A transition to 'smart' local energy systems (SLES) could provide an opportunity to deliver a range of social, economic, technical and place-based co-benefits for SLES communities, alongside CO2 reduction. However, there could also be underlying factors that limit success. In this paper we present the results of a systematic literature review to outline the potential co-benefits and risks of taking a SLES approach to energy system change. This review identifies multiple potential co-benefits, as well as a range of risk factors which could affect delivery. In addition, we identified that several co-benefits are interconnected, whereby certain co-benefits cannot occur until other co-benefits have first been achieved. We propose three dimensions of SLES co-benefits and risks: process, impact, and distribution to aid understanding of how, where, why and when these co-benefits or risks could arise and who might be in receipt of them. However, we conclude that a more co-ordinated approach across a range of stakeholders is required to maximise beneficial outputs and to ameliorate risks.

Citizen science (CS) has emerged as a powerful approach to engage the public in scientific research across various domains. While it is documented that CS has made significant contributions to sustainability areas such as ecology, environmental science, and biology (Kullenberg and Kasperowski, 2016), the area of energy transition-related CS studies has yet to be documented in detail. This study reviews existing CS projects related to energy transitions, examining their approaches, methodologies, activities, and challenges. It identifies contributions of case studies to showcase the diverse ways CS has been applied to address energy transition challenges.There are four primary pathways through which CS supports low carbon energy transitions: problem identification and research agenda setting, resource mobilisation, advocacy for transition off fossil fuels and co-evolution of socio-technical aspects. CS empowers communities, fosters participatory approaches, and generates knowledge that informs decision-making processes, ultimately driving positive change towards sustainable and inclusive futures. CS has the potential to advance energy transitions and needs to expand its integration in energy-related research and initiatives. By involving citizens as active participants, CS not only democratises knowledge but also empowers individuals to shape the future of clean energy systems.Across the nine case study projects activities demonstrate a strong alignment with the diverse aspects required for a successful energy transition. What is more, in empowering communities and adopting participatory approaches, these CS projects generate essential knowledge that informs decision-making processes, thereby facilitating positive changes towards sustainable and inclusive futures. We suggest future routes for citizen action within the energy transition arena.

Low carbon geoenergy technologies are anticipated to occupy a range of roles in the transition to a net zero carbon future, and there is growing acknowledgment and awareness of the importance of societal considerations and community participation in the development and implementation of such technologies. Here, we use the example of minewater geothermal to explore the potential to enhance societal benefits of energy transition developments. Minewater geothermal uses the water in abandoned and flooded coal mines to provide low carbon heating and cooling of homes and businesses and thermal energy storage. Many towns and cities worldwide have potential minewater geothermal resource, offering significant potential for technology scale up, and there are a number of projects in development and operation. We outline how such projects could occupy a role beyond technological implementation given factors including the local dimension of the resource, together with its links with a community’s mining and cultural history, and social, political and environmental impacts of coal mine abandonment. We argue that working with communities to deliver these projects is paramount, and outline five key principles and recommendations for community participation to ensure a fair and sustainable net zero transition. While tailored to minewater geothermal projects, the nuances of these recommendations are relevant to other geoenergy developments.

To be fair, acceptable and ultimately successful, decentralised energy projects involving technological innovations require engagement with users, local communities and wider publics. Yet relatively few studies have adopted a dynamic, temporal approach to understand how publics are engaged with as projects develop over time. We address this gap by researching three case studies of ‘Smart Local Energy System’ (SLES) demonstrator projects involving combinations of power, heat and transport technologies funded under a UK government programme. Guided by literature on public engagement methods and rationales, as well as how users and communities are framed by stakeholders, we track engagement approaches over time from stages of project initiation to technology deployment. Engagement defined as communication and consultation predominates over participation and community empowerment, with instrumental rationales used to frame publics as consumers enabling technology deployment. Disruptions to engagement attributed to external factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic and BREXIT were interpreted both positively and negatively, including the implications of disruptions for social inclusion and fairness. The potential for SLES to catalyse broader social transformations in a context of environment and climate emergency is discussed.

Energy transitions require engagement with users, local communities and wider publics in order to be fair, acceptable and, ultimately, successful. Here we focus on the development of decentralised energy systems instigated by central government. Smart Local Energy Systems (SLES), involving low carbon generation, demand sources and smart technologies in a geographically-bounded location, are important but unexplored contexts for public engagement. Drawing on 23 interviews with partner organisations in 12 UK SLES projects, we investigate the targets, methods and rationales of engagement. Partners engage a range of user and community groups around multiple energy system components using a variety of methods, directly and via intermediary organisations. Project size is not a major influence on breadth and intensity of engagement. Project partners rationalise practices with reference to characterisations of users and engagement, and practices are conditioned by a range of factors (e.g. technological boundaries, place, partners involved, and the wider organisational context within which SLES projects take place). We highlight a need for future SLES policy to emphasise engagement as a key facet, institute systematic social learning between SLES projects, and consider how to engage publics beyond the boundaries of individual projects.

As governments worldwide address the climate crisis, energy systems are becoming both decarbonised and decentralised. In this study, we aim to increase understanding of the spatial dimensions of new forms of decentralised energy systems that integrate electricity, storage, transportation, and heating. Drawing on workshops and secondary data from three, early-stage case studies funded under a UK government programme, we examine how stakeholders responsible for development construct the ‘local’ in Smart Local Energy System (SLES) demonstrators. We employ three analytical concepts to address this aim: emplacement, place-framing, and place/boundary-making. In terms of emplacement, stakeholders use place-based narratives that draw on distinctive infrastructural, social, ecological, and political characteristics to argue that diverse locations (Oxford city, Oxfordshire, and the Orkney Islands) are ‘suitable’ places for decentralised energy. Stakeholders frame projects around non-local goals of creating technological and business models for replication across the UK and worldwide, even if some community-centred benefits are recognized. Lastly, our findings on place-making show pragmatism in flexing ‘local’ boundaries in order to align with project objectives. The three analytical concepts provide a useful framework to uncover ‘local’ complexities of early-stage decentralised energy projects, and emphasise intersections of space, place, and justice that deserve further scrutiny, notably in later stages of project implementation.