Fair shares or smart savings? Exploring business models, justice and efficiency trade-offs in Portuguese energy communities

Energy communities are increasingly playing an important role in citizen engagement during energy transitions. However, the functional benefits for participants are heavily reliant on how energy and profits are shared, which are dictated by regulations. While optimizing trade-offs can prove significant in making energy community projects viable, related techno-regulatory innovations on energy-sharing mechanisms still require in-depth analysis. A key unresolved issue is how to balance justice considerations with model attractiveness by aligning members’ perceptions of fair redistribution with optimal energy utilization. This study investigates the interplay between sharing and metering mechanisms and their respective advantages and disadvantages, using the Portuguese case study as an example. Four hypothetical scenarios related to the implementation of European directives into Portuguese national law are analysed to quantify trade-offs between self-consumption, self-sufficiency, and participant equity. The findings demonstrate how different energy-sharing and metering mechanisms can influence resource allocation, benefit distribution, and financial sustainability. Each of these scenarios reveals that there is no one-size-fits-all solution. The consumption-proportional sharing maximizes self-consumption and self-sufficiency indexes at the community level but fails to uphold principles of energy justice, as it disproportionately benefits high-consuming members. In contrast, the fixed coefficients sharing ensures a distribution proportional to each member’s monetary investment but leads to lower efficiency. These findings underscore the socio-economic implications of techno-regulatory innovations and the need to reconcile equity and efficiency. The study offers guidance to policymakers in designing fair and effective frameworks, reducing the risk of unintentionally obstructing energy community development due to impaired economic viability. • Portugal's role in implementing EU directives on renewable energy communities (REC) • Analyzes efficiency vs equity trade-offs in four hypothetical energy-sharing scenarios in REC • REC-sharing models have implications for justice and accountability principles. • Dynamic energy-sharing models are promising but face significant operational challenges • Recommendations for the change of REC policies to manage justice, efficiency and equity tradeoffs

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Energy Research & Social Science
Published
2025-05-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2025.104102
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
13.25

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Fair shares or smart savings? Exploring business models, justice and efficiency trade-offs in Portuguese energy communities

Róisín Monteiro, J. Santos, A. Pacheco, Renée Scharnigg
6 citations
Energy Research & Social Science
Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
13.25
article

Fair shares or smart savings? Exploring business models, justice and efficiency trade-offs in Portuguese energy communities

Róisín Monteiro, J. Santos, A. Pacheco, Renée Scharnigg
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Energy communities are increasingly playing an important role in citizen engagement during energy transitions. However, the functional benefits for participants are heavily reliant on how energy and profits are shared, which are dictated by regulations. While optimizing trade-offs can prove significant in making energy community projects viable, related techno-regulatory innovations on energy-sharing mechanisms still require in-depth analysis. A key unresolved issue is how to balance justice considerations with model attractiveness by aligning members’ perceptions of fair redistribution with optimal energy utilization. This study investigates the interplay between sharing and metering mechanisms and their respective advantages and disadvantages, using the Portuguese case study as an example. Four hypothetical scenarios related to the implementation of European directives into Portuguese national law are analysed to quantify trade-offs between self-consumption, self-sufficiency, and participant equity. The findings demonstrate how different energy-sharing and metering mechanisms can influence resource allocation, benefit distribution, and financial sustainability. Each of these scenarios reveals that there is no one-size-fits-all solution. The consumption-proportional sharing maximizes self-consumption and self-sufficiency indexes at the community level but fails to uphold principles of energy justice, as it disproportionately benefits high-consuming members. In contrast, the fixed coefficients sharing ensures a distribution proportional to each member’s monetary investment but leads to lower efficiency. These findings underscore the socio-economic implications of techno-regulatory innovations and the need to reconcile equity and efficiency. The study offers guidance to policymakers in designing fair and effective frameworks, reducing the risk of unintentionally obstructing energy community development due to impaired economic viability. • Portugal's role in implementing EU directives on renewable energy communities (REC) • Analyzes efficiency vs equity trade-offs in four hypothetical energy-sharing scenarios in REC • REC-sharing models have implications for justice and accountability principles. • Dynamic energy-sharing models are promising but face significant operational challenges • Recommendations for the change of REC policies to manage justice, efficiency and equity tradeoffs

Energy Research & Social ScienceVol. 125
University of Algarve (PT), University of Stavanger (NO)
Norges Forskningsråd, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Housing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
13.25
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.