Stakeholder engagement strategies

Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 Horizon Europe Programme HORIZON-CL6-2022-ZEROPOLLUTION-01 This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Programme, under Grant Agreement No°101081883. Start date of project: 1st December 2022 Duration: 48 months D 4.3 - Stakeholder engagement strategies Closing the gap between fork and farm for circular nutrient flows Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 1 | P a g e Deliverable details Work Package Title Building the governance framework Task Number T4.2 Deliverable Number D4.3 Deliverable Title Stakeholder engagement strategies Revision Number Responsible Organisation CBS Author(s) Anna Schmid, Albina Dioba and Isabel Froes Due Date Saturday, November 30, 2024 Delivered Date Tuesday, November 26, 2024 Reviewed by ICLEI Dissemination level PU Please cite as Schmid, A., Dioba, A. & Froes, I., D4.3 Stakeholder engagement strategies, 2024 Contact person EC Sofia Pachini Contributing partners 1. AGRATHAER GMBH – Germany (Coordinator) 2. LEIBNIZ-INSTITUT FUR GEMUSEUND ZIERPFLANZENBAU GROSSBEEREN/ERFURT EV – Germany 3. VILLE DE PARIS – France 4. UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN, NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, DUBLIN – Ireland 5. SVERIGES LANTBRUKSUNIVERSITET - Sweden 6. COPENHAGEN BUSINESS SCHOOL - Denmark 7. LUONNONVARAKESKUS - Finland 8. NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND MAYNOOTH - Ireland 9. ETHNIKO KENTRO EREVNAS KAI TECHNOLOGIKIS ANAPTYXIS - Greece 10. BIOAZUL, SL - Spain 11. CIP CITIZENS IN POWER - Cyprus 12. KWB BarnimGermany 13. GOLDEIMER GEMEINNUTZIGE GMBH - Germany 14. INSTITUT D'ARQUITECTURA AVANCADA DE CATALUNYA - Spain 15. ICLEI EUROPEAN SECRETARIAT GMBH (ICLEI EUROPASEKRETARIAT GMBH) - Germany 16. FUNDACION CENTRO ANDALUZ DE INVESTIGACIONES DEL AGUA - Spain Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 2 | P a g e 17. SUN GLOBAL CHEMICALS SERVICES SL - Spain 18. IRIDRA SRL - Italy 19. ECOLE NATIONALE DES PONTS ET CHAUSSEES - France 20. KOZGAZDASAGES REGIONALIS TUDOMANYI KUTATOKOZPONT - Hungary 21. HAFENCITY UNIVERSITAT HAMBURG - Germany 22. SUSTCHEM TECHNIKI SYMVOULEFTIKI ANONYMI ETAIREIA - Greece 23. TRANSITION APS - Denmark 24. TRIODOS BANK NV - Netherlands 25. MOVERIM CONSULTING SPRL - Belgium 26. SOCIEDAD AGRARIA DE TRANSFORMACION TROPS N 2803 DE RESPONSABILIDAD LIMITADA - Spain 27. AGRI SMART DATA SL - Spain 28. TOUCH DOWN GOTLAND AB - Sweden 29. SANITATION360 AB - Sweden 30. GOTLANDS BRYGGERI AB - Sweden 31. AGUAS Y SANEAMIENTOS DE LA AXARQUIA SA - Spain 32. VunaNexus - Switzerland Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 3 | P a g e Deliverable 4.3 Stakeholder engagement strategies Content 1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................... 7 2. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 9 3. Market assessment ........................................................................................... 11 3.1 Objectives and process .............................................................................. 11 3.2 Spain .......................................................................................................... 11 3.3 Germany .................................................................................................... 16 3.4 Sweden ...................................................................................................... 22 4. Stakeholder engagement process ..................................................................... 27 4.1 Overview and objectives ............................................................................ 27 4.2 Methodology .............................................................................................. 28 4.3 Stakeholder Mapping and Overview: WS1 - Initial stakeholder mapping ........ 30 WS1 - Meetings and materials ........................................................................... 30 WS1 - Method and tools .................................................................................... 31 WS1 - Reports and analysis .............................................................................. 33 WS1 - Outcomes ............................................................................................... 58 4.4 Stakeholder Overview and Activation: WS 2 - Stakeholder engagement workshops ............................................................................................................. 59 WS2 - Meetings and materials ........................................................................... 59 WS2 - Methods and tools .................................................................................. 60 WS2 - Reports and analysis .............................................................................. 62 WS2 - Germany ................................................................................................. 62 WS2 - Spain ...................................................................................................... 65 WS 2 - Sweden .................................................................................................. 68 WS2 - Outcomes across pilots .......................................................................... 70 WS2 - Key outcomes ......................................................................................... 72 4.5 Strategize: WS3 - Co-developed community-led strategies ....................... 73 WS3 - Meetings and materials ........................................................................... 73 WS3 - Method and tools .................................................................................... 74 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 4 | P a g e WS3 - Reports and analysis .............................................................................. 76 WS 3 - Germany ................................................................................................ 76 WS3 - Spain ...................................................................................................... 78 WS 3 - Sweden .................................................................................................. 80 WS3 - Outcomes ............................................................................................... 81 5. Stakeholder engagement strategies .................................................................. 82 5.1 Spain ............................................................................................................... 83 5.2 Germany ......................................................................................................... 84 5.3 Sweden ........................................................................................................... 85 5.4 Summary Co-developed stakeholder engagement strategies for Spain, Germany, and Sweden ......................................................................................... 86 5.5 Summary target activities within co-developed stakeholder engagement and strategies for Spain, Germany, and Sweden......................................................... 87 6. Feedback survey ............................................................................................... 88 7. Conclusion and Outlook .................................................................................... 93 8. References ........................................................................................................ 94 9. Appendix: ........................................................................................................ 101 Contact ................................................................................................................... 113 Index of figures Figure 1: Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research (Norström et al., 2020) .............................................................................................................. 27 Figure 2: Stakeholder engagement method ............................................................. 28 Figure 3: 1st Exercise: Initial stakeholder mapping. WS1 ......................................... 32 Figure 4: 2nd Exercise: Stakeholder relevance mapping. WS 1 ................................ 32 Figure 5: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in the German pilot. WS1............... 33 Figure 6: Stakeholders Germany on local/ regional level. WS1 ............................... 34 Figure 7: Stakeholders Germany on national level. WS1 ......................................... 35 Figure 8: Stakeholders Germany on international/ European level. WS1 ................. 37 Figure 9: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in the Swedish pilot. WS1 .............. 38 Figure 10: Stakeholders Sweden on local level. WS1 .............................................. 38 Figure 11: Stakeholders Sweden on national level. WS1 ......................................... 39 Figure 12: Stakeholders Sweden on international/ European level. WS1 ................ 40 Figure 13: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in the Spanish pilot. WS1 ............. 42 Figure 14: Stakeholders Spain on local/ regional level. WS1 ................................... 42 Figure 15: Stakeholders Spain on national level. WS1............................................. 44 Figure 16: Stakeholders Spain on international/ European level. WS1 .................... 45 Figure 17: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in the Greek pilot. WS1 ................ 46 Figure 18: Stakeholders Greece on local/regional level. WS1 ................................. 46 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 5 | P a g e Figure 19: Stakeholders Greece on national level. WS1 .......................................... 47 Figure 20: Stakeholders Greece on international/ EU level. WS1 ............................ 48 Figure 21: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in Hungarian pilot. WS1 ............... 49 Figure 22: Stakeholders Hungary on local/ regional level. WS1 ............................... 49 Figure 23: Stakeholders Hungary on national level. WS1 ........................................ 50 Figure 24: Stakeholders Hungary on international/ European level. WS1 ................ 51 Figure 25: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in Italian pilot. WS1 ...................... 52 Figure 26: Stakeholders Italy on local/ regional level. WS1 ...................................... 52 Figure 27: Stakeholders Italy on national level. WS1 ............................................... 53 Figure 28: Stakeholders Italy on international/ European level. WS1 ....................... 54 Figure 29: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in French pilot. WS1 .................... 55 Figure 30: Stakeholders France local/ regional level. WS1 ...................................... 56 Figure 31: Stakeholders France national level. WS1 ............................................... 57 Figure 32: Stakeholders France international/ European level. WS1 ....................... 58 Figure 33: 1st Exercise: Brainstorming on challenges, needs and benefits. WS2..... 61 Figure 34: 2nd Exercise: Relevance ranking. WS2 ................................................... 61 Figure 35: 3rd Exercise: In/ Out activity. WS2 ......................................................... 62 Figure 36: Stakeholder present in Germany. WS2 ................................................... 63 Figure 37: Overview identified challenges in the German pilot. WS2. ...................... 64 Figure 38: Stakeholder present in Spain. WS2 ........................................................ 65 Figure 39: Overview of identified challenges in the Spanish pilot. WS2 ................... 66 Figure 40: Stakeholder present in Sweden. WS2 ..................................................... 68 Figure 41: Overview of identified challenges in the Swedish pilot. WS2 .................. 69 Figure 42: 1st Exercise: Challenges in the stakeholder engagement process. WS3 74 Figure 43: 2nd Exercise: How might we engage stakeholders. WS3 ........................ 75 Figure 44: 3rd Exercise: Effective stakeholder engagement. WS3............................ 75 Figure 45: Overview of impact/effort matrix in the German pilot. WS3 ..................... 77 Figure 46: Overview impact/ effort matrix in the Spanish pilot. WS3 ........................ 79 Figure 47: Overview impact/ effort matrix in the Swedish pilot. WS3 ....................... 81 Figure 48: Stakeholder engagement strategies for the Spanish pilot ....................... 83 Figure 49: Stakeholder engagement strategies for the German pilot ....................... 84 Figure 50: Stakeholder engagement strategies for the Swedish pilot ...................... 86 Figure 51: Stakeholder engagement process. Evaluation survey ............................ 89 Figure 52: Stakeholders engaged. Evaluation survey .............................................. 90 Figure 53: Stakeholder management. Evaluation survey ......................................... 90 Index of tables Table 1: Meetings WS1 ............................................................................................ 30 Table 2: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level in Germany. WS1 .... 35 Table 3: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Germany. WS1 .............. 36 Table 4: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level Germany. WS1 ......................................................................................................................... 37 Table 5: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level Sweden. WS1 .......... 39 Table 6: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Sweden. WS1................ 40 Table 7: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level in Sweden. WS1 ......................................................................................................................... 41 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 6 | P a g e Table 8: Highly relevant Stakeholders on regional/ local level in Spain. WS1 .......... 43 Table 9: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Spain. WS1 ................... 44 Table 10: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level in Spain. WS1 ......................................................................................................................... 45 Table 11: Highly relevant Stakeholders on regional/ local level in Greece. WS1 ..... 47 Table 12: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Greece. WS1 ............... 48 Table 13: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level in Greece. WS1 ......................................................................................................................... 48 Table 14: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level in Hungary. WS1 ... 50 Table 15: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Hungary. WS1 ............. 51 Table 16: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level in Hungary. WS1 ......................................................................................................................... 52 Table 17: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level in Italy. WS1 .......... 53 Table 18: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Italy. WS1 .................... 54 Table 19: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level in Italy. WS1 ................................................................................................................................. 55 Table 20: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level in France. WS1 ...... 57 Table 21: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in France. WS1 ............... 57 Table 22: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level in France. WS1 ......................................................................................................................... 58 Table 23: Meetings WS2 .......................................................................................... 60 Table 24: Overview Stakeholders engaged across pilots. WS2 ............................... 70 Table 25: Overview of identified challenges, needs, and benefits across pilots. WS2 ................................................................................................................................. 72 Table 26: Meetings WS3 .......................................................................................... 74 Table 27: Summary Co-developed stakeholder engagement strategies for Spain, Germany, and Sweden ............................................................................................. 87 Table 28: Summary target activities within co-developed stakeholder engagement and strategies for Spain, Germany and Sweden ...................................................... 88 List of abbreviations: D Deliverable N Nitrogen P Phosphorus SE Stakeholder engagement SoMe Social Media T Task WS Workshop Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 7 | P a g e 1. Executive Summary Stakeholder engagement (SE) is an essential yet complex aspect of governance and organizational practice. The methodology for SE was developed through a communityled, co-creation approach, drawing on established literature and practical experience from other EU projects. The primary goal of task 4.2 is to co-create strategies that empower and engage local businesses and stakeholders in the development of regional networks necessary for the operationalization of P2GreeN’s innovative systems. This task, which spans the entire project timeline (M1 to M48), aims to develop and implement community-led strategies to facilitate stakeholder engagement and carry out a market assessment of the pilot regions. The first section of the report covers the market assessment, which was conducted in the three pilot regions, examining socio-economic factors, regulatory obstacles, cultural perceptions, and potential growth opportunities for source-separating sanitation systems. The initial search was conducted on Web of Science and Google Scholar, including articles, reports, and legislative text published between 2003 and October 15, 2023 (Moons et al., 2021). Based on predefined inclusion criteria, we developed a string of search terms adopted from related reviews and the Project material (Lam et al., 2015; Corrin & Papadopoulos, 2018; Gwara, 2021). Key identified concerns include low user acceptance of P2Green technologies, as well as regulatory barriers at regional and EU levels, particularly for human excreta-based fertilizers in Sweden and Germany. The second and following sections of the report cover the SE strategies, which focused on crafting core messages to attract public, private, and business stakeholders while adapting to the local contexts of each pilot region. The key objectives of the co-creation process include: • Understanding the specific national and regional contexts of nitrogen and phosphorus (N&P) recovery in pilot regions. • Mapping, ranking, and analysing relevant stakeholders in these regions. • Developing actions to engage stakeholders and address their needs and challenges concerning N&P recovery. In total, seven co-creation workshops were organised across pilot regions, starting with an initial cross-consortium workshop in M1, in January 2023. The workshop helped identify key stakeholders. The stakeholder list was fed into a document to serve as a live database, which has been continuously used by the pilot partners and overall consortium to track and expand their local networks. Additional three online and inperson workshops held in May and June 2023 (M5 & M6) facilitated engagement with local stakeholders in Spain, Sweden, and Germany. These workshops highlighted challenges, needs, and benefits relevant to stakeholders, and helped assess their levels of engagement. For example, a lack of clarity and safety in the envisioned outcomes of the transformation was highlighted by the stakeholders in the German pilot. In the Spanish pilot governance issues and mediating with administrative bodies were highlighted as challenges. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 8 | P a g e Subsequently, during the M11 in November 2023 Consortium Meeting, three sprints were held to address early-stage stakeholder engagement challenges, focusing on developing strategies and tools to overcome these barriers. These events led to the creation of concrete guidelines for crafting and adapting core messages to maintain and further spark stakeholder interest. Additionally, communication strategies were refined to effectively communicate without overburdening stakeholders. This report presents the co-created, community-led stakeholder engagement strategies developed for the three P2GreeN pilot regions, which cover aspects of knowledge and awareness, communication activities, resources, and administration of stakeholder management. These strategies offer practical guidelines for sparking interest among diverse public, private, and business stakeholders, ensuring effective and sustained engagement throughout the project's timeline. The final section of the report presents the outcome of a feedback survey that was carried out internally within the consortium, to evaluate the stakeholder engagement methodology, offering valuable insights into the effectiveness and areas for improvement within the SE process. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 15 | P a g e social, and environmental benefits derived from its use. Literature highlights the need to illustrate the economic benefits to farmers to enhance the sustainability of their agriculture exploitations in the long run (López-Serrano, et al., 2021). Examples from regions like Murcia (IDRA, 2021), with a high percentage of wastewater reuse could support social acceptance and function as upscaling case scenario. Increasing the awareness and acceptance of reclaimed water should be the keystone for local, national, and European strategies to foster its usage in agriculture. The focus can be put on transparency and social trust to counteract fears or consumer resistance. Further, well-established risk assurance systems can increase social acceptance and the implementation of wastewater reclamation technologies (MesaPérez & Berbel, 2020). Regulations: • EU directives and regulations: EU directives and regulations, including Directive 91/271/EEC [4] and the Water Framework Directive (WFD) [5], advocate for the cost-recovery principle in water-related services. In 2018, the EU proposed regulations to encourage water reuse for agricultural irrigation and environmental purposes and this legislation enabled wastewater reclamation and reuse in Spain. Consequently, taxes in Spain have been adjusted to fund wastewater treatment services and improve water quality (Mesa-Pérez & Berbel, 2020). Especially, agricultural water abstraction mechanisms were implemented. These systems aim to recuperate the expenses associated with regulation, storage, and management of basin-level water services. They align with the requirements outlined in the WFD, with different levels of cost recovery being observed (Berbel et al., 2019). Since 2020, reclaimed water is also part of the EU’s circular economy, with regulation 2020/741 [3] aiming to standardize reclaimed water quality and risk management systems across member states. This, along with global initiatives like the UN 2030 Agenda, the Sustainable Development Goals, and the EU Circular Economy Action Plan, promotes wider adoption of reclaimed water reuse for irrigation, offering a promising solution amid water resource pressures (Ballesteros-Olza et al., 2022; Mesa-Pérez & Berbel, 2020). • Safety standards on national level: The EU Water Reuse Regulation [6] is anticipated to promote reclaimed water use in agriculture. This regulation is expected to address trade barriers for agricultural products, establish standardized water quality requirements, and enhance social acceptance through improved risk management processes (Ballesteros-Olza et al., 2022). Agricultural extensification and public awareness campaigns both led to positive outcomes as stressed by Ballesteros-Olza et al. (2022). However, only public awareness initiatives increased water reuse, while agricultural extensification primarily reduced water abstractions and pollution. In Spain, wastewater treatment and reuse are regulated by the EU Directive of 1991 on Urban Wastewater Treatment, which aims to protect the environment from the adverse effects of urban wastewater discharges. The directive is incorporated into Spanish law 11/95 and by the Spanish Royal Decree 1620/2007 on reuse of treated wastewater [2]. Besides the fact that Spain was fined for not complying with EU standards, the country holds a leading position in Europe Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 16 | P a g e regarding water reuse, primarily for agricultural irrigation (Rodríguez-Villanueva & Sauri, 2021). • Lack of institutional coordination on a local level: The use of reclaimed water for irrigation is hampered by institutional aspects, public resistance, and high costs (Ballesteros-Olza et al., 2022). Lack of institutional coordination, complex regulations, and delays imposed by administrative procedures are identified as barriers. Supportive frameworks and clear institutional arrangements are needed to facilitate reclaimed water reuse projects. Political support could facilitate the bureaucratic process and foster reclaimed water use (BallesterosOlza et al., 2022). These regulations and policies aim to empower businesses, particularly in the agricultural sector, by providing a more sustainable and reliable water source through reclaimed water, thus potentially enabling growth opportunities in regions like La Axarquía. However, reclaimed water usage for irrigation faces social, cultural, and economic barriers, including high costs for farmers and public apprehension on water quality. Despite being recognized for its benefits in securing water supply and providing nutrients, concerns regarding sanitary risks hinder its acceptance. Addressing these challenges through social awareness campaigns and compliance with new regulations could unlock growth opportunities in the region, emphasizing the need to address social, cultural, economic, and institutional challenges to promoting reclaimed water use in agriculture. 3.3 Germany Germany faces significant challenges regarding water and soil pollution, intensified by climate change, wastewater management and intensive farming practices. As one of Europe's largest economies, Germany's industrial and agricultural activities contribute to various pollutants entering water bodies, including rivers, lakes, and groundwater. Climate change intensifies these issues, leading to more frequent and intense rainfall events, which can overwhelm sewage systems and agricultural runoff, carrying pollutants into waterways. Major pressures on rivers and groundwater resources in Germany are diffuse agriculture pollution, with 65% of rivers being affected and 41% of groundwater reservoirs (Gruère, Shigemitsu & Crawford, 2020). Especially, high levels of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) pollution in water bodies stem from intense farming in rural zones and wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) discharges in urban regions. The dominant wastewater system in Germany consists of sewers draining to WWTP, with a majority of 96% of German households linked to the in most cases public system, connecting nearly 10,000 treatment facilities with tertiary treatment. Most wastewater passes through a process that eliminates targeted nutrients. The well-established sewage system, and mandatory connection of each German household to it, is argued to be a hindering factor in the shift towards more innovative sanitation and recovery systems (DWA, 2010). Alternatives to the established sewage system are dry source-separating toilets facilitating targeted nutrient recovery and contaminant removal from human waste. These toilets operate without the need for water to flush waste, instead utilizing standardized waste containers to transport and manage human waste. By avoiding the use of water for flushing, dry toilets offer significant water savings, making them particularly appealing in regions where water scarcity is a concern. Additionally, they contribute to environmental conservation by Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 17 | P a g e reducing water pollution and sewage treatment costs (DIN, 2020). While still relatively uncommon compared to traditional toilets, the adoption of dry and source separation toilets in Germany is gradually increasing, driven by growing environmental awareness and the desire for more sustainable sanitation solutions. In the German pilot, Kreiswerke Barnim (KWB) has installed a container based liquid human waste VunaNexus (VN) system treatment facility with a treatment capacity for approximately 100 m3/yr urine. To produce certified Aurin® a third process step will be implemented in cooperation with VN, the distiller. VN will install the distiller and will also take care of necessary adjustments, operation and maintenance of the system to reach the required quality level for Aurin production. The Aurin® fertiliser will be marketed by VN. KWB will be responsible for collection and all logistics related to the human liquid waste collection and handling. Goldeimer (GE) will collect mainly dry toilet contents from festivals, allotment gardens and off-grid nature tourism destinations. Athermophilic container-based composting plant for faeces will be set up, further automating the technology developed by GE’s network partner Finizio, and operated by GE on the Vagtshoff farm in lower saxony near Hamburg. The Vagtshoff farmers provide industrial waste heat and biochar for the composting facility, as well as the agricultural area (10 ha) for fertiliser application. Both faecal compost (~40 t[dm]/yr) and Aurin® fertilisers will be used to grow agricultural crops. During the project period, changes regarding pilot partners in the German pilot took place (2nd Amendment). These changes were communicated continuously and were considered in this market assessment. The market assessment focuses on a national level, through which the changes in the pilot configuration did not affect the quality of the workflow. Socio-economic trends: • Need for close cycle management: Negative impacts of climate change will continuously challenge the German infrastructure. Droughts, lack of fresh water or storms make it urgent to promote policy changes and actions for mobilizing the existing and national resources to accelerate the sustainable transition (Keuter, et. al., 2021; Nelles, Grünes & Morscheck, 2016). The authors also argue for circular production and resource recovery highlighting City Regional food systems (CRFS) interlinking different sectoral systems. The transition of sanitation and nutrient recovery enables the efficient circulation of local nutrients between urban areas and agriculture (Keuter, et al., 2021). In Germany, waste management has been under transition over the last decades moving towards a more sustainable and circular approach, making circular solutions like sanitary waste recovery increasingly realistic. By 2016, closed cycle management already contributed 20% in achieving the German Kyoto targets on reducing climate-relevant emissions (Nelles, Grünes & Morscheck, 2016). The German Association of water management (DWA) describes novel sanitary systems (NASS) as an alternative, promising higher flexibility in adapting to changing environmental conditions. Neligan (2018) further highlights the need to increase the digitalisation of such processes, to ensure an efficient resource recovery from human excreta. Back in 2010, DWA already claimed that the existing sewer system was reaching its limits while nutrients in significant quantities (e.g. nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium) were available in the sewage. These nutrients are largely neglected as a resource in Germany. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 18 | P a g e Häfner et al. (2023) describe human urine and feces as major contributors to the nutrient load in sewage, for example, 80% of Nitrogen and up to 60% of Phosphorus. In comparison to the current sewage treatment, a resourcecentred system would save fresh water, reduce chemical pollutants, increase recycling, and fosters resource efficiency (ZirkulierBAR, 2023). In Switzerland and Austria fertilizers based on P and N recovered from human urine are already on the market demonstrating their demand and feasibility (ZirkulierBAR, 2023). However, they are not widely spread and are not licensed for the German market (DIN, 2020). • Increase in market value and demand: A shortage in P and N as well as a lack of natural freshwater reservoirs contribute to the increasing market value of nutrient recovery solutions. Keuter et al. (2021) argue that the pressing question for the future of agriculture is how to achieve higher yields despite the substantial energy demands of fertilizer production and the ongoing contamination of water and soil with phosphorus and reactive nitrogen. City Regional Food Systems (CRFS) could be a solution to these problems. However, to ensure sustainable CRFSs, innovative technologies and methods need to be further developed and evaluated for the German market (Keuter et al., 2021). Some technologies and methods are already experiencing higher demand. For example, the market for mobile dry toilets has been expanding over the last few years (DIN, 2020). For separately collected solid waste, this involves sanitizing and stabilizing composting. In this process, a particularly high-temperature aerobic treatment method eliminates pathogenic germs from the dry toilet residue. The result is high-quality compost that can be reintroduced into agriculture as a recycling fertilizer. But also separately collected liquid toilet contents can be processed into marketable liquid recycling fertilizers through nitrification and activated carbon adsorption. Nearly all trace substances, such as pharmaceuticals, drugs, and hormones, are removed through activated carbon filtration (Köpping et al., 2020). Another advantage is that by separately collecting and treating the nutrient-rich urine, sewage treatment plants can experience significant relief for energy-intensive nitrogen removal (ZirkulierBAR, 2023). Additionally, the demand for alternative fertilizers is on the rise as a substitute for chemical fertilizers (Dadrasina et al., 2021). Neligan (2018) highlights that the private sector plays a key role in shifting towards a more circular approach and resource recovery. The scholar argues that resource scarcity is pressuring the German economy towards resource efficiency, fostering both economic and environmental self-interest in the efficient use of materials. Horbach and Rammer (2020) argue that, despite initial implementation costs, circular innovations in waste recycling eventually led to cost efficiency. • Success stories: Uncertainties surrounding innovative infrastructure, such as N&P recovery and urban sanitation waste recovery, can hinder the growth of such implementations. However, success stories from existing test regions and implementations can overcome uncertainties. Skambraks et al. (2016) describe a pilot region in Hamburg that was supported by the authorities to create a successful example of resource recovery implementation. This initiative also served as an advocate at both the regional and national levels. Also, the sanitary recycling Eschborn (SANIRESCH) project, highlights in their Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 19 | P a g e experiments, that yields with urine-based fertilizer were higher in comparison to samples without fertilizer. Successful use cases are argued to increase social acceptance and upscaling (Arnold & Schmidt, 2012). Committed stakeholders as well as strong sustainable project drivers are also defined as enablers of a successful implementation. Furthermore, a long-term engagement strategy aiming for broad acceptance is argued to be important for successful implementation and usage. Skambraks et al. (2016) argue that early-stage pilot sites are driven by university and academic collaborations, while test sites in later stages are supported by governmental collaborations and initiatives. Successful projects and pilot test sites are defined as essential prerequisites for long-term implementation and upscaling (Skambraks et al., 2016). Pilot projects can also increase acceptance among decision-makers and the public. In addition, a technical set of rules and binding legal specifications can be developed based on such pioneering projects (DWA, 2008). However, due to the well-established wastewater disposal systems and legal barriers in Germany, innovative sanitation systems have received limited attention beyond test sites. Therefore, every new project is crucial for accumulating experience in the planning, construction, and operation phases (Skambraks et al., 2016; Arnold & Schmidt, 2012). • Environmental goals: Local and national sustainability standards and regional strategies can encourage projects and increase their success (Skambraks et al., 2016). The authors highlight the case of Hamburg, where local environmental objectives for the Jenfelder Au, a newly designed green area, target a climate-neutral community. This involves the utilization of renewable energy sources for heating and electricity, alongside a conscientious approach to resource usage, particularly water preservation and source separation sewage systems. The scholars argue that local implementation and realization of environmental goals through such test sites has a direct impact on the region. The scholars further highlight the effectiveness of local projects compared to national or top-down goals. Skambraks et al. (2016) define concrete regional or local environmental and governmental goals as drivers for innovation in the field of N&P recovery. • Administrative and governance issues: In recent years, countries like Germany, Austria, and Switzerland have seen the rise of a new market involving mobile dry toilets for events and permanent installations in settings such as allotment gardens or mobile homes. Especially, start-ups and small to medium-sized companies picked-up business models based on ecologically (chemical-free) operated and well-serviced toilets in public spaces. However, the growth of this emerging industry faces obstacles stemming from administrative, legal, and economic uncertainties. The uncertainties primarily revolve around soil treatment strategies, as well as the sales and utilization prospects for fertilizers derived from dry toilet content. This highlights the high complexity of establishing human-based fertilizers in the market (Krause et al., 2021). Skambraks et al. (2016) underscore the challenges associated with implementing new and innovative infrastructure systems. For instance, uncertainties in assigning stakeholder responsibilities, rigid organizational structures, financial concerns, and unclear legal regulations can impede growth for companies in the sector. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 20 | P a g e The socio-economic trends identified for the German pilot region, show the interplay between pressing environmental issues such as water scarcity and water pollution, making resource recovery a potential alternative to existing principles. Concrete environmental goals addressing local context as well as successful pilot sites can foster the development of a source separation system. However, hindering administrative and lacking governance aspects slow down the innovation process. Cultural and Social perceptions: • Knowledge acquisition: When implementing source separation technologies, it is considered essential to gather information on user acceptance, regulatory requirements, cross-sectorial stakeholder networks. For this, designated pilot areas can serve as a means to gain insights into the overall environmental impacts and societal performance during their operational phases (Skambraks, 2016). Further, Keuter et al. (2021) argue that innovative processes such as bio-based fertilizer production need to be integrated into long-term social transformation processes to enhance the acceptance of food derived from recycled materials. Moreover, there is a desire for cross-sector collaboration among stakeholders and experts. A notable internal motivation, as highlighted by leaders involved in current and forthcoming pilot projects, is the pursuit of knowledge to effectively tackle potential future challenges in wastewater treatment (Skambraks, 2016). • Education and social acceptance: Krause et al. (2021) highlight the importance of educating stakeholders and the general public on the correct usage of new innovations. Further, easily accessible information and clear guidelines can support social acceptance. Additionally, conducting tests for harmful substances in accordance with local laws and regulations and guaranteeing the production of safe and high-quality fertilizers, can increase social acceptance. The education process also needs to be implemented in the overall process to improve the reception of food made from bio-based fertilizer (Keuter et al., 2021). Regulations: The German market, is influenced by European policies such as the Green Deal implemented in 2019, followed by the Circular Economy Action Plan in 2020 and other European initiatives. Both plans outline the EU's objectives and efforts to pave the way for a circular, climate-neutral, and competitive economy by 2050. Further, the EU waste framework directive set five steps for dealing with waste prioritizing re-use, recycling, and recovery (Nelles et al., 2016). On national and federal levels, regulations and acts influence the market for waste handling, water reclamation, and nutrient recovery in Germany. • The German Circular Economy Act (Kreislaufswirtschaftsgesetz KrWG) [7]: Formulation of a waste prevention program (first introduced in 2012) to promote circular economy and conserve natural resources and ensure the protection of people and the environment in the production and management of waste. To improve the recycling of waste, the obligation to collect waste separately should be strengthened. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 21 | P a g e • Resource Efficiency Program III (2020-2023) [8]: developing and implementing concepts and procedures to recover phosphorus and other valuable materials from municipal wastewater. The goal is to further develop wastewater and waste treatment from a previously hygiene-focused system to a resourceoriented one. • DIN-SPEC-91421 is a quality standardization approach of bio-fertilizers derived from human waste: The product specifications (DIN, 2020) aim to enhance the marketability of recycling products in both the German and European markets, thereby facilitating industry development. This effort also seeks to make a sustainability contribution by promoting the establishment of integrated circular economies, achieved through nutrient recycling, and connecting sanitation and food production. This initiative encourages the practical use of recycled fertilizers in horticulture. • German bio-waste regulation (BioAbfV) [10]: The amendment includes the list of the types of bio-waste suitable for utilisation on land and of other suitable materials. Human excreta or sewage sludge are not defined as waste and therefore not approved for re-use. • German wastewater ordinance (AbfKlärV) [11]: The regulation defines conditions under which soil-related utilisation of sewage sludge (for fertilisation purposes or for agricultural backfilling) is permissible. It stipulates that all treatment plants must determine the phosphorus content of their sewage sludge and outline how phosphorus recovery is to be implemented by 2032. Due to high contamination of sewage sludge, recycling to soils has been halted. Regulations such as the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD) further reduce the effluent concentration of phosphorous in Germany. • Fertilizer ordinance (Düngemittelverordnung DüMV) [9]: The DüMV defines that only raw materials listed as permissible in Annex 2 Table 7 of this ordinance may be used for fertilizer production. There is a prohibition on the use of unlisted substances. This includes human feces and urine as raw materials, and consequently, the resulting recycled fertilizer (see § 3(1) of the Fertilizer ordinance) (ZirkulierBAR, 2023). In particular, the inapplicability of the BioAbfV (Biowaste Ordinance) [10] and the DüMV (Fertilizer Ordinance) [9] prevents the production and promotion of recycling fertilizers. This constitutes a significant obstacle to the advancement of recycling fertilizers in Germany. Under the classification of human waste as wastewater, there is a very limited utilization pathway through the AbfKlärV (Wastewater Treatment Ordinance) [11]. However, this limitation includes the subsequent use of the fertilizer, thereby excluding economic market opportunities. Additionally, the use of dry toilets is locally restricted by obligations. A significant future challenge for humans and farming lies in eliminating unaccounted pollutants in wastewater, such as pharmaceutical residues, hormone-like chemicals, microplastics and perand polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). German regulations assume that the current wastewater treatment methods cannot address these trace substances. Emerging technologies like special membranes for nutrient recovery seem promising for circular nutrient recovery from human waste. However, there are no established legal standards to guide sewage plant operators in their transition to more resource-oriented sewage methods. Additionally, the fertilisation with human feces derived fertilizers is currently forbidden in the German market. The ministry of Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 22 | P a g e environment is currently developing a "trace substance strategy" [12] that could pave the path for water reuse. 3.4 Sweden Gotland, Sweden, an island located in the “Baltic Sea dead zone” is affected by excessive eutrophication and hypoxia (Kerschl, 2023, p. 9). Around 90% of the Swedish population is connected to traditional wastewater treatment plants, many featuring tertiary denitrification processes that release the inert nitrogen gas into the atmosphere and accumulate the phosphorus in sludge. Yet going to the bathroom in Sweden accounts for 38% of the nitrogen and 29% of the phosphorus released into surface waters from anthropogenic activities. Approximately 25% of the sludge is applied to agricultural fields, enabling some phosphorus reuse but limited nitrogen reuse. Efforts to enhance the recycling rate face challenges due to concerns about unwanted elements, i.e. heavy metals, organic micro pollutants and pathogens contaminating the sludge. A major limitation is the current infrastructural lock-in that de-incentivises the implementation of source separation technologies at a larger scale (McConville et al., 2017a). In Sweden, source separation efforts started in the early 1990s, by grassroots organisations originating in eco villages, making Sweden a pioneer in the field. By the late 1990s, source separation was picked up by politics and the construction industry. In 1997 the parliament at the time introduced the concept of “The Free People’s Home” fostering investment in green development programs and technology. Research further picked up the topic of source separation and several test and pilot projects on urine diversion systems and nutrient recovery were carried out. However, due to lack of emphasis on technological development and functionality of implemented systems, source separation experienced a backlash in the early 2000s. Systems which failed to reuse the collected urine or struggled with effective waste management further down the chain or reuse, were retransformed to standard systems (McConville et al., 2017a). One of the main challenges in Sweden and elsewhere, was the handover of the responsibility to the individual homeowner to manage their source separated fractions while the municipality managed the mixed flow only. In the last decades, due to changes in national and European guidelines such as the Horizon 2020 or the European Green Deal, source separation has regained public interest. Several Swedish municipalities have been testing source separation treatments and implementation it in existing municipal infrastructure. However, scholars highlight the importance for a holistic understanding or nutrient cycles and the implementation to existing infrastructures and estimate the number of urine-diversion toilets in Sweden to 135,000, mostly installed at summer houses or allotment gardens (McConville et al., 2017 b). Within P2GeeN, the Swedish pilot site aims to transform human urine into dry fertilizer for barley cultivation. The Swedish University of Agricultural Science (SLU) and Sanitation360, demonstrate nutrient recycling from human urine. In the urban area of Visby, processes for urine collection, stabilisation for nutrient retention and solid fertilizer production will be expanded. The resulting fertilizer will be utilized in agriculture for barley cultivation, ultimately contributing to local beer production at Gotland’s Bryggeri. This initiative creates a new value chain, reducing nutrient loading in wastewater, enhancing local agriculture and food production. The reclamation Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 23 | P a g e potential of this process for collection at public toilets and urinals is estimated at 900 kg of nitrogen and 90 kg of phosphorous per year. Furthermore, the pilot aims to obtain 150 m3 of urine by the end of 2026 (P2GeeN, 2024). The test site especially aims to demonstrate a full-service chain of nutrient recovery focusing on awareness raising, and capacity building with municipalities, farmers, and other relevant stakeholders in Sweden. Socio-economic trends: • Phosphorus supply and resource limitations: Previously, there was the belief that rock phosphate was scarce. This suggests that immediate concerns about phosphorus supply may not be warranted. Nonetheless, resources like rock phosphate, potash ores, hydrogen, and energy for ammonia synthesis are finite (Heshmati & Rashidghalam, 2021). If phosphorus is not recycled, its scarcity could lead to a “phosphogeddon”, impacting not only climate change but also food production and quality (Kalaitzidou et al., 2024; Shirai, Leisz & Kyuma, 2023). Highlighting the limited availability of resources can encourage the exploration of alternative fertilizers, such as those derived from human sanitary waste. The discussions in Sweden have moved over from only focusing on the re-circulation of P into also including the recycling of N. The growing interest in urine source separation, particularly in Europe, is environmentally advantageous and relies on the ability to replace synthetic fertilizers with a product that has low nitrogen emissions (Shirai, Leisz & Kyuma, 2023). • Climate change and environmental degradation: The rapid degradation of the environment has led to the development of sustainable strategies. Countries and organizations are increasingly adopting diverse environmental strategies and policies moving away from linear resource usage towards more circular approaches. There is a shift towards recognizing urine as a valuable resource, rich in nutrients, which can be used for fertilizing crops or integrated into industrial processes (Heshmati & Rashidghalam, 2021). Scholars argue that about 5% of P and 30% N are emitted with the outgoing wastewater from treatment plants when they reach their treatment requirements. The trend towards sustainable resource usage can empower businesses that offer ecofriendly solutions, such as converting human waste to fertilizers (Heshmati, & Rashidghalam, 2021). • Water scarcity and increasing pollution: Water scarcity is becoming a pressing issue, impacting human health, economic development, and ecological systems worldwide. Factors like population growth, urbanization, industrial development, and climate change are expected to push up to 50% of the world’s population into water insecurity by 2050. This trend is restricting Swedish businesses that rely heavily on water resources but can also enable businesses that offer solutions to mitigate water scarcity (Lindqvist et al., 2021). • Infrastructure lock-in and resource recovery: Promoting the reuse of human waste within conventional waste and wastewater systems in Sweden faces significant limitations. Challenges arise from the existing infrastructure and the difficulty of optimizing recovery within systems originally designed for different purposes. This can hinder businesses, especially since systems intended for resource recovery in Sweden are frequently overlooked in urban planning processes. This trend highlights the challenges faced by businesses trying to Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 24 | P a g e introduce innovative waste-to-fertilizer solutions in regions with established infrastructure (McConville, et al., 2017a). • Emerging test sites: The P2Green test site in Gotland is part of a global trend wherein efforts are made to separate urine from sewage and recycle it into products such as fertilizer (McConville et al., 2017a). This approach, known as urine diversion, is not only being explored in Gotland but also countries such as the United States, Australia, Switzerland, Ethiopia, and South Africa. In conclusion, while there are trends that can empower businesses in converting urban sanitary waste to safe bio-based fertilizers in Gotland, there are also significant challenges and restrictions. Environmental pressure and declining resources support the development and implementation of innovative source separation. However, the well-established infrastructure in Sweden can cause a lock-in and hinder new implementation. Understanding these trends and adapting to them can be crucial for businesses aiming to succeed in this domain. Cultural and social perceptions: • Cultural taboos: There are broader questions of social change and acceptance related to varying levels of cultural taboos around human waste and deeply entrenched conventions about industrial sewage and food systems. This suggests that cultural norms and societal conventions can act as barriers to the acceptance of using human waste as fertilizer (Wald, 2022). In line with this argument, McConville et al. (2017a) highlight the importance of social acceptance as a prerequisite for a long-term implementation of source separation and nutrient recycling technologies. • Farmer preferences: Parfitt (2023) indicates that the physical form and usability of bio-fertilizers can influence its acceptance and usage degree. For example, most farmers in Gotland viewed Sanitation360’s dry and pelletized fertilizer favourably. With their experience in spreading this type of fertilizer, farmers can also utilize existing machinery and spreading methods that are compatible with it (Parfitt, 2023). • Conflict of values: In Sweden, there are strong values regarding the public and economic good, which can conflict with environmental priorities and hinder sustainable developments. Conflicting values are also observed in the expansion of the predominant centralized wastewater system or in supporting the establishment of a decentralized approach. Further, values which may drive transition towards nutrient recycling are economic efficiency, risk reduction and the maintenance of existing sewage and wastewater treatment systems (McConville et al., 2017a). • Knowledge and awareness: Many farmers have not been informed about the regulations and possibilities surrounding the use of human urine in agriculture due to such information being presented in jargon-filled legal documents and/or publications. This lack of awareness can act as a barrier to adopting new farming techniques or adjusting existing technologies and infrastructure (Parfitt, 2023). • Consumer Acceptance: There is a divide among experts about consumer acceptance of food fertilized with human urine derived fertilizer. While some believe consumers do not consider the type of fertilizer used, others think consumers might find it repellent or unsafe. This indicates that consumer Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 31 | P a g e WS1 - Method and tools For the workshop, which was planned to comprise 1.5 hours the participants had to brainstorm, map, and rank relevant stakeholders in their pilot region. All participants were encouraged to discuss, align, and complement the results of the exercises. The participants were asked to map stakeholders based on their area and level of operation to create a preliminary categorization of actors and their level of operation: Area of operation • Public authorities: Entities established by the government to serve the public interest and are created by the legislature. They may possess varying degrees of independence from the state, depending on the authority granted to them by their legislative mandate, which includes both powers and limitations. • SME/ businesses: In the European Union, 99% of businesses are classified as small or medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This category encompasses a wide range of business sizes and types, ranging from sole proprietorships to enterprises with hundreds of staff and refers to private operating businesses. • Research/ academia: This category refers to all stakeholders operating in research projects, academia or universities. • NGOs: Non-governmental organisation (NGO) functions autonomously and are typically focused on addressing social or political issues within a specific scope. • General public: Stakeholders within this category are defined as individuals or groups within society that may be of interest for project partners and interested in the project outcomes. • Others: This category gives the option to list other stakeholder that may not fit into one of the earlier listed categories. However, with further analysis this section will be fed into the other categories. Level of operation • Local/Regional level: Stakeholders operating in a geographically and operationally limited area mostly focusing on local and regional topics. • National level: Stakeholders operating on government or federal government level are mostly focusing on national topics or inter-governmental topics. • International/European level: Stakeholders operating above state level are mostly focusing on global, European, or collaborative approaches with other international players. • The three layers represent the multi-level governance and operation formation that is expected among the listed stakeholders. 1st Exercise – Brainstorming In the first exercise, participants were asked to brainstorm and list all stakeholders relevant for their pilot region. The partners were asked to categorise the stakeholders according to the level of operation (local/regional, national, international) and their operation area (public authorities, SMEs and businesses, research/ academia, NGOs, General public and others). The brainstorming table developed specifically for the task by CBS supported the exercise (Figure 3). Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 32 | P a g e Figure 3: 1st Exercise: Initial stakeholder mapping. WS1 2nd Exercise – Relevance ranking In the second exercise, the partners were asked to rank the mapped stakeholders from exercise 1 according to their relevance in the local project context. The stakeholders were ranked in low, medium and high relevance within the identified operation area and context of the pilot region (Figure 4). Figure 4: 2nd Exercise: Stakeholder relevance mapping. WS 1 The activities were developed by CBS based on the tools and canvases presented by Mastrogiacomo and Osterwalder (2021). Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 33 | P a g e WS1 - Reports and analysis The following section will present the outcomes of the first stakeholder mapping workshop (WS1). This initial mapping functions as a base to create a stakeholder database indicating relevant stakeholders in the pilot areas. Here not only individual listed actors are of interest, but also categories of stakeholders. The analysis of stakeholders (categories) functions as a map of actors with whom to engage and invite to the next steps and workshops of the project. The outcomes of the workshop comprise an overview of stakeholders clustered by pilot and follower region. Furthermore, a relevance ranking combined with a contact overview of the listed stakeholders was carried out to show the importance of single actors and stakeholder categories for the project and facilitate the following communication and subsequent interactions. Germany For the German pilot overall 72 actors have been listed. 27 are listed within local or regional level, 24 on national and 21 actors are operating on international/ European level. 25 actors are listed with high relevance, 24 with medium 23 with low relevance across all areas of operation. The following visual illustrates the mapped stakeholders in the German pilot region according to their relevancy and level (see Figure 5). Figure 5: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in the German pilot. WS1 Local regional: Figure 6 presents the overview of stakeholders mapped on local and regional levels in the German pilot. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 34 | P a g e Figure 6: Stakeholders Germany on local/ regional level. WS1 Within the local and regional scope (27 actors) the three main areas of operations are public authorities (41%), SMEs and business (22%) and General public (18%). Municipalities and especially municipal wastewater authorities are listed among the public authorities potentially of interest and relevant for the pilot regions. Furthermore, municipal buildings and local building authorities are mapped. Federal county authorities (environmental, construction, and climate protection departments) are listed as well as wastewater associations and construction authorities. Within the local/ regional level, 10 stakeholders with high relevancy have been listed (see Table 2: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level in Germany. WS1Table 2). Name Function Description Municipal wastewater authorities Public authority In Germany, the responsibility for public wastewater disposal lies with the government, which is carried out by municipalities and cities as part of their public duties. The German wastewater sector is highly fragmented, with almost 7,000 local authority wastewater management entities, which are relatively small. Chamber of Agriculture (Landwirtschaftskammer)/ Landwirtschaftskammer Düngermittel Behörde) Public authority The area of responsibility of the Chamber of Agriculture extends to the care and promotion of agricultural professionals. It ensures that agricultural businesses operate profitably, in an environmentally friendly and consumer-friendly manner, and produce corresponding products. In addition, it promotes the professional and social interests of the workforce and ensures the further development of agricultural vocational training. Building authority Public authority The building authority takes over the building activity of the respective body as a fiscal activity in different formats, e.g. B. building construction (schools, administration buildings) or civil engineering (road construction, canal construction) of a community. Furthermore, building authorities are responsible for municipal land use planning. 41% 22% 11% 4% 18% 4% Stakeholders Germany local/regional Public authorities SME/ businesses Research/ academia NGOs General public Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 35 | P a g e Country authorities (environmental/ construction) Public authority Authorities such as environmental or construction agencies, operating on a district level. Vendors of fertilizer SME/ business The German market is supplied by various fertilizer production and vending companies. Farmers SME/ business Different-sized farms operating in different scopes. Compost systems SME/ business Know-how supplier in biological waste treatment. Focus on recycling organic raw materials, supplying efficient engineering and products for the mechanical and biological treatment of a wide variety of waste streams. The companies’ services contribute to conserving resources and groundwater, reducing emissions, and increasing efficiency in our ecosystem. Finizio SME/ business The company provides various sanitary systems for different sites to recover soil out of human excrement. PTC SME/ business PTC provides digital solutions to help companies optimize operations, improve product development, and enhance business performance through technologies like the Internet of Things (IoT), augmented reality (AR), computer-aided design (CAD), and product lifecycle management (PLM). Table 2: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level in Germany. WS1 National level: Figure 7 presents the overview of German stakeholders mapped on national level. Figure 7: Stakeholders Germany on national level. WS1 On national level, 24 actors are listed while 29% are mapped as NGOs and 29% as Research/ academia. 13% of actors are operating as SMEs/ businesses and further 13% of mapped stakeholders are affiliated to public authorities. Within research and academia stakeholders such as research institutes, relevant EU projects, and scientific associations are listed. Additionally, relevant NGOs have also been mapped. As public authorities, the Ministry of agriculture and Environment as well as the Federal Environmental Agency are listed. Additionally, standardisation bodies such as the DIN are mentioned. 13% 13% 29% 29% 8%8% Stakeholders Germany national Publich authorities SME/ businesses Research/ academia NGOs General public Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 36 | P a g e On national level 8 highly relevant stakeholders are identified (see Table 3). Name Function Description Ministry for Agriculture/ Environment (BMLE/BMUV) Public authority Ministry operating on national level focusing on food security, animal husbandry labelling, organic farming, biodiversity, food and nutrition strategy and climate stewardship. Further the focus is on Chemicals, Resources, Waste and sustainability. Federal Environmental Agency (Umweltbundesamt) (data on soil) Public authority The agency is a central environmental authority, which ensures that Germany has a healthy environment in which people can live protected as far as possible from harmful environmental influences, such as pollutants in the air or water. The range of topics is wide - from waste avoidance to the ⁠climate protection⁠ until the approval of plant protection products. RAL (for compost) SME/ business The quality seal comprises permissible raw materials, product definition, quality requirements and quality control for compost for use as a soil improver and fertilizer as well as requirements for the process quality, the goods declaration and the proper use of the products. Scientific assessments SME/ business The association promotes scientific and technical research and development projects both in the field of urban building naturalization, including the necessary production of plant material in intraand peri-urban agriculture, as well as in the field of food management for animal health, the recycling of biogenic waste and consumer and environmental protection. NetSan NGO NetSan eV is a collaborative network consisting of diverse participants aiming to achieve a sustainable and eco-friendly sanitation and nutrient transition. This community comprises individuals from various fields such as science, research, start-ups, small and medium-sized companies who come together to share knowledge, network, and collaborate on innovative projects related to the responsible management of human waste, while also focusing on climate sustainability. Research Association (Leibniz network) NGO The Leibniz Association connects 97 independent research institutions that range in focus from natural, engineering, and environmental sciences to economics, spatial and social sciences, and the humanities. Leibniz Institutes address issues of social, economic, and ecological relevance. Global public and private users General public Key stakeholders for broad dissemination, demand, and acceptance. Table 3: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Germany. WS1 International/ European level: Figure 8 presents the overview of international and European stakeholders in the German pilot. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 37 | P a g e Figure 8: Stakeholders Germany on international/ European level. WS1 21 actors are listed on international/ European level according to their area of operation 29% of the actors are mapped as NGOs, which comprise environmental and social associations. 19% of the actors are listed as research/ academia and general public. The section “others” represents 14% of the mapped stakeholders. Here, sister projects, influencers, and social media actors are listed. On European and international level 7 highly relevant stakeholders are identified (see Table 4). Name Function Description Directorate federal agriculture Public authority Development of common agricultural policies, and rural development. Members of the European Parliament/ Political decisionmakers (public authority) Public authority Political decision-makers and members of the EU parliament are elected by the member states and form EU politics. EAWAG NGO Focus of research is on drinking and wastewater, ecosystems, biodiversity, societal decision making, and climate change. Valoo/ RAE NGO The Ecological Sanitation Network (RAE) is an association whose objective is to defend the general interest in terms of sanitation. The RAE is part of an approach to preserving the environment through the responsible management of natural resources as well as the prevention and reduction of domestic organic pollution. Collaboration with NetSan. (EU) sister projects Others E.g. ZirkulierBAR project. Table 4: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level Germany. WS1 Sweden For the Swedish pilots overall 60 stakeholders are listed. On a local/ regional level, 19 actors have been mapped, on national, 29 and on international, 12 stakeholders. Overall, 19 stakeholders have been ranked with low relevance in the pilot region. 22 stakeholders are listed with medium relevance and 19 are listed with high relevance. 19% 9% 19% 29% 10% 14% Stakeholders Germany international/ European Public authorities SME/ businesses Research/ academia NGOs General public Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 38 | P a g e The following visualisation shows an overview of the mapped stakeholders according to their relevancy and level (see Figure 9). Figure 9: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in the Swedish pilot. WS1 Local regional level: Figure 10 shows stakeholders mapped on the regional level in the Swedish pilot. Figure 10: Stakeholders Sweden on local level. WS1 Within the local level, 19 stakeholders are listed. Within these 19 actors, nearly half (47%) have been identified as SMEs/ businesses, 21% are public authorities and 16% are listed as general public. Research and academia only represent 5%, NGOs 11%, and the general public 16%. No other actors are listed. On local and regional level, 7 actors are listed as high relevance actors (see Table 5). 21% 47% 5% 11% 16% Stakeholders Sweden local/ regional Public authority SME/business Research/ academia NGOs General public Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 39 | P a g e Name Function Description Gotland region Public authority The administrative body responsible for overseeing public services, healthcare, and regional development in Gotland. Plays a key role in shaping sustainability policies. Gotland Kommune Public authority The local government of Gotland, responsible for municipal services, community planning, and local policy implementation. Works to enhance local sustainability initiatives. GEAB SME/ business Gotland’s main energy company, Gotland’s Energi AB (GEAB), responsible for electricity distribution and renewable energy projects across the island. CEMENTA SME/ business A major local industrial actor in Gotland, Cementa operates limestone quarries and cement production facilities, contributing significantly to the local economy. LRF Gotland SME/ business The local branch of the Swedish Federation of Farmers (LRF), representing agricultural interests in Gotland and focusing on sustainable farming and rural development. GAGT NGO An association dedicated to promoting sustainable and green practices in Gotland, with a focus on renewable energy, local food production, and community resilience. P4 Radio SME/ business P4 Gotland, part of Sveriges Radio, is a key local radio station providing news and information to residents, playing a role in public awareness on sustainability issues. Table 5: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level Sweden. WS1 National level: Figure 11 shows the mapped stakeholders on national level in Sweden. Figure 11: Stakeholders Sweden on national level. WS1 On the national level 29 actors are listed, while 17% represent public authorities, 41% of them are SME/ businesses. 4% represent Research and academia and 31% of the 17% 41% 4% 31% 7% Stakeholders Sweden national Public authority SME/ business Research/ academia NGOs Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 40 | P a g e actors are defined as NGOs. 7% of the stakeholders listed are identified as others. No actors from the general public are listed. On national level, 11 actors have been defined as highly relevant for the pilot region (see Table 6). Name Function Description Naturvårdsverket (EPA) Public authority Sweden's national environmental protection agency, responsible for sustainable policies. Hyrtoaletten SME/ business Provides rental and service of portable toilets across Sweden. IKEA SME/ business Global furniture and home goods retailer headquartered in Sweden. PEAB SME/ business Large Swedish construction company involved in building and infrastructure projects. Svensknärings platform Others Supports Swedish industry and economic growth through collaboration and policy. Svenskt Vatten Public authority National organization responsible for water and wastewater management in Sweden. Avfall Sverige Public authority National organization for waste management and recycling in Sweden. KRAV Public authority Swedish certification agency for organic food and farming practices. Orientering National Club NGO Swedish orienteering club promoting outdoor activities and nature navigation sports. SVT/Sveriges Radio SME/ business Sweden’s national public television (SVT) and radio (Sveriges Radio) broadcasters. LRF Gotland SME/ business Local division of the Federation of Swedish Farmers, promoting sustainable agriculture. Table 6: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Sweden. WS1 International/ European level: Figure 12 shows the mapped stakeholders operating on international and European level in Sweden. Figure 12: Stakeholders Sweden on international/ European level. WS1 25% 34% 33% 8% Stakeholders Sweden international/ European Public authority SME/ business Research/ academia NGOs Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 47 | P a g e On local/ regional level, overall, 6 stakeholders are identified. 33% are affiliated with public authorities as well as SME/ businesses. NGOs and the general public are each represented with 17%. No actors were identified as others. On local/ regional level 5 stakeholders are mapped with high relevancy (see Table 11). Name Function Description Karditsa Municipality Public authority Responsible for local governance, urban planning, and implementing agricultural policies in Karditsa. Ministry of Agriculture Public authority Oversees national agricultural policies, programs, and initiatives related to sustainable development. Metropolitan Expo SME/businesses Organizes exhibitions and events focusing on sustainability, agriculture, and local development in the region. Southern Lights NGO Promotes and develops renewable energy projects in the Southern Greece region, focusing on community engagement. Co-operative of Nikaia SME/ businesses A local cooperative that supports farmers in Nikaia, promoting sustainable practices and community support. Breweries/ microbreweries SME/ businesses Local microbreweries as interested stakeholders in P2GreeNs solutions. Table 11: Highly relevant Stakeholders on regional/ local level in Greece. WS1 National level: Figure 19 shows national stakeholders in the Greek pilot. Figure 19: Stakeholders Greece on national level. WS1 44% of the 18 listed stakeholders, operating on national level are SMEs/ businesses. Public authorities as well as Research and academia make up 17% each. NGOs and others are represented by 11% each. Four actors with high relevancy are listed (Table 12). Name Function Description Ministry of Agriculture Public authority Responsible for formulating and implementing agricultural policies, 17% 44% 17% 11% 11% Stakeholder Greece national level Public authorities SME/ business Research/ academia NGOs General public Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 48 | P a g e supporting farmers, and ensuring food security. EENE - National boy of inspection Public authority Oversees compliance with agricultural and food safety standards, conducting inspections and enforcing regulations. EYDAP - national water company Public authority Provides water supply and wastewater treatment services in Athens, focusing on sustainable water management practices. Certification authorities Public authority Grant certifications for organic farming and sustainable practices, ensuring compliance with national and international standards. Table 12: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Greece. WS1 European level: Figure 20 shows stakeholders on international and European level in Greece. Figure 20: Stakeholders Greece on international/ EU level. WS1 In international level, 9 stakeholders are listed. 11% are listed as public authorities. 34% of the listed stakeholders are SMEs/ businesses, another 33% are the general public and 22% are others, such as the two companies AgroFossil Free and Bio Rusal. No other stakeholders were listed. The company Bio Rural is also listed as highly relevant stakeholder (see Table 13). Name Function Description BioRural Others The BioRural project aims to integrate smallscale bio-based solutions into European rural areas to promote sustainable bioeconomy practices, increase rural development, and establish a network for knowledge exchange and innovation. Table 13: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level in Greece. WS1 11% 34% 33% 22% Stakeholder Greece International/ European level Public authorities SME/ business Research/ academia NGOs General public Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 49 | P a g e Hungary There were identified a total of 31 stakeholders at the Hungarian pilot project. These stakeholders are distributed across different levels: 15 at the local/regional level, 10 at the national level, and 6 at the international level. Among these stakeholders, 6 are considered highly relevant, 12 have medium relevance, and 13 have low relevance across all operational areas. The following visual representation depicts the stakeholders in the Hungarian pilot region, categorized according to their level and relevance (see Figure 21). Figure 21: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in Hungarian pilot. WS1 Local regional: Figure 22 shows local and regional stakeholders in Hungary. Figure 22: Stakeholders Hungary on local/ regional level. WS1 13% 54% 7% 13% 13% Stakeholders Hungary local/regional Public authorities SME/ businesses Research/ academia NGOs Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 50 | P a g e In the local and regional context, the main focus of operations involves SMEs/businesses, accounting for 54% of the actors identified. Among the businesses listed as potentially interested and relevant for the pilot regions, local farmers and Noragro Ltd stand out. Public authorities, NGOs, and a group labelled as Others each make up 13% of the actors included in the mapping. This category includes secondary schools for agriculture and dormitories. Research and academia represent 7% of the actors listed. It is worth noting that the general public is not included in this specific mapping. Within the local/ regional level 5 stakeholders with high relevancy are listed (see Table 14). Name Function Description Local waste treatment company NON-Authority Public authority Manages waste collection and treatment services in the region, ensuring compliance with environmental regulations. Local farmers SME/ business Engage in agricultural production, contributing to local food supply and promoting sustainable farming practices. Noragro Ltd agricultural sites SME/ business Provides agricultural products and services, focusing on sustainable practices and innovation in farming. Camping sites SME/ business Offer accommodation services, promoting ecotourism and sustainable practices in their operations. Public/ festivals toilet rentals SME/ business Provide portable toilet solutions for events and festivals, focusing on sustainability and sanitation standards. Table 14: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level in Hungary. WS1 National level: Figure 23 shows national stakeholders in Hungary. Figure 23: Stakeholders Hungary on national level. WS1 At the national level of the Hungarian pilot region, a total of 10 stakeholders are listed. Among these stakeholders, 40% are categorized under Research/Academia. This group includes research institutes, relevant EU projects, and scientific associations. Public authorities account for the second largest group, representing 30% of the listed actors. The Ministry of Agriculture and the NÉBIH National Food Security Authority are 30% 10% 40% 10% 10% Stakeholders Hungary national Public authorities SME/ businesses Research/ academia NGOs Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 51 | P a g e specifically listed. NGOs, SMEs/businesses, and a category labelled as "Others" each constitute 10% of the actors included in the mapping. It should be noted that the general public is not considered in this particular mapping. No general public was listed. On national level 4 stakeholders with higher level of relevance have been identified (see Table 15). Name Function Description NÉBIH National Food security authority Public authority Responsible for food safety, security, and quality in Hungary, ensuring compliance with national and EU standards. Ministry for agriculture Public authority Oversees agricultural policy, promoting sustainable practices, food security, and rural development in Hungary. University of Pannonia Research/ academia Engages in agricultural and environmental research, providing education and expertise on sustainable practices. Gourmet Festival SME/ business Promotes local gastronomy and food culture, local producers and sustainable food practices through events. Table 15: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Hungary. WS1 International/ European level: Figure 24 shows international and European stakeholders in Hungary. Figure 24: Stakeholders Hungary on international/ European level. WS1 At the international/European level, a total of 6 actors are listed based on their areas of operation. Among these actors, two main groups emerge: Public authorities and NGOs, each representing 33% of the mapped stakeholders. Additionally, 17% of the stakeholders are categorized as research/academia. The "Others" section accounts for another 17% of the mapped stakeholders, with notable inclusion of the Sziget Festival. Neither SME/businesses nor general public were listed. On European and international level 1 highly relevant stakeholder is identified as Covenant of mayors (NGOs) (see Table 16). Name Function Description Covenant of mayors NGO A European initiative that brings together local governments voluntarily committing to increasing energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources in their territories. The 33% 17% 33% 17% Stakeholders Hungary international/ European Public authorities Research/ academia NGOs Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 52 | P a g e covenant promotes sustainable urban development and helps municipalities take action against climate change. Table 16: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level in Hungary. WS1 Italy In the Italian pilot overall 25 stakeholders are listed. On a local/ regional level, 6 actors are mapped, on national, 11 and on international, 8 stakeholders. Overall, 7 stakeholders are listed with high relevance, 7, medium and 11, low relevance across all operational areas. The following visual representation depicts the stakeholders in the Italian pilot region, categorized according to their level and relevance (see Figure 25). Figure 25: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in Italian pilot. WS1 Local regional: Figure 26 shows stakeholders on local and regional level in Italy. Figure 26: Stakeholders Italy on local/ regional level. WS1 50% 33% 17% Stakeholders Italy local/regional Public authorities SME/ businesses Research/ academia Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 53 | P a g e In the local and regional context, there has been a total of 6 actors identified, with the main area of operations being public authorities, representing 50% of the mapped stakeholders. Among the listed public authorities that are potentially interested and relevant for the pilot regions, in particular, municipal water utilities and water authorities stand out. SMEs and businesses account for 33% of the mapped stakeholders, with local farmers and highway stations being listed as examples. Additionally, research and academia make up another 17% of the mapped stakeholders. It is important to note that NGOs, general public and others were not listed in this specific mapping. Within the local/ regional level 2 stakeholders with high relevancy are listed (Table 17). Name Function Description Finagricola SME/ business Finagricola is a small to medium-sized enterprise engaged in agricultural production, specializing in sustainable farming practices and local food supply. They focus on environmentally friendly methods to enhance crop yield while preserving biodiversity. Cremonini GroupChef Express SME/ business The Cremonini Group operates Chef Express, a dining service at highway stations that provides quality food options. They emphasize sourcing local ingredients and sustainable food practices to enhance the travel experience for customers. Table 17: Highly relevant Stakeholders on local/ regional level in Italy. WS1 National level: Figure 27 shows national stakeholders in Italy. Figure 27: Stakeholders Italy on national level. WS1 At the national level, a total of 11 actors are listed in the mapping. Among these actors, 28% are categorized as public authorities, with the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Environment specifically mentioned. Research and academia account for 27% of the mapped stakeholders, including research institutes, relevant EU projects, and scientific associations. Additionally, 18% of the stakeholders are classified as NGOs. SMEs and businesses, the general public, and a group labelled as "Others" each represent 9% of the mapped stakeholders. Notably, the "Others" section includes relevant alpine clubs. 28% 9% 27% 18% 9% 9% Stakeholders Italy national Public authorities SME/ businesses Research/ academia NGOs General public Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 54 | P a g e On national level 5 highly relevant stakeholders have been identified (see Table 18). Name Function Description Ministry of Agriculture (MIASAF) Public authority The Ministry of Agriculture (MIASAF) oversees agricultural policy and regulation in the country, focusing on sustainable farming practices, food security, and environmental protection. Assofertilizzanti SME/ business An association representing fertilizer manufacturers in Italy, advocating for sustainable fertilization practices and innovation in the agricultural sector. Association of biofertilizers (ICAS International, Fertileva, Fertil, Agribios Italiana, Green MAS) Research/ academia This consortium of organizations promotes the use of biofertilizers and sustainable agriculture, conducting research and providing education on the benefits of organic fertilization methods. Farmer Associations (Confagricoltura, Coldiretti) Research/ academia Prominent farmer associations in Italy, representing the interests of farmers and promoting sustainable agricultural practices and policies. Highway users General public Highway users include all individuals and vehicles utilizing the highway system, impacting traffic, environmental concerns, and the need for sustainable transport solutions. Table 18: Highly relevant Stakeholders on national level in Italy. WS1 International/ European level: Figure 28 shows international and European stakeholders. Figure 28: Stakeholders Italy on international/ European level. WS1 On the international/European level, there are a total of 8 listed actors based on their area of operation. Among these actors, 50% are categorized as SMEs and businesses. Notable inclusions within this category are international fertilizer associations and the European Sustainable Phosphorus Platform. Public authorities and NGOs each represent 25% of the mapped stakeholders. Specifically, the European Research Executive Agency, municipalities, and Directorates-General Environment Commission department are listed as public authorities. It is important to note that research and academia, as well as the general public, were not listed. 25% 50% 25% Stakeholders Italy international/ European Public authorities SME/ businesses NGOs Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 55 | P a g e On European and international level no highly relevant stakeholders were listed. 3 medium relevant stakeholders have been identified (see Table 19). Name Function Description COPACogeca (EU Farmers - agrocooperation) SME/ business European farmers and agricultural cooperative, advocating for policies that support sustainable agriculture and rural development at the EU level. IFA (international fertilizer association) SME/ business A global industry association representing fertilizer producers and distributors, focusing on the sustainable use of fertilizers and promoting best practices in nutrient management. ESPP (European Sustainable Phosphorus Platform) SME/ business A multi-stakeholder platform aimed at promoting sustainable phosphorus management in Europe, advocating for resource efficiency and environmental protection in agriculture. Table 19: Highly relevant Stakeholders on international/ European level in Italy. WS1 France In the French pilot region, 39 stakeholders have been mapped. Most actors (21) are operating on local/ regional level. Further 13 stakeholders are listed on national level and 5 actors are listed on international/ European level. Overall, 19 stakeholders are listed with high relevance, 17 on medium, and only 3 on low relevance. The overall landscape of stakeholders in the French pilot is illustrated below (see Figure 29). Figure 29: Overview of all mapped stakeholders in French pilot. WS1 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 56 | P a g e Regional/ local level: Figure 30 shows local and regional stakeholders in France. Figure 30: Stakeholders France local/ regional level. WS1 21 stakeholders are listed on local/ regional level of which 38% are categorized as public authorities, 19% as SMEs/ businesses as well as 19% as general public. Within this category neighbourhood councils, volunteers, district managers and building owners are listed. Out of the 21 stakeholders 12 have been ranked with high relevance (see Table 20). Name Function Description City of Paris Public Authority The local government responsible for managing public services and urban development in Paris. PEMA NGO An organization focused on promoting environmental sustainability and social equity in metropolitan areas. SiAAP Public authority The Syndicat Intercommunal des Eaux d'Île-deFrance (SIAAP) oversees water supply and treatment in the region. Metropole de Grand Paris Public authority The metropolitan authority responsible for coordinating urban planning, transportation, and housing in the Greater Paris area. Public housing offices Public authority Local agencies that manage and allocate public housing resources and support affordable housing initiatives. Water Agency (SeineNormandy) Public authority A regional agency responsible for managing water resources and environmental protection in the SeineNormandy area. Plumber companies SME/ business Businesses specializing in plumbing services, crucial for maintaining water infrastructure and systems. CERENA IDF NGO An organization dedicated to promoting sustainable practices in the construction and renovation sectors in Île-de-France. PIREN-Siene NGO A research program focused on water quality and management in the Seine River and its tributaries. Education centres Research/ academia Institutions providing training and education on sustainable practices and environmental awareness. 38% 19% 14% 10% 19% Stakeholder France local/ regional level Public authorities SME/business Research/academia NGOs General public Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 63 | P a g e Figure 36: Stakeholder present in Germany. WS2 Channels of communication: • Relevant stakeholders were identified based on the stakeholder database and personal relations to relevant actors. • The stakeholders considered to join the workshop were reached via personal Email and reminder emails (or phone calls). Gender dimension: The workshop had 14 participants, with a gender breakdown of 6 female and 8 male participants. While participants identified within a binary framework (m/f/d), it's important to acknowledge that gender exists on a spectrum and gender diversity, beyond male and female categories, was not explicitly represented or reported in this session. All represented stakeholder areas such as public authorities, SME/ business, NGO, and research/academia were evenly represented. The workshop facilitators are encouraged to foster non-binary as well as gender-diverse participation further to ensure the representation of diverse gender identities. Identified Challenges, Needs, and Benefits: The identified challenges in the German pilot region include a lack of clarity and safety in the envisioned outcomes of the transformation, as well as difficulties with the certification of fertilizers and the guarantees offered on products. There is a need to ensure acceptance of these fertilizers by farmers, but legal and governance barriers, particularly for decentralized sanitation approaches, pose significant obstacles. Additionally, there is a shortage of real-life demonstrations and effective communication of scientific results to the broader society. The public "yuk" factor, alongside fear and doubt surrounding new approaches, further complicates the situation. These challenges are exacerbated by the urgency of transformation processes, which are complex and time-consuming, and an economic system that currently favours non-circular and fossil-based systems. There is also a general misconception that ecological options are less economically viable, making it harder to engage companies in the circular economy. Moreover, without legislative changes, the collection and exploitation of feces remains impractical. Achieving investors and 1, 8% 4, 31% 2, 15% 6, 46% Stakeholders represented Germany Publich authority SME/business NGO Research/ academia Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 64 | P a g e decision-makers support, ensuring the safety of fertilizers, and making circular economy models more practical are critical issues, especially when dealing with crosssectoral topics that intersect various legal frameworks (see Figure 37). Figure 37: Overview identified challenges in the German pilot. WS2. Addressing these challenges requires several key needs to be met. First, there must be clarification of legislative processes to replicate P2GreeN value chains effectively. There is also a need for application recommendations for agri-business operators, along with the identification of decision-makers and influencers who can support these initiatives. Investment and financing options are necessary, as is the identification of companies capable of transformative operations. Ecological considerations, such as the need for more information on current sanitation challenges and strategies to save and reuse water, are essential. Additionally, clear documentation of results is needed for effective dissemination. Particularly, in terms of what is demanded from local populations regarding risks associated with using fertilisers derived from human excreta. Collaboration between scientific communities and other societal forces is also crucial, and identifying local knowledge carriers is important for the creation of a centralized knowledge repository. Finally, generating a positive public narrative around these topics will aid in overcoming resistance. The identified benefits of addressing these challenges include the creation of supportive networks, facilitating the exchange of experiences related to barriers and enablers, and the establishment of quality standards. There is also potential for job creation in rural areas, the development of solutions for clients, and the growing demand for organic fertilizers in regenerative agriculture. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 65 | P a g e Stakeholders can contribute to various aspects of governance and infrastructure by helping establish fertilizer quality standards, securing local funding, lobbying for legislative amendments, and communicating with investors about the reliability of investments. They can also contribute to education by organizing local events, forming networks for experience exchange, and developing replicable blueprints for fertilizer application. In the economic sphere, stakeholders can assist in capacity building, job creation, and the development of value chains and business cases. However, certain areas, such as fertilizer certification, quality assurance, and cost calculation for different target groups, remain outside the scope of what stakeholders can contribute. Identified next steps: The next steps identified by the stakeholders highlighted the need to explore the legislative framework, along with any national, federal, and municipal barriers that might hinder implementation processes in the German pilot. Additionally, cost estimates for implementation and comprehensive documentation of all processes are required. This should foster continuous and relevant communication with stakeholders. An in-person stakeholder engagement workshop was promoted to further foster collaboration with external stakeholders. It was communicated that stakeholders will be invited to visit the German test sites and observe developments firsthand. WS2 - Spain The Spanish workshop took place on the 24th of May 2023 (09.00 - 14.00 o’clock) and had 44 participants participating in person facilitated by the Spanish pilot partners (see Figure 38). Figure 38: Stakeholder present in Spain. WS2 Most participants (84%) represented private enterprises. Further, 9% of participants are affiliated with research and academia. One participant was general public, and one represented an NGO. Channels of communication: • Relevant stakeholders were identified based on the stakeholder database and personal relations with relevant actors. 1, 3% 37, 84% 1, 2% 4, 9% 1, 2% Stakeholders represented Spain Public authority SME/business NGO Research/academia General public Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 66 | P a g e • The stakeholders considered to join the workshop were reached via personal Email and reminder emails (or phone calls). Gender dimension: The workshop included 44 participants, consisting of 16 female and 28 male participants. Representation of gender identities beyond the male and female categories was not explicitly reported in this workshop. Stakeholder groups, including public authorities, SMEs/businesses, NGOs, research/academia and the general public, were evenly represented. Going forward, workshop facilitators are encouraged to promote greater participation from a wider spectrum of individuals to ensure a broader representation of diverse gender identities. Further, a more genderbalanced participation is desired in the upcoming pilot activities. Challenges, Needs, and Benefits: The challenges identified focus on governance issues, building effective networks, and mediating with administrative bodies. Efficient management of reclaimed water is crucial, along with reducing associated costs and overcoming societal resistance to its use. Raising citizen awareness and promoting best practices are necessary, as it is improving access to digital tools and systems for both farmers and administrators. Key technical challenges include calculating precise irrigation and nutrient doses, implementing "water on demand" strategies, and utilizing real-time data processing with sensors. Scaling up treatment technologies and adapting infrastructures to make reclaimed water more accessible, while ensuring its quality, are also critical. Additionally, there is a need to study the nutrient content of reclaimed water, reduce its potential impact on soil, and estimate crop water requirements when using reclaimed water (see Figure 39). Figure 39: Overview of identified challenges in the Spanish pilot. WS2 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 67 | P a g e To address these challenges, the identified needs include encouraging the use of various water sources and addressing the current lack of training. Raising public awareness and promoting best practices are essential to the process, along with increasing knowledge and training around digital tools for the general public. Adaptation of European regulations and clear guidelines are necessary, as well as implementing a more sustainable agri-food system. The benefits of addressing these needs include economic and energy savings and reduced water and fertilizer consumption. Digitization can enable precise nutrient and irrigation dosing based on crop needs, contributing to sustainable agriculture and the promotion of a circular economy (CE). These changes would promote a reduction in water and carbon footprints, less waste, and increased water availability. Stakeholders can contribute to governance and infrastructure by lobbying relevant administrations, developing recommendations, and creating synergies through projects. They can propose and develop new projects, secure funding, and operational plans. In education, stakeholders can share success stories, promote P2Green results, and raise public awareness through campaigns, workshops, and conferences. They can also offer training on reclaimed water use, legislation, and risk management, and promote CE partnerships. Economically, stakeholders can help develop technology for reclaimed water, share data, and work on R&D projects to break the status quo. They can develop platforms and tools for better data utilization, provide expert consulting, and integrate IoT sensors and other digital tools into agriculture and industry. Identified next steps: In collaboration with participants, the focus was put on the visibility and dissemination of pilot activities. To advance the initiative, further workshops will be organized to showcase the pilot site and demonstrate the use of digital tools (e.g. smart aggregation tool). Additionally, collaboration with similar projects, such as NOVAFERT, GOVAQUA, and FERPLAY, was highlighted to foster knowledge exchange and strengthen the impact of these efforts. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 68 | P a g e WS 2 - Sweden The Swedish stakeholder engagement workshop took place on the 13th of June 2023 (as part of the event “Demo Day”) at 17.00 o’clock and was facilitated by the Swedish pilot partners. At the workshop 25 actors participated in person. The exercises were slightly adjusted aiming to conduct all relevant insights based on the workshop development (see Figure 40). Figure 40: Stakeholder present in Sweden. WS2 Over half (56%) of the participants represent private enterprises. Public authorities as well as research and academia are each represented by 12%. Another 20% are others. Channels of communication: • Stakeholders were invited in course of the Demo Day event and encouraged to join the workshop by the on-site project partners. Gender dimension: The workshop involved 25 participants, with 18 female and 7 male participants. Attendees are identified within a binary framework (m/f/d). Representation of gender identities beyond male and female categories was not specifically noted in this session. Stakeholder groups, such as public authorities, SMEs/businesses, NGOs, and research/academia, were well-represented. Moving forward, facilitators are encouraged to foster a more balanced gender representation, including non-binary and gender-diverse individuals, to ensure a more inclusive and diverse range of gender identities. Challenges, Needs, and Benefits: The identified challenges include a lack of incentives and subsidies, as well as vague or absent regulations and policies, which creates uncertainty. There is also an absence of clearly defined stakeholders and responsibilities regarding the collection, treatment, and distribution of resources like urine. Public acceptance and awareness remain low, compounded by a lack of research and development, pilot projects, and essential infrastructure (e.g., third pipes, and skilled plumbers). Furthermore, the high 3, 12% 14, 56% 3, 12% 5, 20% Stakeholders represented Sweden Public authority SME/ business Research/ academia Others Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 69 | P a g e cost of system implementation and components adds to these barriers (see Figure 41). Figure 41: Overview of identified challenges in the Swedish pilot. WS2 The identified needs include ensuring food and fertilizer security, improving the efficiency of wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), and preventing the contamination of water with pharmaceutical and medical residues. These efforts also support climate change mitigation and help prevent eutrophication, which results in excessive algae growth. The benefits of addressing these issues are substantial. They include the production of green-labelled products like fertilizers and beer, circular resource recovery, and the promotion of knowledge sharing on the circular economy (CE). Additionally, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from both fertilizer production and WWTP operations, ensuring compliance with treatment regulations, decreasing dependency on synthetic fertilizers, and enhancing water recovery and recycling are key advantages. Stakeholders can contribute to governance and infrastructure by promoting food and fertilizer security, reducing system costs, and addressing the lack of infrastructure. They can also help improve WWTP efficiency. In the realm of education, stakeholders play a vital role in raising public awareness, transferring knowledge, and fostering research and development. From an ecological perspective, stakeholders can support the prevention of pharmaceutical and medical residue spread, reduce eutrophication, and contribute to climate change mitigation efforts. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 70 | P a g e Identified next steps: Focus group interviews, originally planned for the workshop, were scheduled for August 2023 (M9) as part of Task 3.3. Following these interviews, the next steps for stakeholder engagement within the project will be discussed and outlined. WS2 - Outcomes across pilots Overall, 82 stakeholders were reached through the three stakeholder engagement workshops. All categories of stakeholders were represented. However, SMEs and businesses were represented by 67% percent as public authorities, which based on the identified issues are highly relevant actors, were represented by only 6% (see Table 24). Stakeholders represented overall (clustered by category) Public authority 5 (6%) SME/ business 55 (67%) NGO 3 (4%) Research/ academia 13 (16%) General public 1 (1%) Others (and not identified stakeholders) 5 (6%) Table 24: Overview Stakeholders engaged across pilots. WS2 The identified issues are clustered to understand the overall topics brainstormed in the workshop's exercise of mapping challenges needs and benefits. For the identified challenges, the overall categories are: - Regulatory and Governance: this category comprises all challenges that refer to a set of policies, mechanisms, procedures, and organizations focused on the creation, execution, management, and enforcement of new rules or decisions. It encompasses the oversight and adjustment of regulations, regulators, and the guidelines that govern developments in the field of N&P recovery as well as bio-fertilization. - Society and Awareness: this category comprises all challenges mentioning socio-economic factors as well as awareness and acceptance issues. - Technology and infrastructure: the category includes challenges referring to technological and infrastructural deficits and developments in the pilot region. Investment in infrastructure, production, technological standards are also comprised by this category. For the identified needs, the overall categories are: - Education: the category includes educational needs such as improvement in knowledge, training, skills, and processes in the pilot region and among stakeholders operating in the area. Further, aspects of knowledge transfer and collaboration mechanisms are mentioned. - Governance and investment: this category comprises needs concerning policies, collaboration mechanisms, procedures, and the implementation of new rules. Further, social as well as economic investments are included. - Ecological: This category includes ecological components and developments. The category comprises aspects related to usage and emission as well as climate aspects. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 71 | P a g e For the identified benefits, the overall categories are: - Education: similar as above. - Ecological: similar as above. - Economical: this category focuses on economic factors related to N&P recovery and bio fertilization. Aspect such as economic development, feasibility as well as demand and supply are comprised by this category. In the following the most relevant issues listed among the stakeholders of all three workshops are presented based on their category (see Table 25). Challenges Needs Benefits Regulatory and Governance - Certification of fertilizers (GER) - Legislative amendments & governance framework (GER) - Lack of incentives and subsidies (SWE) - Lack of regulations & policies (vague and ambiguous) (SWE) - Mediation with administration (SPA) - Efficient management of reclaimed water (SPA) - Cost reduction (SPA) Education - Positive voice of the public on the topic (GER) - Awareness raising among citizens, promotion of best practice (SPA) - Increase knowledge and training tools (for the general public) (SPA) Education - Creation of a supportive network on the matter (GER) - Exchange of experiences (on barriers and enablers) (GER) Society and Awareness - How to find or create a broad societal acceptance? (GER) Governance and investment - Clarification of legislative processes for the replication of P2GreeN value chain (GER) - Application recommendations for agri-business operations (GER) - Investment and financing (GER) - Food and fertilizer security (SWE) - Augmenting the efficiency in WWTP (SWE) - Adaptation of European regulations, clear guidelines (SPA) - Investment in infrastructures and sensors (SPA) Ecological - Circular resource recovery (SWE) - Reduced GHG emission from fertilizer production & WWTP (SWE) - Enhancing water recovery and recycling (SWE) - Sustainable agriculture (SPA) Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 72 | P a g e Technology and infrastructure - Making CE more practical (GER) - Investment and planning reliability for investors and decision makers (GER) - Create acceptance of investors and decision-makers (GER) - Knowledge on the potential of fertilization products (GER) - Safety of fertilizers (elimination of pollutants) (GER) - Lack of infrastructure, e.g. third pipe, plumbers (SWE) - Cost of the system (implementation, system components) (SWE) - Calculation of irrigation/nutrient dose (SPA) - Nutrient content of reclaimed water (SPA) - Adapt water quality for its use - Accessibility to digital tools and systems on all levels (farmers/ administrators) (SPA) Ecological - Prevention of pharmaceutical, medical residues (SWE) - Climate change mitigation (SWE) - Prevention of eutrophication (excessive growth of algae) (SWE) Economical - Quality standards (GER) - Creation of jobs in rural areas (GER) - Reduce dependency on synthetic fertilizer (SWE) - Economic savings and savings in energy, water, and fertilizer (SPA) - Nutrient/ irrigation dosing adjusted to crop needs through digitization (SPA) Table 25: Overview of identified challenges, needs, and benefits across pilots. WS2 The findings reveal significant challenges in regulatory and governmental aspects, such as a lack of regulatory guidelines and mediation with local public authorities, particularly concerning the certification of fertilizers derived from human excreta. The absence of clear regulations and certifications has been identified as an obstacle to efficient nutrient recovery management. This aligns with current research in circular economy, indicating that despite policy enhancements at national and international levels aiming at minimizing nutrient losses, the issue of fragmented and incomplete governance in nutrient recovery remains persistent (Aliahmad et al., 2023; McConville, 2017b). High implementation costs and the lack of innovative infrastructure were also identified as challenges. The need for social acceptance and awareness-raising efforts was highlighted across all pilots. Increasing societal awareness and knowledge is crucial to enhancing the acceptance and feasibility of new circular approaches. WS2 participants expressed concerns about the safety and potential residues in reclaimed water and fertilizers. As emphasized by Kirchmann et al. (2017) the potential risks associated with pollutants or pharmaceutical residues is a limiting factor in scaling up nutrient recovery. The development of knowledge and transfer networks was identified as a benefit of stakeholder participation in the project. The challenges and needs identified among stakeholders in the three pilot regions underscore the importance of a systematic approach that addresses regulatory, societal, technological, and environmental factors (Larsen et al., 2021). WS2 - Key outcomes The outcomes of the workshops marked an initial activation of stakeholders, and a collaborative identification of existing challenges, needs, and benefits related to nitrogen and phosphorus (N&P) recovery, as well as P2GreeN's pilot activities. These Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 79 | P a g e Figure 46: Overview impact/ effort matrix in the Spanish pilot. WS3 • Low effort/low impact: Increasing dissemination and communication activities at the pilot partner level, such as improving visibility on the websites of partners or disseminating targeted communication material, is a simple but limited strategy. • Medium effort/medium impact: Exploring new sectors for the application of P2GreeN’s solutions, such as gardening and landscaping, offers moderate effort with potential to broaden engagement and create new synergies. Improving and adapting the message to fit different audiences is another valuable approach that requires thoughtful consideration but can yield significant results. • Low effort/high impact: Leveraging existing synergies with the project's network and related initiatives can enhance visibility and stakeholder interest with relatively low input. Translating P2GreeN's social media presence into Spanish can also expand its reach to a broader audience in a straightforward and impactful manner. • High effort/medium impact: Directly reaching out to farmers by attending their meetings and briefly engaging with them could also prove highly effective, though it demands significant time and effort. Similarly, acknowledging stakeholder participation through incentives or small tokens of appreciation can enhance relationships and build long-term trust. • High effort/high impact: The most impactful action involves reaching the right authorities, farmers, and stakeholders through targeted communication strategies. This requires a considerable investment of resources, but it can lead to deep, meaningful engagement with key players. By prioritizing these actions based on their respective effort and impact, the P2GreeN pilot partners can streamline their stakeholder engagement process more effectively. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 80 | P a g e WS 3 - Sweden The outcomes of the workshop highlighted several challenges faced during stakeholder engagement. Firstly, the project topic is inherently complex and hard to explain, making it difficult to engage stakeholders effectively. Many stakeholders are busy and struggle to allocate time and energy to the project. Additionally, there are no clear business models in place to demonstrate financial viability, and the lack of largescale examples or projects means there are no successful precedents to learn from. This leads to a lack of interest among stakeholders. The challenge of upscaling the project adds another layer of complexity, with stakeholders being hesitant due to uncertainties about the outcomes and the absence of monetary incentives. There are no standardized system solutions, making it hard for stakeholders to visualize clear paths to implementation. Identifying the right stakeholders has also been difficult, and the project is sometimes disregarded because it’s seen as not directly related to climate change—a topic that tends to attract more urgency. Stakeholders often lack the time and energy to engage, and the activities offered may not align with their specific needs or expectations. There is also a lack of knowledge about, or even resistance to, concepts like urine diversion, which some stakeholders may find unfamiliar or unfavourable. Furthermore, many stakeholders tend to prioritize other issues, especially when budget constraints are a concern. Reaching stakeholders has been challenging due to low responsiveness or connecting with the wrong points of contact within organizations. The workshop has also highlighted that there is no centralized process for engagement, and the project has been perceived as focusing only on phosphorus (P), which limits its appeal to a broader audience. Communication emerged as a key challenge. There is a lack of a targeted or core message, and uncertainty about which media or communication channels would be most effective. The messaging needs to be adapted—potentially shortened and simplified to suit the audience better. It was also suggested to broaden the range of activities to engage stakeholders more effectively, such as through hackathons or similar interactive formats. Providing acknowledgment or incentives for stakeholder participation would also help to keep them engaged. In summary, the pilot partners must better adjust to stakeholders' needs, and the communication should be streamlined and simplified to increase clarity and engagement. The workshop also recommended using more creative outreach strategies, such as incorporating entertainment or lobbying, to better communicate the project’s value and encourage broader participation. Potential solutions to overcome the challenges (Impact/ Effort Matrix) Potential solutions to overcome the challenges are illustrated below (see Figure 47). Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 81 | P a g e Figure 47: Overview impact/ effort matrix in the Swedish pilot. WS3 • Low effort/low impact: Conducting a simple survey to collect feedback on activities of interest from stakeholders and providing short policy briefs on how new directives may affect them are straightforward strategies with limited impact. • Low effort/high impact: Sharing best practices for engaging stakeholders and distributing low-cost promotional materials, like T-shirts and pins, can significantly enhance visibility and encourage participation with minimal effort. • Medium effort/medium impact: Creating infographics and videos in local languages, along with linking the project to broader issues like climate change, requires moderate effort but can increase relevance and understanding across diverse audiences. Regular press releases in local media also boosts visibility. • Medium effort/high impact: Booking stakeholders for events well in advance and following up one-on-one to address specific concerns helps build stronger relationships and ensures participation, though it demands more planning and coordination. • High effort/high impact: Establishing meaningful two-way dialogues with stakeholders and investing in direct communication, like attending stakeholder events and making cold calls, requires substantial resources but leads to deep, lasting engagement. WS3 - Outcomes • List of challenges faced during the stakeholder engagement process • List of potential actions to overcome the challenges • Clustering of actions according to effort and impact • Development of Stakeholder engagement plan • Development of Stakeholder engagement calendar Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 82 | P a g e 5. Stakeholder engagement strategies In the following section, the summary of the co-created and community-led engagement strategies is presented. The strategies are based on the outcomes of the reported workshops, and various internal co-creation meetings between the pilot partners, and collaborations between WP6 and WP4. Additionally, the insights of the conducted market assessments for three pilot regions provided a deeper understanding of the local contexts. The strategies are crafted to ensure a continued and effective engagement of relevant stakeholders in P2GreeN’s pilot regions. The strategies are targeted to create regional stakeholder networks, which is required to operationalise P2GreeN’s innovative systems solutions so that P2GreeN creates the required wider impact across its pilot regions. Through the strong co-creation approach, and the incorporation of stakeholders’ perspectives, the engagement strategies are built based on the needs of internal project partners and external stakeholders. The guidelines can enable the crafting and adapting of the ‘core message’ of each pilot region, to drive the interests of various tentative public, private, and business partners. The full SE plan for each pilot region can be found in appendix D; D.2 & D.4. The engagement strategies are accompanied by a calendar developed for each pilot region (see appendix D.1; D.3 & D.5). This document provides support in the planning effort for identified SE activities. The stakeholder engagement plans provide a comprehensive overview of co-created strategies to effectively engage stakeholders (Strategize & Execute – WS3), based on an assessment of identified local, national, and international stakeholders (Map & Gain overview – WS1), as well as current challenges and needs in the field (Gain overview & Activate – WS2). The co-created strategies are designed based on the local context and will be continuously revised and further adjusted throughout the project’s duration. The evaluation survey provided deep feedback on the applied SE methodology and usability of the strategies. Continuous evaluation and feedback will support the implementation and further execution. Below, the co-created SE strategies are presented (see Figure 48, Figure 49 and Figure 50). The first stage of the SE strategies focuses on immediate actions, which can be implemented with rather low effort. Additionally, it provides an overview of activities that can be combined with other solutions. The second stage of the SE strategies, highlights activities that can be carried out over time. These activities need to be implemented considering the planning effort. The strategies should be considered in the local context. After presenting the pilot specific co-created stakeholder engagement strategies, a combined overview of the suggested strategies (see Table 27) as well as activities, across pilots (see Table 28) is provided. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 83 | P a g e 5.1 Spain The SE strategies for the Spanish pilot mostly focus on enhancing communication efforts. Especially, the tone of core messages communication is highlighted. It is of high importance to create targeted messages to different stakeholder groups, combining the analysis of the local stakeholder landscape and already engaged stakeholders. To ensure continuous engagement, internal resources should be dedicated. For example, the identification of the right channel, a dedicated community manager as well as adjusted messages should be defined. This process will be continuously executed in collaboration between the pilot partners, WP4 and WP6. Figure 48: Stakeholder engagement strategies for the Spanish pilot Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 84 | P a g e 5.2 Germany For the German pilot, communication efforts are highlighted. Targeted and wellcommunicated core messages could build meaningful connections with diverse groups of stakeholders. Especially, collaboration with local authorities is important to be involved in administrative mechanisms and showcase the high relevance of the pilot’s activities. The strategies were developed throughout the project and consider the changes in the German pilot region (see in section 3.3). Figure 49: Stakeholder engagement strategies for the German pilot Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 85 | P a g e 5.3 Sweden Besides communication efforts and community building, the SE strategies for the Swedish pilot focus on local education and the distribution of knowledge. Pro-active and knowledge-led engagement would increase the public awareness and interest in the pilot activities in a wider scope. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 86 | P a g e Figure 50: Stakeholder engagement strategies for the Swedish pilot 5.4 Summary Co-developed stakeholder engagement strategies for Spain, Germany, and Sweden In the following an overview of stakeholder engagement strategies across all pilot regions is provided (Table 27). Strategy Output Target Audience Frequency Specific Pilot Create targeted messages Targeted, effective messaging. Focus on economic impacts, job creation, market relevance Farmers, regional authorities, economic actors Ongoing Germany, Sweden Use effective channels Utilize online and offline channels, including local platforms Spain, Sweden Adjust for local context Acknowledge diversity within farming communities and territories Germany, Sweden Build personal and meaningful relationships Appoint dedicated communication ambassadors, tangible outcomes Policymakers, farmers' representatives, NGOs Ongoing Germany, Sweden Share tangible outcomes Project progress reports, invitations to test sites Germany, Sweden Create synergies Collaborate with similar projects, co-create events Experts, farmers, stakeholders Spain, Sweden Be proactive Research and participate in stakeholder activities, both online and offline Stakeholders from agriculture, energy, sustainability projects Ongoing Spain, Sweden Use stakeholderspecific language Translate outreach activities into local languages, adjust tone and message Local farmers, NGOs, policymakers Ongoing Spain, Sweden Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 87 | P a g e Incentivize stakeholders Provide small rewards (e.g., fruit samples) to spark interest Local farmers, experts, general public Event-based Spain, Sweden Get away from stereotypes Professional image for pilot, steer away from stereotypical associations General public, experts, academics, influencers Ongoing Germany, Sweden Create emotions Use storytelling, entertainment, and emotional content for engagement General public, NGOs, influencers, social media Event-based All (Spain, Germany, Sweden) Collaborate with agricultural and energy influencers Form strategic partnerships with farmers, cooperatives, influencers Farmers, cooperatives, NGOs, influencers Ongoing Germany, Sweden Engage policymakers Strengthen lobbying efforts, push for budget allocations, and policy changes Policymakers, local authorities, ministry representatives Regular meetings Germany, Sweden Focus on sustainability goals Tie project efforts to Sweden’s national sustainability and climate goals Policymakers, energy stakeholders, farmers Ongoing Sweden Table 27: Summary Co-developed stakeholder engagement strategies for Spain, Germany, and Sweden 5.5 Summary target activities within co-developed stakeholder engagement and strategies for Spain, Germany, and Sweden In the following section, a summary of all SE activities across the three pilot regions is provided. To develop and facilitate effective SE activities a strategic approach is of importance. To engage stakeholders effectively, it must be ensured that everyone involved in the process understands and shares common goals, values, and expected contributions. This preparation will help make activities as productive as possible. Additionally, it is important to communicate shared expectations by either collecting feedback from prior goal-setting sessions or inviting stakeholders to express their expectations for the engagement (Table 28). Activity Description Target Audience Frequency Specific Pilot Regular meetings with stakeholders/ Town Hall meetings Create a core group of stakeholders to engage them with pilot progress updates Policymakers, experts, NGOs, farmers Every 6 months Germany, Sweden External events participation Scan and participate in relevant events to promote P2Green and engage stakeholders Experts, academics, partner projects, NGOs, policymakers, farmers On-demand Spain, Germany, Sweden Info days, workshops, and field visits Organize visits and workshops to showcase test sites and pilot progress Experts, academics, partner projects, NGOs, policymakers, farmers Every 12 months All (Spain, Germany, Sweden) Share dissemination and Disseminate project outcomes via local General public, experts, Every 6 months All (Spain, Germany, Sweden) Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 88 | P a g e information material newspapers, venues, press releases academics, policymakers, NGOs, farmers Door-to-Door & 1:1 communication Informal communication and dissemination material to spread project awareness General public, experts, academics, partner projects, policymakers Continuously Spain, Sweden Social media outreach & blog entries Create project updates, repost content, and collaborate with influencers General public, experts, academics, partner projects, policymakers SoMe (twice a month), Blog (every 3 months) All (Spain, Germany, Sweden) Emails/ newsletters/ press releases Continuous communication with stakeholders on pilot outcomes and technology updates General public, experts, academics, partner projects, policymakers Every 3 months All (Spain, Germany, Sweden) Table 28: Summary target activities within co-developed stakeholder engagement and strategies for Spain, Germany and Sweden 6. Feedback survey Evaluation methodology This section presents the outcomes of a consortium internal feedback survey on the stakeholder engagement methodology carried out. The survey consisted of 16 questions and was designed to be completed within approximately 15 minutes. The survey was distributed internally within the P2Green partners using the Qualtrics platform. Data were provided anonymously, and a consent form was sent to ensure participants' privacy. Respondents were asked to rate statements on a Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." For questions regarding the ranking of stakeholders engaged the most and those most relevant for further engagement, a ranking scale from 0 to 5 was used, where 0 represented "least relevant" and 5 indicated "most relevant." The survey was designed to receive feedback on: • The overall SE process • Stakeholders engaged • Tools used Overall feedback on SE process Out of 35 collected responses, 18 were eligible for analysis. Most survey participants (62%) were involved as participants in the SE process, while the remaining 38% were organizers of SE activities. Additionally, 56% of participants were from the SME/business field, 28% from research and academia, 11% from NGOs, and 5% from public authorities (see appendix E). A majority (56%) of respondents found the SE process to be satisfactory, indicating a general level of contentment among the stakeholders involved. Furthermore, a significant portion (17%) expressed that the process was very satisfactory, which reflects positively on the engagement efforts. However, 22% rated the SE as either unsatisfactory or poor, highlighting potential areas that need to be addressed. This Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 95 | P a g e DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung e. V. (2020). DIN SPEC 91421:2020-12, Qualitätssicherung von Recyclingprodukten aus Trockentoiletten zur Anwendung im Gartenbau. DWA Deutsche Vereinigung für Wasserwirtschaft, Abwasser und Abfall e.V. (2010). Brauchen wir in Deutschland neuartige Sanitärsysteme? Gallego-Valero, L., Moral-Pajares, E., & Román-Sánchez, I. M. (2019). Crop production and irrigation: Deciding factors of wastewater reuse in Spain? Desalination and Water Treatment, 150, 91-98. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2019.23618 Gould, R. W. (2012). Open Innovation and Stakeholder Engagement. Journal of Technology Management,7 (3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4067/S071827242012000300001. Greenwood, M. (2007). Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74 (4). 315–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-007-9509-Y/METRICS. Gruère, G., Shigemitsu, M. & Crawford, S. (2020). Agriculture and water policy changes: Stocktaking and alignment with OECD and G20 recommendations, OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, 144. https://doi.org/10.1787/f35e64af-en. Gwara, S., Wale, E., Odindo, A., & Buckley, C. (2021). Attitudes and perceptions on the agricultural use of human excreta and human excreta derived materials: A scoping review. Agriculture (Switzerland), 11(2). 1–30. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11020153 Häfner, F., Monzon Diaz, O. R., Tietjen, S., Schröder, C., & Krause, A. (2023). Recycling fertilizers from human excreta exhibit high nitrogen fertilizer value and result in low uptake of pharmaceutical compounds. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1038175 Heshmati, A., & Rashidghalam, M. (2021). Assessment of the urban circular economy in Sweden. Journal of Cleaner Production, 310, 127475. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127475 Horbach, J., & Rammer, C. (2020). Circular economy innovations, growth and employment at the firm level: Empirical evidence from Germany. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 24(3), 615–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12977 Iazzi, A., Pizzi, S., Iaia, I. & Turco, M. (2020). Communicating the Stakeholder Engagement Process: A Cross-Country Analysis in the Tourism Sector. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27 (4). 1642–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/CSR.1913. IDRA. (2021). Water Reuse in Spain. In the News. https://idadesal.org/water-reuse-inspain/ Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 96 | P a g e Jodar-Abellan, A., López-Ortiz, M. I., & Melgarejo-Moreno, J. (2019). Wastewater treatment and water reuse in Spain. Current situation and perspectives. Water (Switzerland), 11(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/w11081551 Kalaitzidou, K., Mitrakas, M., & Zouboulis, A. (2024). Post-Removal of Phosphorus from Biologically Treated Wastewater and Recovering It as Fertilizer: Pilot-Scale Attempt-Project PhoReSe. Water, 16(11), 1527. Kerschl, L. J. K. (2023). Living in a lifeless sea. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 43, 8–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.12.006 Keuter, V., Deck, S., Giesenkamp, H., Gonglach, D., Katayama, V. T., Liesegang, S., Petersen, F., Schwindenhammer, S., Steinmetz, H., & Ulbrich, A. (2021). Significance and vision of nutrient recovery for sustainable city food systems in germany by 2050. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(19). https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910772 Kirchmann, H., Börjesson, G., Kätterer, T., & Cohen, Y. (2017). From agricultural use of sewage sludge to nutrient extraction: A soil science outlook. Ambio, 46(2), 143– 154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-016-0816-3 Köpping, I., McArdell, C. S., Borowska, E., Böhler, M. A., & Udert, K. M. (2020). Removal of pharmaceuticals from nitrified urine by adsorption on granular activated carbon. Water Research X, 9(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wroa.2020.100057 Krause, A., & Boness, J.-O. (2021). Risikoanalyse zur Anwendung von Recyclingdüngern aus menschlichen Fäkalien im Gartenbau. https://doi.org/10.31030/3213808 Krause, A., Häfner, F., Augustin, F., Harlow, E., Boness, J.-O. & Udert, K. (2021). Risikoanalyse zur Anwendung von Recyclingdüngern aus menschlichen Fäkalien im Gartenbau. http://dx.doi.org/10.31030/3213808 Lam, S., Nguyen-Viet, H., Tuyet-Hanh, T. T., Nguyen-Mai, H., & Harper, S. (2015). Evidence for public health risks of wastewater and excreta management practices in Southeast Asia: A scoping review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(10),12863–12885. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph121012863 Larsen, T. A., Gruendl, H., & Binz, C. (2021). The potential contribution of urine source separation to the SDG agenda–a review of the progress so far and future development options. Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology, 7(7), 1161-1176. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EW01064B Li, X., & Feng, J. (2021). Empowerment or Disempowerment: Exploring Stakeholder Engagement in Nation Branding through a Mixed Method Approach to Social Network Analysis. Public Relations Review, 47 (3), 102024. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PUBREV.2021.102024. Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 97 | P a g e Lindqvist, A. N., Fornell, R., Prade, T., Tufvesson, L., Khalil, S., & Kopainsky, B. (2021). Human-water dynamics and their role for seasonal water scarcity–a case study. Water Resources Management, 35, 3043-3061 López-Serrano, M. J., Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., & RománSánchez, I. M. (2021). Financial evaluation of the use of reclaimed water in agriculture in Southeastern Spain, a mediterranean region. Agronomy, 11(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11112218 Ma, G., & Nex, O. (2022). How recycling urine could help save the world. Nature, 602. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-00338-6 Maestre-Valero, J. F., González-Ortega, M. J., Martínez-Álvarez, V., & Martin-Gorriz, B. (2019). The role of reclaimed water for crop irrigation in southeast Spain. Water Science and Technology: Water Supply, 19(5), 1555–1562. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2019.024 Mastrogiacomo, S., & Osterwalder, A. (2021). High-impact Tools for Teams. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated: Hoboken, N.J. McConville, J. R., Kvarnström, E., Jönsson, H., Kärrman, E., & Johansson, M. (2017a). Is the Swedish wastewater sector ready for a transition to source separation? Desalination and Water Treatment, 91, 320–328. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2017.20881 McConville, J. R., Kvarnström, E., Jönsson, H., Kärrman, E., & Johansson, M. (2017 b). Source separation: Challenges & opportunities for transition in the Swedish wastewater sector. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 120, 144-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.12.004 Mesa-Pérez, E., & Berbel, J. (2020). Analysis of barriers and opportunities for reclaimed wastewater use for agriculture in Europe. Water (Switzerland), 12(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/w12082308 Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., & Saldana, J. (2019). Qualitative Data Analysis A Methods Sourcebook. SAGE Publications, Inc: Thousand Oaks, California. Moons, P., Goossens, E., & Thompson, D. R. (2021). Rapid reviews: the pros and cons of an accelerated review process. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 20(5), 515–519. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvab041 Muñoz-Sánchez, D., Bogodist, V., García-Cañizares, V. M., Frías-Gil, D., López-Díaz, M. R., Jaime-Fernández, E., & Romero-Aranda, M. R. (2018). Assessing Quality of Reclaimed Urban Wastewater from Algarrobo Municipality to Be Used for Irrigation. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 10(11), 1090–1105. https://doi.org/10.4236/jwarp.2018.1011064 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 98 | P a g e Neligan, A. (2018). Digitalisation as enabler towards a sustainable circular economy in Germany. Intereconomics, 53(2), 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-0180729-4 Nelles, M., Grünes, J., & Morscheck, G. (2016). Waste Management in Germany – Development to a Sustainable Circular Economy?. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 35, 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2016.07.001 Norström, A., Cvitanovic, C., Löf, M.F., West, S., Wyborn, C., Balvanera, P., T. Bednarek, A., et al., (2020). Principles for Knowledge Co-Production in Sustainability Research.Nature Sustainability, 3(3), 182–90. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-0190448-2. Ogunmakinde, O. E. (2019). A review of circular economy development models in China, Germany and Japan. Recycling, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling4030027 Parfitt, N. (2023). Centering Farmer Perspectives on a Dry-Fertiliser Made from Human Urine Master Thesis Series in Environmental Studies and Sustainability Science, Lund University. Ray, K. N., and Miller, E. (2017). Strengthening Stakeholder-Engaged Research and Research on Stakeholder Engagement. Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research, 6(4), 375–89. https://doi.org/10.2217/CER-20160096/SUPPL_FILE/SUPPL_APPENDIX.DOCX. Reed, M. S. (2016). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417-2431. Rodríguez-Villanueva, P., & Sauri, D. (2021). Wastewater treatment plants in mediterranean spain: An exploration of relations between water treatments, water reuse, and governance. Water (Switzerland), 13(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/w13121710 Shirai, Y., Leisz, S. J., & Kyuma, K. (2023). A Short History of the Utilization of Nightsoil in Agriculture. Sanitation, 7(2), 1-24. Skambraks, A. K., Kjerstadius, H., Meier, M., Davidsson, Å., Wuttke, M., & Giese, T. (2017). Source separation sewage systems as a trend in urban wastewater management: Drivers for the implementation of pilot areas in Northern Europe. Sustainable Cities and Society, 28, 287–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.09.013 Stocker, F., Arruda, M., & Mascena, K. (2018). Stakeholder Engagement Strategy: Evaluation of Quality, Focus and Extension. Academy of Management Proceedings, 17957. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2018.17957abstract Udert, K. M., & Wächter, M. (2012). Complete nutrient recovery from source-separated urine by nitrification and distillation. Water Research, 46(2), 453–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.11.020 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 99 | P a g e Umweltbundesamt. (2017). Wasserwirtschaft in Deutschland: Grundlagen, Belastungen, Maßnahmen. www.gebaeudekuehlung.de Verband der Humusund Erdenwirtschaft e.V. (2019). Gesetz zur Förderung der Kreislaufwirtschaft und Sicherung der umweltverträglichen Bewirtschaftung von Abfällen (Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz-KrWG). www.vhe.de ZirkulierBAR. (2022). Stellungnahme des Forschungskonsortiums: “REGION.innovativ – zirkulierBAR: Interkommunale Akzeptanz für nachhaltige Wertschöpfung aus sanitären Nebenstoffströmen“ des BMBF. www.vuna.ch Regulatory documents [1] European Commission, (2020), Regulation (EU) 2020/741 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 on minimum requirements for water reuse (Text with EEA relevance). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32020R0741 [2] The Royal Decree 1620/2007: Spanish regulations for Water Reuse, (2007), https://www.asersagua.es/Asersa/Documentos/Spanish%20Regulations%20f or%20Water%20Reuse%20EN.pdf [3] European Parliament; Council of the European Union. Regulation, (2020), 2020/741 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 on minimum requirements for water reuse. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32020R0741 [4] European Commission, (1991), Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment. Directive - 91/271 - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu) [5] European Commission, (2000), Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2000/60/ojDirective - 2000/60 - EN - Water Framework Directive - EUR-Lex (europa.eu) [6] European Commission, (2023), Water Reuse Regulations, Water Reuse Regulation [7] Kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz: Gesetz zur Förderung der Kreislaufwirtschaft und Sicherung der umweltverträglichen Bewirtschaftung von Abfällen (revised 2020), https://www.bmuv.de/gesetz/kreislaufwirtschaftsgesetz [8] Deutsches Ressourceneffizienzprogramm III – 2020 bis 2023, (2020), https://www.bmuv.de/en/publication/deutsches-ressourceneffizienzprogrammiii-2020-bis-2023 [9] Verordnung über das Inverkehrbringen von Düngemitteln, Bodenhilfsstoffen, Kultursubstraten und Pflanzenhilfsmitteln1 (Düngemittelverordnung - DüMV), (revised 2019), https://www.gesetze-iminternet.de/d_mv_2012/BJNR248200012.html [10] Verordnung über die Verwertung von Bioabfällen auf Böden1,2, (Bioabfallverordnung - BioAbfV), (revised 2022), https://www.gesetze-iminternet.de/bioabfv/BioAbfV.pdf Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 100 | P a g e [11] Verordnung über die Verwertung von Klärschlamm, Klärschlammgemisch und Klärschlammkompost (Klärschlammverordnung - AbfKlärV), (revised 2017), https://www.gesetze-iminternet.de/abfkl_rv_2017/BJNR346510017.html#BJNR346510017BJNG000 100000 [12] Trace substance strategy, (n.d.), BMUV: Wastewater [13] Swedish environmental code Ds 2000:61, (revised 2015), https://www.government.se/legal-documents/2000/08/ds-200061/ [14] Classification of Waste Fractions, (revised 2023), https://www.naturvardsverket.se/en/topics/waste/municipal-wastemanagement-in-sweden/ [15] Quality assurance of source separated wastewater fractions (SPCR 178), https://www.ri.se/en/what-we-do/services/certification-of-source-separatedwastewater-fractions [16] SNFS 1994:2, https://www.naturvardsverket.se/4ac4f4/globalassets/nfs/1994/snfs199402k.pdf [17] SJVFS 2012:41, https://lagen.nu/sjvfs/2012:41 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 101 | P a g e 9. Appendix: Appendix A: Agenda WS1 Appendix A.1: Pictures WS 1 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 102 | P a g e Appendix B: Agenda WS 2 5 min People presentation 10 min Project presentation: focus on pilot region and tested technologies and highlighting the benefits for stakeholders to be involved in the project 20 min Brainstorming in small groups on key issues relating to the needs, challenges (including social) and potential benefits from participating in the project and more broadly in nutrient recovery (remember to take pictures when done) 10 min Present and discuss/ clarify identified needs and challenges 5 min break 20 min Ranking the identified needs, challenges, and potential benefits from participating in the project and more broadly in nutrient recovery, in the relevant ranking table (remember to take pictures when done) 10 min Discuss/ Clarify and select the most relevant ones 5 min break 20 min • In/out activity: for participants to indicate which and how they can contribute to the most relevant challenges and needs (remember to take pictures when done) • Mapping stakeholder cooperation: Are you working with local authorities; with whom and in what capacity regarding nutrient recovery or any other topic (i.e., spatial, and urban planning, wastewater management or agricultural policy)? Are there any co-ordination mechanisms in place for this co-operation? 15 min Discuss/align activities and expectations • The final section of the workshop should clarify the following: o How much each stakeholder would like to engage in the project activities. Some stakeholders may simply want updates from the project as to how it is progressing, whereas others may want to take part in future workshops to assist in the development of the use cases etc. Finding this out is important for the future workshops. o Possible option of involvement according to the survey: stakeholder should shortly summarize their expected involvement. o Collection (on post Its): Are some stakeholders missing in the workshop that should be included in the upcoming workshops/project progress? o Collection (on post Its): Potential challenges, what do we need to consider if we want to implement our solution/use cases, what could be potential pitfalls? 10 min Lay out the plan for next steps based on in/out activity 5 min break 30-40 min Focus group interviews (T3.3) 5 min Wrap up Appendix B.1: Reporting template WS2 General information Pilot region: Date and host of Workshop: Number of attendees: Which stakeholder groups were represented? For each stakeholder group, please specify: • potential contribution • current and desired level of engagement Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 103 | P a g e • The stakeholder's expectations from the pilot/participation in the project • Channel(s) of communication used to reach them Which stakeholders were not reached and why? Identified needs and challenges Identified local needs: (Please list all of them) Identified local challenges: (Please list all of them) Identified local benefits: (Please list all of them) Which were the prioritised needs? (Please list only the needs ranked as most relevant) Which were the prioritised challenges? (Please list only the challenges ranked as most relevant) Which were the prioritised benefits? (Please list only the benefits ranked as most relevant) Stakeholder relationships and existing processes Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 104 | P a g e Interest of stakeholders (to participate in the workshop and P2GreeN overall): Identified relations and coordination mechanisms between stakeholders: Ideas to support the development and coordination process between stakeholder, if any were discussed/mentioned during the meeting: Next steps What are the next steps? (Please indicate activities/aspects to engage the different stakeholder groups based on their availability and their expertise) Appendix B.2: Reporting template WS2 Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 111 | P a g e Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 112 | P a g e Project Number: 101081883 Project Acronym: P2GreeN Deliverable 4.3 113 | P a g e Contact Programme Coordinator: agrathaer GmbH Eberswalder Straße 84, 15374 Müncheberg Tel.: +49 33432 82 149 [email protected] www.p2green.eu www.facebook.com/p2greenHorizonEU https://www.linkedin.com/in/p2green-horizon-eu-72aba1259/ www.instagram.com/p2green/ www.twitter.com/P2green_Horizon This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Programme, under Grant Agreement No°101081883.