This editorial introduces the Collection on “Energy Commons: Collective Action for Sustainable Energy” examining energy commons as alternatives to market-based energy systems. Through three empirical contributions, it explores how energy commoning practices navigate five fundamental paradoxes: inclusion versus exclusion, Western frameworks versus pluriversal approaches, local autonomy versus global coordination, narrow focus versus whole value chains, and anti-capitalist ideals versus market realities. The Collection demonstrates these tensions as productive forces driving innovation in energy governance.

CO₂ emissions need to be reduced drastically to fight climate change and minimise the further increase of average global temperatures. The decarbonisation of the energy system aims at reducing CO₂ emissions and is thus urgently needed. This transition is facilitated by inter alia switching to renewable energy sources and more efficient technologies. In the past, the energy transition has mostly focused on supply-side measures. However, at least since the publication of the 6th IPCC assessment report, demand-side measures have gained attention. Thereby, the roles individuals play in achieving this transition is recognised as important. This Special Feature is dedicated to exploring the roles of individuals within the energy transition. The nine thematically featured articles provide insights on this topic using different foci and angles, such as the information to guide individuals' behaviour, the influence of media in framing roles, and technology acceptance. To contextualise and synthesise these diverse contributions, this editorial introduction outlines three different, complementary clusters of roles: technology adoption, lifestyle choices, and political action. By theorising users as participants in transitions through diverse practices, we widen the basis for future research to address and incorporate the roles users play in engaging with and shaping these transitions.

Community-based energy systems are gaining traction among policymakers and practitioners as promising models for implementing a low-carbon energy transition. As a result, there has been a proliferation of concepts in the scientific literature, such as community energy, energy communities, community solar, and community wind. However, what scholars mean by “community” in these contexts is often unclear and inconsistent. This paper provides further conceptual clarity in the field by analyzing how the term of community is conceptualized in the scholarly literature on energy systems, through a systematic review of 405 articles. We combine an author keyword network analysis of this corpus with an in-depth analysis of 183 definitions extracted from these articles and systematically coded across three dimensions: meanings, activities and objectives of communities. Our findings show that the meanings attached to the notion of community and the alleged objectives pursued by communities vary substantially across concepts and over time. In particular, there has been a shift away from a notion of community understood as a process that emphasizes participatory aspects toward a notion of community primarily referring to a place. Furthermore, there is a growing focus on communities' economic objectives rather than their social or political goals. These findings suggest a weakening of scholars’ attention to “transformative” notions of community emphasizing collective and grassroots processes of participation in energy transitions, to the benefit of “instrumental” notions. This trend runs the risk of placing the sole emphasis on the market value of communities, thereby diluting their distinctiveness from more commercial actors.