Community of place or community of interest: challenging the role of citizen engagement and proximity in energy communities in Sweden

There is an ongoing debate about what should be considered an energy community (EC), particularly in terms of citizen engagement and the proximity of community members to renewable energy production. The type of EC that exclusively engages with actors in a certain geographical location is defined as a community of place (COP). In contrast, communities of interest (COI) do not limit membership to the area where the renewable energy project is located but include members with shared interests. This study explores the distinction between COPs, defined by geographical proximity, and COIs, united by shared interests. Using Swedish solar energy communities as examples, the paper assesses five key elements—financial benefits, range of actors, distribution of voting rights, decisions on technology scale, and level of community engagement—to determine whether the studied ECs are COPs or COIs, and how this impacts the degree of an EC's community orientation. Each element is assessed on a five-point scale, where characteristics that are deemed more community-oriented correspond to a high score, while outcomes that are deemed less community-oriented correspond to a low score. Most of the ECs in our analysis allowed non-local actors to join them and a vast majority of the ECs included members based on their interest in solar power rather than the member's proximity to the solar plant(s). Apart from their exclusively local connection, the COPs and COIs thus shared similar characteristics. We conclude that all the Swedish ECs offer low-effort citizen engagement in the energy transition but are not arenas for building strong social commitment between their members. The findings challenge conventional dichotomies between COPs and COIs, suggesting a more nuanced understanding of community engagement in energy projects is needed.