TY - JOUR

T1 - Integrated policymaking is needed to deliver climate and ecological benefits from solar farms

AU - Carvalho, Fabio

AU - Lee, Hing Kin

AU - Blaydes, Hollie

AU - Treasure, Lucy

AU - Harrison, Laura J.

AU - Montag, Hannah

AU - Vucic, Kristina

AU - Scurlock, Jonathan

AU - White, Piran C. L.

AU - Sharp, Stuart P.

AU - Clarkson, Tom

AU - Armstrong, Alona

PY - 2024/7/29

Y1 - 2024/7/29

N2 - Multi‐purpose land use is of great importance for sustainable development, particularly in the context of increasing pressures on land to provide ecosystem services (e.g. food, energy) and support biodiversity. The recent global increase in land‐take for utility‐scale ground‐mounted solar farms (hereafter referred to as solar farms) to meet Net Zero targets presents an opportunity for enhanced delivery of ecosystem services, especially in temperate ecosystems where solar farm development often results in land use change away from comparatively intensive agricultural land management. Solar farms have long operational lifespans, experience low levels of disturbance during operation and can be managed for ecosystem services beyond low‐carbon electricity generation, including food production and biodiversity conservation. Here, we briefly synthesise the mechanisms by which solar farm development and operation may impact natural capital and ecosystem services, and provide policy recommendations for policymakers and the solar farm sector. Solar farms can deliver environmental benefits for hosting ecosystems while minimising negative impacts, with outcomes depending on location, construction techniques, and land management practices. However, the historical misalignment between climate, nature, and land use policies has hindered efforts to simultaneously address the climate and biodiversity crises through land use change for solar farms. For instance, existing public financial incentives in the UK that encourage landowners and developers to manage land for biodiversity largely exclude land with solar farms. Policy implications: We call for public policymakers to identify appropriate opportunities to amend existing national laws that address climate and biodiversity separately to improve integration of multiple aspects of the climate‐nature‐land use nexus into policymaking by: (1) formulating ecological and socio‐economic indicators and metrics that are appropriate to underpin the development, implementation, and assessment of public policies; (2) adopting a cross‐sectoral and cross‐government approach to form public policies; (3) ensuring solar farms can access public financial incentives that encourage sustainable land use; (4) implementing land use policies that incentivise funding from non‐government sources (e.g. private sector) into nascent nature markets; (5) embedding solar farms in biodiversity‐inclusive spatial planning policies and decision‐making; and (6) building equity and clarity into responsibilities and benefits for all actors involved.

AB - Multi‐purpose land use is of great importance for sustainable development, particularly in the context of increasing pressures on land to provide ecosystem services (e.g. food, energy) and support biodiversity. The recent global increase in land‐take for utility‐scale ground‐mounted solar farms (hereafter referred to as solar farms) to meet Net Zero targets presents an opportunity for enhanced delivery of ecosystem services, especially in temperate ecosystems where solar farm development often results in land use change away from comparatively intensive agricultural land management. Solar farms have long operational lifespans, experience low levels of disturbance during operation and can be managed for ecosystem services beyond low‐carbon electricity generation, including food production and biodiversity conservation. Here, we briefly synthesise the mechanisms by which solar farm development and operation may impact natural capital and ecosystem services, and provide policy recommendations for policymakers and the solar farm sector. Solar farms can deliver environmental benefits for hosting ecosystems while minimising negative impacts, with outcomes depending on location, construction techniques, and land management practices. However, the historical misalignment between climate, nature, and land use policies has hindered efforts to simultaneously address the climate and biodiversity crises through land use change for solar farms. For instance, existing public financial incentives in the UK that encourage landowners and developers to manage land for biodiversity largely exclude land with solar farms. Policy implications: We call for public policymakers to identify appropriate opportunities to amend existing national laws that address climate and biodiversity separately to improve integration of multiple aspects of the climate‐nature‐land use nexus into policymaking by: (1) formulating ecological and socio‐economic indicators and metrics that are appropriate to underpin the development, implementation, and assessment of public policies; (2) adopting a cross‐sectoral and cross‐government approach to form public policies; (3) ensuring solar farms can access public financial incentives that encourage sustainable land use; (4) implementing land use policies that incentivise funding from non‐government sources (e.g. private sector) into nascent nature markets; (5) embedding solar farms in biodiversity‐inclusive spatial planning policies and decision‐making; and (6) building equity and clarity into responsibilities and benefits for all actors involved.

KW - biodiversity

KW - renewable energy

KW - natural capital

KW - land use policy

KW - photovoltaic panels

KW - land use change

KW - planning

KW - ecosystem services

U2 - 10.1111/1365-2664.14745

DO - 10.1111/1365-2664.14745

M3 - Journal article

JO - Journal of Applied Ecology

JF - Journal of Applied Ecology

SN - 0021-8901

ER -