Energy Cooperatives as an Instrument for Stimulating Distributed Renewable Energy in Poland

Abstract

In Poland, the development of renewable energy primarily focuses on solar energy, especially through household prosumer installations. One emerging solution for promoting distributed renewable energy is energy cooperatives. The main aim of the research was to identify the legal and socioeconomic factors influencing the formation and growth of energy cooperatives in Poland and to provide recommendations for their development. The research, conducted in 2024, covered 47 energy cooperatives. The data gathered included information from the National Court Register (KRS), the National Support Centre for Agriculture (KOWR), and qualitative research through in-depth individual interviews using the CATI technique (computer-assisted telephone interview). The findings highlight the need to streamline legal regulations concerning energy cooperatives, particularly the dual registration system (KRS and KOWR), which delays operational start-up. They also suggest reviewing restrictions on the area and power capacity for renewable energy distribution. Proper training for cooperative managers and network operator staff is essential. Given the early stage of Poland’s energy cooperative development, ongoing monitoring is necessary. Further research will aid in creating effective tools to foster the growth of distributed renewable energy, especially through energy cooperatives.

1. Introduction

Achieving climate neutrality is a challenge for many European Union member states [1,2]. While the energy transition towards renewable energy sources (RESs) in Western European countries can be cited as an example of RES utilization, Poland, like other countries in Central and Eastern Europe, serves as an example of a nation struggling with the challenges of the energy transition [3]. Due to its significant demographic and economic potential and high greenhouse gas emissions, Poland is facing a transformation process that is much more difficult than in other EU countries [4]. The causes lie both in historical factors (functioning under a centrally planned economy between 1945 and 1989) and in the substantial reserves of coal, which are the main reason for the dependence of the power sector on this fossil fuel. For these reasons, the energy transition in Poland is a necessity, but it requires finding effective ways to accelerate it [5,6,7].

Despite many problems, Poland is the fourth market in the European Union in terms of the development of solar energy. This success is mainly attributed to the dynamic development of prosumer installations. According to data from the Energy Regulatory Office, at the end of March 2024, approximately 1.43 million prosumer photovoltaic micro-installations with a capacity of less than 50 kW were connected to the power grid, which gives a total capacity of 11.5 GWh [8].

The development of home consumer installations is certainly due, among other things, to the high economic attractiveness of this type of investment for consumers in previous years. This success was possible thanks to government support and a favorable settlement system with the operator [9,10,11]. However, due to the insufficient quality of the power grid and related problems with connecting new installations to the network limit the development of the energy industry, especially community energy. These issues indicate the main barriers to the further development of this segment of renewable energy sources [12]. In addition to the limitations resulting from the state of the network infrastructure, a reduction in the profitability of such installations (due to the change in the scope of household support for this type of investment) and problems with energy storage can constitute barriers to development in that area. [13,14,15,16]. This situation inspires the search for new paths of renewable energy development, and one of them is attempts to organize the production and use of energy within emerging energy cooperatives.

The issues presented became an inspiration to the authors of this study to undertake research on the state and development opportunities of energy cooperatives in Poland. The source literature lacks research on the analysis of the process of establishing energy cooperatives in Poland because 95.7% of cooperatives were established in 2023–2024. Due to such a limited period of the operation of cooperatives, it is difficult to assess their economic result (insufficient data). However, it is possible to analyze the legal and organizational conditions of their operation and identify barriers and conditions for the further development of such entities in Poland. Even though energy cooperatives in Poland are considered one of the paths leading to energy transformation (due to creating conditions for the functioning of distributed energy systems), they are developing very slowly. This might be considered peculiar, as in principle, they should be one of the goals of energy policy [17,18]. Recognizing the factors that determine the establishment of energy cooperatives will allow for the preparation of recommendations for political decision-makers in the field of developing economic policy tools supporting the development of energy cooperatives and determining the directions of their further growth.

Taking into account the indicated premises, the authors adopted the identification of legal and socioeconomic conditions that affect the establishment and development of energy cooperatives in Poland as the main objective of the research. Analysis that considers the specificity of the established cooperatives in the context of the cooperative idea is particularly important. In the authors’ opinion, the cooperative nature of the established entities may affect both the dynamics of development and the durability of functioning. The main point is that the purpose of functioning should not only be financial benefits but also benefits in the social dimension. Theoretical considerations based on the analysis of the literature on the subject and inquiries and conclusions based on the empirical research conducted served to achieve the adopted objective.

This study brings new knowledge in the field of assessing the state of energy cooperatives in Poland and the prospects for their development. Previous reports, studies, and scientific publications in this field were mainly based on the analysis of available data of cooperatives registered in the National Support Centre for Agriculture (KOWR) and/or on case studies of operating cooperatives that have achieved success [19,20]. This knowledge does not provide a full picture and does not reflect the state of energy cooperatives in Poland. The empirical studies conducted allow for the assessment of emerging cooperatives in terms of the structure of the founding entities, the establishment process, management methods, and the possibilities of achieving cooperative goals in practice.

The article has the following structure: Section 1 includes an introduction to the problem; Section 2 contains a review of the literature with a particular emphasis on the theoretical foundations of cooperatives, the level of development of this form of activity in Europe and Poland, and the legal aspects of their functioning; Section 3 discusses the research methods and data sources used; Section 4 presents the research results and discussion; and Section 5 contains a summary and recommendations.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Theoretical Foundations of Energy Cooperatives

The explanation of the role and place of cooperation between various entities operating within a given territory, including energy cooperatives, can be illustrated through the application of several economic and sociological concepts, such as rational choice theory, social exchange theory, the concept of social capital, resource dependence theory, and transaction cost theory.

The basis of rational choice theory is the belief that all complex economic and social phenomena can be explained by analyzing the individual actions of which they consist [21]. It is also based on the assumption that people make decisions rationally, guided by the desire to achieve benefits at the lowest possible costs, and therefore prefer greater benefits to smaller ones. At the same time, they expect to have many choices related to different levels of satisfaction, depending on their individual needs, goals, and, therefore, subjective preferences. In turn, rational choice theory is mainly associated with economics and used to explain economic phenomena [22], but it is also transferred to other disciplines and the description of human behavior [23]. The analysis of alternatives and, ultimately, the selection of a specific action are intended to lead to the highest possible level of satisfaction [21,24,25].

The use of rational choice theory to describe social relations resulted in the creation of social exchange theory, which, based on the assumptions of behavioral psychology [26] (Homans 1961) and sociology [27], tried to create mathematical models of human behavior. This theory is based on the claim that the basis of social order is the individual interactions of actors, focusing on the exchange of material goods (e.g., things and services) or intangible goods (e.g., trust and respect) bringing a specific benefit or reward (satisfied need). The exchange of benefits allows us to maintain the cohesion of modern societies despite differences in the individual potential of their members, often focused on their own selfish expectations [28]. The exchange continues as long as each party in the relationship benefits [26]. Increased desires to obtain benefits that are limited and perceived by recipients as more valuable may lead to greater compliance with offerors [29].

An important sociological context of rational choice theory and social exchange theory is ascribing the process of stimulating development to institutions whose framework defines the principles of rational choice, simultaneously leading to the creation of social systems [30].

In order to understand the importance of non-market factors and socio-cultural phenomena influencing the behavior of local communities, it is necessary to recall the concept of social capital. It is considered to be the foundation of cooperation and a significant, non-financial factor determining the economic development of a given area [31,32,33,34]. As can be seen, the conceptualization of social capital introduces a sociological perspective to economic analyses. The foundation here is the belief that relationships between individuals are treated as resources understood strictly economically, which constitute the capital of a given community. This approach implies the economic dimension of social capital, understood as a resource, i.e., potential accumulated in social relations connecting individuals, institutions, or social systems [35,36]. In this approach, the concept of joint action within cooperatives is also explained by the sociological trend of social economy because, owing to social capital, social activity is triggered [37,38], as well as altruism. They constitute the basis for the functioning of the third sector (social economy) and civil society. Additionally, an explanation of the impact of social relations on cooperation within the social economy, which includes various forms of cooperative organizations, can be found in the theory of associative democracy [39]. It emphasizes the idea of the grassroots organization of citizens into voluntary, democratic associations. This leads to the increased democratization of society and greater self-determination on matters that concern civil society, in this case, cooperation in the creation and distribution of energy. As a result, there are opportunities to create new types of organizations in order to take over as many social issues as possible and decentralize political power and public–legal cooperation [40]. The concept of resource dependence theory could also provide valuable insights into this issue. This theory examines organizations in the context of their environment, emphasizing the role of that environment and focusing on the relationships and interactions between an organization and entities operating within the same territory. Originating from organizational theory, the interdependence between organizations is understood as a result of their need for resources that are essential or necessary for functioning and whose ownership or control is dispersed. Each entity possesses or controls limited resources within a given territory, such as capital, knowledge, information, experience, labor, and institutional authority [41]. When acting independently, an entity usually cannot access all the resources needed for the effective implementation of plans or achieving developmental goals, especially in relation to external conditions [42,43].

P. Tsasis [44] introduces non-economic variables to the analysis of relationships between organizations. Adopting the assumptions of resource dependence theory, that work supplements the research with variables such as trust, interpersonal relations, discrepancy, or consensus in the context of goals or values. Collaborative relationships are characterized as a process of exchanging knowledge and sharing resources in order to achieve mutual benefits and pursue common interests. In the context of the decision to start cooperation, the expectations of the organization and its environment regarding the goals and directions of activities also become important. If they are divergent, there is a tendency to compete, rather than cooperate.

The mechanisms of cooperation for various entities in an organization are also explained by new institutional economics, introducing the concept of transaction costs into economic analysis. Those are understood as the costs of using the pricing mechanism related to the transfer of ownership rights. In transaction cost theory, the leading categories are institutions, contracts, and transaction costs [45,46].

Transaction costs can be broadly defined as the costs of operating the economic system, and they are related to concluding transactions, transferring property rights, and institutional arrangement. These are the costs of coordinating activities between exchange participants, searching for partners, negotiating and concluding contracts, or collecting information [47,48]. Transaction costs depend on the way the market is organized, on the institutions, and especially on the functioning legal system.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the idea of the operation of energy cooperatives assumes the rational management of energy production and distribution, including dependencies and connections between entities operating in a small area, which represent different sectors, and their goal is to achieve higher efficiency. Entities, regardless of the form of ownership (private or public), decide to cooperate when they come to the conclusion that securing favorable conditions for obtaining energy will allow them to reduce expenses, become at least partially independent from global suppliers, take advantage of emerging opportunities, or overcome a problem of energy exclusion. However, energy producers will become members of the cooperative if it is a beneficial solution for them and/or they see further development opportunities.

2.2. Cooperatives as a Method of Solving Energy Problems

The beginnings of the development of cooperatives in the energy sector in Europe took place at the end of the 19th century and mainly involved inhabitants of rural areas in countries such as Germany, Denmark, and Italy. Their main goal was to improve living conditions by jointly investing in infrastructure for the electrification of rural areas. In Germany, over 6000 energy cooperatives were established between 1895 and 1932. The highest growth dynamics of this type of entity occurred after World War I in the years 1918–1925 (in the situation of the greatest economic difficulties in the post-war period) and during the Great Depression of 1929–1933. Under bad economic conditions, private investors did not decide to invest in the energy sector, while local governments or citizen cooperatives across Europe took this risk and filled the gaps in electricity supplies [49,50].

After World War II, there was a change in economic policy, which resulted in a decline in the number of energy cooperatives, which was especially visible in Germany, where, in the 1990s, there were only 40 cooperatives [51].

In Western Europe, the revival of the energy cooperative movement took place under the influence of the fuel crisis of 1973, when the Arab countries belonging to OPECf led to an increase in oil prices by 70%. This had a direct impact on problems with electricity generation, the costs of which increased dramatically. This situation made European societies aware of the degree of dependence on oil and initiated the process of searching for alternative sources of hydrocarbon fuels from outside Arab countries, as well as searching for new technologies enabling the reduction in energy consumption and energy production from sources other than fossil fuels (renewable energy) [50].

In the 1980s, the first wind turbines built on the initiative of citizens appeared in Denmark and later in the Netherlands and Germany. From these civic initiatives, energy cooperatives were born whose activity was focused on obtaining renewable energy. Their functioning was based on residents of local communities cooperating with each other to install and operate increasingly larger wind turbines.

Subsequent crises that contributed to the development of energy cooperatives in Western Europe were the 1986 explosion of a nuclear power plant reactor in Chernobyl (Ukraine) [52] and the tsunami-induced disaster at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan in 2011 [53]. These events influenced the growth of civic awareness and increased interest in searching for safe energy sources, which include renewable energy sources. During this period, many new energy cooperative initiatives emerged, which eventually led to the creation of REScoop (the federation of energy communities), including Ecopower in Belgium in 1991 and ElektrizitatsWerke Schonau (EWS) in Germany in 1991, the latter of which was transformed in 2009 into a cooperative [50].

In the case of Poland, it should be noted that, until World War II, the cooperative movement was highly developed. In 1937, there were 12,860 cooperatives of various types, with approximately 3 million members. After the introduction of a centrally planned economy in Poland from the end of the 1940s until 1956, the state’s policy towards the cooperative movement led to the dissolution of 85% of all types of cooperatives. During this period, all energy cooperatives in Poland were liquidated. In the following years—until the transformation of the planned economy system in 1989—cooperative organizations in Poland operated similarly to state-owned enterprises, and their efficiency was additionally limited due to extensive bureaucracy [54].

The data on newly registered and deregistered cooperatives in the REGON register in Poland (Data from Local Data Bank Central Statistical Office (GUS)) provide valuable insights. When the distribution of new and de-registered cooperatives was examined, it was noted that, between 2003 and 2011, more cooperatives were removed from the REGON register than were registered. The most significant discrepancy occurred in the record year of 2008, when 862 cooperatives were removed from the database, and thus the number of deregistered cooperatives exceeded the number of newly registered cooperatives by 775. Since 2012, this trend has reversed, with the number of newly registered entities exceeding the number of deregistered entities, which has contributed to the observed overall increase in the number of cooperatives.

When the history of the cooperative movement is followed, it can be seen that its essence results from the cultural unity of a given community, based on relatively lasting social bonds. These bonds materialize in the form of various forms of organization of economic and social activities.

At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, deregulation and privatization processes in the energy sectors began in many European countries (the so-called old European Union, as well as new member states from the former Eastern Bloc), and interest in the use of renewable energy sources gradually increased. The role and importance of cooperatives in the energy sector have also increased, and Germany and Denmark have again become pioneer countries in this process [55,56,57].

In 2022, there were over 9000 energy cooperatives operating in EU member states [58], with some sources estimating the number to be around 10,000 [59]. The vast majority of these (82%) formed energy communities focused on photovoltaics (PVs). Wind energy was used as an energy source by 7% of European social energy initiatives. Energy communities using biomass accounted for 7%, and water energy was used by 2% of cooperative entities. The spatial distribution of this type of initiative indicates that, in 2023, it was most concentrated in Northern Europe. However, it can be observed that the development of energy communities in this part of the continent is slowing down. On the other hand, there is growing momentum in the establishment of such organizations in Croatia, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Italy, and Spain [59].

Energy cooperatives operating in Germany, Denmark, Austria, Sweden, and the Netherlands are characterized by the following [60]:

• Voluntary and open membership—they are voluntary organizations available to all people who can use their services and are ready to accept the obligations of membership;
• Democratic member control—these are democratic organizations controlled by their members, who actively participate in setting rules and making decisions;
• Autonomy and independence—they are autonomous, self-help organizations controlled by their members;
• Education, training, and information—cooperatives provide education and training for their members, elected representatives, managers, and employees so that they can effectively contribute to the development of the cooperative;
• Care for the community—the goals of the cooperative are consistent with those regarding the sustainable development of local communities.

When the situation in Poland is referred to, it should be noted that energy cooperatives are a relatively new phenomenon, and their principles are regulated under the Renewable Energy Sources Act (hereinafter referred to as the RES Act) of 2016, as amended (Section 2.3).

The definition of a cooperative adopted in Poland defines it as an independent association of people uniting voluntarily to meet common needs and aspirations of an economic, social, and cultural nature through co-ownership and the democratic management of a venture. This definition highlights the dual nature of a cooperative. On the one hand, it is an association of people with common goals, and on the other, it is an enterprise run by these individuals (to achieve the goals for which they founded the cooperative). This specific property of cooperatives is referred to in the literature as the “bimodal model”. The functions and tasks of the cooperative—as an association and, at the same time, an enterprise—in this model partially overlap, but at the same time, they remain separate. When creating a cooperative, including an energy cooperative, its founders adopt the general goals guiding its establishment, and when embarking on appropriate economic activities, they divide these functions into specific “goals-tasks” of the cooperative as an enterprise [61,62,63]. Therefore, the essence of cooperatives, as can be seen, is based on the assumption that cooperatives are the opposite of the commercial system. Instead of concentrating ownership, cooperatives popularize it and grant opportunities for activity to excluded people, and they are guided by the principle of meeting the needs of their members and developing the environment in which they operate.

Proof of the growing importance of the concept of cooperatives and cooperation in local communities is the awarding of the Nobel Prize in economics in 2009 to the American scientist Elinor Ostrom (1933–2012) for her analysis of economic management, especially common goods. It proved that the efficiency of community management can be better than that of the commercial system or the public sector because it favors the optimization of human decisions [64].

Nowadays, European and global analysts emphasize the exceptional stability of cooperative organizations in the conditions of the global economic crisis and other threats to this economy (pandemics, war, climate change, and energy crises). However, the problem of contemporary cooperatives remains the achievement of the economic efficiency of the functioning of the cooperative and, at the same time, the problem of social responsibility for the economic situation of its members. There is no doubt that the development of cooperative forms of economic activity, especially in the energy sector, may be an important element of further economic and social transformations in rural Poland and agriculture. However, this requires the engagement of public institutions in support of the following:

• Inspiring rural residents to undertake cooperative activities;
• Promoting the social role of cooperative forms of management;
• Substantive support for cooperative members aimed not only at increasing their awareness of the use of renewable energy sources but also at improving the cooperative management system in a competitive market.

In order to increase knowledge among those setting up and managing energy cooperatives, a national program of technical support should be developed, e.g., workshops, study visits, model documents, training modules, mentoring programs, and information and advice centers.

2.3. Legal Aspects of the Organization and Functioning of Energy Cooperatives in Poland

Various models and types of energy communities have been adopted in Europe, with various legal forms, such as associations, cooperatives, companies, or non-profit organizations. It is estimated that over 9000 energy communities of different sizes and forms operate within the European Union. Although energy cooperatives have been legally recognized in Poland since 2016, they did not attract significant attention due to the lack of implementing regulations. The relevant Decree from the Minister of Climate and Environment [65] came into effect on April 1, 2022, and since then, energy cooperatives have begun to emerge in Poland. According to the wording of Article 2(33a) of the Renewable Energy Sources (RES) Act [66], an energy cooperative is understood as a cooperative as defined in Article 1 § 1 of the Cooperative Law [67] or a farmers‘ cooperative within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the Farmers’ Cooperatives Act [68]. The activities of energy cooperatives include the production of electricity, biogas, biomethane, or heat in renewable energy installations, as well as their trade or storage. These activities are conducted exclusively for the benefit of the cooperatives and their members. The provisions of the Farmers’ Cooperatives Act should be considered lex specialis in relation to the Cooperative Law, which serves as lex generalis [69]. Such a principle is directly expressed in Article 3 of the Act on Farmers‘ Cooperatives, which stipulates that, in matters not regulated by the provisions of the act, the provisions of the Cooperative Law shall apply to farmers’ cooperatives. Consequently, when defining an energy cooperative under the RES Act [66], the nature of the cooperative may require clarification, as specific requirements for farmers’ cooperatives may differ from those for general cooperatives. Importantly, the act does not mandate that an energy cooperative engage exclusively in the activities outlined in Article 2(33a) of the RES Act [66]. Therefore, it should be emphasized that, in addition to the activities specified in the act, a cooperative may conduct any other business activities in the interest of its members [70]. For instance, cooperatives such as dairy, agricultural, or social cooperatives can simultaneously produce energy for their own needs and function as energy cooperatives. Members of energy cooperatives may include households, agricultural enterprises, businesses, and local government entities, as well as their organizational units. Energy producers within energy cooperatives benefit from various exemptions, including exemptions from the Renewable Energy Fee under Article 95 of the Renewable Energy Sources Act [66], capacity charges, cogeneration fees, transmission fees, and excise duty (up to 1 MW). Energy cooperatives act in the interests of their members. They operate according to statutes that include transparent and democratic governance principles. These cooperatives can include a diverse range of entities, such as individuals, legal entities, and organizational units without a legal personality. Furthermore, multiple energy cooperatives can operate within the same municipality simultaneously.

On 1 October 2023, an amendment to the Renewable Energy Sources Act [66] came into force, implementing further provisions of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of energy from renewable sources, commonly referred to as the RED II Directive [71]. In order to encourage the involvement of local governments and businesses to participate in this initiative, new regulations were introduced to facilitate the establishment and operation of energy cooperatives (

Table 1. The most important changes in the legal regulations for energy cooperatives made as a result of the amendment of the RES Act.

Legal Regulations Before the Amendment	Legal Regulations as Amended
No ability to trade energy among cooperative members.	Expanded scope to include energy trading and storage
Maximum of 1000 members allowed	Removal of the 1000 member limit
No option to integrate multiple energy sources (natural gas, agricultural biogas, biomethane) into a single distribution system	Expansion of the area of activity of energy cooperatives to include agricultural biogas or biomethane
No preferential treatment for grid connection	Introduction of mandatory grid connection
No specified deadline for concluding agreements with grid operators	Obligatory agreements with grid operators within 90 days
The total installed capacity of renewable energy systems must cover at least 70% of the cooperative’s and its members’ annual needs and not exceed 10 MWe	Transition period until 31 December 2025, with a reduced requirement of 40%
No obligation or timeframe for meter installation	Mandatory installation of a remote meter within 4 months

Source: the authors’ own elaboration based on the analysis of legal acts.

).

Energy cooperatives are undoubtedly one of the key elements of the energy transition. They are crucial not only from the point of view of energy production, ensuring energy security, reducing energy costs, and minimizing transmission expenses, but also for addressing the need to store generated energy, a challenge that is difficult to overcome for individual prosumers [66]. Pooling resources among individual prosumers, who often lack the financial capacity for expensive energy storage solutions, can significantly facilitate this goal. Moreover, the varying energy consumption patterns of cooperative members over time can partly mitigate storage demands through an internal energy exchange. The expansion of activities permitted for energy cooperatives has enabled them to produce and consume agricultural biogas, in addition to biogas, using installations with an annual output below 40 million m³ or biomethane from installations with a capacity under 20 million m³. Restrictions on the number of cooperative members have also been lifted. This aligns with the principles of civic energy, which allow all interested parties, provided they meet the cooperative’s internal rules outlined in its statute, to join energy cooperatives. This shift supports a more inclusive and sustainable approach to energy production and distribution.

Following the legislative changes, energy enterprises engaged in the transmission or distribution of electricity can no longer refuse to issue connection conditions for renewable energy installations operated by cooperatives. A significant improvement is the introduction of a provision stipulating that the total energy output from all renewable sources in cooperatives, which apply for registration in the energy cooperative registry by 31 December 2025, must meet at least 40% of the cooperative’s and its members’ annual energy needs. This requirement also applies to cooperatives that are already registered. However, the deadline set for 2025 appears overly ambitious, as investments in energy cooperatives remain at a pioneering stage. The legislator has not provided a rationale for selecting this specific timeline, raising concerns about whether cooperatives will have sufficient time to adapt and meet the stipulated requirements. Therefore, the preferential treatment period for cooperatives should be significantly extended, or the 70% threshold should be permanently reduced. Additionally, a key amendment clarifies that any statutory area of activity of an energy cooperative can benefit one or more members, rather than requiring participation from all members. The amendment also imposes an obligation on the distribution system operator and the obligated seller to conclude relevant agreements with the cooperative and its members within 90 days. This is crucial, as the lack of a precise deadline previously allowed energy companies to delay agreements, effectively preventing cooperatives from commencing operations. Moreover, the responsibility for installing remote-read meters for each cooperative member now falls on the distribution network operator. These meters must be installed within four months of the cooperative’s request, ensuring timely and efficient service activation.

Although these changes should be considered an evolution, rather than a revolution, they are undoubtedly a step in the right direction. The Polish legislator has chosen a unique model for the operation of energy cooperatives, which is intended to meet the needs of the local community, with profit being a secondary goal [70]. Despite the many changes introduced, the regulations still require modifications to fully unlock the potential of energy cooperatives. The authors’ suggestions in this regard are outlined in the final chapter in Section 5.

3. Methodology

This research was conducted in October and November 2024, and it covered 47 energy cooperatives. The research material consisted of information contained in the National Court Register (KRS) and data included in the register of the National Centre for Agricultural Support (KOWR). The qualitative research used a method employed in social sciences, i.e., in-depth individual interviews [72]. They were conducted using the telephone interview technique (CATI—computer-assisted telephone interview), using a research tool in the form of an interview questionnaire.

The choice of the research method, i.e., in-depth individual interviews using the research technique of telephone interviews with representatives of a cooperative’s management boards and/or people who have knowledge in this field, was optimal for several reasons. Firstly, due to the geographically dispersed group of cooperative representatives covered by the research, it was not possible to conduct field research, which is expensive and, in many cases, impossible to conduct (due to the specificity of the entities covered by the research). The address data indicated in both the KRS and the KOWR were helpful only in the case of public entities because, most often, they were the addresses of municipal offices. However, in the case of cooperatives that comprise private entities, establishing contact with managers required tracing the available connections of the cooperative’s management board members with other companies and/or cooperatives. This method of searching for contacts turned out to provide added value to the research because it allowed us to learn about the specific nature of the cooperatives being created and how they were managed. In several cases, it turned out that the person acting as president had no knowledge of the cooperative that they theoretically managed. In order to obtain information, it was necessary to conduct interviews with another member of the management board or with a representative of another entity belonging to the energy cooperative. The method of in-depth individual interviews that was utilized turned out to be optimal because it allowed for learning the individual histories of particular cooperatives. This knowledge allowed a better understanding of what underlies the operation of these cooperatives and determine their development potential. The basis for generalizing the research results was their repeatability in subsequent interviews. During the interview, questions were asked that allowed the achievement of the main goal and the adopted specific goals, which concerned the following:

• The assessment of the state of legal regulations in the field of energy cooperatives;
• The identification of features enabling the assessment of the nature and current situation of energy cooperatives and their division into groups showing their development potential;
• The identification of factors influencing the development of energy cooperatives in Poland.

The hypothetico-deductive method was used to develop the results; it involves formulating a theory–hypothesis [73,74]. Deduction is optimal in such cases. If experience does not support a theory, it should be rejected. The starting point is the principles that enable the prediction of new events and facts and, therefore, allow the creation of a new theory [75]. Using the current state of research in the field of energy cooperatives, the following research hypotheses were formulated.

Hypothesis H1:

Polish legislation on energy cooperatives does not support the creation of cooperatives and requires further changes.

Hypothesis H2:

Expected economic benefits are the main motive for establishing energy cooperatives in Poland.

Hypothesis H3:

Energy cooperatives in Poland are characterized by great diversity in terms of the structure of founding entities and the method of operation.

4. Research Results and Discussion

As of 8 November 2024, the KOWR register lists 47 energy cooperatives. Two cooperatives were registered in 2021 (one in May and the other in December), with the cooperative registered in May currently undergoing liquidation. The subsequent cooperatives began being registered in March 2023, during the global energy crisis at the turn of 2022/2023, or shortly thereafter, when the effects of the crisis were particularly severe for the budgets of local government units. In total, 19 cooperatives were registered in 2023, and by November 8, 2024, another 26 cooperatives had been registered (

Table 2. Energy cooperatives in Poland and their installed capacity according to the year of registration in KOWR (as of 8 November 2024).

Year of Registration	Number of Cooperatives	Total Installed Capacity at Disposal [MWe]
2021	2	0.138
2022	None	NA
2023	19	3.521
2024	26	4.203

Source: the authors’ own study based on the list of energy cooperatives registered in KOWR (as of 8 November 2024).

).

Energy cooperatives registered in KOWR are diverse in many respects. The vast majority of these are entities with a small number of energy consumption points. Cooperatives in which the number of energy consumption points does not exceed 5 (55.3%) dominate (Figure 1). The most collection points were indicated for two cooperatives located in spa communes, in which the priority goal is to ensure clean air, which favors the development of “green energy”.

Energy cooperatives in Poland also differ significantly in terms of the number of installations they own (Figure 2). The largest number, 15 installations, was owned by a cooperative with fourteen members and operating in the area of three communes in the Silesian Voivodeship. Also in the area of three communes (in the Lublin Voivodeship), there is a cooperative using 12 installations. It should be noted that 32% of the energy cooperatives surveyed have only one installation (Figure 2).

The vast majority of members creating energy cooperatives (87.2%) do not exceed four entities. Six cooperatives (12.8%) integrate a larger number of members. The cooperative with the largest number of members (15) operates in the area of three communes in the Silesian Voivodeship (Figure 3).

The analysis of the production potential of photovoltaic installations used by cooperatives allows to conclude that it is low. The installed capacity in the energy cooperatives covered by the research ranges from approx. 0.004 MWe to approx. 1.07 MWe. In the case of 61.7% of entities, it does not exceed 0.1 MWe, and at four cooperatives, it was approximately 1 MWe (Figure 4).

The presented characteristics of energy cooperatives, based on the data available in the KOWR register, allow them to be classified in terms of the number of members, installations, consumption points, and installed capacity. The research results obtained on the basis of in-depth individual interviews make it possible to expand the list of features characterizing these cooperatives. Due to the initial stage of development of energy cooperatives in Poland and the lack of numerical data, the analyzed features are descriptive.

Motives are an important feature that influences the durability of undertaken activities. Research shows that the main motive for establishing energy cooperatives in Poland is the financial benefits expected by their members related to both the search for ways to reduce high energy prices (66.0%) and the possibility of obtaining support for the further development of renewable energy (53.2%) (Figure 5). Interview participants emphasized that the energy crisis related to the war in Ukraine and the drastic increase in energy prices forced and accelerated these actions. They decided to establish a cooperative because it is the only possible form of cooperation in the field of small-scale energy production and distribution in Poland. These decisions were also influenced by the legal regulations introduced in the country regarding the operation of energy cooperatives, described in detail in Section 2.3, and the prospect of obtaining financial support for further development from various sources, including the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP). The research shows that energy cooperatives are at different stages of the procedure for obtaining funds for investments. Some cooperatives are at the stage of developing the project concept, others have already submitted applications, and several applications have been approved. These plans concerned the expansion of existing photovoltaic installations, including micro-installations and photovoltaic (PV) farms, as well as the construction of energy storage facilities. There was also a recognition of the need to diversify energy sources in order to improve the balance between energy production and consumption. The plans included seeking financial support for the construction of biogas plants, wind turbines, and energy production using hydrogen as both a storage medium and fuel source. Additionally, plans for investment also included the construction of electric vehicle charging stations.

The motivations that were indicated much less frequently include issues with sales and excessively low energy prices for producers (12.8%) (Figure 5). It is worth emphasizing that this is also an economic factor, but in the context of the idea of cooperatives, it may mean that members who are energy producers in such cooperatives will not be interested in pursuing social goals. Other motives included the next stage of development for already existing joint ventures (10.6%) and the desire to test and experiment with this form of economic activity (8.5%) (Figure 5).

Therefore, hypothesis 2, which assumes that economic benefits are the primary motivation for the establishment and operation of energy cooperatives in Poland, was positively verified.

The results of the empirical research indicate that the entities defined as energy cooperatives differ in many respects. Accordingly, they were classified into groups based on the following criteria:

• The type of entities included in the cooperative—among those participating in the research were cooperatives of local government units (public entities), cooperatives of private entities, and public–private entities, as well as cooperatives of integrated entities, i.e., those that were established as the next stage of cooperation, e.g., social cooperatives, producer groups, etc.;
• The creation procedure and/or management method—in this case, we can distinguish between energy cooperatives that were established and managed by external entities (most often, they were companies providing consulting services) and cooperatives created and managed bottom-up by cooperative members themselves;
• The method of operation—four groups of cooperatives can be distinguished: leaders, i.e., developing cooperatives and producing and settling energy; active cooperatives, which are at various stages of development but have a vision and human resources to achieve their adopted goals; and cooperatives in stagnation and cooperatives at risk of collapse.

When the type of entities forming their cooperatives is taken into account, it can be noted that, in Poland, the dominant cooperatives are those whose members are local government units (LGUs). This group constitutes 52.2% of all energy cooperatives registered in KOWR (Figure 6). The members of these cooperatives are usually three to four public entities such as municipal offices, commune cultural centers, municipal establishments, kindergartens, schools, libraries, etc. Photovoltaic installations are usually located in these facilities (either one or several properties). The main goal of these energy cooperatives is to optimize the production and consumption of energy produced among the entities formally subordinated to local governments. This means that, for example, a photovoltaic installation located at a school during the summer break can supply power to a communal enterprise. The intention of the local governments joining the cooperatives was to reduce the operational costs of budget-funded entities, particularly those with high energy consumption. Such an organized energy cooperative is, according to the participants in the study, considered a secure form of cooperation, as it integrates only public entities and allows for obtaining financial support for further investments, which will also be publicly owned.

Private entity cooperatives represented 32.6% of the total number of energy cooperatives (Figure 6) and were diverse in terms of their internal structure. Two groups can be distinguished within this category:

• Cooperatives established by private entities that are energy producers, which, due to limited sales opportunities (such as power plant shutdowns during the summer period), lose the potential to increase revenue through this form of cooperation (category 1).
• Cooperatives involving one or several business entities collaborating with individuals (category 2).

In-depth individual interviews revealed the connections between individuals who were members of the cooperatives and the business entities forming these cooperatives. In this form of cooperation, the aim is not only to reduce energy costs for cooperative members (mainly businesses) but also to acquire support for investments in energy production development and/or diversification. In this model, energy cooperatives can be seen as new forms of conducting business activities.

The next group are public–private cooperatives (6.5%) (Figure 6). Both public and private entities were reluctant to undertake such cooperation. The concerns expressed by representatives of the cooperatives covered by the research concern both the method of financing future investments and the decision-making process (for public entities, the consent of collegial bodies is required). For these reasons, in the case of this group of cooperatives, the role of private entities was mainly limited to know-how. This means that private entities were neither producers nor consumers of the energy produced within the cooperative. Instead, they contributed knowledge and performed specific tasks, such as registering the cooperative, signing agreements with operators, securing financial support for development, and managing the cooperative, particularly in the initial phase of its operation. According to the research, public–private partnership is the least chosen form of cooperation among the energy cooperatives registered in the KOWR.

The next group includes energy cooperatives defined as cooperatives of integrated entities that had already been cooperating in other areas. During the study period, these accounted for 8.7% of the total energy cooperatives (Figure 6). An example of such cooperation is a social cooperative engaged in, among other things, public housing, which initiated the creation of an energy cooperative to reduce the maintenance costs of public housing. Another example is an energy cooperative founded by a group of fruit and vegetable producers as their next joint venture, which, according to the representative of this cooperative, should contribute to reducing the operational costs of the group.

Classifying cooperatives by their process of formation and/or management approach allows us to distinguish between energy cooperatives that only receive external support for advisory services and those for which a representative of an external entity is part of the management body (i.e., serves as the president or vice president of the cooperative). An analysis of the management bodies of energy cooperatives registered in the KRS reveals connections between these individuals and other cooperatives that are not part of our study, as they have yet to be registered in the KOWR but are already listed in the KRS. From this analysis, it is clear that the leading entity supporting the formation of energy cooperatives in Poland is DOEKO Group (the founder and statutory coordinator of the largest number of energy clusters in Poland), whose members are on the boards of five cooperatives registered in KOWR and an additional 25 registered in KRS. However, energy cooperatives are, by definition, a different organizational form than clusters. Their foundation lies in grassroots cooperation, which is confirmed by the findings of other authors [76,77,78]. Nevertheless, the leader’s role is significant, as the leader of contemporary cooperatives should possess not only knowledge and strategic thinking abilities but also the capacity to make decisions that serve the common good. At this point, it is necessary to agree with Chyra-Rolicz [79], who argues that a leader not only must head various forms of collective action but should also inspire members to actively participate in these activities. In this context, both human capital, i.e., the ability to effectively manage cooperatives, and social capital, i.e., understanding and identification with the cooperative idea by its members, are crucial. It is important to remember that Poland is a post-communist country, and like other countries in the Eastern Bloc, the historical baggage from that era can still influence the current shape of cooperatives, particularly distorting their core idea. This is confirmed by the results of the conducted analyses and our own research. As mentioned earlier, energy cooperatives in Poland are at the initial stage of development, which makes their resources—such as human and social capital—especially important. The research findings indicate that some cooperatives’ management teams include individuals who lack basic knowledge regarding the functioning of cooperative entities. This reinforces Chyra-Rolicz’s [79] view that there is a need to revive cooperatives and foster skills for collaboration. This is crucial, as cooperative forms of action can address various needs of the population. According to the author, contemporary economic manager education focuses on competition, corporate success, and profit maximization, often overlooking the humanistic values of social economy, as discussed in Section 2.1.

The second group consists of cooperatives that are created and managed bottom-up by their members. Within this group, there are cooperatives whose management team actively seeks inspiration (e.g., through postgraduate studies, attending training sessions and conferences, and supplementing their knowledge), as well as those whose management is focused on survival and expects ready-made solutions.

The classification proposed by the authors, which takes into account the functioning of cooperatives, is an original one. It is related to the objective of the conducted research, which is to evaluate emerging cooperatives in terms of the structure of their founding entities, the establishment process, management methods, and the practical feasibility of achieving cooperative goals. However, this classification is consistent with those outlined by the International Labour Organization [80].

The research shows that, at this stage, it is not possible to assess the effectiveness of achieving the economic goals of individual groups of cooperatives. However, it is the cooperatives of integrated entities that pursue social goals to the greatest extent.

According to the authors, the criteria considered in the evaluation influence not only the development dynamics but also, more importantly, the sustainability of energy cooperatives in Poland. The evaluation was based on information from the KRS and KOWR registers, as well as the results of the authors’ own research. The assessment considered factors such as the purpose of the cooperative’s establishment, the structure and number of founding entities, the number of installations and energy intake points, the establishment process, management methods, and development plans. The qualitative indicators used are subjective in nature (based on the responses of research participants), and they take the following into account:

• The number of collection points;
• The development stage (functioning on the market, implemented billing system, and energy);
• Investment plans, mainly in the field of the diversification of renewable energy sources and the scope of services provided;
• Human capital (experience in the field of renewable energy and conducting cooperative initiatives);
• The pro-social nature of the project.

The collected research material enabled the identification of four groups of cooperatives (

Table 3. Energy cooperatives according to the features characterizing their functioning.

Specification	Characteristic	Share [%]
Leaders	Cooperatives with multiple installations and consumption points, active in the market, with an implemented energy settlement system, they have investment plans regarding both the diversification of energy sources and the scope of services provided.	10.6
Active/development cooperatives	This group includes cooperatives that have professional management staff and promising business plans. These cooperatives pursue both business and social goals. Their further development is limited by lack of capital.	44.7
Cooperatives in stagnation	These are cooperatives that were most often initiated by external entities, and their members do not really identify with them. They are characterized by a survival orientation, lack of decision-making on the part of members, no idea for further operation, and lack of capital.	36.2
Cooperatives at risk of collapse	This group includes not only cooperatives in a state of bankruptcy but also those that do not have the nature of business ventures, and it is difficult to consider the adopted goals to be of a social nature.	8.5

Source: the authors’ own study based on KOWR data, KRS information, and their own research.

).

The above summary fully supports hypothesis 3, which states that energy cooperatives in Poland are highly diverse in terms of the structure of founding entities and their modes of operation.

It is important to emphasize that the proposed classification of cooperatives and their grouping into specific categories does not limit their growth potential. However, it suggests that, according to the authors’ assessment, every other cooperative (leaders and developing/active cooperatives) has the potential for growth. Cooperatives in stagnation will find it significantly more difficult to succeed. This classification is crucial for monitoring the process of establishing energy cooperatives in Poland. In this context, especially at the initial stage, it is not the scale of the project that is important, but the way it operates. This is confirmed by the results of Duvignau, et al. [81], who showed that, in recent years, there has been a development of investments in renewable electricity sources on various scales. This is also possible on a small scale. In their opinion, energy sharing can be beneficial even in small groups (two to five participants). In turn, Brodziński et al. [82] emphasize that, especially in photovoltaics, distributed energy sources should be supported for environmental and landscape reasons. It is, therefore, crucial to support entities that adhere to the idea of cooperatives and are equipped with development strategies. Supporting promising initiatives is valuable—those that have been or will be established, as they represent the beginning of this process in Poland. For instance, in Australia, where 2 GW of photovoltaic capacity was installed by the end of 2019, plans are in place to increase the capacity to 25 GW by 2030. These investments are subsidized by the government, with support not only determined by the installed capacity but also varying regionally. The country is divided into five zones, with subsidies tailored to each zone’s specific conditions [83,84]. However, differentiated support requires identifying the factors that determine the development of energy cooperatives, which may vary in scope, such as legal regulations, procedural practices, and the financial support system for investments. In this context, the opinions of representatives from the surveyed energy cooperatives are crucial. These representatives deal with the practical aspects of cooperative entities functioning in the field of renewable energy in Poland. The factors they identified in individual in-depth interviews were grouped into three categories. These categories, however, relate to two main areas: legal and procedural regulations that are beneficial for cooperative entities, and financial preferences, both in terms of investment support and advantageous settlements with grid operators (Figure 7).

According to study participants, appropriate legal regulations are particularly important for development opportunities. These include the ambiguity and variability of the regulations and, most importantly, their unpredictability. Simplifying procedures is essential for promoting cooperative models in the energy sector. Legal provisions should be clear and stable, avoiding frequent changes that create uncertainty.

Research conducted by Koukoufikis and his team [85] on the role of European Union energy communities in overcoming energy poverty also highlights similar barriers to their development. They emphasize the need to remove legal obstacles at all policy levels, from European to local, that hinder household participation in energy cooperatives and the broader development of energy cooperation. Energy cooperatives are recognized within the European Union as a tool for fostering a fair and socially inclusive energy transition. However, research by Arnould and Quoiroz [86] points to insufficient legislative preparation and a lack of regulatory precision regarding renewable energy communities in Poland and other EU countries, including Austria, Ireland, Belgium, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Slovenia, France, Finland, and Portugal.

In the realm of legal regulations, the need to simplify the process of connecting cooperatives to the power grid was emphasized by study participants. Due to technical constraints in the grid infrastructure, entities planning such investments must be prepared for potentially lengthy struggles to fully operationalize their installations. Participants frequently cited a lack of competent personnel on the operator’s side, reluctance to collaborate, unclear processes, and even requirements to sign confidentiality agreements with the operator. Such practices discourage potential cooperative members. Similar conclusions were drawn by Hanzelka and Skomudek [87], as well as Orłowska and Trembaczowski [77].

These findings suggest that both the in-depth interviews and the analysis of Polish legal acts presented in Section 2.2 not only confirm hypothesis 1 but also provide a basis for specific recommendations in this area. The problem was partly overcome by the amendment of the RES Act [3] in 2023, which made it mandatory to conclude the relevant agreements with the cooperative and its members within 90 days. However, there are still territorial restrictions and limitations regarding the requirement to select only one operator.

A significant majority of participants (89.4%) highlighted that a financial support system and the tangible economic benefits of cooperative membership are crucial for the development of energy cooperatives. While Polish energy cooperatives currently enjoy some fiscal preferment—such as exemptions from distribution service fees, renewable energy fees, capacity charges, or cogeneration charges for energy produced and consumed by members, as well as conditional exemptions from excise taxes and certification requirements—financial support remains a cornerstone for growth. According to surveyed cooperative members, financial assistance should particularly target investments in energy storage and/or the diversification of energy sources. All existing energy cooperatives in Poland are based on photovoltaic systems, yet they aim to incorporate energy from other sources, requiring investments in capital that they currently lack. Numerous authors emphasize that greater financial support, especially during the initial stages of a cooperative’s lifecycle, would be highly beneficial. Similar conclusions were reached by Cohen et al. [88], Jasiński et al. [89], Gajdzik et al. [90], and experts from the British-Polish Chamber of Commerce [91].

Arnould and Quoiroz [86] reached similar conclusions, noting that energy communities face significant challenges in accessing private external financing mechanisms. They argued that, “because they do not present the typical business case that financial institutions are interested in investing in – they are small, risky, maintain democratic governance and ownership models, and generally raise the bulk of their financing after the financial close of their project” [86]. Public funds designed to support energy communities are often unavailable to those organizing such initiatives due to the lack of specialized knowledge required to utilize public funds. These authors also highlighted that access to aid funds is further hindered by inappropriate and/or constantly changing national and regional policies in this area in individual countries.

Another significant factor limiting the development of energy cooperatives in Poland, which was strongly expressed in the in-depth individual interviews, is the crisis of cooperatives. These entities struggle with negative perceptions of cooperative activities, particularly in Poland and other post-communist countries, where the concept of cooperatives has been distorted. This discourages potential participants from engaging in this type of venture. Orłowska and her team [92] identified a similar barrier, finding a general lack of trust among Poles and a reluctance to engage in pro bono activities. Only a small fraction of individuals are willing to dedicate their time and energy to community-oriented endeavors. Studies by other researchers indicate that this is not only a problem in Poland, as cooperatives are experiencing a crisis even in countries where these entities have developed and continue to grow very dynamically. Research on the situation of Spanish energy cooperatives shows that they also operate in a hostile regulatory and economic environment [93]. Similarly to those in Poland, energy cooperatives in Southern Europe are entities of relatively minor significance within the energy systems of their respective countries (Portugal, Spain, and Italy). These entities are small, have few members, and hold a negligible share of the energy market. Forced to operate in an environment dominated by large operators and in an unfavorable social and cultural context (including low trust), they are characterized by low civic engagement [94].

As highlighted in other studies [95,96], the cooperative crisis stems from two primary issues. First, defining their identity proves challenging, as successful cooperatives often begin to resemble typical enterprises. Second, cooperatives that prioritize social goals and uphold democratic management structures may demonstrate lower economic efficiency compared to other entities. This may hinder their development and negatively affect the degree to which members identify with their cooperative. Addressing these challenges, particularly in the case of energy cooperatives, involves overcoming these barriers through social mobilization—understood as self-organized efforts aimed at forming interest groups and social movements, as well as initiatives to garner collective support for these goals [97,98].

The analysis of the authors’ own research reveals that energy cooperatives in Poland face numerous interrelated negative factors, including legal (regulatory), financial, technical, and social challenges. Poland is not unique in this regard, as studies on energy cooperatives in Southern European countries have led to similar findings. Consequently, it is proposed that these countries adopt energy policies that are “more favourable to small operators, as seen in Germany and Denmark” [94]. Such policies require more flexible regulations that accommodate various types of operators within the energy system, alongside reduced bureaucracy for establishing small-scale renewable energy infrastructure and energy cooperatives. Moreover, it is suggested to introduce special conditions for nonprofit entities in energy auctions, such as allowing smaller-scale tenders. In addition, as in Poland, it is essential to enhance energy cooperatives’ access to financial support and other resources, including organizational and management assistance, as well as improving human and social capital. Training in these areas not only would increase the competencies of those managing energy cooperatives but could also help build public trust in the concept of energy cooperatives. The proposed measures align with the findings of the authors’ research, as the development of energy cooperatives is consistent with the authors’ research results. However, in the Polish context, it is crucial to monitor the implementation of initiatives aimed at stimulating the development of energy cooperatives, which is exemplified by the analysis presented in this study.

5. Conclusions

Socioeconomic challenges and emerging global issues related to climate change and energy security inspire the search for innovative solutions. One such proposal aimed at optimizing the production and utilization of renewable energy sources is cooperative structures, which have found a new domain of activity in decentralized energy systems based on renewable energy production. In this context, energy cooperatives, which have been growing in Western Europe for years, have proven effective in addressing local community problems and mitigating the effects of energy exclusion. They are also seen as a new avenue for supporting multifunctional and sustainable rural development in Eastern European countries, including Poland.

These considerations formed the research problem addressed by the authors in this study. By achieving their objectives, the authors validated the proposed hypotheses and provided recommendations for policies supporting the development of energy cooperatives in Poland. These findings contribute to expanding the knowledge base on this tool for fostering the growth of decentralized renewable energy systems in the country.

Based on the results of the conducted research, there is a rationale for recommending that energy cooperatives, defined as public entity cooperatives, could operate under a different legal form, such as that of energy communities, with simplified registration and settlement procedures. However, further research is required to explore this possibility.

Another issue hindering the development of energy cooperatives in Poland is the dual registration system, which needs to be simplified. An energy cooperative acquires a legal personality upon being registered in the National Court Register (KRS), but it can only begin operations after obtaining an entry in the register maintained by the National Support Centre for Agriculture (KOWR), which requires additional documentation and significantly prolongs the registration process. According to the research, going through the administrative procedure requires hiring a professional company, which generates significant transaction costs. The system is burdened with numerous control mechanisms and forms of reporting, in contrast to the energy cluster. In order to spread the idea of energy cooperatives, it is necessary to simplify the process of establishing energy cooperatives and to liberalize the control mechanisms, at least in the first phase of encouraging actors to engage in building this type of venture.

The legal regulation limiting energy cooperatives’ operations exclusively to rural and rural–urban municipalities is unfavorable to their development in Poland. This exclusion affects many regions that are attractive for such investments, such as post-mining areas and former waste disposal sites. The authors believe that extending the areas where energy cooperatives can be established to include urban municipalities would accelerate the development of Polish energy cooperatives.

In Poland, the development of energy cooperatives is limited to the area of three neighboring rural or rural–urban municipalities and a maximum capacity of energy generated from renewable sources (up to 10 MW). It may appear that national legislators are restricting the development of civic energy and are attempting to limit it to small, local entities. While this limitation is not significant at the current stage of energy cooperative development in Poland, it could become a barrier to growth in the future.

Given the instability of solar energy generation, the diversification of energy sources and/or energy storage is essential to optimize the functioning of energy cooperatives. The conducted research indicates the need for financial support for investments undertaken by energy cooperatives, including in energy storage systems and renewable energy sources other than solar.

Under current legal regulations, surplus energy produced by energy cooperatives cannot be sold but is instead fed into the distribution grid, from which 60% of the stored energy can later be retrieved (e.g., during the winter months when production is lower and consumption is higher). Polish energy cooperatives should be allowed to sell surplus energy externally and thus partially generate income. Furthermore, the fees paid to the network operator should reflect the actual costs incurred by the operator. In this context, a fee amounting to 40% of the produced energy is difficult to justify. The authors recommend changing it to 20%. In comparison, in Germany, there are no territorial restrictions, there is the possibility to sell energy, until 2014, there were significant financial incentives resulting from the Energiewiende, and most of the entities that were established were bottom-up initiatives supported by local authorities [60].

It is noteworthy that the EU RED II [71], IEMD [99] and RED III [100] have still not been fully transposed in the Polish legislation. The complex regulation and complex formalities related to the implementation of RES investments require expert knowledge. Therefore, it is worthwhile to introduce legal facilities for local self-governments to establish and operate in energy cooperatives. Then, their members could count on support from their municipality. It could be important for the development of cooperatives to make it easier for local government units to purchase energy from energy cooperatives, which would require exemption from the obligations imposed through the Public Procurement Act [101].

In addition to legal factors, economic factors (the profitability of investments), political factors (financial and advisory support), organizational factors (support for social activities by local authorities), and cultural factors (shaping the pro-ecological attitudes of society) also play a key role.

In the presented conditions of the functioning of energy cooperatives utilizing renewable energy sources (RESs) in Poland, the authors note the need for the development and implementation of a so-called “barometer of distributed renewable energy”, with which energy cooperatives can become an important link. Currently, due to the short period of operation of energy cooperatives in Poland, the prepared reports lack financial data that would allow for an assessment of the condition of this new cooperative sector. Given the early stage of Polish energy cooperatives, it is crucial to monitor this process and provide support to promising solutions.

The presented study can be regarded as a proposal initiating the “Barometer of the Development of Energy Cooperatives in Poland 2024”. It has presented the dynamics of the development of cooperatives, in all its complexity, which includes areas such as legal, economic, and social conditions, the well-being of cooperatives, and the prospects for staying on the market, as well as management and co-management. The analysis included all cooperatives registered with the KOWR, enabling future comparative analyses concerning both the area of economic profitability of these energy cooperatives and the directions and scopes of their development. This will allow the monitoring of the development process for energy cooperatives in Poland and a search for effective solutions (legal, economic, and social) that influence not only the process of their creation but also the sustainability of this form of economic activity in the area of distributed energy in Poland. The proposed solution provides an opportunity to compare the perspectives of officials, energy recipients, activists in the cooperative movement, employees and entities involved in the organization, management, or the popularization of energy cooperatives. This is an interesting direction for future research, allowing for the realization of both theoretical and applied goals.