PROSPECT - Peer to Peer Learning for Cities: Project Summary

1

www.h2020prospect.eu #H2020PROSPECT

Peer Powered Ci�es and Regions An overview of PROSPECT mission, results, impacts, and replica�on guidlines

Photos from the study visits of the PROSPECT learning programme See more: https://h2020prospect.eu/library/mentorscorner

The Consor�um The project was implemented by ten partners from eight European countries. The coordina�on tasks were shared between the two Netherland partners - Ins�tute for Housing and Urban Development Studies BV, and the Ins�tute for European Energy and Climate Policy S�ch�ng, which undertook the scien�fic and day-to-day coordina�on.

The three large European networks for ci�es and regions disseminated the knowledge and findings to their networks and beyond: FEDARENE, Energy Ci�es, and EUROCITIES, while the European knowledge innova�on community Climate – KIC developed a cer�fica�on process for the learning programme.

The University of Piraeus Research Center, together with IHS and UPRC, ensured that the results are properly anlysed and that the feedback from ci�es and regions is took into account in our learning, the created recommenda�ons and replica�on ac�vi�es.

Finally, there were our three test candidates for the learning programme: ESV, the experienced Upper Austrian Energy Agency as the main mentor on board responsible for mentoring the City of Trnava and the Portugeese Energy Agency S.Energia.

If you would like to encquire more informa�on, please contact either the coordinators Vlasios Oikonomou vlasis@ieecp.org or Mia Dragović Matosović mia@ieecp.org at IEECP, or the Dissemina�on leader Elodie Bossio elodie.bossio@fedarene.org at FEDARENE.

Project objec�ves, results and useful resources The overall aim of PROSPECT was to enable peer to peer learning in regional and local authori�es in order to finance and implement their sustainable energy plans. The learning empowered over 200 ci�es, including mentors and mentees to make use of best prac�ces in developing financing for these plans, which have been implemented successfully in other ci�es and regions in the EU. PROSPECT was organized in such a way that the first project period was intensely oriented towards the development of essen�al project ac�vi�es: the learning program, indicators to monitor the success of the learning program, learning material for different modules of the learning program, the applica�on and matching process to reach the right applicants, developing the benchmarking tool to have a basis for iden�fying replica�on poten�al, and of course, developing means to disseminate our ac�vi�es. A�er this seven-month prepara�on and development period, the learning cycles started occurring, with a new learning cycle launching every eight months. The results coming from this three and a half year learning journey are the following:

Developing and execu�ng a complete and easily replicable peer to peer learning program addressing local and regional authori�es through prominent local and regional associa�ons and agencies This objec�ve was accomplished in the first period of PROSPECT when a learning program with five thema�c modules was developed, each covering as many innova�ve financing schemes, for which a real-life best prac�ce example exists and was found and inspected by PROSPECT team members. The five developed thema�c modules are:

Each thema�c module is accompanied by a learning module handbook displaying good prac�ces with all innova�ve financing schemes that can be used for that sector . In addi�on, a module specifically on ci�zen finance was also developed.

The learning process ended in an op�onal Professional Cer�fica�on consis�ng of three innova�ve financing exams: Energy Performance Contracts (EPC), Ci�zen Financing (crowdfunding and coopera�ves) and Green Bonds. While Green Bonds did not specifically get iden�fied as a leading innova�ve financing scheme within the PROSPECT par�cipant community, the topic was included in the cer�fica�on programme because it is a key financing tool for cross-sectoral and energy efficient transporta�on infrastructure ini�a�ves. The process of crea�ng the cer�ficates is described in this report .

170 par�cipants received a cer�ficate of par�cipa�on, while there were 67 par�cipants who received the Professional cer�fica�on. 32 cer�fica�ons were issued for Energy performance contracts, 20 for green bonds and 15 for ci�zen financing.

Given the prevalence of Energy Performance Contract focused peer groups within the PROSPECT Learning Programme, it is no wonder that EPC shows the highest number of advanced-level cer�ficates; Ci�zen Financing is in comparison to the other two, a rather simple financing scheme, and Green Bonds shows a higher failure rate because it is a newer topic for most, it was the last exam to launch, and many par�cipants ran out of �me to study. A number of par�cipants signed up for all three exams but were unable to take all three given the overall tes�ng period of two months.

Each test taker received a summary of the results in which he/she could compare his/her results against the anonymized test popula�on for that specific cer�fica�on exam, as well as detailed results by content category, page, and exam sec�on to iden�fy areas of strength and weakness. The cer�ficate below was then presented to those who passed the exams.

Name Surname

Crea�ng an effec�ve and produc�ve peer-to-peer groups among European regional and local authori�es and agencies to ensure the exchange of experience and exper�se Tools tailored for peer to peer learning were developed mainly in the form of providing two different learning methods, to cater either those with basic knowledge of the project and in the early phase of project development (Study visits – one mentor and up to seven mentees), or those with a more in-depth knowledge, in a later development project phase, needing one on one advice and concrete experience sharing (Peer Mentoring – one mentor, one mentee).

Peer mentoring is a one-to-one rela�onship between a mentor and a mentee characterised by more in-depth counseling and joint problem solving. During the Peer mentoring, the mentor and mentees carried out 3 online and 1 physical mee�ng. Each par�cipant dedicates app. one week to the en�re learning programme (not including the �me in which they want to work on developing and improving the projects with which they applied to the learning programme).

Study visits allow a group of mentees to visit a mentor to exchange knowledge, learn from best prac�ces in securing finance, and interact with key stakeholders. During the study visits, mentor and mentees carry out 3 online mee�ngs and 1 physical mee�ng; each par�cipant dedicates approximately 4 days throughout the whole learning programme.

For both methods, Peer Mentoring and Study Visits , a thorough booklet was developed so that par�cipants can choose the best method for them in the applica�on phase. The booklets contain details about the steps, condi�ons and budget for the learning programme:

Steps The five designed steps for each of the learning groups are designed to include different type of learning – from online mee�ngs to a physical mee�ng, from the exchange of experiences, to surveys and structured learning materials:

STEP

1

Ge�ng Started

Online Orienta�on Session

Working Together

STEP

2

Online Learning Plan Development & Peer Learning Ac�vi�es

STEP

3

Mee�ng Up Physical Visit and Peer Learning Ac�vi�es

Moving Forward Online Transferability Assessment & Evalua�on - Feedback

STEP

4

To test the peer-to-peer learning methodology for PROSPECT, a pilot learning programme was implemented between February and April 2018. This was par�cipated in by three city and regional partners: ESV, S. Energia and M.Trnava. A representa�ve from Energy Ci�es served as a facilitator. From the par�cipant feedback and lessons learned, the final methodology was developed for full-scale implementa�on.

The en�re process is described in the reports Detailed structure and plan for the learning programme and set parameters and Se�ng up a peer to peer powered by ci�es and regions .

In implemen�ng the learning programme, to have a transparent and easy to follow elec�on process, online applica�on forms were distributed through partners’ networks, but with special effort from Energy Ci�es, FEDARENE and EUROCITIES which have disseminated the news about the program to all their members, as well as to the Covenant of Mayors community.

There were four applica�on processes and they are described in detail in the Summary of the monitoring outcomes of the learning programme . Each applica�on was followed by new materials engaging audiences for the specific learning modules.

Building partnerships that will s�mulate mutual understanding of each other’s issues, situa�ons and challenges with the aim of exploring new ideas, op�ons and solu�ons The key factor in developing a successful peer learning programme is proper matching of par�cipants; connec�ng mentors with mentees that can replicate the knowledge. Beyond choosing one of the five modules, and one of the two learning methods, the a pplica�on process asked about specifics of projects they want to showcase or learn about, as well as ques�ons about the phase the projects are in.

Beyond implemen�ng the learning program, the Networks (FEDARENE, EUROCITIES and Energy Ci�es) helped build partnerships with local and regional authori�es and their associa�ons targe�ng at the exchange of experiences for developing finance for sustainable energy. Such partnerships among public authori�es will enable future successful collabora�ons to implement energy projects.

The star�ng site of www.h2020prospect.eu offers an interac�ve map of all par�cipants, and the library sec�on offers a list of all par�cipants, as well as mentors’ best prac�ces.

Introduc�on In order to ensure that we create a programme that there is a need for, the en�re process started, and ended, with a Needs assessment .

The final report was created in June 2020 and it validated the needs of local and regional authori�es (municipali�es, provinces, regions, and energy agencies) and knowledge gaps for sustainable energy and climate financing. The report also contains conclusions and recommenda�ons for the future.

Also, at the beginning of each learning cycle, the facilitators ensured that each mentee sets objec�ves on what they would like to learn, so that the success of the learning process can be properly assessed by the end of the programme. The next image shows an excerpt from this report on the summary of objec�ves, analysing the mentors and mentees who joined the PROSPECT learning programme:

Iden�fying and se�ng up replica�on mechanism for the learning programs available to regions/ci�es beyond the consor�um network and the project’s dura�on Project replica�on was ensured through means of dissemina�on beyond the project’s dura�on, mainly through the project website that has been structured and developed to highlight the project results and to replicate the experiences acquired through all four learning cycles of PROSPECT. At the end of the project, a booklet was created on Success Stories form Prospect .

The Replica�on report is a brochure created for local authori�es who would like to replicate the programme. Addi�onally, The Replica�on plan is complementary to the Replica�on report. It shows, per module, in an easy-to-read brochure-style the replicable elements, lessons learned which are most relevant for a city, regional authority who wishes to implement a similar project. It is a prac�cal guide and summary, synthesizing based on materials developed through the PROSPECT project and relevant for replica�on. Moreover, an extensive benchmark tool was developed to assess the mentor and mentee city/region capaci�es. This was transferred into an open-access easy-to-use excel tool for selec�ng financing schemes called the PROSPECT Recommenda�ons Decision Matrix and a userguide to accompany the tool was also developed. The matrix helps the user check the pre-requisites for implemen�ng each innova�ve financing scheme at the local level (i.e. the condi�ons that each public authority needs to meet in terms of its characteris�cs among the three axes of the Benchmark survey). This matrix is based on the factors assessed in the PROSPECT Benchmark survey and includes the ques�ons that mentors and mentees answered for the different municipali�es and regions. The variables used in the matrix were selected a�er taking into considera�on the strengths and weaknesses of each innova�ve financing scheme, as well as the barriers to each scheme that different sectors (e.g. Public and Private Buildings, Public Ligh�ng, Cross sectoral) present. It consists an easy-to-grasp checklist that assists a local authority in its first decision-making steps to decide against a set of financing alterna�ves, it compares them and proposes the most suitable one.

Furthermore, data collected through the benchmark survey from the first two LCs were further elaborated using the SPSS so�ware. This analysis led to some remarkable results and conclusions regarding the performance of ci�es towards the financing and implementa�on of sustainable energy projects and was used for the development of a scien�fic ar�cle en�tled “A City Capability Assessment Framework Focusing on Planning, Financing, and Implemen�ng Sustainable Energy Projects”, published in the Sustainability MDPI journal . The ar�cle facilitates ci�es to explore the most important competencies for the successful implementa�on of sustainable energy projects and policy-makers to be�er understand the barriers when it comes to local sustainable energy financing and planning.

Presenta�ons of the project An important part of replica�on is proper dissemina�on throughout the project so that the targeted audiences learn about PROSPECT results. At the beginning, a Dissemina�on Strategy was created to set a tone and a plan for dissemina�ng the results. We monitored all PROSPECT events and presenta�ons where PROSPECT was men�oned.

As shown by the map below, the spread of events over the all dura�on of the project and across Europe is quite balanced. Although some EU countries are missing (Bulgaria, Croa�a, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Lithuania, Portugal, Slovakia) when comparing with the geographical origin of par�cipants in the PROSPECT programme, we can see that the dissemina�on reached out to local authori�es in these countries and this might be a result of events/ presenta�ons at EU level. Bulgaria had indeed 11 par�cipants in the Peer Learning Programme, Croa�a 9, Cyprus 2, Denmark 2, Estonia 2, Lithuania 1 and Portugal 25.

What we learned along the way As any project, PROSPECT had areas where our ideas thrived, and those where we were met with uncertain�es and difficul�es for which we needed to find ad hoc solu�ons. It was a fun and challenging process which we ended by implemen�ng all objec�ves, and also learned a few lessons in the process: We learned that planning such a high-content and programme takes a lot of �me (for us, around nine months for ten partners was spent on planning the learning materials for the five thema�c areas and all the accompanying guides and documenta�on), and that proper alloca�on of �me for this process is crucial.

A�er experiencing with two ways of engaging the par�cipants, we realized we obtain a be�er match between mentor and mentee if we choose the mentors first. Then a second engagement campaign followed for mentees. In this way, mentees who are applying know exactly who they can learned from and it is easier to set realis�c learning objec�ves. We learned that having a physical visit is a preferred way of learning. And once the learning had to go completely online, due to the 2020 pandemic, we had to accommodate learning into shorter few-day interac�ons to have the same result in one and a half day of a physical visit. These contrasted methods of learning, but that the personal element is crucial. O�en it is the kindness of mentors and the availability of our facilitators that made a difference in mo�va�ng mentees to learn and helping create a friendly atmosphere in which it was easier to talk about local challenges and find proper solu�ons.

These facilitators provided by PROSPECT were crucial in keeping the track of learning and helping both mentor and mentee to achieve their objec�ves. Even with proper and thorough planning, one of the biggest surprises was the amount of �me and effort it takes to take care of mee�ng organiza�on and simply helping with the familiariyas�on process among mentor and mentee was crucial. The most important lesson, or rather a confirma�on, resul�ng from the PROSPECT learning programme, was that Europe has amasing experts in ci�es, regions and agencies. The mentors were ready to offer their availability and experience, o�en for free. Almost every project could be implemented with innova�ve financing instruments, and any star�ng budget can be enough for at least a pilot project. There only needs to be a will, a clear project, and people in ci�es with assigned sufficient �me to work on sustainable solu�ons.

Project Terminology Energy efficiency ac�ons ● Sustainable energy and climate acions: These refer to actions that fall under the five (5) thematic modules of the PROSPECT learning program; namely public ● ● ● ● ●

buildings, private buildings, transport, public lighting and cross-sectoral.

Public buildings: This covers buildings and facilities owned, managed, or controlled by public authories. Facilities refer to energy consuming entities that are not buildings, such as wastewater treatment plants.

Private buildings: This covers buildings owned, managed, or controlled by private individuals or corporations. This refers primarily to the tertiary sector (services), such as private companies, banks, commercial, and retail activities, hospitals, etc. and residential buildings, including social housing.

Transport: This covers the provision of and management of mass transit systems by public authorities, as well as private transport.

Public lighting: This covers the provision of public lighting (e.g. street lighting and traffic lights) owned or operated by public authorities. Non-municipal public ligh ng is under private buildings.

Cross-sectoral: This covers all those interventions falling under two or more thematic modules; climate change adaptation; local electricity production (e.g. wind power, hydroelectric power, photovoltaic); and local heat/cold production (e.g. combined heat and power and district heating plant).

Project Terminology Innova�ve financing schemes ● Ci�zens finance (crowdfunding and coopera�ves): A crowdfunding involves an open call, mostly through the internet, for the provision of financial ●

● ● ● ●

●

resources either in form of dona�on or in exchange for some form of reward and/or vo�ng rights. This can happen in combina�on with energy coopera�ves, which are business models based on shared ownership and democra�c decision-making procedures.

Energy Performance Contrac�ng (EPC): EPC is a method to implement energy efficiency projects, by which an ESCO (Energy Services Company) acts as a unique contractor and assures most steps of a project, from audit through installa�on up to opera�ons and maintenance. The ESCO delivers a performance guarantee on the energy savings and takes responsibility for the end result. The EPC contract is the contractual agreement by which the output-drive results are agreed upon.

Green bonds: Local government (or their agencies) can issue green bonds to fund their sustainable energy and climate ac�ons. A green bond can operate as a normal bond, which is a debt that will be paid back, depending on the characteris�cs of the bond, with interest. These can be made a�rac�ve via tax-exemp�ons.

Guarantee funds: These are loan guarantees provided to lenders which serve as buffers against first losses of non-payment by the borrowers.

So� loans: So� loan schemes are loans below market rates and with longer payback periods derived from public funding to facilitate investments.

Revolving funds: A Fund established to finance a con�nuing cycle of investments through ini�al amounts received from its shareholders, creditors or donors and later on through amounts received from reimbursements of provided funding or loans to projects. These recovered funds become available for further reinvestment in other projects under similar scope (e.g. revolving funds for sustainable energy will use the loans recovered funds to finance new sustainable energy projects.

Third party financing: This refers solely to debt financing. The project financing comes from a third party, usually a financial ins�tu�on or other investor, or the ESCO, which is not the user or customer.

Project Terminology Project & Investment Cycles ● Bankable projects: Project or proposal that has sufficient collateral, future cash flow, and high probability of success, to be in accepted for funding by a financial ins�tu�on or investor. ● Investment cycle: This refers to the stages of pre-financing or servicing/opera�ons from the financial ins�tu�on’s perspec�ve. ● Pre-financing: This includes origina�on (e.g. own funds, technical assistance, EU facili�es e.g. PDA, ELENA), underwri�ng (deter mining value and risk, requiring final project informa�on, accurate costs and savings, procurement and contrac�ng approach), and the investment decision. ● Post-financing includes (servicing and opera�ons): Investment administra�on (legal documenta�on), draw down of funds (the external financing en�ty’s final inspec�on) and on-going servicing for the life of the investment (following the agreement). ● Project cycle: This refers to the stages of development, implementa�on, and monitoring of a sustainable energy and climate ac�on project financed by an innova�ve financing scheme.

Project Terminology Learning Program ● Mentor: An individual represen�ng a local or regional authority who have had direct experience on or have a specific exper�se in financing a sustainable energy and climate ac�on through an innova�ve scheme and is willing to share insights to a mentee. ● Mentee city/region/agency: An individual represen�ng a local or regional authority who would want to learn from an experienced in expert peer on financing a sustainable energy and climate ac�on using an innova�ve scheme and is interested to apply what in learned in their own context. ● Peer mentoring: A one-to-one rela�onship between a mentor and a mentee and is characterized by open ended counselling in joint problem solving. ● Matched pair: A pair of mentor and mentee who would par�cipate in the peer learning program through peer mentoring. ● Peer mentoring visit: This refers to an ac�vity wherein the mentor visits the mentee to understand the learning context and carry out mentoring ac�vi�es. ● Peer group: A group of more than two peers (maximum of seven) with similar learning needs and objec�ves who can par�cipate in the learning program via study visits with the support of a mentor and a facilitator. ● Study visit: An ac�vity that involves a peer group observing first-hand how a mentor city or region has implemented its sustainable energy or climate ac�on project using an innova�ve financing scheme and get insights and recommenda�ons directly from the implementers. ● Online peer learning: A learning ac�vity that involves virtual discussions wherein the matched pair or peer group can discuss their issues and challenges and work on how they can achieve their learning objec�ves. ● Facilitator: An individual who supports the interac�on among the matched pair or peer group by establishing the purpose of the program, steering the discussions, and collec�ng feedback on the peer learning process. Project partners in the PROSPECT consor�um act as facilitators.