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 CO 2 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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bray et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: