Although grassroots initiatives in the renewable energy transition are flourishing, their embeddedness in local contexts challenges their capacity to spread their impact on a broader scale. Certainly, while scaling up has been described as difficult to combine with local embeddedness, little is known on the specific nature of the tensions involved in combining the two. Studying a federation of citizen renewable energy (RE) cooperatives in the south of France, we show that the engagement in a scaling-up process at a regional level generates three main kinds of tensions associated with specific dimensions of local embeddedness: natural, cultural, and political. We emphasize how these dimensions are likely to be threatened when the federation engages the cooperatives in a rapid scaling-up dynamic in which the drive to industrialize projects and find funding is dominant. We acknowledge the effects of these tensions on grassroots sustainability initiatives and collective organizing processes.
AhlemeyerK.GrieseK. M.WawerT.SiebenhünerB. (2022). Success factors of citizen energy cooperatives in Northwestern Germany: A conceptual and empirical review. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 12(1), 1–14.
2.
AlvessonM.WillmottH. (1992). On the idea of emancipation in management and organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 17(3), 432–464.
3.
AndréK.PacheA. C. (2016). From caring entrepreneur to caring enterprise: Addressing the ethical challenges of scaling up social enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), 659–675.
4.
AugensteinK.BachmannB.EgermannM.HermelingmeierV.HilgerA.Jaeger-ErbenM.von WirthT. (2020). From niche to mainstream: The dilemmas of scaling up sustainable alternatives. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 29(3), 143–147.
5.
BansalP.Knox-HayesJ. (2013). The time and space of materiality in organizations and the natural environment. Organization & Environment, 26(1), 61–82.
6.
BarnettM. L.HenriquesI.HustedB. W. (2020). Beyond good intentions: Designing CSR initiatives for greater social impact. Journal of Management, 46(6), 937–964.
7.
BauwensT.Devine-WrightP. (2018). Positive energies? An empirical study of community energy participation and attitudes to renewable energy. Energy Policy, 118, 612–625.
8.
BauwensT.HuybrechtsB.DufaysF. (2020). Understanding the diverse scaling strategies of social enterprises as hybrid organizations: The case of RE cooperatives. Organization & Environment, 33(2), 195–219.
9.
BauwensT.VaskelainenT.FrenkenK. (2022). Conceptualising institutional complexity in the upscaling of community enterprises: Lessons from renewable energy and carsharing. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 42, 138–151.
10.
BeckerS.KunzeC.VanceaM. (2017). Community energy and social entrepreneurship: Addressing purpose, organization and embeddedness of renewable energy projects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 147, 25–36.
11.
BlanchetT. (2015). Struggle over energy transition in Berlin: How do grassroots initiatives affect local energy policy-making?Energy Policy, 78, 246–254.
12.
BlockF. (2001). Introduction. In PolanyiK. (Ed.), The great transformation (pp. xviii–xxxviii). Beacon Press. (Original work published 1944)
13.
BombergE.McEwenN. (2012). Mobilizing community energy. Energy Policy, 51, 435–444.
14.
BowenS. (2011). The importance of place: Re-territorializing embeddedness. Sociologia Ruralis, 51(4), 325–348.
15.
ChowdhuryR.KourulaA.SiltaojaM. (2021). Power of paradox: Grassroots organizations’ legitimacy strategies over time. Business & Society, 60(2), 420–453.
16.
Cuesta-FernandezI.Belda-MiquelS.Calabuig TormoC. (2020). Challengers in energy transitions beyond RE cooperatives: Community-owned electricity distribution cooperatives in Spain. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 33(2), 140–159.
17.
CurtisF. (2003). Eco-localism and sustainability. Ecological Economics, 46, 83–102.
18.
DeSantolaA.GulatiR. (2017). Scaling: Organizing and growth in entrepreneurial ventures. Academy of Management Annals, 11(2), 640–668.
19.
ErgeneS.BanerjeeS. B.HoffmanA. J. (2021). (Un) sustainability and organization studies: Towards a radical engagement. Organization Studies, 42(8), 1319–1335.
20.
GaneshS.ZollerH. (2014). Organizing transition: Principles and tensions in eco-localism. In ParkerM.CheneyG.FournierV.LandC. (Eds.), The Routledge companion to alternative organization (pp. 260–274). Routledge.
21.
GeelsF. W.SchotJ. (2007). Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Research Policy, 36(3), 399–417.
22.
GeorgallisP.LeeB. (2020). Toward a theory of entry in moral markets: The role of social movements and organizational identity. Strategic Organization, 18(1), 50–74.
23.
GephartR. P.Jr. (2004). Qualitative research and the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 454–462.
24.
GernertM.El BilaliH.StrassnerC.(2018). Grassroots initiatives as sustainability transition pioneers: implications and lessons for urban food systems. Urban Science, 2(1), 23.
25.
Gibson-GrahamJ. K. (2003). Enabling ethical economies: Cooperativism and class. Critical Sociology, 29(2), 123–161.
26.
Gibson-GrahamJ. K. (2006). A postcapitalist politics. University of Minnesota Press.
27.
GierynT. F. (2000). A space for place in sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 463–496.
28.
GioiaD. A.CorleyK. G.HamiltonA. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.
29.
GranovetterM. (1985). Economic action and economic structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481–510.
30.
GrimleyM.ShastryV.Kânoğlu-ÖzkanD. G.BlevinsE.BeckA. L.ChanG.RaiV. (2022). The grassroots are always greener: Community-based organizations as innovators of shared solar energy in the United States. Energy Research & Social Science, 90, Article 102628.
31.
GutheyG. T.WhitemanG.ElmesM. (2014). Place and sense of place: Implications for organizational studies of sustainability. Journal of Management Inquiry, 23(3), 254–265.
32.
HamiltonJ.MayneR.ParagY.BergmanN. (2014). Scaling up local carbon action: The role of partnerships, networks and policy. Carbon Management, 5(4), 463–476.
33.
HancockJ. (2003). Scaling up issues and options: Supporting good practices and innovation. AGR.
34.
HarveyD. (1990). Between space and time: Reflections on the geographical imagination. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 80(3), 418–434. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2563621.
35.
HessM. (2004). “Spatial” relationships? Towards a reconceptualization of embedded ness. Progress in Human Geography, 28(2), 165–186.
36.
HokenosP. (2021). As big energy gains, can Europe’s community renewables compete?Yale School of the Environment.
37.
HossainM. (2018). Grassroots innovation: The state of the art and future perspectives. Technology in Society, 55, 63–69.
38.
IltenC. (2019, June). The iron cage has a mezzanine: Alternative organizations and the selection of isomorphic pressures via meta-organization [Conference session]. 31st Annual Meeting SASE, New York, NY, United States.
39.
KimS.KimA. (2022). Going viral or growing like an oak tree? Towards sustainable local development through entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Journal, 65(5), 1709–1746.
40.
KooijH. J.OtemanM.VeenmanS.SperlingK.MagnussonD.PalmJ.HvelplundF. (2018). Between grassroots and treetops: Community power and institutional dependence in the RE sector in Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands. Energy Research & Social Science, 37, 52–64.
41.
LamD. P.Martín-LópezB.WiekA.BennettE. M.FrantzeskakiN.Horcea-MilcuA. I.LangD. J. (2020). Scaling the impact of sustainability initiatives: A typology of amplification processes. Urban Transformations, 2(1), 1–24.
42.
LampinenA.RossittoC.Gradin FranzénC. (2019, October25). Scaling out, scaling down: Reconsidering growth in grassroots initiatives. Ethnographies of Collaborative Economies Conference, Edinburgh, Scotland.
43.
LangleyA. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.
44.
LangleyA.SmallmanC.TsoukasH.Van de VenA. H. (2013). Process studies of change in organization and management: Unveiling temporality, activity, and flow. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 1–13.
45.
LewisN.MoranW.Perrier-CornetP.BarkerJ. (2002). Territoriality, enterprise and réglementation in industry governance. Progress in Human Geography, 26(4), 433–462.
46.
MairJ.SeelosC. (2021). Organizations, social problems, and system change: Invigorating the third mandate of organizational research. Organization Theory, 2(4), 1–22.
47.
MartinC. J.UphamP. (2016). Grassroots social innovation and the mobilisation of values in collaborative consumption: A conceptual model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 134, 204–213.
48.
MastersonV. A.StedmanR. C.EnqvistJ.TengöM.GiustiM.WahlD.SvedinU. (2017). The contribution of sense of place to social-ecological systems research: A review and research agenda. Ecology and Society, 22(1), Article 49.
49.
MerriamS. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
50.
MooreM. L.RiddellD.VocisanoD. (2015). Scaling out, scaling up, scaling deep: Strategies of non-profits in advancing systemic social innovation. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 58(58), 67–84.
51.
MoserS.BaderC. (2023). Why do people participate in grassroots sustainability initiatives? Different motives for different levels of involvement. Frontiers in Sustainability, 3, Article 994881.
52.
NicolP. (2020). Pathways to scaling agroecology in the city region: Scaling out, scaling up and scaling deep through community-led trade. Sustainability, 12(19), Article 7842.
53.
OmettoM. P.GegenhuberT.WinterJ.GreenwoodR. (2019). From balancing missions to mission drift: The role of the institutional context, spaces, and compartmentalization in the scaling of social enterprises. Business & Society, 58(5), 1003–1046.
54.
OtemanM.KooijH. J.WieringM. A. (2017). Pioneering renewable energy in an economic energy policy system: The history and development of Dutch grassroots initiatives. Sustainability, 9(4), Article 550.
55.
ParkS.YunS. J. (2021). Multiscalar energy transitions: Exploring the strategies of RE cooperatives in South Korea. Energy Research & Social Science, 81, Article 102280.
56.
ParkerM.CheneyG.FournierV.LandC. (2014). The question of organization: A manifesto for alternatives. Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organization, 14(4), 623–638.
57.
PolanyiK. (2001). The great transformation. Beacon Press. (Original work published 1944)
58.
PrattM. G.SonensheinS.FeldmanM. S. (2022). Moving beyond templates: A bricolage approach to conducting trustworthy qualitative research. Organizational Research Methods, 25(2), 211–238.
59.
PuntM. B.BauwensT.FrenkenK.HolstenkampL. (2022). Institutional relatedness and the emergence of RE cooperatives in German districts. Regional Studies, 56(4), 548–562.
RaynoldsL. T. (2000). Re-embedding global agriculture: The international organic and fair-trade movements. Agriculture and Human Values, 17, 297–309.
62.
RiddellD.MooreM. L. (2015). Scaling out, scaling up, scaling deep. JW McConnell Family Foundation & Tamarack Institute.
63.
RuggieroS.MartiskainenM.OnkilaT. (2018). Understanding the scaling-up of community energy niches through strategic niche management theory: Insights from Finland. Journal of Cleaner Production, 170, 581–590.
64.
Schiller-MerkensS. (2020). Scaling up alternatives to capitalism: A social movement approach to alternative organizing (in) the economy. MPIfG Discussion Paper, 20/11.
65.
SeyfangG.HaxeltineA. (2012). Growing grassroots innovations: Exploring the role of community-based initiatives in governing sustainable energy transitions. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 30(3), 381–400.
66.
SeyfangG.HielscherS.HargreavesT.MartiskainenM.SmithA. (2014). A grassroots sustainable energy niche? Reflections on community energy in the UK. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 13, 21–44.
67.
SeyfangG.ParkJ. J.SmithA. (2013). A thousand flowers blooming? An examination of community energy in the UK. Energy Policy, 61, 977–989.
68.
SeyfangG.SmithA.LonghurstN. (2010). Grassroots innovations for sustainable development: A new research agenda. Economic Sociology, 12(1), 68–72.
69.
SharmaG.JaiswalA. K. (2018). Unsustainability of sustainability: Cognitive frames and tensions in bottom of the pyramid projects. Journal of Business Ethics, 148, 291–307.
70.
ShawD.CumbersA.McMasterR.CrossanJ. (2018). Scaling up community action for tackling climate change. British Journal of Management, 29(2), 266–278.
71.
SlawinskiN.BansalP. (2015). Short on time: Intertemporal tensions in business sustainability. Organization Science, 26(2), 531–549.
72.
SmithB. R.StevensC. E. (2010). Different types of social entrepreneurship: The role of geography and embeddedness on the measurement and scaling of social value. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22(6), 575–598.
73.
TsingA. (2013). More-than-human sociality: A call for critical description. In HastrupK. (Ed.), Anthropology and nature (pp. 37–52). Routledge.
74.
TsingA. L. (2012). On nonscalability the living world is not amenable to precision-nested scales. Common Knowledge, 18(3), 505–524.
75.
TsingA. L. (2017). A threat to Holocene resurgence is a threat to livability. In BrightmanM.LewisJ. (Eds.), The anthropology of sustainability: Beyond development and progress (pp. 51–65). Palgrave Macmillan.
76.
Van LunenburgM.GeuijenK.MeijerA. (2020). How and why do social and sustainable initiatives scale? A systematic review of the literature on social entrepreneurship and grassroots innovation. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofitorganizations, 31(5), 1013–1024.
77.
VermuntD. A.NegroS. O.Van LaerhovenF. S. J.VerweijP. A.HekkertM. P. (2020). Sustainability transitions in the agri-food sector: How ecology affects transition dynamics. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 36, 236–249.
78.
VickersI.LyonF. (2014). Beyond green niches? Growth strategies of environmentally motivated social enterprises. International Small Business Journal, 32(4), 449–470.
79.
WestleyF.AntadzeN.RiddellD. J.RobinsonK.GeobeyS. (2014). Five configurations for scaling up social innovation: Case examples of nonprofit organizations from Canada. The Journal of Applied Behavioralscience, 50(3), 234–260.
80.
WierlingA.SchwanitzV. J.ZeißJ. P.BoutC.CandeliseC.GilcreaseW.GreggJ. S. (2018). Statistical evidence on the role of energy cooperatives for the energy transition in European countries. Sustainability, 10(9), Article 3339.
81.
WokuriP. (2021). Community energy in the United Kingdom: Beyond or between the market and the state?Revue Française de Civilisation Britannique [French Journal of British Studies], 26(XXVI-2), 1–17.
82.
YinR. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage.
83.
YorkR.BellS. E. (2019). Energy transitions or additions? Why a transition from fossil fuels requires more than the growth of RE. Energy Research & Social Science, 51, 40–43.
84.
ZanoniP.ContuA.HealyS.MirR. (2017). Post-capitalistic politics in the making: The imaginary and praxis of alternative economies. Organization, 24(5), 575–588.
85.
ZhongS.HughesA.CrangM.ZengG.HocknellS. (2022). Fragmentary embeddedness: Challenges for alternative food networks in Guangzhou, China. Journal of Rural Studies, 95, 382–390.
86.
ZukinS.DiMaggioP. (Eds.). (1990). Structures of capital: The social organization of the economy (Vol. 15, No. 1–2). CUP Archive.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
