Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Global assessment of solar park impacts on ecos...

Associated organisational unit

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Global assessment of solar park impacts on ecosystem services

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Forthcoming

Standard

Global assessment of solar park impacts on ecosystem services. / Treasure, Lucy; Sharp, Stuart Peter; Smart, Simon Mark et al.
In: Progress in Energy, 02.06.2025.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Treasure L, Sharp SP, Smart SM, Parker G, Armstrong A. Global assessment of solar park impacts on ecosystem services. Progress in Energy. 2025 Jun 2. doi: 10.1088/2516-1083/addfa4

Author

Bibtex

@article{c839833ad8ea4e448d08a05ef1be9c16,
title = "Global assessment of solar park impacts on ecosystem services",
abstract = "Global solar photovoltaic capacity is growing exponentially, and it is projected to become the dominant renewable energy source by 2050. A significant proportion of photovoltaic capacity is deployed as ground-mounted solar parks (SPs), incurring significant land use change, with implications for hosting ecosystems. Despite the rapid deployment of SPs, understanding of their environmental impacts and consequences for ecosystem services (ES) remains poor. Here, we use a systematic literature review to identify environmental impacts of SPs and derive implications for ES, beyond the benefits that SPs confer over other means of electricity generation. We found 622 pieces of evidence from 167 articles demonstrating a wide range of both positive and negative impacts of SPs on ES, with responses varying with climate, ecosystem type and SP life cycle phase. Dominant positive outcomes included enhanced soil quality regulation in dry climates, and enhanced water cycle support, soil erosion regulation and pollination regulation during the operational phase. Conversely, savanna and grassland ecosystems and the construction phase were more commonly associated with negative outcomes. Further, negative climate regulation outcomes tended to occur in desert ecosystems. Crucially, we highlight significant knowledge gaps, with ≤ 20 pieces of evidence for half of all ES, including vital services such as pollination regulation, likely to be impacted by SP land use change. The outcomes of this review could inform site location and management decisions which maximise ecosystem co-benefits and avoid detrimental impacts, providing valuable insight for emerging environmental policies. Ultimately, understanding of the impact of SPs on ES could aid an energy system transition that mitigates the climate and ecological crises.",
author = "Lucy Treasure and Sharp, {Stuart Peter} and Smart, {Simon Mark} and Guy Parker and Alona Armstrong",
year = "2025",
month = jun,
day = "2",
doi = "10.1088/2516-1083/addfa4",
language = "English",
journal = "Progress in Energy",
issn = "2516-1083",
publisher = "IOP Publishing",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Global assessment of solar park impacts on ecosystem services

AU - Treasure, Lucy

AU - Sharp, Stuart Peter

AU - Smart, Simon Mark

AU - Parker, Guy

AU - Armstrong, Alona

PY - 2025/6/2

Y1 - 2025/6/2

N2 - Global solar photovoltaic capacity is growing exponentially, and it is projected to become the dominant renewable energy source by 2050. A significant proportion of photovoltaic capacity is deployed as ground-mounted solar parks (SPs), incurring significant land use change, with implications for hosting ecosystems. Despite the rapid deployment of SPs, understanding of their environmental impacts and consequences for ecosystem services (ES) remains poor. Here, we use a systematic literature review to identify environmental impacts of SPs and derive implications for ES, beyond the benefits that SPs confer over other means of electricity generation. We found 622 pieces of evidence from 167 articles demonstrating a wide range of both positive and negative impacts of SPs on ES, with responses varying with climate, ecosystem type and SP life cycle phase. Dominant positive outcomes included enhanced soil quality regulation in dry climates, and enhanced water cycle support, soil erosion regulation and pollination regulation during the operational phase. Conversely, savanna and grassland ecosystems and the construction phase were more commonly associated with negative outcomes. Further, negative climate regulation outcomes tended to occur in desert ecosystems. Crucially, we highlight significant knowledge gaps, with ≤ 20 pieces of evidence for half of all ES, including vital services such as pollination regulation, likely to be impacted by SP land use change. The outcomes of this review could inform site location and management decisions which maximise ecosystem co-benefits and avoid detrimental impacts, providing valuable insight for emerging environmental policies. Ultimately, understanding of the impact of SPs on ES could aid an energy system transition that mitigates the climate and ecological crises.

AB - Global solar photovoltaic capacity is growing exponentially, and it is projected to become the dominant renewable energy source by 2050. A significant proportion of photovoltaic capacity is deployed as ground-mounted solar parks (SPs), incurring significant land use change, with implications for hosting ecosystems. Despite the rapid deployment of SPs, understanding of their environmental impacts and consequences for ecosystem services (ES) remains poor. Here, we use a systematic literature review to identify environmental impacts of SPs and derive implications for ES, beyond the benefits that SPs confer over other means of electricity generation. We found 622 pieces of evidence from 167 articles demonstrating a wide range of both positive and negative impacts of SPs on ES, with responses varying with climate, ecosystem type and SP life cycle phase. Dominant positive outcomes included enhanced soil quality regulation in dry climates, and enhanced water cycle support, soil erosion regulation and pollination regulation during the operational phase. Conversely, savanna and grassland ecosystems and the construction phase were more commonly associated with negative outcomes. Further, negative climate regulation outcomes tended to occur in desert ecosystems. Crucially, we highlight significant knowledge gaps, with ≤ 20 pieces of evidence for half of all ES, including vital services such as pollination regulation, likely to be impacted by SP land use change. The outcomes of this review could inform site location and management decisions which maximise ecosystem co-benefits and avoid detrimental impacts, providing valuable insight for emerging environmental policies. Ultimately, understanding of the impact of SPs on ES could aid an energy system transition that mitigates the climate and ecological crises.

U2 - 10.1088/2516-1083/addfa4

DO - 10.1088/2516-1083/addfa4

M3 - Journal article

JO - Progress in Energy

JF - Progress in Energy

SN - 2516-1083

ER -