A new study finds that anticipatory solastalgia, or distress over expected changes to familiar landscapes, can undermine public acceptance of agrivoltaics. Perceived environmental and economic benefits, trust in experts, and fair decision-making processes are associated with more favorable attitudes.
The prospect of large-scale changes to familiar landscapes can trigger emotional distress long before those changes take place. Known as anticipatory solastalgia, this sense of impending environmental loss may help explain why agrivoltaic projects face local opposition, even when they promise benefits for renewable energy generation and agricultural resilience.
The concept builds on solastalgia, a term introduced by Australian philosopher Glenn Albrecht in the early 2000s to describe distress caused by environmental changes to familiar places. Its future-oriented dimension was subsequently developed in environmental psychology, with anticipatory solastalgia examined as a distinct psychological construct in 2023.
A new survey examining public perceptions of agrivoltaics suggests that anticipated landscape changes are among the most significant barriers to social acceptance. At the same time, perceived environmental sustainability, local economic opportunities, trust in scientific experts, and the fairness of decision-making processes are associated with more favorable attitudes toward the technology.
“Global and local sustainability are among the factors most closely associated with a positive assessment of agrivoltaics,” Mirella De Falco, lead author of the study, told pv magazine.
Global sustainability refers primarily to the perceived environmental consequences of agrivoltaic technology, including its effects on ecosystems, biodiversity, and agricultural land. Local sustainability, meanwhile, concerns the benefits people expect for their communities, such as employment opportunities and support for agricultural activities.
“At the heart of these assessments is a concrete question: what benefits can agrivoltaics bring to the environment and local communities?” she said.
The findings suggest that acceptance depends not only on the technology’s perceived environmental performance but also on whether communities recognize tangible ecological and socioeconomic benefits.
Landscape concerns and anticipated loss
Among the concerns identified by the survey, the potential transformation of familiar landscapes emerged as particularly significant.
“We investigated what is known as anticipatory solastalgia: distress experienced in the present when faced with the possibility that a familiar landscape may change and lose some of its meaning,” De Falco explained.
According to the findings, this emotional response is associated with less favorable assessments of agrivoltaics and a lower intention to support its deployment.
“Landscapes hold memories, habits, and a sense of belonging. Imagining their transformation can trigger a feeling of loss even before a project is built,” she said.
Nevertheless, the survey found that respondents generally held favorable views of agrivoltaics, particularly when they associated the technology with environmental benefits and opportunities for local economies.
The researchers emphasized that positive expectations and concerns about landscape transformation can coexist. They also noted that the survey examined general perceptions of agrivoltaic technology rather than asking respondents to rank specific design features or installation configurations.
Information alone may not improve acceptance
The findings also challenge the assumption that resistance to agrivoltaics can be addressed primarily through information campaigns.
“It would be reductive to assume that finding the right message is enough to generate public support. In fact, our findings suggest that providing more information does not necessarily change the outcome,” De Falco said.
In the statistical models used in the study, respondents who considered themselves more knowledgeable about agrivoltaics did not necessarily express greater acceptance. Instead, perceptions of procedural fairness, the legitimacy of decisions, and trust in technical and scientific stakeholders were associated with more favorable assessments.
The researchers therefore recommend that developers and policymakers make the claimed benefits of agrivoltaics concrete and verifiable, using documented examples and monitoring results to demonstrate environmental and agricultural outcomes.
“If agrivoltaics is presented as a sustainable solution, it is necessary to explain what evidence supports that claim and what it actually means for agriculture and the territory concerned,” De Falco said.
Communication should also involve trusted local stakeholders who can address residents’ questions and connect technical knowledge with community experiences.
“People also assess who is proposing the technology, how decisions are made, and what consequences they anticipate for the places they care about,” she added.
The findings indicate that information remains necessary, but its effectiveness depends partly on the credibility of those providing it and the broader context in which projects are developed.
Implications for project developers
For companies planning agrivoltaic installations, the research highlights the importance of engaging with local communities from the earliest stages of project development.
“I would suggest starting by listening to the local community: what agricultural activities characterize the area, which places hold particular meaning for residents, and what expectations or concerns already exist,” De Falco said.
Developers should also clarify how farming activities will continue, which landscape changes will be visible, who will receive the benefits, and how commitments will be monitored.
“Credibility is also built by giving people the opportunity to ask questions and receive documented answers,” she said.
The relatively limited importance of technical characteristics in the survey should not, however, be interpreted as evidence that agronomic and engineering considerations are secondary in all circumstances.
The researchers noted that respondents were evaluating agrivoltaics in general terms. For farmers directly involved in projects, compatibility with crops, machinery, and agricultural operations may be decisive.
The results therefore provide a framework for identifying potential social acceptance issues, rather than a substitute for project-specific engagement and assessments of local agricultural conditions.
Further research into regional differences
The survey did not establish whether particular geographical areas or demographic groups are more likely to support agrivoltaic installations.
“This study does not yet allow us to identify geographical areas or social groups that are more predisposed to accepting agrivoltaics,” De Falco said.
The research team plans to expand the investigation through a targeted national survey to examine geographical differences in greater detail, potentially down to the municipal level where sample sizes permit.
“The aim is to distinguish levels of agrivoltaic acceptance with a degree of geographical detail that could extend to individual municipalities,” she said.
The expanded research will also examine communities directly affected by agrivoltaic developments.
The findings are presented in the study “The social acceptance of agrivoltaics: Exploring the cognitive and affective outcomes of technological, contextual, and personal beliefs,” published in Renewable Energy Focus. The research was conducted by researchers from Sapienza University of Rome, the Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA), and the University of Padua.
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: [email protected].