In brief
Third‑party investment has played a key role in the development of renewable energy in Wallonia — but today’s regulatory framework might no longer be fitted to market needs and realities.
This article examines the existing regulatory models applicable to third-party investment in Wallonia, how Wallonia’s approach diverges from Flanders and Brussels, and which targeted reforms could unlock modern behind‑the‑meter solutions combining renewables, storage and flexibility services.
Key observations and proposals for reform of the Walloon regulatory framework for third-party investments in the energy sector
Initial expansion and subsequent decline since the 2020s
In the Walloon Region, third-party investment in renewable energy witnessed substantial growth for a decade, driven by generous green certificate programs, high initial photovoltaic (PV) costs, and net-metering arrangements. However, these favorable circumstances are no longer present. Decreasing PV prices, the cessation of net metering (residential market), and diminished green certificate revenues have critically impacted the viability of this investment model.
Primary regulatory barriers in Wallonia
The Walloon Region regulatory landscape comprises two frameworks:
- MàD (mise à disposition): This framework practically prohibits electricity sales, restricts kWh-based compensation, and does not allow surplus valorization, rendering it economically infeasible under current market conditions.
- On-site power purchase agreement (PPA): Classified as "standard supply activity", it necessitates both a supply license and direct-line authorization. These requirements are complex, costly, and often disproportionate to project scale.
Consequently neither model, as currently applicable, provides a truly satisfactory solution that is economically practical, appealing and adapted to the new forms of integrated products that could be offered today on the energy market.
Notable divergence from Flanders and Brussels
The regulatory barriers identified in the Walloon Region are assessed by comparing them to the approaches adopted by other Belgian regions, as they face the same challenges. The differences of the regulatory treatment of third-party investment between the three Belgian regions are significant to this day:
- Flanders: Direct lines require only notification rather than prior authorization; supply licenses are unnecessary for on-site PPA structures. This fosters an active and innovative market, including frequent co-located projects (PV + storage + EV charging).
- Brussels: Does not employ the MàD regime and does not require supply licenses for leasing-type arrangements; offers greater flexibility for local PPA structuring.
Disproportionate and restrictive regime
The restrictive regulatory approach toward third-party investment activities should be examined not only in comparison with other regions, but also in consideration of the original rationales that continue to influence current policies:
- Green certificate system financing: This rationale has become irrelevant due to the stabilization of the support mechanisms and an existing exemption for "green" direct lines.
- Consumer protection: Current supplier obligations are misaligned with behind-the-meter projects, pose unnecessary administrative demands on clients, and impede the adoption of local renewable solutions.
Overall, the Walloon regulatory framework is probably disproportionately demanding and rigid in light of the goals pursued (as they could be achieved by less impeding measures), calling for changes and adaptations.
Clear reform options to revive third‑party investment
Several reform avenues can be identified:
- Transition from a prior‑authorization regime to a simple notification for direct lines (in line with Flanders).
- Limit or abolish the application of the MàD regime for non-residential clients.
- Introduce a simplified “behind‑the‑meter” supply license tailored to local PPAs.
- Deploy secondary service points, enabling third‑party investors to inject or sell surplus electricity autonomously.
Facilitate the development of co‑located solutions (PV + storage + flexibility services).
Conclusion
Regulatory frameworks have become excessively complex, costly, and misaligned with current market realities, preventing the development of systems that combine storage, flexibility services, and surplus valorisation strategies. However, these services and strategies could deliver, in the Walloon Region like in other regions and countries, a priority tool to alleviate grid congestion, supporting self‑consumption, and accelerating the Region's energy transition.
If you wish to obtain the full-version of our article on third-party investment in the Walloon region (available in French or English/Dutch), please contact us.