- A new report from the U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) finds that agrivoltaics can foster stronger community engagement while also creating new financial and regulatory hurdles for project developers.
The study, led by NREL researcher and analyst Alexis Pascaris, with contributions from colleagues at NREL and the University of Arizona, explores how policies and local engagement shape solar deployment on farmland. “Further deployment of agrivoltaics is likely to require better understanding of how policies and agreements can shape the outcome of solar siting on farmland,” the authors wrote. “Our findings demonstrate how policy has mixed effects on deployment processes and outcomes.”
The report evaluates agrivoltaics policies and projects in Massachusetts—one of the few U.S. states with a mature framework for integrating agriculture and solar. The state’s Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target (SMART) program, launched in 2018 by the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (MDOER), supports solar development toward a statewide goal of 30 GW of capacity by 2050. Additional policies, including renewable electricity standards, feed-in tariffs, solar carveouts, and investment and production tax credits, have further encouraged deployment. However, as the report notes, land availability remains a challenge in the Northeast, where large, cost-effective sites suitable for utility-scale PV are often agricultural. “Opposition to solar siting on farmland is prevalent,” the report observed, citing community and environmental concerns about land use and habitat loss.
A central tenet of agrivoltaics is early stakeholder engagement to build consensus and mitigate opposition. Yet the NREL report warns that this engagement often lacks genuine participation from farmers and agricultural organisations. Instead, it is frequently dominated by environmental conservation groups, which tend to prioritise land preservation over renewable development. “When all the new energy stuff was being debated, the agricultural community wasn’t really at the table much,” one NGO representative said. “The land protection community and the environmental folks were very much at the table.” This imbalance, the report cautions, can inadvertently foster an anti-development narrative, even when developers are trying to be inclusive.
For agrivoltaics to succeed, the study argues, farmers must not only have a seat at the table but a clear reason to support projects. Some farm owner-operators in the Northeast view solar installations as a “30-year cover crop”—a way to stabilise and diversify revenue streams while protecting against permanent land conversion, such as housing developments. Programs like Massachusetts’ Agricultural Solar Tariff Generation Units (ASTGU) guidelines have helped align agricultural and solar interests by establishing tariff incentives, defining eligible farmland, and requiring collaboration between solar developers and farmers. However, the same rules can also slow or complicate projects, creating what the report calls a “double-edged scythe” of opportunity and bureaucracy.
Overall, NREL’s analysis positions Massachusetts as a case study in the complexities of agrivoltaic policy and practice. While the model offers valuable insights for future solar development, it also exposes the fine balance between enabling clean energy growth and preserving agricultural land. As the authors conclude, agrivoltaics holds promise as a tool for both decarbonisation and rural resilience—but only if developers, policymakers, and farmers can align their goals and share in the benefits.
Link to the full paper HERE
Author: Bryan Groenendaal
