Pilot Cases – Bürger*innenKRAFTwerk

 Managerial Aspects

The managerial framework of the case reveals both opportunities and gaps.

The municipality is informed of their activities, while interaction and collaboration with county and national actors is a part of the plans. Although the municipality of Melk has established its own energy community to serve public buildings, their scope of service leaves out private households and another E.C. is not expected to be formed in Schönbühel-Aggsbach and Loosdorf by the municipalities. This divergence calls for stronger coordination mechanisms across municipal, regional, and national levels. The community must establish a clear management structure that supports both strategic partnerships and local autonomy. Engaging local leaders and community members to align their vision with regional goals will be critical in ensuring continuity and progress. A well-defined roadmap, complemented by regular stakeholder meetings and transparent decision-making, will foster trust and help manage the complexities of bottom-up governance. The shared vision of the energy community should be presented to the municipal council to ensure alignment and gain political and public support. Further activities for the energy community could include and motivate municipal officials to cooperate with the future vision for the local community.

Social Aspects

The Austrian case demonstrates positive and successful community engagement by promoting social interaction and incorporating cultural identity, which is critical for inclusivity. The association has defined roles and decision making mechanisms; organizes regular public events; has managed to define the roles of members;  include social projects in their activities and creates extra value for the members; offers membership to citizens of all backgrounds and capacities in contrast to most E.C.’s in which only individuals with an energy contract can become members, resulting in membership of one person per household, with that person mostly being the men. We find all these variables to be different in the Austrian case study.

 The energy community is driven by strong social ambitions, aiming to create a diverse and inclusive environment where well-being, environment and heritage is as important as energy efficiency. There is a shared desire to foster collaboration with other PEDs and involve younger generations. There is a profound desire to involve the municipality/municipal council and collaborate with other PEDs. Many members showed willingness to shape the future of the E.C. with complementing and synergetic activities and projects.   However, balancing inclusiveness with practical outcomes will require innovative engagement tools, such as barter systems or local exchange platforms. The community’s effort to remain apolitical is crucial, as it ensures broad participation and avoids polarization, reinforcing cohesion across social groups.

The Process

Improved clarity in process information, including the project phase and accessible data, is essential in enhancing transparency and support for stakeholders. The energy community embraces a bottom-up approach, focusing on long-term resilience and sustainability across multiple dimensions. However, the complexity of combining philosophical, social, and technological aspirations poses challenges. The complexity of a PED is extensive for a bottom-up initiative, requiring support in attaining such a status.  Structured decision-making processes with clear milestones, interdisciplinary collaboration, and active learning from other PEDs will prove to be vital towards this goal. Building on community satisfaction and fostering tolerance for differing views will further enhance the legitimacy and functionality of the project.

The main agenda of the community as wll as the issues they tackle are quite diverse. Goals and visions combine philosophical, social, ecological, technological, and technical aspects. Memberrs look positively towards the future, a perspective made possible through the resilience of the actors and satisfaction with the facilitator role of the energy community, alongside the the structure of the association and cultural embedding in “public networks”. Informed decision-making is required by the members since local capacity is very low. The community possesses the self-determined ability to act through tolerance and appreciation for “dissenters” and create an atmosphere in which opinions are expressed and considered impartially through attitude, approach and abstraction.

 Part of the process is the need to future-proof communication & technological infrastructure so that new tools for local efficiency can be developed, making it necessary to consider the role of  technology in the wider context. Designing for the future also means thinking about decisions and solutions in different directions by creating points of contact between philosophically oriented and technology-oriented participants through interdisciplinary collaborative action. By looking at the past, documenting the status quo and surveying future visions, the diversity of solutions should be promoted.

Age equality is also important, which is why the opinion of young people needs to be obtained through targeted marketing and interactions with youth communities. Cooperating with schools is one step towards this goal. Such are aspects not tackled, mapped, or organised by regular PED projects, therefore the requirements from the matrix have to be significantly enhanced, to meet the needs of communities.

Technical Aspects

Lower technical scores indicate a need for greater integration of advanced energy efficiency measures, storage solutions, and flexibility. Addressing these areas will enhance resilience and adaptability to future energy demands. After being equipped with the energy certificate and the resulting data of 2 buildings in the pilot case area, more building data should be acquired to help obtain a holistic view on the current substance.

It could be said however, that solar energy is limited due to the shadowed terrain, but wind energy and micro-hydro from local rivers present promising alternatives. The energy strategy must therefore reconcile heritage protection with renewable energy production. Innovative solutions like bladeless turbines could align with visual heritage requirements. Gathering more comprehensive building and energy data will be essential in optimizing production methods. Additionally, exploring energy storage solutions will be crucial to managing the region’s intermittent energy needs.

Additionally, local conditions have to be analysed to create a foundation on how to identify the best suited energy production methods. Data on the potential of solar panels on roofs in respect to the angle and sun hours in the area could be considered, for example. Concerning the heritage regulations alongside the Danube, alternative and visually less noticeable and disturbing renewable energy infrastructure could be applied, as the potential for wind energy is quite promising when the the channelling effect of the river is taken into account.

Use of uniquely developed innovations such as bladeless turbines could have less visual impact on the heritage-saved area. What’s more, locations not visible from the view of settlements could also serve as potential space for use of alternative technologies, without the visual restrictions of heritage protection. There are also 2 small rivers, the Siecherbach and the Roßbach, which could be utilized for energy production. Supposedly, turbines have been mounted already, although there is a lack of documentation and specific data for the case.

Governance Aspects

Governance scores highlight a well-defined, transparent structure aligned with overarching strategic frameworks. As a citizen-led initiative, the Schönbühel-Aggsbach energy community operates with enthusiasm but lacks formal authority and decision-making power, making it dependent on national policies, financial incentives, and top-down regulations. The absence of direct municipal leadership introduces a layer of complexity, as the community must balance self-organization with the need to collaborate with public authorities. Strengthening multi-level governance structures—linking local actors with regional and national bodies—will be essential for long-term success. Additionally, transparent rules, shared responsibilities, and inclusive decision-making processes must be developed to ensure that all voices are heard. A governance model that blends flexibility with accountability will enable the community to manage risks effectively, coordinate energy production efficiently, and pursue sustainability goals.

Environmental Aspects

The community is mindful of environmental goals, with members recognizing that energy production alone will not secure sustainable rural development. They recognize that biodiversity and climate resilience must be incorporated into the energy roadmap. Collaborations with environmental experts and local stakeholders will help identify synergies between energy production and ecological goals. Initiatives to activate local rivers or wind resources must also address the environmental impacts of these technologies to ensure alignment with conservation efforts.

There is a framework to support e.c. and good awareness of environmental topics and also some kind of support and so on… but it is not well calibrated towards becoming a PED.

Legal Aspects

Moderate scores in the legal category suggest challenges in navigating changing regulations and achieving comprehensive compliance. The energy community benefits from national incentives and legal frameworks for energy cooperatives, but it remains exposed to shifting regulations. Its private-sector structure offers it flexibility, but leaves it lacking the legal authority that municipal-driven projects enjoy. Navigating legal challenges, particularly those related to heritage protections and inter-community energy sharing will require ongoing legal counsel and careful planning. The community may also need to advocate for policy reforms that support innovative energy models within heritage regions.

The legal framework of the association as an entity, the laws and rules related to the energy community is pretty well established. Challenges do exist however, particularly in regard to external factors. The community is unable to obtain information on the energy network of the municipality, they have no guarantee over their investments, they can’t be assured if self-created infrastructure (e.g. storage) can be turned on/off depending on the decisions and whims of the energy supplier, they’ve received some limited financial support  and only for solar panels whereas a majority of their energy needs are in the evenings and at night. Another challenging issue is that the community and members are knowledgeable on the basics of technical topics but need support for research, innovaton and local adaptation.

Financial Aspects

The financial viability of the energy community hinges on balancing the return on investment (ROI) with social and environmental goals. While national subsidies for photovoltaics provide a starting point, shadowed valleys limit solar potential. Developing a diversified energy portfolio will be key to ensuring sustainable production. Long-term financing models—such as crowdfunding, cooperative investments, or public-private partnerships—can help sustain both energy and social projects, ensuring that the community remains financially resilient while achieving its vision of well-being.

With an impulsive rating, the energy community has a very well developed management team and the operation through an association with statutes and rules for decision making have created a foundation to operate as an EEG and potentially a future PED. The great ambitions in social and environmental aspects make the community a candidate that can empower local citizens to become a main actor in the climate mission field. As a citizen initiative, they benefit from the national rules, financial incentives and laws in terms of energy communities, but are also vulnerable given. That they neither have the decision-power in governance, nor in legal and financial aspects.

In comparison to municipal driven PED processes, lack of knowledge and capacities to drive such a complex process are the biggest challenges facing the community. As private households (investors) members of the community are steered along with the top down decisions, e.g. financial support for photovoltaik systems. On the one hand, the need for energy is mostly on evenings and weekends, and as the example of the two buildings exhibiton, the location of the buildings (shadow in the valley) is not supportive for solar energy production. The communities are not yet supported to create a better energy mix production, and this would be the biggest added value of a PED: to better synchronise the production of the energy when needed and coordinate this within the community.

Changing the means of energy production and sharing very often requires adaptation, transformation and an investment. Every investment requires a decision basis, making the evaluation of risks crucial. As a main compenent of a business plan, (ROI) Return on investment is a very important aspect, yet the investment on social structure and potentials also need to be included in the plan and the vision of the local community. Concrete measures and evaluations methods have to be provided to ensure the “success” of the community in the long run.