Abstract :
[en] Existing social sciences research on agrivoltaics (Agri-PV) and its implications for society is recent and limited, primarily focusing on social acceptance and opposition to the implementation of Agri-PV. This underlines the need for a novel perspective that goes beyond the concept of acceptance to explore the environmental and energy justice implications of Agri-PV. The concepts of environmental and energy justice in the clean energy transition involves embeddedness, equitability, meaningful engagement, and the fair distribution of costs and benefits related to energy projects that affect human health, well-being, and the environment. This deliverable summarizes the results of qualitative research on the environmental and energy justice implications of Agri-PV in four regions of the European Union (EU). By adopting multiple qualitative methods, including an interpretative literature review, semi-structured interviews in Catalonia, North Brabant, South Tyrol and Wallonia, and two foresight workshops conducted in Barcelona and Bolzano, the study explores the distributional, recognitional, and procedural justice implications of Agri-PV deployment as part of the clean energy transition in the EU.
The results highlight that Agri-PV is perceived to have potentially positive benefits on agricultural productivity through combined use of land, and protection of soil from the adverse impacts of climate changes. Agri-PV can offer additional revenue sources for farmers facing low revenues from agricultural production. However, the potential for double revenue generation could lead to new power imbalances in the agricultural sector. For example, farmers leasing their fields to energy companies for Agri-PV installation might lose control over their land. Additionally, differences in investment capacity might exacerbate disparities between small and large farmers, as well as between those with more or fewer resources or land suitable for Agri-PV installation. The findings also suggest that the lack of a clear and commonly agreed definition of Agri-PV hinders the understanding of the technology by local stakeholders and its effective implementation, creating discrepancies between local, national and European scales. Although residents, local communities and local farmers potentially bear the negative impacts of Agri-PV systems, they tend to be excluded from decision-making processes, which appear to favor agricultural organizations, local authorities and investors holding economic power. Exclusion from decision making and negative aesthetic impact of uncontrolled agricultural landscapes transformation are main drivers of opposition and resistance by residents and local communities as well as sources of injustice. Additionally, the combined land use favored by Agri-PV is perceived to contribute to the increase of land prices, which affects land ownerships for local farmers, residents and communities. This also has intergenerational consequences, as younger and future generations may be deprived of land and landscape value due to current Agri-PV projects.
To address the environmental and energy justice implications identified in the study, the report emphasizes the need for a balanced distribution of the benefits of Agri-PV, and to compensate for socio-economic and environmental costs it may entail. It also advocates for the inclusion of farmers, residents and local communities in the early stages of the Agri-PV development, potentially as co-designers or co-owners of the plants within energy communities or cooperatives. Moreover, clear and harmonized regulatory frameworks, supported by subsidies or other programs, are required at national and EU level to favor Agri-PV deployment. Although some countries, like Spain and the Netherlands, have already implemented national regulatory frameworks for Agri-PV, these are not always supported by adequate funding or effective implementation that ensure sustainability, environmental and energy justice. Finally, clearer understanding and explicit considerations regarding biodiversity (e.g., bird migrations, insects, native species), impact on ecosystem services (e.g. water, soil quality, air quality), impact on human health and well-being (e.g., pollutions, use of pesticides) must be included in regulatory frameworks to ensure environmental justice.
