Conflict handling in Renewable Energy Cooperatives (RECs): organizational effects and member well-being

Keywords: Renewable Energy Cooperatives, Conflict Handling, Cooperative Membership Interests, Organizational Frame Conditions Members’ motives to join an REC are highly heterogeneous. However, RECs are characterized by... [ view full abstract ]

Keywords: Renewable Energy Cooperatives, Conflict Handling, Cooperative Membership Interests, Organizational Frame Conditions

Members’ motives to join an REC are highly heterogeneous. However, RECs are characterized by their members’ mutual interests, such as civic engagement, the will to participate in the “Energiewende” ̶- the transition of the energy system to sustainable sources ̶-, or the potential annual revenue (Hoffman, High-Pippert 2010; Volz 2012; Radtke 2014). The choice of the REC organizational frame is associated with expectations to provide the “institutional framework to involve citizens with political, social, and financial aspects of renewable energy deployment, thus democratizing the energy sector” (Yildiz et al. 2015, p. 61). At the same time, these expectations are put under pressure since current reforms in the institutional environment (Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG)) challenge the existing business models of the RECs. Furthermore, the predominant dependence on volunteers exhausts members’ capacities for cooperation. Despite shared interests and goals at the RECs’ formation, practical business demands or opportunities might cause the need to readjust. This development puts the interests at risk and thus makes the organization prone to conflict.
What differentiates RECs from hierarchical organizations and even other cooperatives are their organizational frame conditions: besides the above-mentioned expectations, business management is highly voluntary; the members are not highly dependent on their cooperative in terms of their economic survival. They can exit anytime (other than e.g. in agricultural cooperatives). Manifest conflicts that are not adequately handled might thus endanger the existence and further development of an REC.
Therefore, we propose that handling emerging conflicts in the REC is crucial for the perceived success of an REC and its further development as a cooperative project. This paper investigates which ways of conflict handling REC-members employ to achieve their goals when conflict arises. Secondly, we investigate how the REC’s socio-organizational structure affects conflict handling styles. Conflict is defined as a „process in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party” (Wall, Callister 1995, p. 517) .
We use a modified system of Blickle’s (2004) taxonomy of conflict handling to understand conflict handling processes and styles in RECs. The taxonomy allows us to delineate how different conflict handling styles affect the organizational frame of the REC and the interests of individual members of the REC. It furthermore allows us to assess the effects of conflict handling on social relationships and socio-psychological well-being among members.
To gather the data needed, we undertook a qualitative investigation looking at 15 RECs in Germany. The RECs observed differ in size, location (rural vs. urban) and energy technology used. The data was gathered by participant observations in the annual general meetings as well as by conducting problem-centered open interviews with members (Witzel 2000). The empirical data was then analyzed to find out patterns of conflict behavior and the corresponding conflict styles. The findings were related to the RECs’ socio-organizational characteristics.
Preliminary results show that (i) different organizational frames (size , structure, technology) of RECs are associated with significant differences in the use of conflict handling styles (ii) There are direct and indirect forms of conflict handling styles that can be observed that appear as opposing with the democratic foundation of the RECs’ organizational frame (iii) social networks among members and the socio-structural composition of RECs are perceived to have effects on conflict handling styles.

Bibliography
Blickle, Gerhard (2004): Einflusskompetenz in Organisationen. Psychologische Rundschau 55 (2), pp. 82–93.
Hoffman, Steven M.; High-Pippert, Angela (2010): From private lives to collective action: Recruitment and participation incentives for a community energy program. Energy Policy 38 (12), pp. 7567–7574.
Radtke, Jorg (2014): A closer look inside collaborative action: civic engagement and participation in community energy initiatives. PPP 8 (3), pp. 235–248.
Volz, R. (2012): Genossenschaften im Bereich erneuerbarer Energien: Status quo und Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten eines neuen Betätigungsfeldes, Univ. Hohenheim.
Wall, James A.; Callister, Ronda R. (1995): Conflict and Its Management. Journal of Management (21), pp. 515–558.
Witzel, Andreas (2000): The Problem-centered Interview. Available online http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/
Yildiz, Özgür; Rommel, Jens; Debor, Sarah; Holstenkamp, Lars; Mey, Franziska; Müller, Jakob R. et al. (2015): Renewable energy cooperatives as gatekeepers or facilitators? Recent developments in Germany and a multidisciplinary research agenda. Energy Research & Social Science 6, pp. 59–73.