Technology and Infrastructure
Grid architecture
Grid architecture frameworks provide structured models for mapping the components, layers, and domains of an electricity system, supporting interoperability planning, standards development, and governance analysis. Three frameworks have been developed since the 2000s — SGIRM, GWAC, and SGAM — each decomposing the smart grid into layers that span from physical assets and communications to business processes and regulatory structures.
Why this matters
As electricity systems integrate more distributed resources and digital control, coordinating actors, assets, and data across multiple grid levels becomes more complex. Architecture frameworks provide a shared language for this coordination — allowing engineers, regulators, and market designers to map where decisions are made, which interfaces carry which information, and where interoperability is required. Without such frameworks, standards and regulations risk being designed in isolation, creating gaps and conflicts in system operation.
SGIRM, GWAC, and SGAM each decompose the smart grid into layers spanning from physical assets and communications to business processes and regulatory structures, but they differ in emphasis and regional uptake.
Shared definitions
A grid architecture framework is a conceptual model that decomposes an electricity system into defined layers, domains, or zones, specifying how physical, informational, and institutional components interact. Frameworks of this type guide standards development, inform regulatory design, and support interoperability analysis.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Domain | In SGAM, a segment of the physical energy conversion chain: generation, transmission, distribution, DER, and customer premises |
| Zone | In SGAM, a level of the operational hierarchy, from the physical process layer through field, station, operation, enterprise, and market |
| Interoperability layer | In SGAM, one of five levels at which components, systems, or organisations must exchange meaningful information: component, communication, information, function, or business |
| Transactive energy | A control and coordination approach combining economic signals with physical control to balance supply, demand, and network constraints across distributed grid actors |
| Integrated architectural perspective (IAP) | In SGIRM, one of three cross-cutting views of the smart grid: components and functions; information and communications; business and economics |
Perspectives
Actors and stakeholders
Architecture frameworks serve different user communities. Standards bodies and equipment manufacturers use them to define interoperability requirements. System operators use them to assess integration challenges when new resource types connect to the grid. Regulators and policymakers use them to identify governance gaps across system layers. The WG7 analytical work on network architecture and governance maps how ownership structures and decision-making authority configure differently depending on whether network architecture, logical control, and policy authority are aligned or diverge.1)
@@GAP@@ Case examples needed: one case showing how an architecture framework informed a regulatory or standards process; one from outside the EU or North America.
Technologies and infrastructure
The Smart Grid Interoperability Reference Model (SGIRM), revised in IEEE 2030.4-2023, organises smart grid architecture around three integrated architectural perspectives: components and functions (physical assets and their built-in control functions); information and communications (data models and communication systems); and business and economics (market structures, fleet management, grid services transactions, tariffs, and regulatory considerations — added in the 2023 revision to reflect distributed energy resources).2) Physical locations are classified as grid-edge (load and customer end), field or substation, and enterprise or cloud.
The GridWise Transactive Energy Framework, developed by the GridWise Architecture Council, applies the GWAC interoperability stack to architectures that use economic and control techniques jointly to improve grid reliability and efficiency.3) The GWAC Stack runs from basic connectivity and network interoperability at lower levels through semantic and informational interoperability to business objectives and economic or regulatory policy at the upper levels.
Figure 1. GWAC Stack with transactive energy strata. Source: GridWise Architecture Council (2019).
The Smart Grid Architecture Model (SGAM), developed by CEN-CENELEC-ETSI and the reference architecture for EU smart grid standardisation, represents grid architecture as a three-dimensional model across domains, zones, and interoperability layers.4)
Figure 2. SGAM three-dimensional representation across Domains, Zones, and Interoperability Layers. Source: CEN-CENELEC-ETSI Smart Grid Coordination Group.
@@GAP@@ Case examples needed: one case showing a specific interoperability challenge diagnosed using one of these frameworks.
Institutional structures
Beyond technical architecture, the configuration of a grid network has governance implications. Cross-tabulating network architecture (centralised, decentralised, distributed) against the logical layer and the policy layer produces structurally distinct grid types with different implications for ownership, participation, and resilience.5)
Table 1. Network architecture crossed with logical layer — resulting grid coordination types.
Source: Kubeczko (2017), adapted.
| Logical layer | Network architecture | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Centralised | Decentralised | Distributed | ||
| Centralised | Trusted national TSO | Smart meter national ledger (e.g. Sweden) | Blockchain ledger for direct interaction | |
| Decentralised | Markets and market institutions | Markets and market institutions; smart meter ledger by DSOs | Markets and market institutions | |
| Distributed | Bilateral contract solutions | Bilateral contract solutions | Bilateral contract solutions |
Table 2. Network architecture crossed with policy layer — resulting ownership and governance types.
Source: Kubeczko (2017), adapted.
| Policy layer | Network architecture | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Centralised | Decentralised | Distributed | ||
| Centralised | Transmission grid (national monopoly) | Super-grid (global oligopoly) | Publicly owned local grids with local RES feed-in | |
| Decentralised | Private monopolies and oligopolies of multinationals | Distribution grid (local monopoly); suppliers on market | Linked mini-grids; local grid with local RES (e.g. cooperative) | |
| Distributed | People as shareholder; public voting | Local shareholders in monopoly | Linked local grids (locally co-owned, e.g. cooperatives, energy communities) |
@@GAP@@ Case examples needed: one case where SGAM or SGIRM was used in a regulatory process; one from outside the EU.
Distinctions and overlaps
Grid architecture vs grid operation
Architecture frameworks describe the structural composition of the grid — the layers it contains and the interfaces between them. Grid operation covers how that structure performs in real time, including frequency regulation, voltage control, and balancing. Architectural choices constrain and enable operational possibilities; operational functions are addressed in the Operability topic.
SGAM vs SGIRM
Both decompose the smart grid into layers and domains, but SGAM is the standard reference in European regulatory and standardisation contexts, developed under EU mandate M/490; SGIRM is the IEEE-based reference used primarily in North American contexts. The frameworks are compatible but not identical in structure.
Architecture framework vs interoperability standard
A framework (GWAC, SGAM) is a conceptual structure for analysing and planning interoperability across system layers. A standard (e.g. IEC 61968, IEC 61970, IEEE 2030) defines specific technical requirements for how components communicate. Frameworks inform which standards are needed and where; standards specify the technical implementation.