory board is democratically elected and decides on the use of profits, how to deal with losses, and general trend-setting decisions about BEB that are made at the general assembly (TESS 5, pg. 31).

'''16. Exclusion:'''

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Non-German speakers and those who cannot buy the 5 shares necessary (each cost 100 Euros) to be part of BEB’s decision-making process (TESS 5, pg.25).
BEB members who have financially contributed to the project by purchasing a minimum share of 500€ are more influential. The members who cannot afford that cost are excluded from certain decisions (TESS 5, pg. 31).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The cooperative is German-based and therefore operates in German.
Regarding the financial matter, it highly depends on its members’ ability to buy shares in the Berlin energy grid. As a result, members with greater financial contributions have a greater say in decision making.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

'''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''

BEB was driven by civil discontent and frustration with a profit-oriented company - Vattenfall - owning the energy grid in Berlin.
Over the past decades, the governance of electricity grids in German municipalities has been shaped by liberalization processes. In the 1990s, Berlin took a leading role in the privatization of public assets due to the city’s financial crisis post-reunification. The city failed to install appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for the emerging hybrid service provision systems. This resulted in poor performance on regional innovation and environmental modernization, along with limited economic benefits for the city. Consequently, growing discontent with private utility ownership and an increase in awareness of the potential financial benefits from grid operations have given rise to a resurgence of ideas around community management.
One of the principal actors in the resurgence was a roundtable organization who campaigned the city government to regain control of the power grid and create a municipal power utility. This began in 2010.

'''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''

BEB started in response to a change in the allocation procedure in the Berlin power system, which opened the possibility of buying and operating the Berlin energy grid. BEB benefited from Energietisch (a plebiscite held in 2013 voted in favor of remunicipalisation (83%) but missed the threshold of total numbers in favor), and the new allocation procedure for the Berlin power system (Strombetriebskonzession – current operating license). It took advantage of the window of opportunity, challenging single dichotomies of public versus private management by introducing a citizen-owned management partner (TESS 4, pg. 15).
Other policies shaping the intervention include the German Feed and Tariff Program (2000), which sought to achieve renewable energy goals of 40-45% by 2025 and 55-60% by 2035. This was followed by the EU Renewable Energy Directive 2009 that sets rules for its member countries to achieve 20% of renewable energy by 2020 (TESS 4, pg. 32).

'''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens, etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''

The initiative has been founded on the basis of the right to hold a plebiscite/referendum and the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (Art. 8) and association (Atr. 9). Moreover, BEB was launched to strengthen democratic participation and achieve a more progressive climate policy (TESS 5, Pg. 31). Other constitutional rights (given by the Federal Republic of Germany) include:
*Art. 8 freedom of assembly
*Art. 9 freedom of association
*Art. 5 Freedom of arts, expressions, and sciences
*Art. 42 The Bundestag - Public sitting (majority decisions)
*Art. 72 Division of powers between federation and Landers
*Art. 104 Apportionment of expenditure - financial system - Liability
*Art. 28 Land Constitution - Autonomy of Municipalities

'''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''

BEB is an initiative attempting to decentralize the hierarchic and monopolized energy market in Berlin. It is mainly the result of public distrust in private and government institutions and the realization of their responsibility and competency to provide themselves the basic services in a more efficient, effective, inclusive, and sustainable way.
However, given the current political system, BEB’s success is highly dependent on political decisions that take a long time to come along and is well-connected to formal political parties and actors. Therefore, it works extensively on making and maintaining contacts with public figures. Furthermore, the cooperative is perceived as a space for political training where people can meet and deliberate. In their attempts to buy the energy grid of Berlin, BEB cooperates with the city government and needs the collaboration of local officials (TESS 5, pg.17).

'''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''

BEB mainly depends on corporate members’ shares and trust funds for raising money to purchase a 25% share of Berlin’s electricity grid. Funding from sponsorships and donations are used for the awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. zuvielKohle) that are run by the cooperative (TESS 4, pg. 46).

'''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''

Awareness-raising campaigns have successfully reached a number of citizens and positively impacted the intervention with a large increase in volunteers and members. These campaigns focused mostly on the importance of safe, green, and democratically managed energy utility.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

'''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Legal arrangements related to bidding procedures are complex and time intensive. For instance, Vattenfall is currently taking legal measures against the preliminary operator of the grid "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" (who won the procurement procedure in 2019), but legally can only start operating when Vattenfall´s legal measures are overcome. An interviewee representing BEB said,
''“One of the barriers to the goals we have is the national regulation for grid ownership. The legal system doesn’t favor easy changes in the grid concession, especially if you are a newcomer it is very difficult to get into this area because you have to fulfill a lot of requirements which is a good thing actually because it is a very important public infrastructure consequently, it is important that one is highly capable of delivering a safe and secure energy supply”''.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The flow of information and transparency have also been flagged as shortcomings.

*'''c. Public awareness'''

Another barrier stated by an interviewee with a BEB member is the lack of public attention. The interviewee said that it had been a long time since they started as a cooperative in 2011 (officially started in 2012 and handed in the bid for the concession in 2016), and the senate in Berlin is still making a decision on who gets the concession for the grid. Many people in the public may have forgotten or are unfamiliar with this initiative, as it has not recently been in the public view or media attention.

*'''d. Finances'''

*Arranging funds to obtain 25% of the Berlin power grid. BEB is highly dependent on membership fees (or 100 euro) due to its legal restrictions to harness project funding for being a cooperative.
*Vagueness of the act for the economy of energy (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz) costs money (lawyer’s consultancy) and time.
*Vattenfall has been proposing numbers concerning the value of the grid that was not reasonable (TESS 4, pg.17).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

*The resistance against remunicipalisation is strong; companies and the Federal Cartel Agency question the suitability of citizens and cities as service operators and want to protect the current market structure
*Given most of the members work on a voluntary basis, BEB cannot be as professional as it could be due to the constant change of people. One of the board members states she has a lot of control over the cooperative, although the supervisory committee also plays a central role in management.
*Dependence of BEB’s success on political will. One interviewed politician says, “It could be too much money and work for them to handle” (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview, a BEB representative stated:
''“The political will is another barrier even though it is mentioned in the coalition agreement between the currently governing parties in Berlin that the cooperative ownership in the public grid is wanted. Politicians tend to forget this over time. Well, we are not in the spotlight of attention anymore and we have to remind them, especially if there is a legal procedure which is going on pushed by Vattenfall against the governments’ decision on giving grid concession to a public entity”''.

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

'''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Lack of required finance
| Run awareness campaigns to attract financial donations and membership share through the media. In an interview (Sep 9, 2020) a BEB representative illustrated that the cooperative uses 50% of the money from the membership shares to provide a financial base for the implementation of a project.
|-
| 2.Data security issue
| Ensured safety of data by changing BEB website’s security standards.
|-
| 3.Legitimacy/Transparency concern
| Flow of information and transparency matters have been addressed by issuing an internal newsletter.
|-
| 4.Resistance against the initiative by Vattenfall
| BEB is reaching enough people to influence political decisions and to strengthen its stand.
|-
| 5. Regulatory challenges
| Are being dealt with by the members of BEB with great patience and a significant amount of economic, time, and energy resource investment (TESS 5, pg. 25).
In an interview a BEB interviewee emphasized,
''“we demand better conditions in terms of better regulations and more favorable policies that would allow us to do certain things not only us but in general civil society and citizens to get directly engaged for example in electricity production from solar PV. We try to campaign for that, we try and propose what is possible and we do it regardless of the legal system which is our identity as a cooperative to do it anyway. if the state doesn’t provide us with the rights and enabling conditions we try to generate them ourselves. But this is really difficult in the energy area because it is strongly regulated in an Urban context where you have to deal with a lot of actors and lot of regulations and it is quite complex”.''

|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

'''25. What are the reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''

BEB has not reached its goal of purchasing the Berlin energy grid, but its success could be measured in terms of its campaigns work, and in sparking important discussion on public participation in decisions concerning energy infrastructure.
Below are some achievements of the milestones accomplished by BEB:
*Collection of 11 million Euros in 2015 (100 million Euros is the target) to buy 25% of the energy grid.
*Increases in the rate of membership (and therefore funding), campaign sponsorships, a number of volunteers, and media attention are the biggest achievements of BE.
*Success in the future would mean being a shareholder or cooperation partner of a renewable-focused energy grid in Berlin (TESS 5, pg. 16). In 2019, the "Landesbetrieb Berlin Energie" won the procurement procedure, an important victory on the path to remunicipalization.
After an interview with a BEB member, it has been found that the BEB has not been selected for the grid concession, which was one of their goals. The government has made the decision to give the license to a city-owned public utility. But the decision is not yet final as Vattenfall, the current grid operating company, has filed a lawsuit against the government’s decision. BEB, however, supports the government decision, the BEB representative said,
''“The government has made a great decision. It is also part of our campaign. We have to reinvent ourselves a little bit because our overarching goal is not only operating and having a grid concession but also contributing to a sustainable energy system in Berlin. So we have started implementing for example solar power projects and there we have a completely different set of barriers. Having an overarching goal, a vision, and being able to adapt that to the circumstances is very important because over time (that is my personal feeling) the circumstances change a lot. You have to constantly think if our vision is still relevant and up to date, do we need to adapt, and can we carry on”.''

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

'''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

No

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The intervention is building upon previous experience from the town of Schönau, though it from a different context: Schönau is a small town whereas Berlin is a city state. In an interview, a BEB member highlighted that Schönau EVS had provided great support. He further elaborated ''“…. Schönau EVS pioneers were the ones most experienced in operating the grid, campaigning against nuclear power, campaigning in favor of sustainable energy, and also successfully winning the concession of their grid. They have supported us from the beginning. They have also given guidance during the whole journey and provided resources we couldn’t have come up with ourselves. The concession of a grid is an extremely difficult matter. One has to have very very specific detailed legal knowledge which demands a lot of resources. In that sense, we have been directly supported and inspired by EVS Schonau. We have also shared learnings in a different context with people working on a similar initiative in Hamburg. Likewise, there are a lot of examples in Germany especially with cooperatives implementing projects for renewable energy generation and there is an active process of sharing best practices and learning so on”.''

=== Learning content ===

'''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

N/A.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

EWS Schönau has been instrumental in the success of BEB by passing on knowledge and expertise. One of the founders of Schönau is even a board member of BEB. In order to perform outreach and recruit participants in the cooperative, BEB worked together with the media organization “NetzGipfel” (Network Summits), and participated in demonstrations and other events. A BEB representative mentioned,
''“From my own experience over the years a huge amount of interest from all kind of different actors in what BEB has been shared in forms of: participation in research projects, presenting our experiences before different groups varying from a class of school children who would like to learn about the project to a delegation from a South Korean city, civil servants visiting Berlin on a study trip to journalists, media, and so on. We are constantly in touch with the responsible people from the Berlin city administration especially in the area of energy and we also participate in civil society platforms, forums and events”.''

*'''c. from other knowledge gatherings/research'''

Not reported.

=== Learning process ===

'''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''

The intervention had not been replicated elsewhere yet.

'''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''

Not reported

'''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''

No learning tools documented or reported.

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

'''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

BEB is a replication of another cooperative from the town of Schönau that successfully purchased the town’s power grid. A similar initiative has been undertaken in Hamburg. So, it can be said that the initiative is highly replicable, however, transferability/replicability has not been suggested.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Transferability in the same context has been recommended.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Not reported.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

'''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>

As part of TESS study, BEB members had been interviewed about the intervention including confronted challenges/obstacles.

'''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''

BEB’s goal has not yet been achieved therefore the replication of the specific intervention has not been recorded.

== j) Structural learning ==

'''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

In response, see the statement below by an interviewee from BEB:
''"I would argue that there have been changes in terms of how the energy system can be imagined, who owns it and who participates in it. There have also been changes in political documents for example the coalition agreement in Berlin especially, there has been quite a lot of public and policy attention to citizens’ participation in the energy sector. There is legislation for tenants’ energy self-consumption models contributed by the citizen energy movement. BEB is part of that movement".''

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

'''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''

The initiative aims to build and improve alternatives in parallel to the existing governance structure. They pose a decentralized energy system (and economy) that focuses on supply-driven-demand, not demand-driven-supply.

'''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''

A citizens-driven initiative based on a decentralized bottom-up governance system, standing firm to achieve envisioned goals even when things didn’t work as expected and planned.

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Making local energy systems inclusively sustainable - by ourselves, with a little help by friends

2020-12-22T21:55:46Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali moved page Making local energy systems inclusively sustainable - by ourselves, with a little help by friends to Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation.

#REDIRECT [[Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation.]]

Creating a Sustainable Energy System: a Citizen-Driven Transformation

2020-12-22T21:55:46Z

Dealing flexibly with and learning from resistance in Barcelona

2020-12-22T21:51:34Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Inviting citizens to a transformation of street space - flexibly dealing with resistance]].

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

'''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (neighborhood in capital city)”]'''

This is about the creation of Superblocks in Barcelona, a mobility concept that tries to restructure the city in 503 so-called Superblocks, lowering the amount of cars and returning public functions such as leisure and neighborhood activities to city streets.
Each of the 503 Superblocks will be different in its exact structure as they will be adapted to neighbourhood contexts.

The first Superblock in Barcelona was established in Ciutat Vella (El Born) in 1993 and in Vila de Gràcia in 2003 (SMARTEES_01: A114)
Between 2012 - 2015 the Superblock Programme started with four pilot areas in:
*La Maternitat i Sant Ramón, in Les Corts
*Sants-Hostrafrancs, in Sants-Montjuïc
*DiagonalPoblenou, in Sant Martí,
*Esquerra de l’Eixample, in Eixample (Ajuntament_01: 21)

From 2016 to 2019, the large-scale Municipal Action Plan, “Let's fill the streets with life. The implementation of the Superblock Model in Barcelona” (Ajuntament_01: 1) continued to work on creating and implementing Superblocks. They worked in other areas in the city, piloting the program such in the Poblenou neighborhood.

'''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in ? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''

Mobility and transport.

'''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''

The municipality of Barcelona summarizes the strategic goals of the intervention in four points (Ajuntament_01: 25f).:
*Improving the habitability of public spaces
This is about boosting the use of public spaces (e.g for children, meeting, resting etc.) by prioritizing pedestrians, increasing traffic reduced areas, promoting new uses of public spaces, and improving attraction and comfort of those spaces.

*Moving towards more sustainable mobility
The goal is a healthy, low-carbon model of traffic with less noise and exhaust pollution. This is done by reducing motorized vehicles in general, promoting alternative fuels in the transport sector, and switching to more efficient means of transport.

*Increasing and improving urban greenery and biodiversity
This is about generally increasing green areas, creating micro-habitats for birds and other species, ensuring a broad variety of plants, and making the ground permeable for water. Also community managed green areas are promoted to increase public interest and participation.

*Promoting public participation and joint responsibility
The aim is to open up the process as much as possible to ensure participation in city and territory approaches.

As its main goal, the reclamation of public spaces, currently occupied by private cars, for and by residents stands at the core of this intervention. It is about “filling the streets with life again”. (Ajuntament_01: 1f.)

'''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''

The initial Superblock Programme took place from 2012 to 2015. The Municipal Action Plan lasted from 2016 to 2019. The longterm goal is to create up to 503 Superblocks (SMARTEES_01: A114).

'''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''

Government - led.

'''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>

A) The intervention has been implemented and studied on a district as well as a city-wide level
B) There are EU-funded studies concerning the intervention
C) The intervention aims at sustainable as well as just goals
D) It is very well documented (project materials, research, media)

'''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''

SMARTEES (2019): Deliverable 3.1. Report about profiles of social innovation “in action” for each cluster [https://local-social-innovation.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Deliverables/SMARTEES-D3.1_SI_in_Action_R1.pdf]

Barcelona (2016). Government measure: Let's fill streets with life. Establishing Superblocks in Barcelona. Commission for Ecology, Urban Planning and Mobility, Council of Barcelona. [https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/ecologiaurbana/sites/default/files/en_gb_MESURA%20GOVERN%20SUPERILLES.pdf]

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

'''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

It has been studied by SMARTEES - Social Innovation Modelling Approaches to Realizing Transition to Energy Efficiency and Sustainability - from 2018-2021 [https://local-social-innovation.eu/] as well as GREENLULUS - Green Locally Unwanted Land Uses - from 2016 - 2021 [http://www.bcnuej.org/projects/greenlulus/].

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Energy and Mobility solutions.
It is also about the ideas concerning rights to the city, as it wants to free up public space currently taken by cars.
It could also fit into Nature-based solutions as some affected spaces are "greened".

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes [https://local-social-innovation.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Deliverables/SMARTEES-D3.1_SI_in_Action_R1.pdf]

'''9. Problematization and priority:'''

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Exclusion of residents from public spaces and the loss of public spaces in general is the fundamental inequality that the municipality of Barcelona addresses through this intervention (Ajuntament_01: 2).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Justice is not explicitly mentioned, although it is definitely a driver behind returning the rights to streets to its residents.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
| X
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
| X
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
| X
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
| X
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
| X
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

'''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''

The municipality of Barcelona.

'''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''

Residents as well as other citizens visiting the areas who may be looking for public spaces to let their children play safely, relax, etc.. (Ajuntament_01: 1f.).

'''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| X
| Different universities, other expert institutions.
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
| X
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
| X
| Biciclot SCCL - a bicycle workshop in Poblenou which supported the implementation of the Superblock in Poblenou and who have joined the working group.
|-
| Platforms
| X
| There are citizen platforms which are in favor of their particular neighbourhood Superblock e.g “Col·lectiu Superilla Poblenou”<ref>https://superillap9.wordpress.com.</ref> in Poblenou or in Camp d´en Grassot<ref>https://superillagrassot.wordpress.com.</ref> which have argued in favor of Superblocks as a way to reduce private vehicle circulation.

|-
| NGOs
| X
| TaulaEix Pere IV supported the Superblock in Poblenou and have also joined the working group.
|-
| Social movements
| X
| It seems that there are different strong movements in favor and against Superblocks, which are mostly in regards to the effects on the district/neighbourhood level and any perceived positive/negative outcomes of Superblocks (rather than the city plan in general).
The most controversial debate seems to be going on in Poblenou with strong opinions on both sides.
|-
| Political parties
| X
| The pilot projects were initially launched by the conservative party “Convergència i Unió”. After 2015´s election the new left party “Barcelona en Comú” is leading the city in a coalition with other left parties. They are giving the program continuity. Opposition comes from “Partido Popular” who defend the priority of private car use.
There are also opposition parties in favor of the concept.
|-
| Media
| X
|
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
|
|
|-
| For profit entreprises
| X
| Consultancies provide support in the development of measures for each Superblock as well as guidance with participation processes.
|-
| Local/regional government
| X
| Municipality initiated the intervention and several city council departments are working on it. Primarily, the mobility and urban design departments of the local administration.
The local government formed a technical secretariat which is leading the program.
Furthermore district administrations are playing a counseling role and members (which can also be members of the local political parties) sometimes are actively part of the district working group providing expertise etc.

Moreover, the Catalan government and the public authorities “Metropolitan Area of Barcelona “and the “Metropolitan Transport Authority” are involved with the formulation of the programme on the city level.
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| X
| The Urban Ecology Agency: a consortium of the City Council of Barcelona, the Municipal Council and Metropolitan Area of Barcelona, and the Barcelona Provincial Council. Its role is to diagnose every neighbourhood where Superblocks are implemented and to aid with technical solutions that could improve the neighbourhoods' sustainability.
|}

'''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''

In several neighbourhoods, multi-stakeholder decision making processes have been formalized in local, regular working groups that are steering the design for their Superblocks. This was a result of the lack of participation processes in Poblenou and the municipality retroactively realizing that individual Superblocks have to be adapted to local peculiarities. The working groups also serve promotional purposes e.g, presenting the Municipal Action Plan to residents and engaging citizens, local associations, and local economy. They also try to find agreements between different voices and stakeholder interests (SMARTEES_01: A121).

'''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''

Citizen participation happens at the neighbourhood level within the city-wide plan to implement Superblocks. There is a standard procedure for involving different stakeholders and citizens that is followed for each Superblock. It can be characterized in nine distinctive steps (SMARTEES_01: A120):
*Definition and analysis of the area
*Internal work by the Technical Secretariat
*Technical work with the districts
*Work with the Promotional Group
*Participation of specific groups
*Participation of local residents
*Approval of Action Plan
*Drafting projects with suitable protocol and participation according to type of initiative
*Implementing the initiatives
The process itself is the same over the different districts, but the approval ratings from citizens and their view on their respective Superblock varies for each context. The implementation of a Superblock itself did not seem to be up for debate, as it was integrated into the Urban Mobility Plan, but rather was more controversial in how it could be implemented.
The municipality defines its general establishment process of Superblocks in two bigger phases: ''add the graphs''

Over the course of the project, participation became increasingly open and informal, as resistance in some neighbourhoods led to adaptations in the process. The Technical Secretariat designed this participatory process in the beginning, but politicians were too eager to start implementing the program and started implementation in Poblenou without any kind of participation process (Interview_6:01). When the city council decided on making the first physical changes in Poblenou, they were met with public outrage. This steered the project in a more participatory direction and was crucial for key learnings of this project. (Interview_6:05)

The meeting minutes and a protocol for the deliberative process and public meetings are published on the website of the municipality for transparency (SMARTEES_01: 45).

'''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''

The city of Barcelona always had leadership over the whole project. The Technical Secretariat (see Q. 22; Q24) is in charge of the Superblock Programme, which includes only three or four public servants (members of the city council) as well as people from urban designing/planning companies (Interview). Therefore, it relies on the help of different consultants, which provide support in defining the measures to be implemented (SMARTEES_01: 44).

The Urban Ecology Agency has a key role in the project because of its charismatic leader Salvador Rueda (SMARTEES_01: A122). In fact, the idea of Superblocks originates from Salvador Rueda (TheGuardian_01). Especially in the beginning, the Urban Ecology Agency was very important in designing the Superblocks, but now they perform ecological diagnoses of the areas for new Superblocks.

Launched by the City Council, local actors, neighbourhood stakeholders, and citizens are involved in a co-designing process to develop the action plan that “should be” approved by the district political body (SMARTEES_01: A122). These processes are formalized in local working groups where different stakeholders can participate and which presents the Local Action Plan to the neighbourhood (SMARTEES_01: A121).

'''16. Exclusion:'''

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Citizens at the earliest stages (see q.14).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

In Poblenou, politicians wanted to implement changes to the neighbourhood without waiting for a participation process, which was being designed at the time by the Technical Secretariat. The missing participation resulted in local resistance from the neighbourhood. In response, the project participation became increasingly open and informal to accommodate citizens more.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

'''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''

One of the main issues was that streets had lost many of their traditional functions, i.e. as spaces for children's games, local resident gatherings, strolls, resting, financial exchanges, sport, culture, and protests, because they had developed into spaces only used for transit. Additional issues identified over the previous decades included rising air-pollution levels, traffic noise, road-accident rates, a lack of greenery, and overall decline in citizens' quality of life. (Ajuntament_01: 7).
Barcelona had developed different integrated plans to tackle these issues and additionally embedded them into global issues such as climate change and loss of biodiversity. Superblocks are thus one of the measures of a systematic change of Barcelona.
SMARTEES (01: 42) reported that a critical attitude towards the management of environmental issues in their city started with people from the municipality participating in the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio Summit) in 1992. Environmental awareness and a holistic management strategy for ecological issues in the city were among key drivers of the Superblock Programme.

'''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''

Very important for the implementation of the Superblocks is the so called “Citizen Commitment for Sustainability,” which was first signed in 2002 by over 800 organizations (large and small enterprises, community groups, professional associations, political parties and educational institutions). It was evaluated and renewed in 2012, leading to the “Citizen Commitment for Sustainability 2012-2022”. (SMARTEES_01: A123).
The goal of this commitment is to improve people's life in the city, in the process improving participation and implementing small-scale interventions. Superblocks are one of several actions that are defined in the document and thereby receive additional support.
In general, Superblocks are connected to different policies besides the Municipal Action Plan e.g. the Barcelona Mobility Pact (1998), which over 30 mobility-linked organizations have formalized and to which over 100 have signed to improve sustainable mobility (SMARTEES_01: A121); the Urban Mobility Plan of Barcelona (2013-2018); the Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Plan (until 2020); and the Barcelona Commitment to Climate (Ajuntament_01: 22f.), which adopts a common strategy to move toward a unified vision for comprehensive change.

Superblocks are therefore embedded in holistic city-wide changes as well as municipal policies (regulatory, informative, and voluntary frameworks) (See Appendix 1).

'''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''

Spain is a decentralized state that comprises of three levels of governance: central, regional, and local, and is divided into Provinces and Municipalities (Art. 137 of the Constitution).

Provinces and Municipalities (and Autonomous Communities) run their respective affairs autonomously, which is ensured by Art. 137

Municipalities have considerable authority and decision - making power that is important for the implementation of Superblocks. For example, municipalities with over 50.000 inhabitants are in charge of “Collective urban transportation” and “Urban environmental protection” (CorSpain).

'''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policy makers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation etc.)'''

The eagerness to start “constructing” Superblocks without talking to residents about any of the changes in Poblenou led to a fundamental change of their implementation in other areas of the city and in the general participatory process.

'''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''

The total budget for the Superblock Programme between 2016 and 2019 (“Let´s fill streets with life. Establishing Superblocks in Barcelona”) was 11 million Euros (Ajuntament_01: 40). The cost of the Superblock project in Sant Antoni is 7 million Euros. It is estimated that the implementation of all Superblocks in Barcelona would cost less than 100 million euros (SMARTEES_01: A117).

'''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''

As mentioned, the Technical Secretariat that was formed because of resistance in Poblenou (see Q.24) is now in charge of the project. This improved communication between residents and the government, and assisted in reorganizing the whole process in a better way.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

'''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Most issues are about legitimacy and public awareness and not so much about regulatory framework issues.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

Fears of gentrification have arisen, as the process might transform neighbourhoods into “trendy places” (SMARTEES_01: 47).
Perceived safety issues were also raised, especially during late night hours when Superblocks become “deserted” and are frequented by young people drinking on the streets.
In addition, the project in Poblenou apparently led to a sharp drop in merchant sales in the neighbourhood (SMARTEES_01: A128).
Finally, because of unchanged habits in personal vehicle use, traffic on perimeter streets has remained the same. This also relates to insufficient public transport for commuters (ebd.).

*'''c. Public awareness'''

The Superblock in Poblenou was started without any kind of participatory process: the first physical changes in the neighbourhood were done “on a weekend”, which led to a lot of neighbourhood resistance (Interview_7:51)

Groups that emerged in 2016 from different neighbourhoods called the Superblocks unrealistic in a city the size of Barcelona. They warned of a widespread collapse of the city if Superblocks continued to be built, and referred to the then (from their perspective) increasing pollution levels.
In Sant Marti, resistance groups also criticized missing information and the mobility chaos of the Superblock perimeter. It has also been criticized that the urban configuration itself has not changed at all and only feels provisional (SMARTEES_01:46)

Of 1739 residents who voted in May 2017 in a consultation promoted by the Plataforma d'Afectats of the Superilla de Poblenou (a platform against the Superblock in Poblenou), 87% voted against its implementation in their district (SMARTEES_01: 46).

*'''d. Finances'''

The project in general is deemed a low-cost solution. However investment was more substantial for some Superblocks, such as that in Saint-Antoni, because some roads and sidewalks had to be newly constructed.
Some critique called for more investment by the city councils, as they were skeptical that low-cost solutions could be truly beneficial (SMARTEES_01: 47).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

The implementation of Superblocks is taking far longer than expected and it still only involves small parts of the city . This is partially due to the participatory processes that were adapted by the municipality after facing resistance in Poblenou. These processes involve multiple stakeholders operating in local working groups to co-design Superblocks in each neighbourhood (see Q. 24). According to one technician, there are “about 100 areas already pacified, where Superblocks could be created quickly and without social contestation.” (SMARTEES_01: A127).

In a few cases, the local district council acted against the implementation of their Superblock, thus strengthening project resistance (SMARTEES_01: A129).

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

'''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| Citizen resistance in Poblenou
| Municipality adopted a post-intervention participatory process and engaged in dialogue with resident associations and institutions (e.g schools, kindergartens) in order to improve their plans (getting insights from residents about which streets to reopen for traffic etc.) (Interview)
|-
| Citizen resistance in Poblenou
| Local working groups were created to steer the process for each neighborhood, wheich would co-design with residents and local actors to improve legitimacy in other areas and give residents more agency. (Interview)
|-
| Different fears of negative consequences of Superblocks by residents (e.g. unsafety at night ..)
| The municipality is conducting Measurements/Surveys and empirical research in existing Superblocks to gain insights about the interventions' impact, the results of which they can present to residents of other potential Superblocks. This can help in breaking misperceptions about negative consequences. The SMARTEES team is currently conducting research on the topic of safety at night in Poblenou, along with general perceptions about Superblocks elsewhere (Interview)
|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

'''25. What are reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''

This programme proves that is not always necessary to implement huge changes nor invest large sums of money in order to improve the quality of life in a city. Small-scale or low-cost actions are sometimes just as effective and far easier to implement.

Observed outcomes include (SMARTEES_01: A125):
*Habitability: 25,129 m2 of new public space without cars have been gained, 349 benches have been installed, 2,483 m2 of playgrounds for children have been created.
*Mobility: The number of cars that access the streets on a daily basis has gone down from 2,218 to 932 vehicles / day. The area for pedestrians has increased by 80%, and the area for cars reduced by 48%. Unregulated car parking spaces have decreased (from 401 to 74) while cyclist meters have increased.
*Green spaces and biodiversity: The green area has increased by 91% from 9,722 m2 to 18,632 m2. 176 units of trees have been planted.
*Economic activity: The number of economic activities on the ground floor has gone up from 65 to 85.
*Public housing: A public housing building is being constructed in the central area of the Superblock by the Municipal Housing Trust.

Equally as important are observed changes in the lifestyles of residents (SMARTEES_01: A126). Several residents have reported an increase in the personal use of bikes while reducing use of private cars/motorbikes. Biking has become a trend as it is perceived safer with the lower numbers of cars around.

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

'''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

The municipality mentions that the implementation of Superblocks builds on several city-wide plans from the past such as the:
*Cerdà Plan
*County Plan (1953)
*The General Metropolitan Plan (1977) - the “current framework”
*The Street Plan (1986)
*Re-developments of Portal de l’Àngel and Plaça de la Catedral
*The Mobility Plan for Vila de Gràcia (2003) (Ajuntament_01: 8f.)

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The municipality reports that taming the passage of cars based on blocks is not a new idea. Other examples can be seen in:
*proposals for neighbourhood units
*ideas for environmental areas and traffic management published by English engineer Colin Buchanan<ref>Bianconi M., Tewdwr-Jones M. (2013): The form and organisation of urban areas: Colin Buchanan and Traffic in Towns 50 years on. In: The Town planning review 84(3):313-336.</ref>.
*the woonerfs in the Netherlands<ref>https://www.naturespath.com/en-us/blog/woonerf-the-dutch-solution-to-city-planning/.</ref>.

Barcelona was the first city to implement Superblocks, but today the idea is very common across Spain. There is a lot of exchange about the implementation of Superblocks between cities. Barcelona has an especially strong inter-city partnership with Vitoria-Gasteiz, which has a Superblock Programme (SUMP - Sustainable Mobility Plan) that is reorganizing the city in 77 Superblocks. This plan started after Barcelona's, in 2008 and will end in 2023 (SMARTEES_01: A95).
Both cities are continuing to support each other through ii) legitimacy, iii) knowledge sharing, learning and peer support. Barcelona profits from the experiences learned in Vitoria-Gasteiz (SMARTEES_01: A109).

=== Learning content ===

'''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

Technical knowledge about how to physically change the existing structure of blocks was originally implemented in the Cerdà Plan (19th century).

Numerous experiences on how to reclaim space for pedestrians have been reported useful to the intervention, especially those based on developments from the Street Plan of 1986 (Ajuntament_01: 10). Much like the current debates surrounding Superblocks, during the first re-developments of Portal de l’Àngel and Plaça de la Catedral, merchants were worried that making streets only accessible to pedestrians would lead to a drop in sales (Ajuntament_01:10).
Learning to respond to resistance against implementation with process adaptation instead of halting the project was critical.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

It is difficult to measure the exact content and learnings from partnerships with other cities, as exchanges are rather informal but steadily happening.

*'''c. from other knowledge gathering/research'''

From the implementation of the intervention itself:
The municipality had to learn the importance of providing enough, place-specific and reliable data about the proposals for each neighbourhood. This is important to break any misperceptions and better communicate the benefits of the project.
In addition, it is crucial to connect the Superblock proposal with the overall ambitions to tackle specific issues on a city-wide scale (SMARTEES_01: 48).

Furthermore the ability to adapt certain parts of the Superblock invtervention in cooperation with stakeholders from different fields and local residents has been one of the key learnings for the municipality (Interview_31:05).

Best practices about participatory processes have been developed based on experiences (especially in coping with resistances) include:
*engaging people in deliberative processes
*information and communication strategies and channels
*the use of ICT technologies (e.g., GIS maps) for illustrating main changes proposed at the neighbourhood level
*maintaining a coherent discourse and practice
*building trust to accomplish goals while being open to peoples proposals (SMARTEES_01: A123).

Janet Sanz, a city councillor and today's “Deputy Mayor for Ecology, Urban Planning and Mobility” stressed that "listening to the neighbourhood has been the main learning of this project” (El Periodico).

=== Learning process ===

'''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''

In order to reduce conflict and resistance, the Technical Secretariat (in Poblenou):
*Created new channels for communication
*Improved participatory process (citizens were invited to formulate improvements in the design of the Superblocks)
*Entered into a negotiation process between supporters and critics of the intervention

This lead to the implementation of certain changes, such as preventing private vehicles and public transport from entering Superblocks.

The Technical Secretariat also became important in communicating with other cities, as it reportedly gave advice and shared knowledge with representatives from New York and Copenhagen (SMARTEES_01: 50).

'''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''

The resistance in Poblenou fundamentally changed the way in which Superblocks are implemented. As a critical point, newly created local working groups give residents and other stakeholders the platform to express issues and co-create their neighbourhood (Interview). Speculatively, this might also change the way other projects in Barcelona could be designed in the future, although it is still too early to measure this (Interview).

'''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''

*Face-to-Face meetings (all actors)
*Field visits / meeting the locals (Workshops organized by city council with city technicians, politicians and residents) (SMARTEES_01: A119).

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

'''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

Barcelona's Superblock program recognized internationally; many other cities are in contact with Barcelona to learn from their experience.
Barcelona has received a lot of media attention over the last couple of years from e.g The New York Times (2016)<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/nyregion/what-new-york-can-learn-from-barcelonas-superblocks.html?_r=1.</ref>, The Guardian (2019<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/sep/10/barcelonas-car-free-superblocks-could-save-hundreds-of-lives.</ref>), El Pais (2018)<ref>https://elpais.com/ccaa/2018/09/29/catalunya/1538246791_684437.html .</ref>, Deutschlandfunk (2016)<ref>https://www.deutschlandfunknova.de/beitrag/superblocks-in-barcelona.</ref>, Die Zeit (2018<ref> https://www.zeit.de/mobilitaet/2018-04/barcelona-verkehr-problem-autofahrer-smart-data.</ref>) or very extensively from VOX<ref>https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/4/9/18300797/barcelona-spain-superblocks-urban-plan.</ref>.

The New York Times and Vox are suggesting possibilities to replicate the Superblock idea, the New York Times article is called “What New York Can Learn From Barcelona’s ‘Superblocks’” (NewYorkTimes_01). Similarly, VOX is suggesting the possible replicability of the Superblock idea in Portland, Oregon. An interviewee from Bloomberg Associates sees potential in Washington, DC, New York City, San Francisco, and Chicago as they already have grid patterns, walkable blocks, and suffer from air and noise pollution. She also sees potential in several smaller cities, as “just about every city or town has some central area with remnants of a block pattern”(VOX_02).

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Districts and city-wide plans, dense cities.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Media, urban planners, researchers.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

VOX mentions different limits to transferability, especially in regards to US cities:
*Cities tend to be too wide and focused around interstates and freeways
*Missing density and walkability
*Missing short, regular blocks, orthogonal streets, and mixed-use zoning
*Missing familiarity with urban transformations and civic pride (VOX_02). Americans are so accustomed to the absence of walkable and accessible public spaces they barely can express what they are missing.

These factors are especially prominent in the US but can be applied to a lot of European cities, as well.

Also interesting is the relationship between the suburbs and hurdles to reduce cars on the roads:
Suburbs with clear property borders and separated dwellings means less density, less walkability, and slower and less frequent public transport. This leads to a dependance on private vehicles as a predominant form of mobility.

The idea of vibrant, public spaces then does not really work if there is not sufficient density around them: “They become internal tourist destinations, places residents drive to visit” (VOX_02).

'''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>

SMARTEES has a large report on all kinds of issues related to the implementation of Superblocks. There is specific section on “Critical issues and How Critical issues have been overcome” (SMARTEES_01: 45f); as well as specific stories (an extra info box) that show how exactly certain project processes developed e.g resistance in Poblenou (SMARTEES_01: A129f.).
As mentioned, there is also a lot of media coverage around Barcelona's implementation of Superblocks, which have reported how other cities could learn from the challenges Barcelona faced (NewYorkTimes_01).

SMARTEES is actively trying to build networks between Barcelona and other Spanish cities and thereby creating ways to formalize learning and sharing. SMARTEES wants to develop policy scenario workshops where cities can discuss next steps for future Superblock interventions (Vitoria-Gasteiz and Barcelona will be part of these workshops). The goal is to bring researchers and actors from the cities together to discuss lessons learned, strategize on alternative approaches, and find best practices to transfer that knowledge to future implementations.

'''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''

Within Spain, the idea of Superblocks is spreading to other topologically diverse cities such as A Coruña, Ferrol,Viladecans and El Prat (SMARTEES_01: A49).

SMARTEES report that representatives of New York and Copenhagen have already visited Barcelona and are advised by the Technical Secretariat (SMARTEES_01: 50).

Other cities in the world such as Melbourne, Toronto, Lisbon, Quito, Buenos Aires are also interested in the Superblock Programme and are in contact with the Agencia de Ecologia Urbana. Seattle is also reportedly considering implementing its first Superblock, which was brought to the table by Seattle Councilwoman Teresa Mosqueda (CapitolHill_01).

A lot of other cities in the world (from Japan, China, India, South Korea, Canada, Ecuador, Mexico and Moscow) have requested information on Superblocks (SMARTEES_01: 50).

== j) Structural learning ==

'''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

The Superblock model developed a new strategy to facilitate public participation, pursuing co-responsibility as one of the core strategies of the programme (SMARTEES_01: 43). Other long-term consequences are not yet foreseeable, as this project only started relatively recently and will be ongoing for several years.
It will be interesting to see if there are going to be institutional changes because of the Superblocks Programme. SMARTEES is trying to evaluate these as part of their project.

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

'''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''

Barcelona has a long history public engagement and has formal structures for participation in place, such as the Conseils de Barri (SMARTEES_01: 43) (VOX_02).

'''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''

This intervention shows how important it is to be able to adapt existing plans to local contexts.
There could possibly be long-term changes in the way the municipality interacts with residents for different programmes beyond Superblocks. Therefore, the lessons learned from the Superblock intervention could be a critical moment of change for the city (Interview).

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation

2020-12-22T21:50:57Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali moved page Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation to Inviting citizens to a transformation of street space - flexibly dealing with resistance over redirect

#REDIRECT [[Inviting citizens to a transformation of street space - flexibly dealing with resistance]]

Reclaiming Street Space: Cooperation for Neighbourhood Transformation

2020-12-22T21:50:57Z

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a real-world case: [[Dealing flexibly with and learning from resistance in Barcelona]]

'''Imagine your city's streets not being dominated by cars but by people. Streets are a place of social gatherings, a place where children play and neighbours meet, a place of interaction, where they are urban hotspots!'''

How can we get there?

Reaching this reality would mean to largely rethink our transport and mobility system (Q3). In many places, cars are the dominating mode of transport, which is leading to air and noise pollution, accelerating climate change and making urban life less healthy. Combatting these issues is also a matter of justice as poorer people are generally more affected by environmental degradation, pollution and the effects of climate change. Additionally, streets right now mainly serve as transport routes, but have lost social functions that they have once had (Q9).. Giving streets their old functions back also means targeting injustices created by urban intensification and the unjust effects of a weak civil society such as the exclusion of marginalized groups in urban governance.

How could a municipality address these problems?. Who would municipal actors need to work with, who would they have to include?

It seems like a complete overhaul of such a deep-rooted problem would necessitate working together with all kinds of local stakeholders be it local businesses, NGOs or academia (Q12) but especially crucial seems to have local residents on board (Q13) . Such a city-wide transformation would also have to adapt to local particularities. Formalised local working groups that regularly meet and are responsible for designing the process in each neighbourhood could give citizens responsibility and power over their neighbourhood while also including a variety of other actors that want to participate (Q13, Q15). For this to work, it is necessary that municipalities safeguard their power to govern their local transport system (Q19). Additionally, connecting the process to other local level sustainable development policies and agreements in different sectors can give the project legitimacy and help develop holistic visions for comprehensive change (Q18). The better integrated specific solutions are into bigger developments of change, the easier it is to believe in grand opportunities of change and the power of a shared vision! (Q19) If this happens, sustainable developments may be achievable even with comparatively little extra spending (Q21).

In what ways can municipalities deal with and learn from potential local resistance?

As this process hinges upon working together with citizens, it is crucial that citizens feel they are an integral part of it. Still, municipality-led processes might encounter local resistance, potentially because residents do not believe in the effectiveness of the process and its ability to change the current situation or because they fear potential negative consequences (Q23). For example, some may question whether public transport can provide enough capacity to cushion the reduction of private car usage or worry that commuting to work would take too long (Q23). To address such concerns, it may be important to tackle the substance of such problems, but it could also be important to change the process, especially how participation is organised (Q24).

Why should municipalities look at similar projects in the past to ensure more just participation in the future?

Looking at learning outcomes from past projects in your own city can further help the process in overcoming obstacles. This might mean that experiences from past policies in similar sectors, for example making streets more pedestrian-friendly can prove vital here (Q27). It might even be the case that resistance in the past against other municipality-led projects have voiced the same concerns. This might help in finding solutions for overcoming those obstacles as well as encouraging project proponents to not give up if things do not go as originally planned (Q27). In the end, this general flexibility in how the project has to develop could lead to improved methods of communication and participation in the future (Q28).
Finally, communicating with media about ideas within the project can help pique the interest of other cities and spread knowledge to other urban areas (Q33).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

Take a look at the detailed description of [[Dealing flexibly with and learning from resistance in Barcelona]] that has inspired this scenario.
This intervention is about the municipality in Barcelona

This scenario fits under the '''approaches''':
*[[Energy and Mobility solutions]].
*[[Right to the city (YOU ARE WELCOME TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PAGE!)| Right to the city]].
*[[Nature-based solutions]].

It addresses some '''drivers of injustice''':
*[[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]].
*[[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism]].
*[[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities]]
*[[Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
*[[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
*[[Weak(ened) civil society]]

Dealing flexibly with and learning from resistance in Barcelona

2020-12-22T21:44:18Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation]].

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

'''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (neighborhood in capital city)”]'''

This is about the creation of Superblocks in Barcelona, a mobility concept that tries to restructure the city in 503 so-called Superblocks, lowering the amount of cars and returning public functions such as leisure and neighborhood activities to city streets.
Each of the 503 Superblocks will be different in its exact structure as they will be adapted to neighbourhood contexts.

The first Superblock in Barcelona was established in Ciutat Vella (El Born) in 1993 and in Vila de Gràcia in 2003 (SMARTEES_01: A114)
Between 2012 - 2015 the Superblock Programme started with four pilot areas in:
*La Maternitat i Sant Ramón, in Les Corts
*Sants-Hostrafrancs, in Sants-Montjuïc
*DiagonalPoblenou, in Sant Martí,
*Esquerra de l’Eixample, in Eixample (Ajuntament_01: 21)

From 2016 to 2019, the large-scale Municipal Action Plan, “Let's fill the streets with life. The implementation of the Superblock Model in Barcelona” (Ajuntament_01: 1) continued to work on creating and implementing Superblocks. They worked in other areas in the city, piloting the program such in the Poblenou neighborhood.

'''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in ? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''

Mobility and transport.

'''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''

The municipality of Barcelona summarizes the strategic goals of the intervention in four points (Ajuntament_01: 25f).:
*Improving the habitability of public spaces
This is about boosting the use of public spaces (e.g for children, meeting, resting etc.) by prioritizing pedestrians, increasing traffic reduced areas, promoting new uses of public spaces, and improving attraction and comfort of those spaces.

*Moving towards more sustainable mobility
The goal is a healthy, low-carbon model of traffic with less noise and exhaust pollution. This is done by reducing motorized vehicles in general, promoting alternative fuels in the transport sector, and switching to more efficient means of transport.

*Increasing and improving urban greenery and biodiversity
This is about generally increasing green areas, creating micro-habitats for birds and other species, ensuring a broad variety of plants, and making the ground permeable for water. Also community managed green areas are promoted to increase public interest and participation.

*Promoting public participation and joint responsibility
The aim is to open up the process as much as possible to ensure participation in city and territory approaches.

As its main goal, the reclamation of public spaces, currently occupied by private cars, for and by residents stands at the core of this intervention. It is about “filling the streets with life again”. (Ajuntament_01: 1f.)

'''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''

The initial Superblock Programme took place from 2012 to 2015. The Municipal Action Plan lasted from 2016 to 2019. The longterm goal is to create up to 503 Superblocks (SMARTEES_01: A114).

'''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''

Government - led.

'''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>

A) The intervention has been implemented and studied on a district as well as a city-wide level
B) There are EU-funded studies concerning the intervention
C) The intervention aims at sustainable as well as just goals
D) It is very well documented (project materials, research, media)

'''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place specific) governance intervention?'''

SMARTEES (2019): Deliverable 3.1. Report about profiles of social innovation “in action” for each cluster [https://local-social-innovation.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Deliverables/SMARTEES-D3.1_SI_in_Action_R1.pdf]

Barcelona (2016). Government measure: Let's fill streets with life. Establishing Superblocks in Barcelona. Commission for Ecology, Urban Planning and Mobility, Council of Barcelona. [https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/ecologiaurbana/sites/default/files/en_gb_MESURA%20GOVERN%20SUPERILLES.pdf]

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

'''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

It has been studied by SMARTEES - Social Innovation Modelling Approaches to Realizing Transition to Energy Efficiency and Sustainability - from 2018-2021 [https://local-social-innovation.eu/] as well as GREENLULUS - Green Locally Unwanted Land Uses - from 2016 - 2021 [http://www.bcnuej.org/projects/greenlulus/].

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

Energy and Mobility solutions.
It is also about the ideas concerning rights to the city, as it wants to free up public space currently taken by cars.
It could also fit into Nature-based solutions as some affected spaces are "greened".

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes [https://local-social-innovation.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Deliverables/SMARTEES-D3.1_SI_in_Action_R1.pdf]

'''9. Problematization and priority:'''

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Exclusion of residents from public spaces and the loss of public spaces in general is the fundamental inequality that the municipality of Barcelona addresses through this intervention (Ajuntament_01: 2).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Justice is not explicitly mentioned, although it is definitely a driver behind returning the rights to streets to its residents.

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
| X
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
| X
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
| X
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
|
| X
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
| X
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

'''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''

The municipality of Barcelona.

'''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''

Residents as well as other citizens visiting the areas who may be looking for public spaces to let their children play safely, relax, etc.. (Ajuntament_01: 1f.).

'''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| X
| Different universities, other expert institutions.
|-
| Religious organizations
|
|
|-
| Civil society organizations
| X
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
| X
| Biciclot SCCL - a bicycle workshop in Poblenou which supported the implementation of the Superblock in Poblenou and who have joined the working group.
|-
| Platforms
| X
| There are citizen platforms which are in favor of their particular neighbourhood Superblock e.g “Col·lectiu Superilla Poblenou”<ref>https://superillap9.wordpress.com.</ref> in Poblenou or in Camp d´en Grassot<ref>https://superillagrassot.wordpress.com.</ref> which have argued in favor of Superblocks as a way to reduce private vehicle circulation.

|-
| NGOs
| X
| TaulaEix Pere IV supported the Superblock in Poblenou and have also joined the working group.
|-
| Social movements
| X
| It seems that there are different strong movements in favor and against Superblocks, which are mostly in regards to the effects on the district/neighbourhood level and any perceived positive/negative outcomes of Superblocks (rather than the city plan in general).
The most controversial debate seems to be going on in Poblenou with strong opinions on both sides.
|-
| Political parties
| X
| The pilot projects were initially launched by the conservative party “Convergència i Unió”. After 2015´s election the new left party “Barcelona en Comú” is leading the city in a coalition with other left parties. They are giving the program continuity. Opposition comes from “Partido Popular” who defend the priority of private car use.
There are also opposition parties in favor of the concept.
|-
| Media
| X
|
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
|
|
|-
| For profit entreprises
| X
| Consultancies provide support in the development of measures for each Superblock as well as guidance with participation processes.
|-
| Local/regional government
| X
| Municipality initiated the intervention and several city council departments are working on it. Primarily, the mobility and urban design departments of the local administration.
The local government formed a technical secretariat which is leading the program.
Furthermore district administrations are playing a counseling role and members (which can also be members of the local political parties) sometimes are actively part of the district working group providing expertise etc.

Moreover, the Catalan government and the public authorities “Metropolitan Area of Barcelona “and the “Metropolitan Transport Authority” are involved with the formulation of the programme on the city level.
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
| X
| The Urban Ecology Agency: a consortium of the City Council of Barcelona, the Municipal Council and Metropolitan Area of Barcelona, and the Barcelona Provincial Council. Its role is to diagnose every neighbourhood where Superblocks are implemented and to aid with technical solutions that could improve the neighbourhoods' sustainability.
|}

'''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''

In several neighbourhoods, multi-stakeholder decision making processes have been formalized in local, regular working groups that are steering the design for their Superblocks. This was a result of the lack of participation processes in Poblenou and the municipality retroactively realizing that individual Superblocks have to be adapted to local peculiarities. The working groups also serve promotional purposes e.g, presenting the Municipal Action Plan to residents and engaging citizens, local associations, and local economy. They also try to find agreements between different voices and stakeholder interests (SMARTEES_01: A121).

'''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''

Citizen participation happens at the neighbourhood level within the city-wide plan to implement Superblocks. There is a standard procedure for involving different stakeholders and citizens that is followed for each Superblock. It can be characterized in nine distinctive steps (SMARTEES_01: A120):
*Definition and analysis of the area
*Internal work by the Technical Secretariat
*Technical work with the districts
*Work with the Promotional Group
*Participation of specific groups
*Participation of local residents
*Approval of Action Plan
*Drafting projects with suitable protocol and participation according to type of initiative
*Implementing the initiatives
The process itself is the same over the different districts, but the approval ratings from citizens and their view on their respective Superblock varies for each context. The implementation of a Superblock itself did not seem to be up for debate, as it was integrated into the Urban Mobility Plan, but rather was more controversial in how it could be implemented.
The municipality defines its general establishment process of Superblocks in two bigger phases: ''add the graphs''

Over the course of the project, participation became increasingly open and informal, as resistance in some neighbourhoods led to adaptations in the process. The Technical Secretariat designed this participatory process in the beginning, but politicians were too eager to start implementing the program and started implementation in Poblenou without any kind of participation process (Interview_6:01). When the city council decided on making the first physical changes in Poblenou, they were met with public outrage. This steered the project in a more participatory direction and was crucial for key learnings of this project. (Interview_6:05)

The meeting minutes and a protocol for the deliberative process and public meetings are published on the website of the municipality for transparency (SMARTEES_01: 45).

'''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''

The city of Barcelona always had leadership over the whole project. The Technical Secretariat (see Q. 22; Q24) is in charge of the Superblock Programme, which includes only three or four public servants (members of the city council) as well as people from urban designing/planning companies (Interview). Therefore, it relies on the help of different consultants, which provide support in defining the measures to be implemented (SMARTEES_01: 44).

The Urban Ecology Agency has a key role in the project because of its charismatic leader Salvador Rueda (SMARTEES_01: A122). In fact, the idea of Superblocks originates from Salvador Rueda (TheGuardian_01). Especially in the beginning, the Urban Ecology Agency was very important in designing the Superblocks, but now they perform ecological diagnoses of the areas for new Superblocks.

Launched by the City Council, local actors, neighbourhood stakeholders, and citizens are involved in a co-designing process to develop the action plan that “should be” approved by the district political body (SMARTEES_01: A122). These processes are formalized in local working groups where different stakeholders can participate and which presents the Local Action Plan to the neighbourhood (SMARTEES_01: A121).

'''16. Exclusion:'''

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

Citizens at the earliest stages (see q.14).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

In Poblenou, politicians wanted to implement changes to the neighbourhood without waiting for a participation process, which was being designed at the time by the Technical Secretariat. The missing participation resulted in local resistance from the neighbourhood. In response, the project participation became increasingly open and informal to accommodate citizens more.

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

'''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''

One of the main issues was that streets had lost many of their traditional functions, i.e. as spaces for children's games, local resident gatherings, strolls, resting, financial exchanges, sport, culture, and protests, because they had developed into spaces only used for transit. Additional issues identified over the previous decades included rising air-pollution levels, traffic noise, road-accident rates, a lack of greenery, and overall decline in citizens' quality of life. (Ajuntament_01: 7).
Barcelona had developed different integrated plans to tackle these issues and additionally embedded them into global issues such as climate change and loss of biodiversity. Superblocks are thus one of the measures of a systematic change of Barcelona.
SMARTEES (01: 42) reported that a critical attitude towards the management of environmental issues in their city started with people from the municipality participating in the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio Summit) in 1992. Environmental awareness and a holistic management strategy for ecological issues in the city were among key drivers of the Superblock Programme.

'''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''

Very important for the implementation of the Superblocks is the so called “Citizen Commitment for Sustainability,” which was first signed in 2002 by over 800 organizations (large and small enterprises, community groups, professional associations, political parties and educational institutions). It was evaluated and renewed in 2012, leading to the “Citizen Commitment for Sustainability 2012-2022”. (SMARTEES_01: A123).
The goal of this commitment is to improve people's life in the city, in the process improving participation and implementing small-scale interventions. Superblocks are one of several actions that are defined in the document and thereby receive additional support.
In general, Superblocks are connected to different policies besides the Municipal Action Plan e.g. the Barcelona Mobility Pact (1998), which over 30 mobility-linked organizations have formalized and to which over 100 have signed to improve sustainable mobility (SMARTEES_01: A121); the Urban Mobility Plan of Barcelona (2013-2018); the Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Plan (until 2020); and the Barcelona Commitment to Climate (Ajuntament_01: 22f.), which adopts a common strategy to move toward a unified vision for comprehensive change.

Superblocks are therefore embedded in holistic city-wide changes as well as municipal policies (regulatory, informative, and voluntary frameworks) (See Appendix 1).

'''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''

Spain is a decentralized state that comprises of three levels of governance: central, regional, and local, and is divided into Provinces and Municipalities (Art. 137 of the Constitution).

Provinces and Municipalities (and Autonomous Communities) run their respective affairs autonomously, which is ensured by Art. 137

Municipalities have considerable authority and decision - making power that is important for the implementation of Superblocks. For example, municipalities with over 50.000 inhabitants are in charge of “Collective urban transportation” and “Urban environmental protection” (CorSpain).

'''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policy makers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation etc.)'''

The eagerness to start “constructing” Superblocks without talking to residents about any of the changes in Poblenou led to a fundamental change of their implementation in other areas of the city and in the general participatory process.

'''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''

The total budget for the Superblock Programme between 2016 and 2019 (“Let´s fill streets with life. Establishing Superblocks in Barcelona”) was 11 million Euros (Ajuntament_01: 40). The cost of the Superblock project in Sant Antoni is 7 million Euros. It is estimated that the implementation of all Superblocks in Barcelona would cost less than 100 million euros (SMARTEES_01: A117).

'''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''

As mentioned, the Technical Secretariat that was formed because of resistance in Poblenou (see Q.24) is now in charge of the project. This improved communication between residents and the government, and assisted in reorganizing the whole process in a better way.

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

'''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

Most issues are about legitimacy and public awareness and not so much about regulatory framework issues.

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

Fears of gentrification have arisen, as the process might transform neighbourhoods into “trendy places” (SMARTEES_01: 47).
Perceived safety issues were also raised, especially during late night hours when Superblocks become “deserted” and are frequented by young people drinking on the streets.
In addition, the project in Poblenou apparently led to a sharp drop in merchant sales in the neighbourhood (SMARTEES_01: A128).
Finally, because of unchanged habits in personal vehicle use, traffic on perimeter streets has remained the same. This also relates to insufficient public transport for commuters (ebd.).

*'''c. Public awareness'''

The Superblock in Poblenou was started without any kind of participatory process: the first physical changes in the neighbourhood were done “on a weekend”, which led to a lot of neighbourhood resistance (Interview_7:51)

Groups that emerged in 2016 from different neighbourhoods called the Superblocks unrealistic in a city the size of Barcelona. They warned of a widespread collapse of the city if Superblocks continued to be built, and referred to the then (from their perspective) increasing pollution levels.
In Sant Marti, resistance groups also criticized missing information and the mobility chaos of the Superblock perimeter. It has also been criticized that the urban configuration itself has not changed at all and only feels provisional (SMARTEES_01:46)

Of 1739 residents who voted in May 2017 in a consultation promoted by the Plataforma d'Afectats of the Superilla de Poblenou (a platform against the Superblock in Poblenou), 87% voted against its implementation in their district (SMARTEES_01: 46).

*'''d. Finances'''

The project in general is deemed a low-cost solution. However investment was more substantial for some Superblocks, such as that in Saint-Antoni, because some roads and sidewalks had to be newly constructed.
Some critique called for more investment by the city councils, as they were skeptical that low-cost solutions could be truly beneficial (SMARTEES_01: 47).

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

The implementation of Superblocks is taking far longer than expected and it still only involves small parts of the city . This is partially due to the participatory processes that were adapted by the municipality after facing resistance in Poblenou. These processes involve multiple stakeholders operating in local working groups to co-design Superblocks in each neighbourhood (see Q. 24). According to one technician, there are “about 100 areas already pacified, where Superblocks could be created quickly and without social contestation.” (SMARTEES_01: A127).

In a few cases, the local district council acted against the implementation of their Superblock, thus strengthening project resistance (SMARTEES_01: A129).

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

'''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| Citizen resistance in Poblenou
| Municipality adopted a post-intervention participatory process and engaged in dialogue with resident associations and institutions (e.g schools, kindergartens) in order to improve their plans (getting insights from residents about which streets to reopen for traffic etc.) (Interview)
|-
| Citizen resistance in Poblenou
| Local working groups were created to steer the process for each neighborhood, wheich would co-design with residents and local actors to improve legitimacy in other areas and give residents more agency. (Interview)
|-
| Different fears of negative consequences of Superblocks by residents (e.g. unsafety at night ..)
| The municipality is conducting Measurements/Surveys and empirical research in existing Superblocks to gain insights about the interventions' impact, the results of which they can present to residents of other potential Superblocks. This can help in breaking misperceptions about negative consequences. The SMARTEES team is currently conducting research on the topic of safety at night in Poblenou, along with general perceptions about Superblocks elsewhere (Interview)
|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

'''25. What are reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''

This programme proves that is not always necessary to implement huge changes nor invest large sums of money in order to improve the quality of life in a city. Small-scale or low-cost actions are sometimes just as effective and far easier to implement.

Observed outcomes include (SMARTEES_01: A125):
*Habitability: 25,129 m2 of new public space without cars have been gained, 349 benches have been installed, 2,483 m2 of playgrounds for children have been created.
*Mobility: The number of cars that access the streets on a daily basis has gone down from 2,218 to 932 vehicles / day. The area for pedestrians has increased by 80%, and the area for cars reduced by 48%. Unregulated car parking spaces have decreased (from 401 to 74) while cyclist meters have increased.
*Green spaces and biodiversity: The green area has increased by 91% from 9,722 m2 to 18,632 m2. 176 units of trees have been planted.
*Economic activity: The number of economic activities on the ground floor has gone up from 65 to 85.
*Public housing: A public housing building is being constructed in the central area of the Superblock by the Municipal Housing Trust.

Equally as important are observed changes in the lifestyles of residents (SMARTEES_01: A126). Several residents have reported an increase in the personal use of bikes while reducing use of private cars/motorbikes. Biking has become a trend as it is perceived safer with the lower numbers of cars around.

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

'''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

The municipality mentions that the implementation of Superblocks builds on several city-wide plans from the past such as the:
*Cerdà Plan
*County Plan (1953)
*The General Metropolitan Plan (1977) - the “current framework”
*The Street Plan (1986)
*Re-developments of Portal de l’Àngel and Plaça de la Catedral
*The Mobility Plan for Vila de Gràcia (2003) (Ajuntament_01: 8f.)

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

The municipality reports that taming the passage of cars based on blocks is not a new idea. Other examples can be seen in:
*proposals for neighbourhood units
*ideas for environmental areas and traffic management published by English engineer Colin Buchanan<ref>Bianconi M., Tewdwr-Jones M. (2013): The form and organisation of urban areas: Colin Buchanan and Traffic in Towns 50 years on. In: The Town planning review 84(3):313-336.</ref>.
*the woonerfs in the Netherlands<ref>https://www.naturespath.com/en-us/blog/woonerf-the-dutch-solution-to-city-planning/.</ref>.

Barcelona was the first city to implement Superblocks, but today the idea is very common across Spain. There is a lot of exchange about the implementation of Superblocks between cities. Barcelona has an especially strong inter-city partnership with Vitoria-Gasteiz, which has a Superblock Programme (SUMP - Sustainable Mobility Plan) that is reorganizing the city in 77 Superblocks. This plan started after Barcelona's, in 2008 and will end in 2023 (SMARTEES_01: A95).
Both cities are continuing to support each other through ii) legitimacy, iii) knowledge sharing, learning and peer support. Barcelona profits from the experiences learned in Vitoria-Gasteiz (SMARTEES_01: A109).

=== Learning content ===

'''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

Technical knowledge about how to physically change the existing structure of blocks was originally implemented in the Cerdà Plan (19th century).

Numerous experiences on how to reclaim space for pedestrians have been reported useful to the intervention, especially those based on developments from the Street Plan of 1986 (Ajuntament_01: 10). Much like the current debates surrounding Superblocks, during the first re-developments of Portal de l’Àngel and Plaça de la Catedral, merchants were worried that making streets only accessible to pedestrians would lead to a drop in sales (Ajuntament_01:10).
Learning to respond to resistance against implementation with process adaptation instead of halting the project was critical.

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

It is difficult to measure the exact content and learnings from partnerships with other cities, as exchanges are rather informal but steadily happening.

*'''c. from other knowledge gathering/research'''

From the implementation of the intervention itself:
The municipality had to learn the importance of providing enough, place-specific and reliable data about the proposals for each neighbourhood. This is important to break any misperceptions and better communicate the benefits of the project.
In addition, it is crucial to connect the Superblock proposal with the overall ambitions to tackle specific issues on a city-wide scale (SMARTEES_01: 48).

Furthermore the ability to adapt certain parts of the Superblock invtervention in cooperation with stakeholders from different fields and local residents has been one of the key learnings for the municipality (Interview_31:05).

Best practices about participatory processes have been developed based on experiences (especially in coping with resistances) include:
*engaging people in deliberative processes
*information and communication strategies and channels
*the use of ICT technologies (e.g., GIS maps) for illustrating main changes proposed at the neighbourhood level
*maintaining a coherent discourse and practice
*building trust to accomplish goals while being open to peoples proposals (SMARTEES_01: A123).

Janet Sanz, a city councillor and today's “Deputy Mayor for Ecology, Urban Planning and Mobility” stressed that "listening to the neighbourhood has been the main learning of this project” (El Periodico).

=== Learning process ===

'''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''

In order to reduce conflict and resistance, the Technical Secretariat (in Poblenou):
*Created new channels for communication
*Improved participatory process (citizens were invited to formulate improvements in the design of the Superblocks)
*Entered into a negotiation process between supporters and critics of the intervention

This lead to the implementation of certain changes, such as preventing private vehicles and public transport from entering Superblocks.

The Technical Secretariat also became important in communicating with other cities, as it reportedly gave advice and shared knowledge with representatives from New York and Copenhagen (SMARTEES_01: 50).

'''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''

The resistance in Poblenou fundamentally changed the way in which Superblocks are implemented. As a critical point, newly created local working groups give residents and other stakeholders the platform to express issues and co-create their neighbourhood (Interview). Speculatively, this might also change the way other projects in Barcelona could be designed in the future, although it is still too early to measure this (Interview).

'''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''

*Face-to-Face meetings (all actors)
*Field visits / meeting the locals (Workshops organized by city council with city technicians, politicians and residents) (SMARTEES_01: A119).

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

'''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

Barcelona's Superblock program recognized internationally; many other cities are in contact with Barcelona to learn from their experience.
Barcelona has received a lot of media attention over the last couple of years from e.g The New York Times (2016)<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/nyregion/what-new-york-can-learn-from-barcelonas-superblocks.html?_r=1.</ref>, The Guardian (2019<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/sep/10/barcelonas-car-free-superblocks-could-save-hundreds-of-lives.</ref>), El Pais (2018)<ref>https://elpais.com/ccaa/2018/09/29/catalunya/1538246791_684437.html .</ref>, Deutschlandfunk (2016)<ref>https://www.deutschlandfunknova.de/beitrag/superblocks-in-barcelona.</ref>, Die Zeit (2018<ref> https://www.zeit.de/mobilitaet/2018-04/barcelona-verkehr-problem-autofahrer-smart-data.</ref>) or very extensively from VOX<ref>https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/4/9/18300797/barcelona-spain-superblocks-urban-plan.</ref>.

The New York Times and Vox are suggesting possibilities to replicate the Superblock idea, the New York Times article is called “What New York Can Learn From Barcelona’s ‘Superblocks’” (NewYorkTimes_01). Similarly, VOX is suggesting the possible replicability of the Superblock idea in Portland, Oregon. An interviewee from Bloomberg Associates sees potential in Washington, DC, New York City, San Francisco, and Chicago as they already have grid patterns, walkable blocks, and suffer from air and noise pollution. She also sees potential in several smaller cities, as “just about every city or town has some central area with remnants of a block pattern”(VOX_02).

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Districts and city-wide plans, dense cities.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Media, urban planners, researchers.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

VOX mentions different limits to transferability, especially in regards to US cities:
*Cities tend to be too wide and focused around interstates and freeways
*Missing density and walkability
*Missing short, regular blocks, orthogonal streets, and mixed-use zoning
*Missing familiarity with urban transformations and civic pride (VOX_02). Americans are so accustomed to the absence of walkable and accessible public spaces they barely can express what they are missing.

These factors are especially prominent in the US but can be applied to a lot of European cities, as well.

Also interesting is the relationship between the suburbs and hurdles to reduce cars on the roads:
Suburbs with clear property borders and separated dwellings means less density, less walkability, and slower and less frequent public transport. This leads to a dependance on private vehicles as a predominant form of mobility.

The idea of vibrant, public spaces then does not really work if there is not sufficient density around them: “They become internal tourist destinations, places residents drive to visit” (VOX_02).

'''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>

SMARTEES has a large report on all kinds of issues related to the implementation of Superblocks. There is specific section on “Critical issues and How Critical issues have been overcome” (SMARTEES_01: 45f); as well as specific stories (an extra info box) that show how exactly certain project processes developed e.g resistance in Poblenou (SMARTEES_01: A129f.).
As mentioned, there is also a lot of media coverage around Barcelona's implementation of Superblocks, which have reported how other cities could learn from the challenges Barcelona faced (NewYorkTimes_01).

SMARTEES is actively trying to build networks between Barcelona and other Spanish cities and thereby creating ways to formalize learning and sharing. SMARTEES wants to develop policy scenario workshops where cities can discuss next steps for future Superblock interventions (Vitoria-Gasteiz and Barcelona will be part of these workshops). The goal is to bring researchers and actors from the cities together to discuss lessons learned, strategize on alternative approaches, and find best practices to transfer that knowledge to future implementations.

'''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''

Within Spain, the idea of Superblocks is spreading to other topologically diverse cities such as A Coruña, Ferrol,Viladecans and El Prat (SMARTEES_01: A49).

SMARTEES report that representatives of New York and Copenhagen have already visited Barcelona and are advised by the Technical Secretariat (SMARTEES_01: 50).

Other cities in the world such as Melbourne, Toronto, Lisbon, Quito, Buenos Aires are also interested in the Superblock Programme and are in contact with the Agencia de Ecologia Urbana. Seattle is also reportedly considering implementing its first Superblock, which was brought to the table by Seattle Councilwoman Teresa Mosqueda (CapitolHill_01).

A lot of other cities in the world (from Japan, China, India, South Korea, Canada, Ecuador, Mexico and Moscow) have requested information on Superblocks (SMARTEES_01: 50).

== j) Structural learning ==

'''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

The Superblock model developed a new strategy to facilitate public participation, pursuing co-responsibility as one of the core strategies of the programme (SMARTEES_01: 43). Other long-term consequences are not yet foreseeable, as this project only started relatively recently and will be ongoing for several years.
It will be interesting to see if there are going to be institutional changes because of the Superblocks Programme. SMARTEES is trying to evaluate these as part of their project.

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

'''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''

Barcelona has a long history public engagement and has formal structures for participation in place, such as the Conseils de Barri (SMARTEES_01: 43) (VOX_02).

'''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''

This intervention shows how important it is to be able to adapt existing plans to local contexts.
There could possibly be long-term changes in the way the municipality interacts with residents for different programmes beyond Superblocks. Therefore, the lessons learned from the Superblock intervention could be a critical moment of change for the city (Interview).

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favourable (or unfavourable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurments. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Reclaiming Street Space: Cooperation for Neighbourhood Transformation

2020-12-22T21:43:27Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali moved page Inviting citizens to a transformation of street space - flexibly dealing with resistance to Creating a sustainable energy system: a citizen-driven transformation

Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park

2020-12-22T21:15:30Z

Nadia Ali:

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Negotiating green space development: balancing long-term sustainability and short-term social needs]]

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

'''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (neighborhood in capital city)”]'''

Peri-urban Natural Park of Collserola (Serra de Collserola Natural Park) in Barcelona (Naturvation_08).

'''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in ? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''

Green Space for biodiversity protection, ecosystem services provision, and Nature-Based Solution (NBS).

'''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''

The intervention aims to protect Barcelona's fragile Peri-Urban ecosystems for both social and ecological functions while preserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services to nearby residents (Naturvation_08). Since the enactment of the special plan for planning and protection of the natural environment in 1987, the park has become an area for recreation and connection to nature, promotion of the cultural and environmental values of the local population, and protection of an area of great ecological value (Naturvation_09).
Barcelona is a highly populated and dense city with relatively a few available green spaces. Collserola Park enhances the quality of life in the city, in particular through the forests' contribution to air pollution removal and urban cooling (Naturvation_08).

'''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''

The park’s new management activities started in 2010 and are still ongoing. The intervention was studied in the context of the NATURVATION project during the period 2016 - 2020 (Naturvation_08).

'''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''

Government-led (Naturvation_08).

'''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>

This intervention meets the WP5 criteria for a case selection/study criteria by highlighting the governance challenges associated with the addressing the need for green spaces for both recreational activities and biodiversity protection. In particular, maintaining a balance between different stakeholders' visions for the park and ensuring local citizens participate in the park’s planning and management (given the geographical scale of the intervention and the traditionally hierarchical governance mode of the actors) are noteworthy challenges.

'''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place-specific) governance intervention?'''

Naturvation Deliverables
*Urban Nature Atlas: A database of nature-based solutions across 100 European cities, 2018 (Naturvation_07)
*Taking action for urban nature - citizens engagement handbook, 2019 (Naturvation_01)
*International comparison of nature-based solutions project report, 2019 (Naturvation_06)

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

'''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

The intervention was studied by NATURVATION with funding by the European Union’s HORIZON 2020 Programme (Naturvation_08).
https://naturvation.eu/nbs/barcelona/peri-urban-natural-park-collserola

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

The intervention best fits under the “Nature-Based Solutions” approach. It has been studied under the NATURVATION project, which is mentioned as an example in the database of approaches.

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes, the four deliverables mentioned above (Q. 7).

'''9. Problematization and priority:'''

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Collserola Park is the largest green space in the metropolitan area of Barcelona, an area that is under significant demographic pressure (Naturvation_09). Rapid urbanization was seen as a potential threat to fragile peri-urban ecosystems and consequently to biodiversity protection, ecosystem services, and access to nature. Additionally, uneven representation of different visions - biodiversity protection vs. recreation - between different groups reflect wider tensions and inequalities that local citizens had problematized in the park's existing management (Naturvation_06:82).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Striking a balance between dual goals of biodiversity protection and fulfilling local citizens' demand for greater access to green spaces and recreational activities is the major motivation behind the intervention (Naturvation_08).
The Special Plan for the Protection of the Natural Environment and Landscape of Collserola Mountain (PepNat) was devised to address Collserola’s new status as a NATURA 2000 site, responding to the challenge of preserving biodiversity while providing much needed recreational ecosystem services, especially in relation to the high density of population in surrounding areas (Naturvation_06:19).

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
| Yes
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

'''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''

The intervention was initiated and is now jointly managed by the Park Consortium, composed of members from the Catalan government (Generalitat de Catalunya), the Barcelona Provincial Council (Diputació de Barcelona), the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona (AMB), and the adjacent nine municipalities (within the territory of the Park): El Papiol, Molins de Rei, Sant Feliu de Llobregat, Sant Just Desvern, Esplugues de Llobregat, Barcelona, Montcada i Reixac, Cerdanyola Del Vallès and Sant Cugat del Vallè (Naturvation_08).

'''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''

Park visitors and local citizens. Park visitors could be outsiders e.g. tourists or scientists. Local citizens not only benefit from visits but also from the ecosystem services that the park provides, such as moderating atmospheric temperature.

'''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| as part of consultative and scientific committees, see Q15
|-
| Religious organizations
| Yes
| as part of consultative and scientific committees, see Q15
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
| as part of consultative and scientific committees, see Q15
|-
| Social movements
|
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
|
|
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
|
|
|-
| For profit entreprises
|
|
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| The park consortium (see Q10) is responsible for the management and development of the Special Plan for the Ordering and Protection of the Natural Environment of the Parc de Collserola (Naturvation_08).
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
|
|
|}

'''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''

The interactions within the initiating consortium, i.e. between the Catalan government (Generalitat de Catalunya), the Barcelona Provincial Council (Diputació de Barcelona), the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona, and the nine adjacent municipalities (Naturvation_06:19).

'''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''

Citizens and visitors to the park are encouraged to leave suggestions for the park’s improvement at the information centre (Naturvation_07:59). Citizens are also asked for their feedback on the Park’s management plan (Naturvation_01:11). However, according to the NATURVATION project documentation, the Collserola Park's management plans are often only shared with the public at an advanced stage of development and in formats that are not easy to understand. According to NATURVATION’s informants, citizens in Barcelona were invited to comment on initial park management drafts where, despite the inclusive small group format, the discussion topics were pre-decided by the organizers, which obstructed effective participation (Naturvation_06:24).

'''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''

In terms of inclusive decision-making, the park's governance system is comparatively advanced and informed (Interview, 08.06.2020).
The Serra de Collserola Natural Park is governed by the following bodies:
*General assembly
The General Assembly is the Consortium’s supreme deliberation and decision-making body. It is made up of 10 members from Barcelona Diputació, 10 members from Barcelona Metropolitan Area, four members from the Government of Catalonia (Generalitat), one member from each city or town council affiliated to the Consortium and one member from an invited entity.
*Executive committee
The Executive Committee is an operational body established to monitor and develop mechanisms for the implementation of decisions taken in the General Assembly. The Executive Committee comprises of twenty-one members, of which at least three are representatives of Barcelona Diputació, three Barcelona Metropolitan Area, and three from the Government of Catalonia.
*Consultative committee
The Consultative Committee is the advisory body that brings together the social, academic, cultural, professional, and economic sectors, alongside private non-profit organizations that pursue goals of general interest that coincide with those of the Consortium.
*Scientific advisory committee
The aim of the Scientific Advisory Committee is to provide advice based on scientific knowledge to the governing and management bodies of the Natural Park in regards to particular action items. Its creation is pursuant to Article 13 of Decree 146/2010, of a declaration of the Natural Park of the Serra de Collserola (Naturvation_10).

'''16. Exclusion:'''

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

The Naturvation project reported the tokenized participation of local citizens in the Parks management and planning (Naturvation_06:24).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The analysis conducted by NATURVATION project lists following constraints to citizens’ participation::
*Park managers fear that the citizens' engagement (or inclusion) in the park’s planning could weaken their vision for longterm sustainability and biodiversity protection (Interview).
*Citizens' engagement in park management often depends on the interest and goodwill of individuals coordinating the plan.
*Lack of trust sometimes makes municipalities reluctant to genuinely engage with civil groups.
*A perceived sense among the citizens that the proposed plan would proceed regardless of consultation responses has also impeded public participation in the management of the Park.
*The contextual distance between civil groups and municipalities and any pre-existing contestations has influenced the participation process.
*Low turn-out rate is a factor of privilege: only those who could afford to volunteer or participate affected who could be present in NBS consultations and management planning (Naturvation_06:24).

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

'''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''

The EU directive 92/43 / EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora provided context for the creation of Natrua 2000: a European ecological network of special areas for conservation. Under this directive, the Agreement of the Government of the Generalitat de Catalunya of September 5, 2006 approved the proposal detailing places of community importance. This included the Serra de Collserola, which corresponds to the totality of the "Space included in the Plan of Areas of Natural Interest".
This territory has been managed since 1987 within the framework of a special protection plan. Its environmental protection dimension was then consolidated with the declaration of the Natural Park in 2010 (Naturvation_08).

'''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''

As already stated above (Q. 17), the EU Policy NATURA 2000 joins national implementation in local territories with multiple levels of regional, local, and municipal government agencies.

'''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''

On basis of the constitutional responsibilities (as prescribed by Spain’s constitution from 1978), regional and local government bodies have been involved in the implementation of the (European) NATURA 2000 policy within the context of the park's management:
Part VIII Territorial Organization of State:
*Section 140: Autonomy of municipalities
*Section 141: … a provincial government comprised of municipalities is designed to carry out the activities of the state.
*Section 142: local treasuries must have sufficient funds available in order to perform the tasks assigned by the law.
Chapter 3: Principles Governing Economic and Social Policy
*Section 45: Everyone has the right to enjoy an environment suitable for the development of the person, as well as the duty to preserve it.
*Section 45: The public authorities shall watch over a rational use of all natural resources with a view to protecting and improving the quality of life and preserving and restoring the environment…

'''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''

According to NATURVATION project documentation (Naturvation_06), constant coordination and collaboration between municipalities and regional bodies were very important to the success of the intervention - for instance, in overcoming differences in interests.

'''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''

The Diputació de Barcelona and the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona provide the annual budget to support the program of actions (Naturvation_08).

'''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''

The Naturvation project has documented that the park consortium adopted new and improved methods for engaging citizens in planning and managing the park (Naturvation_01:59).

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

'''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

The NATURVATION project has reported some controversies during the development the Collserola Management Plan (PepNat) specifically focused on whether or not an urban park - highly accessible and with considerable grey infrastructure - should be subject to a stricter (biodiversity) protection regime.
Similarly, an interviewee for the study highlighted that there were conflicts between visions for the park from major park management entities i.e. the regional government, park authority, and the MBA. The regional government and the park authority favored more biodiversity protection for long-term sustainability, whereas the MBA favored fulfilling the demand for recreation and thus shorter-term social justice goals (given the small number of green spaces in the highly dense and populated city of Barcelona).
The interviewee further flagged tensions around the central authority of the park. Collserola was first under the direct control of the regional government, but due to some political power influences, the park’s authority shifted from the regional to local government.
Finally, the NATURVATION project has also documented that the Collserola Management Plan (2019) left some issues unaddressed, such as the possibility of gentrification in the Park’s surrounding areas and illegal housing within the park's premises (Naturvation_06:26).

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The Naturvation project has documented the obscured socio-economic impacts of the Park’s management plans. The plans had gained popularity by promising multiple benefits, yet remained imprecise and neglected difficulties or discrepancies with implementing such measures (Naturvation_06:26).

*'''c. Public awareness'''

The proposal for adaptive management in Collserola’s PepNat introduced new concepts and ideas about park management that were too technical to understand by all stakeholders, giving rise to questions and contestation about their implementation and impacts (Naturvation_06:24).

*'''d. Finances'''

According to an interviewee, the park is the best financially-equipped park in the region.

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

We found no references to other types of obstacles

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

'''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Contestations around different visions for the park: biodiversity protection vs. recreation
| Stakeholder negotiations and park planning to strike a balance between both visions.
On the ground, the park managers are trying to reduce the number of trails, adopt a regulative approach, and restrict zones for bikers (additional signage) (WP5 Interview on 08.06.202).
|-
| 2. Questionable social benefits
| The Park Consortium designed more recreational activities for the Park’s visitors (Naturvation_09).
|-
| 3.Poor public participation and lack of awareness
| The regional and park authorities initiated a variety of public participation methods – incorporating discussions that were similar to round tables in order to debate and discuss its planning drafts with citizens.
The initiative benefited from numerous public meetings and workshops held on municipal premises adjacent to the park. However, it was found difficult to provide sufficient information for citizens to develop an informed perspective (Naturvation_01:11).
|-
| 4.
|
|-
| 5.
|
|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

'''25. What are reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''

The park currently hosts several plant and animal species; a large number of visitors are attracted every year (almost 30.000 in 2015); and programs several environmental education activities. The intervention is ongoing, below are expected impacts:
*Green space, habitats and biodiversity (SDG 15)
*Regeneration, land-use and urban development
*Inclusive and effective governance (SDG 16)
*Health and well-being (SDG 3) (Naturvation_08).

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

'''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

Not reported.

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

Not reported.

=== Learning content ===

'''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

The Park has adopted a lot of guidance from the region. The park authority was involved in various European networks for learning and knowledge exchange with other parks. In general, its management/governance system composed of various bodies has greater capacity for learning and exchange (https://www.europarc.org/case-studies/transition-agroecology-collserola-nature-park-enhanced-participatory-process) (Interview, 08.06.20).

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

Answered above under question number 27.

*'''c. from other knowledge gathering/research'''

The parks’ governance body has a scientific advisory committee that makes decisions for the park on the basis of scientific research (Interview, 08.06.20).

=== Learning process ===

'''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''

Not reported.

'''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''

According to the NATURVATION project, the park consortium has adopted new ways of citizens engagement in the park’s management planning. However, the issue is not yet fully addressed (6).

'''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''

It can be assumed that the numerous citizen engagement meetings and workshops organized in municipal premises by the park consortium (as recorded by Naturvation) added to the learning process (Naturvation_01).

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

'''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

The intervention could be replicated in other places in Spain or Catalonia. Interestingly, according to an interviewee, southern countries are not often exemplary in terms of sustainability governance and are rather replicating interventions from northern European countries i.e. Scandinavia, Germany, the Netherlands etc. This may change, as Italy especially has shown some interest in Catalonian sustainability interventions.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Other cities in Spain.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Johannes Langemeyer, Established Researcher, ICTA - UAB as a passive observer of the Collserola National Park on June 10, 2020, has made the claim of potential transferability of the intervention.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

'''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>

Some learnings from the intervention have been recorded by the NATURVATION project and are hence accessible via the respective website.

'''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''

Not reported.

== j) Structural learning ==

'''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

None

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

'''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''
This is a purely government-led intervention that benefitted from trans-organisational cooperation, but was challenged by a lack of effective citizens’ participation.

WP5 Interviewee (Johannes Langemeyer) on June 08, 2020: The biggest takeaway from this intervention in terms of governance arrangements is how bringing together different legitimate views, especially in combining long-term vision (from the province and with a view to protect a natural area) and short-term vision (from the municipality to mitigate the lack of natural areas and provide residents with a recreational area), could be a challenge.

'''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favorable (or unfavorable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurements. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Balancing long term sustainability and short-term social needs in peri-urban green space

2020-12-22T21:12:07Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali moved page Balancing long term sustainability and short-term social needs in peri-urban green space to Negotiating green space development: balancing long-term sustainability and short-term social needs

#REDIRECT [[Negotiating green space development: balancing long-term sustainability and short-term social needs]]

Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs

2020-12-22T21:12:07Z

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park |real-world case]].

'''Imagine your city where rapid urbanization and increasing density necessitates both protection of biodiversity and provision of green spaces for locals by means of a natural park.'''

'''How might this become a reality?'''

To address the potential threats of decreasing green spaces and biodiversity loss (Q3), municipalities and local and regional governments may come together to actively take measures for the protection of the urban ecosystems. The ecosystems could be demarcated and managed for their best use both for long term sustainability by protecting the ecosystem and its species and the immediate social needs (recreational and health) of the local people (Q10).

'''What potential policies and laws can support the cause?'''

The formation of a natural park in a highly dense city can be shaped and supported by some national and EU policies e.g. NATURA 2000 (Q18). It can be further supported by the constitutional rights of citizens (to a healthy environment) and the responsibility and duties of governments at multiple scales to provide those services for the citizens (Q19).

'''How critical is diverse stakeholder engagement and balancing their interests?'''

For the successful implementation of the intervention, the formation of a governance body based on multi-level government agencies, municipalities, scientific, advisory, and consultative bodies (engaging the members of civil society, research institutes, NGOs, and academia) would be crucial (Q9). Yet, striking a balance between different visions of the stakeholders for the park, particularly, biodiversity protection (for next generations/long term outcome) and social benefits (recreation and green space for present generation) could be a great challenge. It is possible that one vision overshadows the other due to exclusion of some actors at various stages of the park’s management planning process. As in many cases, park managers or other main stakeholders may avoid local citizens’ participation to the extent possible fearing further complexity of the planning process. However, to avoid exclusion and to promote legitimacy and equality, effective, non-tokenistic participation of all stakeholders during all stages of the park’s management planning should be ensured (Q23).

'''What methods can ensure effective and productive stakeholders engagement throughout the process?'''
The park management team may ensure continuous communication about the park’s affairs by using various communication tools e.g. meetings and workshops while making sure the content is comprehensible for all stakeholders. For better decision making park authority can create a network for learning and exchange of knowledge between parks within and across regions/urban contexts. Finally, learning and knowledge exchange across parks in Europe may help to overcome challenges and adopt more inclusive planning methods to achieve long-term sustainability and short-term social justice goals (Q25).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

Take a look at the detailed description of [[Biodiversity protection and social justice in the Barcelona Natural Park]] that has inspired this scenario.

This scenario fits under the '''approach''':
*[[Nature-based solutions]]. This approach refers to solutions for urban sustainability that are inspired and supported by nature, which are cost-effective, simultaneously provide environmental, social, and economic benefits and help build resilience.

It addresses some '''drivers of injustice''':
*[[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]. This driver refers to the ways in which new urban developments might force trade-offs between the social and environmental goals of urban sustainability projects. It involves public efforts to improve a neighborhood’s physical structure and boost its economy by attracting investment, usually in the sectors of real estate and tourism.
*[[Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]. This driver refers to the limited involvement and engagement of citizens and citizens’ initiatives in decision-making around the planning, design, implementation, and/or evaluation of urban sustainability-oriented interventions.
*[[Unfit institutional structures]]. This driver refers to those aspects or functions of organizations, public offices, administrations, and authorities that deal with urban governance and stand in the way of achieving just outcomes in urban sustainability.

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].

Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs

2020-12-22T21:10:36Z

Nadia Ali:

Biodiversity protection and social justice in the Barcelona Natural Park

2020-12-22T21:09:36Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali moved page Biodiversity protection and social justice in the Barcelona Natural Park to Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park

#REDIRECT [[Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park]]

Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park

2020-12-22T21:09:36Z

Nadia Ali: Nadia Ali moved page Biodiversity protection and social justice in the Barcelona Natural Park to Biodiversity Protection and Social Justice in the Barcelona Natural Park

This intervention has been translated into a brief governance scenario. Take a look at [[Balancing long term sustainability and short-term social needs in peri-urban green space]]

== a) Basic characteristics and ambitions of the intervention ==

'''1. What is the name and the urban context (e.g. city/district) of the intervention? Please also indicate the geographical scale of the intervention (e.g. neighborhood, district, small/medium/ capital city, metropolitan area ...). [Example: “Brixton Energy in Brixton, London (neighborhood in capital city)”]'''

Peri-urban Natural Park of Collserola (Serra de Collserola Natural Park) in Barcelona (Naturvation_08).

'''2. What sector(s) (alias domain/ policy field) is the intervention primarily implemented in ? [e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, health, local economy, biodiversity, CC adaptation, etc.]'''

Green Space for biodiversity protection, ecosystem services provision, and Nature-Based Solution (NBS).

'''3. What is the intervention (i.e. situated experiment) aiming to achieve in terms of sustainability and justice? [If possible, please copy from a project website and give a reference]'''

The intervention aims to protect Barcelona's fragile Peri-Urban ecosystems for both social and ecological functions while preserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services to nearby residents (Naturvation_08). Since the enactment of the special plan for planning and protection of the natural environment in 1987, the park has become an area for recreation and connection to nature, promotion of the cultural and environmental values of the local population, and protection of an area of great ecological value (Naturvation_09).
Barcelona is a highly populated and dense city with relatively a few available green spaces. Collserola Park enhances the quality of life in the city, in particular through the forests' contribution to air pollution removal and urban cooling (Naturvation_08).

'''4. What is the interventions’ timeframe?'''

The park’s new management activities started in 2010 and are still ongoing. The intervention was studied in the context of the NATURVATION project during the period 2016 - 2020 (Naturvation_08).

'''5. By what governance mode is the intervention characterized primarily? (see [[#Appendix 1: Three modes of governance | Appendix 1: Three modes of governance]])'''

Government-led (Naturvation_08).

'''6. Why do you consider it worthwhile to study and share experiences made in the context of this governance intervention for sustainable and just cities?<ref>Background to this question: Our four main criteria for selecting particular governance interventions and develop rich descriptions of them were: A) The intervention has been studied in a specific urban context (e.g. city), B) this context is located in Europe (and, preferably, the study was EU-funded), C) the intervention considers to a large extent sustainability AND justice (at least implicitly), and D) it is well-documented, ideally including assumptions or even critical reflections on enablers and barriers to implementation and on transferability (i.e. ‘de-contextualizability’). Additionally, we aimed at a diverse portfolio of domains (see Q2.) and governance modes (see Q5): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nCPcUd-COIQ1MsBjir20_F1CBbnSu6HqKH9nNLshiVQ/edit?usp=sharing.</ref>

This intervention meets the WP5 criteria for a case selection/study criteria by highlighting the governance challenges associated with the addressing the need for green spaces for both recreational activities and biodiversity protection. In particular, maintaining a balance between different stakeholders' visions for the park and ensuring local citizens participate in the park’s planning and management (given the geographical scale of the intervention and the traditionally hierarchical governance mode of the actors) are noteworthy challenges.

'''7. In which project deliverable(s) or other documents can information be found on this situated (i.e. place-specific) governance intervention?'''

Naturvation Deliverables
*Urban Nature Atlas: A database of nature-based solutions across 100 European cities, 2018 (Naturvation_07)
*Taking action for urban nature - citizens engagement handbook, 2019 (Naturvation_01)
*International comparison of nature-based solutions project report, 2019 (Naturvation_06)

== b) Additional basic characteristics, links to earlier UrbanA work ==

'''8. EU Project-context of the intervention:'''

*'''a. Has the intervention been developed or studied in the context of an (EU-funded?) project? (please name the project, its duration and include a link to the project website here).'''

The intervention was studied by NATURVATION with funding by the European Union’s HORIZON 2020 Programme (Naturvation_08).
https://naturvation.eu/nbs/barcelona/peri-urban-natural-park-collserola

*'''b. According to WP3’s database of approaches, which approach(es) does the intervention best fit under? Where applicable, please indicate if the intervention is found in a project that has been explicitly mentioned in the database.'''

The intervention best fits under the “Nature-Based Solutions” approach. It has been studied under the NATURVATION project, which is mentioned as an example in the database of approaches.

*'''c. Have some project deliverables been coded in the context of UrbanA’s WP4?'''

Yes, the four deliverables mentioned above (Q. 7).

'''9. Problematization and priority:'''

*'''a. How exactly has inequality and exclusion been problematized (by whom) in the context of this intervention?'''

Collserola Park is the largest green space in the metropolitan area of Barcelona, an area that is under significant demographic pressure (Naturvation_09). Rapid urbanization was seen as a potential threat to fragile peri-urban ecosystems and consequently to biodiversity protection, ecosystem services, and access to nature. Additionally, uneven representation of different visions - biodiversity protection vs. recreation - between different groups reflect wider tensions and inequalities that local citizens had problematized in the park's existing management (Naturvation_06:82).

*'''b. Has the achievement of justice explicitly been named as a major motivation behind the intervention?'''

Striking a balance between dual goals of biodiversity protection and fulfilling local citizens' demand for greater access to green spaces and recreational activities is the major motivation behind the intervention (Naturvation_08).
The Special Plan for the Protection of the Natural Environment and Landscape of Collserola Mountain (PepNat) was devised to address Collserola’s new status as a NATURA 2000 site, responding to the challenge of preserving biodiversity while providing much needed recreational ecosystem services, especially in relation to the high density of population in surrounding areas (Naturvation_06:19).

*'''c. Which drivers of injustice does the intervention address? (see [[Database of drivers of injustice | Database of drivers of injustice]])'''

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Drivers of injustices
! Based on WP4 coding
! Based on own assessment
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 1. [[Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure| Exclusive access to the benefits of sustainability infrastructure]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 2. [[Material and livelihood inequalities | Material and livelihood inequalities]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 3. [[Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization | Racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 4. [[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration | Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 5. [[Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns|Uneven environmental health and pollution patterns]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 6. [[Unfit institutional structures | Unfit institutional structures]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 7. [[Limited citizen participation in urban planning | Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 8. [[Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities | Lack of effective knowledge brokerage and stewardship opportunities ]]
|
|
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 9. [[Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism | Unquestioned Neoliberal growth and austerity urbanism ]]
| Yes
| Yes
|-
| style="text-align:left;" | 10. [[Weak(ened) civil society | Weak(ened) civil society]]
|
| Yes
|}

== c) Actor constellations ==

'''10. Who initiated the intervention?'''

The intervention was initiated and is now jointly managed by the Park Consortium, composed of members from the Catalan government (Generalitat de Catalunya), the Barcelona Provincial Council (Diputació de Barcelona), the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona (AMB), and the adjacent nine municipalities (within the territory of the Park): El Papiol, Molins de Rei, Sant Feliu de Llobregat, Sant Just Desvern, Esplugues de Llobregat, Barcelona, Montcada i Reixac, Cerdanyola Del Vallès and Sant Cugat del Vallè (Naturvation_08).

'''11. Who are the envisioned benefiters of the intervention? (both at a local level and higher, if applicable)'''

Park visitors and local citizens. Park visitors could be outsiders e.g. tourists or scientists. Local citizens not only benefit from visits but also from the ecosystem services that the park provides, such as moderating atmospheric temperature.

'''12. Who else is (going to be) involved in the intervention, and what was/is their main role?'''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Actor types<ref>Actor types according to TRANSIT’s Critical Turning Point Database, http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/about-ctps-in-tsi-processes.</ref>
! Yes
! Actor name and role<ref>If easily possible mention sources for your association of roles.</ref>
|-
| Academic organizations
| Yes
| as part of consultative and scientific committees, see Q15
|-
| Religious organizations
| Yes
| as part of consultative and scientific committees, see Q15
|-
| Civil society organizations
|
|
|-
| Hybrid/ 3rd sector organizations
|
|
|-
| Platforms
|
|
|-
| NGOs
| Yes
| as part of consultative and scientific committees, see Q15
|-
| Social movements
|
|
|-
| Political parties
|
|
|-
| Media
|
|
|-
| Unions
|
|
|-
| Social entreprises
|
|
|-
| For profit entreprises
|
|
|-
| Local/regional government
| Yes
| The park consortium (see Q10) is responsible for the management and development of the Special Plan for the Ordering and Protection of the Natural Environment of the Parc de Collserola (Naturvation_08).
|-
| Regional organizations
|
|
|-
| National government
|
|
|-
| Supranational government
|
|
|-
| International networks
|
|
|-
| Other initiatives
|
|
|}

'''13. Which particular interactions among various stakeholders (stakeholder configurations) were crucial in enabling the intervention to emerge successfully? This could include direct or indirect impacts on interventions.'''

The interactions within the initiating consortium, i.e. between the Catalan government (Generalitat de Catalunya), the Barcelona Provincial Council (Diputació de Barcelona), the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona, and the nine adjacent municipalities (Naturvation_06:19).

'''14. To what extent, in what form and at what stages have citizens participated in the shaping of the intervention?'''

Citizens and visitors to the park are encouraged to leave suggestions for the park’s improvement at the information centre (Naturvation_07:59). Citizens are also asked for their feedback on the Park’s management plan (Naturvation_01:11). However, according to the NATURVATION project documentation, the Collserola Park's management plans are often only shared with the public at an advanced stage of development and in formats that are not easy to understand. According to NATURVATION’s informants, citizens in Barcelona were invited to comment on initial park management drafts where, despite the inclusive small group format, the discussion topics were pre-decided by the organizers, which obstructed effective participation (Naturvation_06:24).

'''15. How are responsibilities and/or decision-making power distributed among actors?'''

In terms of inclusive decision-making, the park's governance system is comparatively advanced and informed (Interview, 08.06.2020).
The Serra de Collserola Natural Park is governed by the following bodies:
*General assembly
The General Assembly is the Consortium’s supreme deliberation and decision-making body. It is made up of 10 members from Barcelona Diputació, 10 members from Barcelona Metropolitan Area, four members from the Government of Catalonia (Generalitat), one member from each city or town council affiliated to the Consortium and one member from an invited entity.
*Executive committee
The Executive Committee is an operational body established to monitor and develop mechanisms for the implementation of decisions taken in the General Assembly. The Executive Committee comprises of twenty-one members, of which at least three are representatives of Barcelona Diputació, three Barcelona Metropolitan Area, and three from the Government of Catalonia.
*Consultative committee
The Consultative Committee is the advisory body that brings together the social, academic, cultural, professional, and economic sectors, alongside private non-profit organizations that pursue goals of general interest that coincide with those of the Consortium.
*Scientific advisory committee
The aim of the Scientific Advisory Committee is to provide advice based on scientific knowledge to the governing and management bodies of the Natural Park in regards to particular action items. Its creation is pursuant to Article 13 of Decree 146/2010, of a declaration of the Natural Park of the Serra de Collserola (Naturvation_10).

'''16. Exclusion:'''

*'''a. Which stakeholders or social groups were excluded (at which stages)?'''

The Naturvation project reported the tokenized participation of local citizens in the Parks management and planning (Naturvation_06:24).

*'''b. Is there any indication why this may have happened? With what outcomes? Has anything been done to overcome such exclusions?'''

The analysis conducted by NATURVATION project lists following constraints to citizens’ participation::
*Park managers fear that the citizens' engagement (or inclusion) in the park’s planning could weaken their vision for longterm sustainability and biodiversity protection (Interview).
*Citizens' engagement in park management often depends on the interest and goodwill of individuals coordinating the plan.
*Lack of trust sometimes makes municipalities reluctant to genuinely engage with civil groups.
*A perceived sense among the citizens that the proposed plan would proceed regardless of consultation responses has also impeded public participation in the management of the Park.
*The contextual distance between civil groups and municipalities and any pre-existing contestations has influenced the participation process.
*Low turn-out rate is a factor of privilege: only those who could afford to volunteer or participate affected who could be present in NBS consultations and management planning (Naturvation_06:24).

== d) Enabling conditions for the implementation of the intervention ==

'''17. What circumstances or events are reported to have triggered the intervention? (In what ways?)'''

The EU directive 92/43 / EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora provided context for the creation of Natrua 2000: a European ecological network of special areas for conservation. Under this directive, the Agreement of the Government of the Generalitat de Catalunya of September 5, 2006 approved the proposal detailing places of community importance. This included the Serra de Collserola, which corresponds to the totality of the "Space included in the Plan of Areas of Natural Interest".
This territory has been managed since 1987 within the framework of a special protection plan. Its environmental protection dimension was then consolidated with the declaration of the Natural Park in 2010 (Naturvation_08).

'''18. Are particular substantive (multi-level) governmental policies considered to be highly influential in the genesis and shaping of the intervention? (If easily possible, please specify the policy, the policy field and the governance level mainly addressed, and characterize it along [[#Appendix 2: Policy typology | Appendix 2: Policy typology]])'''

As already stated above (Q. 17), the EU Policy NATURA 2000 joins national implementation in local territories with multiple levels of regional, local, and municipal government agencies.

'''19. What constitutional responsibilities and rules does the intervention build upon? In other words, what rights, powers, and/or responsibilities, does the country's constitution (in a broad sense) award municipalities, states, utilities, NGOs, citizens etc. and how does this impact the intervention?'''

On basis of the constitutional responsibilities (as prescribed by Spain’s constitution from 1978), regional and local government bodies have been involved in the implementation of the (European) NATURA 2000 policy within the context of the park's management:
Part VIII Territorial Organization of State:
*Section 140: Autonomy of municipalities
*Section 141: … a provincial government comprised of municipalities is designed to carry out the activities of the state.
*Section 142: local treasuries must have sufficient funds available in order to perform the tasks assigned by the law.
Chapter 3: Principles Governing Economic and Social Policy
*Section 45: Everyone has the right to enjoy an environment suitable for the development of the person, as well as the duty to preserve it.
*Section 45: The public authorities shall watch over a rational use of all natural resources with a view to protecting and improving the quality of life and preserving and restoring the environment…

'''20. According to project material/and or interviews, in what ways have particularities of (local) political culture influenced the character and success of the intervention? (i.e. trust in political institutions, citizens’ will to interact with policymakers and vice versa, traditions of cooperation, etc.)'''

According to NATURVATION project documentation (Naturvation_06), constant coordination and collaboration between municipalities and regional bodies were very important to the success of the intervention - for instance, in overcoming differences in interests.

'''21. What are financial arrangements that support the intervention?'''

The Diputació de Barcelona and the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona provide the annual budget to support the program of actions (Naturvation_08).

'''22. Have any of the above conditions changed within the intervention’s timeframe, which have (significantly) influenced it in a positive or negative way?'''

The Naturvation project has documented that the park consortium adopted new and improved methods for engaging citizens in planning and managing the park (Naturvation_01:59).

'''''Note: Certain contexts, which provide opportunities to learn from other relevant experiences, may also be a supportive framework condition. Please see section h, questions 26 + 30 on learning context.'''''

== e) Obstacles to successful intervention implementation ==

'''23. What obstacles to implementing the intervention (both generally, and in this particular context) have been identified, relating to:'''

*'''a. Regulatory framework'''

The NATURVATION project has reported some controversies during the development the Collserola Management Plan (PepNat) specifically focused on whether or not an urban park - highly accessible and with considerable grey infrastructure - should be subject to a stricter (biodiversity) protection regime.
Similarly, an interviewee for the study highlighted that there were conflicts between visions for the park from major park management entities i.e. the regional government, park authority, and the MBA. The regional government and the park authority favored more biodiversity protection for long-term sustainability, whereas the MBA favored fulfilling the demand for recreation and thus shorter-term social justice goals (given the small number of green spaces in the highly dense and populated city of Barcelona).
The interviewee further flagged tensions around the central authority of the park. Collserola was first under the direct control of the regional government, but due to some political power influences, the park’s authority shifted from the regional to local government.
Finally, the NATURVATION project has also documented that the Collserola Management Plan (2019) left some issues unaddressed, such as the possibility of gentrification in the Park’s surrounding areas and illegal housing within the park's premises (Naturvation_06:26).

*'''b. Legitimacy'''

The Naturvation project has documented the obscured socio-economic impacts of the Park’s management plans. The plans had gained popularity by promising multiple benefits, yet remained imprecise and neglected difficulties or discrepancies with implementing such measures (Naturvation_06:26).

*'''c. Public awareness'''

The proposal for adaptive management in Collserola’s PepNat introduced new concepts and ideas about park management that were too technical to understand by all stakeholders, giving rise to questions and contestation about their implementation and impacts (Naturvation_06:24).

*'''d. Finances'''

According to an interviewee, the park is the best financially-equipped park in the region.

*'''e. Others (please name)'''

We found no references to other types of obstacles

== f) (Institutional) Work done to overcome obstacles ==

'''24. What has been done by each central actor group to overcome which particular obstacles in the way of successfully implementing the intervention? (this may include institutional Work - maintaining, disrupting, and creating new rules, applying to both formal laws/regulations and informal norms and expectations.)'''

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name of obstacle
! What work was/is being done to overcome this obstacle and by what actor groups?
|-
| 1.Contestations around different visions for the park: biodiversity protection vs. recreation
| Stakeholder negotiations and park planning to strike a balance between both visions.
On the ground, the park managers are trying to reduce the number of trails, adopt a regulative approach, and restrict zones for bikers (additional signage) (WP5 Interview on 08.06.202).
|-
| 2. Questionable social benefits
| The Park Consortium designed more recreational activities for the Park’s visitors (Naturvation_09).
|-
| 3.Poor public participation and lack of awareness
| The regional and park authorities initiated a variety of public participation methods – incorporating discussions that were similar to round tables in order to debate and discuss its planning drafts with citizens.
The initiative benefited from numerous public meetings and workshops held on municipal premises adjacent to the park. However, it was found difficult to provide sufficient information for citizens to develop an informed perspective (Naturvation_01:11).
|-
| 4.
|
|-
| 5.
|
|}

== g) Reported outcomes ==

'''25. What are reported outcomes of the intervention? This may include economic outcomes, political outcomes, ability to reach sustainability and justice targets, etc.'''

The park currently hosts several plant and animal species; a large number of visitors are attracted every year (almost 30.000 in 2015); and programs several environmental education activities. The intervention is ongoing, below are expected impacts:
*Green space, habitats and biodiversity (SDG 15)
*Regeneration, land-use and urban development
*Inclusive and effective governance (SDG 16)
*Health and well-being (SDG 3) (Naturvation_08).

== h) Learning involved in establishing the intervention ==

''Please fill in any information on social learning that has occured in this intervention (conceptualized here as “Learning context, content, and process” in line with the FOODLINKS project)<ref>Deliverable 7.1 Synthesis Report on results from Monitoring and Evaluation (p.14) : http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf .</ref>. Where possible, please differentiate your response into learning done by specific actor groups.''

=== Learning context ===
''(i.e. the configuration and social environment enabling the learning process)''

'''26. According to the TRANSIT project’s four mechanisms for empowerment – i. funding; ii. legitimacy; iii. knowledge sharing, learning, and peer support; or iv. visibility and identity – please briefly describe the following, and indicate where the intervention has been developed or supported as part of which formal collaborations, networks or projects:'''

*'''a. any previous experiences in the same urban context (e.g. city…) that the intervention is (reportedly) building upon? This could include any relevant experiences in the same or another sector.'''

Not reported.

*'''b. any inter-city partnerships, or transfers from experiences elsewhere that have (reportedly) been important in the emergence of this intervention?'''

Not reported.

=== Learning content ===

'''27. Has any acquired knowledge (e.g. technical knowledge, awareness of local political procedures etc.) been reported as particularly helpful to this intervention?'''

*'''a. from previous experiences in the same urban context'''

The Park has adopted a lot of guidance from the region. The park authority was involved in various European networks for learning and knowledge exchange with other parks. In general, its management/governance system composed of various bodies has greater capacity for learning and exchange (https://www.europarc.org/case-studies/transition-agroecology-collserola-nature-park-enhanced-participatory-process) (Interview, 08.06.20).

*'''b. from inter-city partnerships or transfers from experiences elsewhere'''

Answered above under question number 27.

*'''c. from other knowledge gathering/research'''

The parks’ governance body has a scientific advisory committee that makes decisions for the park on the basis of scientific research (Interview, 08.06.20).

=== Learning process ===

'''28. In what ways has the intervention been adapted to specific circumstances of the targeted urban context based on the learned content reported in question 27?'''

Not reported.

'''29. Based on your answers to question 24, how has overcoming obstacles (reportedly) contributed to the learning process?'''

According to the NATURVATION project, the park consortium has adopted new ways of citizens engagement in the park’s management planning. However, the issue is not yet fully addressed (6).

'''30. Please list any tools that enabled the learning process (e.g. various Knowledge Brokerage Activities from pg. 24 of FOODLINK’s Deliverable 7.1 - linked in footnote)<ref>http://www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/karner-etal-d-7-1.pdf
.</ref> and the actors involved in using them.'''

It can be assumed that the numerous citizen engagement meetings and workshops organized in municipal premises by the park consortium (as recorded by Naturvation) added to the learning process (Naturvation_01).

== i) Learning involved in establishing interventions elsewhere (transferability)==

'''31. Suggestions regarding transferability.'''

*'''a. Have any suggestions been made about a replicability, scaleability or transferability of the intervention? [e.g. in the documentation of the intervention in a project or the press? Links would be perfect]'''

The intervention could be replicated in other places in Spain or Catalonia. Interestingly, according to an interviewee, southern countries are not often exemplary in terms of sustainability governance and are rather replicating interventions from northern European countries i.e. Scandinavia, Germany, the Netherlands etc. This may change, as Italy especially has shown some interest in Catalonian sustainability interventions.

*'''b. Transferability to what kind of contexts has been suggested?'''

Other cities in Spain.

*'''c. Who has made the claims?'''

Johannes Langemeyer, Established Researcher, ICTA - UAB as a passive observer of the Collserola National Park on June 10, 2020, has made the claim of potential transferability of the intervention.

*'''d. What limits to transferability to broader contexts have been discussed?'''

Not reported

'''32. In what forms has the learning process, including stories of overcoming obstacles, been recorded for, and/or made accessible to city makers also from elsewhere?<ref>Feel free to include learning that has been made available through EU project documentation, intervention initiatives, or other channels. In addition to the forms in which the learning process has been shared with others, please indicate whether the learning process that’s being shared has been recorded in a self-critical/reflexive way.</ref>

Some learnings from the intervention have been recorded by the NATURVATION project and are hence accessible via the respective website.

'''33. Have any signs of collaboration, support, or inspiration already been reported between actors involved in this intervention and others that follow its example? (e.g. in “follower cities”?)'''

Not reported.

== j) Structural learning ==

'''34. Has the intervention influenced higher-level governance arrangements such that sustainability and justice are considered (together) in a more durable, structural way? In other words, are there any observations about more structural, long-term changes as a result of the intervention?'''

*For example: new programs run by local councils, new modes of citizen participation, new mediating bodies
*Is there other evidence that the project has contributed to enhancing sustainable and just governance in cities in a general sense?

None

== k) Reflections on important governance concepts ==

'''35. What other aspects of governance, that were not covered above, are important to highlight, too?'''
This is a purely government-led intervention that benefitted from trans-organisational cooperation, but was challenged by a lack of effective citizens’ participation.

WP5 Interviewee (Johannes Langemeyer) on June 08, 2020: The biggest takeaway from this intervention in terms of governance arrangements is how bringing together different legitimate views, especially in combining long-term vision (from the province and with a view to protect a natural area) and short-term vision (from the municipality to mitigate the lack of natural areas and provide residents with a recreational area), could be a challenge.

'''36. From your perspective as a researcher, which word or phrase characterizes this governance intervention most concisely? (Please attach your name to the characterization) In other words, what is the biggest takeaway from this intervention about governance arrangements?'''

== Appendix 1: Three modes of governance ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

NATURVATION's [https://naturvation.eu/atlas| NBS-Atlas ] distinguishes three categories of governance arrangements (dubbed "management set-ups":

* '''Government-led''' (Gov)
* '''Co-governance or hybrid governance''' (mix of responsibilities between government and non-government actors) (c/h)
* '''Led by non-government actors''' (NGO)

Alternatively or additionally, the following four modes of governing (as distinguished also by Bulkeley/Kern 2006 and Zvolska et al. 2019) could be used as a typology:
Castan Broto/ Bulkeley 2013:95

# '''Self-governing''', intervening in the management of local authority operations to ‘‘lead by example’’;
# '''Provision''', greening infrastructure and consumer services provided by different authorities;
# '''Regulations''', enforcing new laws, planning regulations, building codes, etc.; and
# '''Enabling''', supporting initiatives led by other actors through information and resource provision and partnerships”

== Appendix 2: Policy typology ==
''(from NATURVATION project)''

{| class="wikitable"
|- style="font-weight:bold; text-align:center;"
! Policy typology
! Description
! Examples
|-
| '''Regulatory (administrative, command-and-control)'''
| Mandatory fulfillment of certain requirements by targeted actors
| Legislations, regulations, laws, directives, etc.
|-
| '''Economic (financial, market-based)'''
| Financial (dis)incentives to trigger change by providing (new) favorable (or unfavorable) economic conditions for targeted actors
| Positive incentive include subsidies, soft loans, tax allowance and procurements. Negative incentives are taxes, fees and charges.
|-
| '''Informative (educational)'''
| They aim at providing information or knowledge to target actors in order to increase awareness and support informed decision-making accomplish or prevent social change
| Information and awareness raising campaigns, informative leaflets, advertisements in different media.
|-
| '''Voluntary'''
| Commitment and/or actions beyond legal requirements, undertaken by private actors and/or non-governmental organisations.
| Voluntary actions and agreements.
|}

[[test tableau]]

Negotiating Green Space Development: Balancing Long-Term Sustainability and Short-Term Social Needs

2020-12-22T21:00:59Z

Nadia Ali:

This scenario has been developed on the basis of a [[Biodiversity protection and social justice in the Barcelona Natural Park |real-world case]].

'''Imagine your city where rapid urbanization and increasing density necessitates both protection of biodiversity and provision of green spaces for locals by means of a natural park.'''

'''How might this become a reality?'''

To address the potential threats of decreasing green spaces and biodiversity loss (Q3), municipalities and local and regional governments may come together to actively take measures for the protection of the urban ecosystems. The ecosystems could be demarcated and managed for their best use both for long term sustainability by protecting the ecosystem and its species and the immediate social needs (recreational and health) of the local people (Q10).

'''What potential policies and laws can support the cause?'''

The formation of a natural park in a highly dense city can be shaped and supported by some national and EU policies e.g. NATURA 2000 (Q18). It can be further supported by the constitutional rights of citizens (to a healthy environment) and the responsibility and duties of governments at multiple scales to provide those services for the citizens (Q19).

'''How critical is diverse stakeholder engagement and balancing their interests?'''

For the successful implementation of the intervention, the formation of a governance body based on multi-level government agencies, municipalities, scientific, advisory, and consultative bodies (engaging the members of civil society, research institutes, NGOs, and academia) would be crucial (Q9). Yet, striking a balance between different visions of the stakeholders for the park, particularly, biodiversity protection (for next generations/long term outcome) and social benefits (recreation and green space for present generation) could be a great challenge. It is possible that one vision overshadows the other due to exclusion of some actors at various stages of the park’s management planning process. As in many cases, park managers or other main stakeholders may avoid local citizens’ participation to the extent possible fearing further complexity of the planning process. However, to avoid exclusion and to promote legitimacy and equality, effective, non-tokenistic participation of all stakeholders during all stages of the park’s management planning should be ensured (Q23).

'''What methods can ensure effective and productive stakeholders engagement throughout the process?'''
The park management team may ensure continuous communication about the park’s affairs by using various communication tools e.g. meetings and workshops while making sure the content is comprehensible for all stakeholders. For better decision making park authority can create a network for learning and exchange of knowledge between parks within and across regions/urban contexts. Finally, learning and knowledge exchange across parks in Europe may help to overcome challenges and adopt more inclusive planning methods to achieve long-term sustainability and short-term social justice goals (Q25).

'''How could this reality be created in your city? What obstacles would have to be overcome?'''

==Do you want to learn more about this scenario?==

Take a look at the detailed description of [[Biodiversity protection and social justice in the Barcelona Natural Park]] that has inspired this scenario.

This scenario fits under the '''approach''':
*[[Nature-based solutions]]. This approach refers to solutions for urban sustainability that are inspired and supported by nature, which are cost-effective, simultaneously provide environmental, social, and economic benefits and help build resilience.

It addresses some '''drivers of injustice''':
*[[Uneven and exclusionary urban intensification and regeneration]]. This driver refers to the ways in which new urban developments might force trade-offs between the social and environmental goals of urban sustainability projects. It involves public efforts to improve a neighborhood’s physical structure and boost its economy by attracting investment, usually in the sectors of real estate and tourism.
*[[Limited citizen participation in urban planning]]. This driver refers to the limited involvement and engagement of citizens and citizens’ initiatives in decision-making around the planning, design, implementation, and/or evaluation of urban sustainability-oriented interventions.
*[[Unfit institutional structures]]. This driver refers to those aspects or functions of organizations, public offices, administrations, and authorities that deal with urban governance and stand in the way of achieving just outcomes in urban sustainability.

What do you think about this scenario? Was it helpful to you? Do you find our approach problematic? Send us an email to [[User: Philipp Spaeth|Philipp Spaeth]].