<div><p>La charte concerne l’ensemble des chercheur.es contribuant à l’activité de recherche ou y apportant un appui dans le cadre du projet Flex-Mediation. Les participant.es s’engagent à respecter les principes énoncés dans la charte. Cette dernière fixe un cadre pour faciliter la recherche en collectif, la mutualisation des ressources (documents, données brutes, etc.) et l'ouverture des données.</p></div>

Since the mid-2010s, participatory renewable energy (RE) projects in France have included so-called co-development projects, involving a private developer, citizens' associations and a local authority. As yet little studied, this article proposes an analysis based on the following question: in what way does the cooperative process supporting co-development ENR projects constitute a form of commoning of energy production that contributes to the "citizen energy transition"? Based on a study of three cases, and through the prism of commoning, we analyze the social construction of cooperation between heterogeneous players aimed at the collective management of ENR production. We show that, in these projects, the creation of energy commons is based on five variables: a heterogeneous cooperating community, the articulation of plural logics (market, public and reciprocal), the territorialization of resources, democratic governance and conflictuality, provided it is the vector of compromise.

Understanding mediations between variable production and evolving uses of electricity. Presentation of the human and social sciences research project 2023-2028 in 5 axes: - New organizational arrangements between production and consumption, and the ways in which resources are used - Influence of the ways in which energy communities emerge and operate on the fair sharing of costs and benefits - Influence of intermediaries on the perception of the variability of renewable energies and consumer practices - Design of public policies and regulation relating to flexibility: new forms of services (suppliers, aggregators, communities) and integration into market mechanisms, international comparison - Legal translation of flexibility and questions of energy justice: European comparison, multi-scale contractual analysis, innovations in specific rights for the players concerned.

Climate risk is considered "too big to ignore" (Garschagen et al., 2020), and seen as the result of a series of interactions between society and nature that lead to socio-environmental extremes (Balch et al., 2020). What's more, its uncertain nature seems to limit the use of a climate model and projection as a single decision-making tool (Hallegatte, 2009). Understanding the strategies of economic actors, or in other words, how actors coordinate to cope with this change, is a fruitful research agenda (Agrawal, 2008; Wang et al., 2013; Agrawal & Carmen Lemos, 2015). Among the challenges of climate change, the question of flood prevention and management seems to deserve our full attention. More specifically, the challenge is to understand how economic players in an exposed territory adapt and cope with the economic development-flood dilemma. The aim of our paper is to examine how economic agents, both private and public, manage the dilemma between economic development and flooding in an area that is highly exposed to risk and has a history of transforming its hydraulic environment (Cœur, 2003). Based on an abductive approach, we mobilize the concept of risk regime (Wissman-Weber & Levy, 2018) to qualify tensions between economic agents and the construction of a compromise (Renn et al., 2018). More concretely, we propose to study the risk regime that stabilizes around the Athanor sorting and incineration plant located in the Grenoble metropolis. This critical site for waste collection, the circular economy, district heating and the energy transition of the metropolis is strongly affected by the evolution of climate risk due to its spatial positioning in a high-hazard flood zone. Between the choice of maintaining the site or relocating it, we highlight a process of in situ transformation synchronized with structuring diking and securing projects for political, economic, societal and environmental reasons. The aim is therefore to characterize a problematic local situation, inherited from historical choices whose eventual resolution is complicated by climate change. We apply this risk regime at the level of a "scene" in the sense of (Decrop et al., 2001), bringing together a set of "identified or identifiable" actors (Decrop et al., 2001, p. 9). In this context, the study of scenes can help us understand the modalities of evolution and transformation. The notion of scene is relevant to the study of negotiation spaces "in which risk is the object or one of the objects" (Decrop et al., 2001). Our case study is then a micro-scene defined as a localized situation presenting a flooding and industrialization issue (presence of a detected or historical risk, presence of installations or particular industrial interest, presence of stakeholder concerns). In concrete terms, it enables us to detect tensions and fragilities at the boundary between the two dynamics, and the choices negotiated between a multiplicity of stakeholders in a context of climate change. This work is based on an analysis of the discourses of the main players on this scene, we have analyzed the governance model, the economic model and the discourses. The aim is to highlight a local risk regime at the frontier between adaptation and resilience needs on the one hand, and industrial development ambitions (driven by the metropolis and businesses) on the other. Our results show that: (1) despite the presence of an accepted, objectified flood risk made critical by climate uncertainty, interdependence effects are emerging, leading to a critical immobility of the Athanor station. Between the choice of maintaining and relocating, a range of political, economic and mitigation issues are at play, leading to a decision in favor of conversion in an at-risk area; (2) at-risk areas are faced with an overlap between climate mitigation objectives and adaptation issues. In this context, the actors making up the localized risk regime are dealing with a meagre portfolio of adaptive options; (3) in situ transformation effects are conducted and desired, contributing more to carbon neutrality but also more resilient than before to socio-environmental extremes.