Optimizing agrivoltaic systems for global sustainability: a structural and wind dynamics approach to resilience and performance

This article synthesizes recent research on Agrivoltaics (AV), underscoring its transformative potential to address escalating demands for food and energy while mitigating land-use conflicts and climate change impacts. Key insights reveal that AV systems optimize land productivity, modulate microclimates, and significantly conserve water resources, fostering enhanced agricultural resilience and diversified crop production. Moreover, they deliver substantial economic advantages to farmers, ensuring stable income streams and boosting profitability, while also generating considerable clean energy. The exponential growth in agrivoltaics research reflects its escalating recognition as a multifaceted and vital solution. Despite these compelling benefits, widespread adoption encounters notable challenges. These include overcoming high initial capital costs, optimizing intricate technical configurations to balance light and shade, navigating complex sociopolitical landscapes, and establishing robust waste management and recycling frameworks for PV modules. Crucially, significant structural engineering challenges arise from high-intensity wind loads. Existing codes often misestimate loads, and traditional wind tunnel testing frequently underestimates peak pressures, highlighting a critical lack of comprehensive design standards. Therefore, addressing these challenges demands advanced methodologies—including open-jet testing, sophisticated computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations, and a consistent peak load estimation method—to ensure structural resilience and economic viability. Future advancements are critical for unlocking AV’s full potential, necessitating deeper integration of cutting-edge technologies like artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things for dynamic control and predictive analytics. Focused efforts are also required for refining modeling tools, creating comprehensive data repositories, and developing flexible policy instruments. Ultimately, fostering cross-sector collaboration and implementing tailored, holistic approaches will be paramount to building more resilient, sustainable, and economically viable agricultural and energy sectors worldwide.

1 Introduction

The 21st century is defined by an escalating confluence of global crises, including notably climate change impacts, burgeoning energy demands, and the critical imperative of ensuring food security for a rapidly expanding human population (Singh, 2021). These interconnected pressures exacerbate competition for finite land resources, frequently resulting in land-use conflicts between conventional agricultural production and the expansion of renewable energy infrastructure (Turnley et al., 2024). In response to this complex nexus, agrivoltaics (AV), also known as agrophotovoltaics (APV) or solar sharing, has emerged as a highly innovative hybrid technology (Asa’a et al., 2024). This pioneering approach integrates solar photovoltaic (PV) power generation with agricultural cultivation on the same land area, thereby optimizing overall land productivity (Dinesh and Pearce, 2016; Dupraz et al., 2011) (see Figure 1 for a conceptual overview). Such dual-use land management offers a compelling and sustainable solution to concurrently address the global demands for both food and energy (Abubakar et al., 2025; Widmer et al., 2024).

Figure 1

Figure 1. Conceptual overview of agrivoltaics as a sustainable solution to the food–energy–water nexus and global challenges. The schematic illustrates (A) major drivers such as climate crisis, energy demand, food security, and water scarcity; (B) the agrivoltaic dual-use system integrating photovoltaic panels with crop cultivation, shown with various AV system types; and (C) key outcomes including enhanced land productivity, resource efficiency, economic benefits, and persistent challenges such as shading management, structural design, and regulatory gaps. Future research directions emphasize improving system resilience, standards development, and sociopolitical frameworks to unlock AV’s full potential.

The foundational concept of agrivoltaics was first conceptualized in the early 1980s by Goetzberger and Zastrow, who extensively explored the coexistence of solar energy conversion and plant cultivation (Goetzberger and Zastrow, 1982). This innovative methodology involves the strategic placement of solar PV modules, often on elevated mounts or seamlessly integrated within greenhouse structures, directly above agricultural lands. This configuration ensures the continuation of agricultural activities beneath them while maximizing the synergistic harnessing of sunlight for both energy generation and crop growth (Majumdar and Pasqualetti, 2018; Trommsdorff et al., 2021). The pursuit of a standardized classification system for agrivoltaic systems reflects a growing consensus within the scientific community regarding its multidisciplinary nature and future trajectory in integrated energy and agriculture systems (Willockx et al., 2020; Asa’a et al., 2024). Agrivoltaic systems present a multifaceted paradigm for sustainable development, delivering not only clean energy but also substantial agricultural, environmental, and economic benefits (Adomavičius et al., 2025; Pascaris, 2021). These benefits encompass significantly enhanced land productivity, effective microclimate modulation, and critical water resource conservation (Adeh et al., 2018). Furthermore, AV systems provide remarkable economic advantages to farmers, offering diversified income streams and demonstrably improved profitability, as substantiated by recent techno-economic analyses (Schindele et al., 2020; Kumdokrub and You, 2025). The continuous advancement of PV technologies, ranging from traditional crystalline silicon to innovative semitransparent and wavelength-selective modules, is pivotal for their synergistic integration with agricultural practices, facilitating optimized spectral light distribution and enhanced energy yield (Allard, 2025; Mouhib et al., 2024; Sollazzo et al., 2025). The rapid expansion of research in this domain, evidenced by over 430 publications in 2024, unequivocally signals the escalating scientific interest and broad recognition of agrivoltaics as a pivotal, multidimensional solution (Di Domenico et al., 2025).

Despite these compelling advantages and burgeoning interest, the widespread adoption of agrivoltaic systems faces considerable challenges. These include high initial capital costs, intricate technical complexities concerning optimal system design and shade management, and multifaceted sociopolitical and regulatory barriers (Vezzoni, 2025; Taylor et al., 2025). Furthermore, agrivoltaic systems introduce significant structural engineering challenges, particularly concerning their resilience to high-intensity wind loads. A primary impediment to widespread adoption is the critical lack of comprehensive guidance or codified standards for evaluating these wind loads on solar panel structures, especially within the unique configurations of AV systems (Aly, 2016; Stathopoulos et al., 2012). Existing building standards, such as ASCE 7–10 and ASCE 7–16, have been shown to often underestimate these loads, aligning with observed real-world damage from windstorms (Aly and Clarke, 2023a; Aly and Whipple, 2021), while the most recent ASCE 7–22 edition can greatly overestimate them, hindering economic affordability (Aldoum and Stathopoulos, 2020). Traditional wind tunnel testing also faces limitations in replicating the complex turbulence characteristics of real-world atmospheric flows (Aly and Khaled, 2024; Aly, 2023), frequently leading to a substantial underestimation of peak pressures. To overcome these analytical shortcomings and better capture dynamic wind effects like torsional galloping (Rohr et al., 2015; Valentín et al., 2022), advanced methodologies such as open-jet testing and sophisticated computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations are essential (Irtaza and Agarwal, 2018).

The need for improved modeling tools and advanced sensor technologies is also evident for robust system design and optimization (Zohdi, 2021; Rahman et al., 2025). Addressing these multifaceted aspects, this comprehensive review aims to systematically synthesize the latest research findings on agrivoltaics, encompassing its fundamental concepts, diverse design configurations, extensive benefits, and inherent challenges across global contexts (Agyekum, 2024; Chopdar et al., 2024). By critically examining these dimensions, we seek to identify critical knowledge gaps and articulate focused future research directions, technological milestones, and policy recommendations essential for fully realizing the transformative potential of agrivoltaics in establishing a more sustainable and resilient global food–energy–water nexus while also promoting broader conservation efforts (Pandey et al., 2025b; Gomez-Casanovas et al., 2023; Time et al., 2024).

As illustrated in Figure 1, the AV approach strategically integrates photovoltaic energy generation with agricultural cultivation on the same land area. This dual-use system simultaneously addresses the pressing global challenges of climate change, food security, and increasing energy demand by optimizing land use. The figure highlights key global drivers prompting AV adoption, the nexus-based AV solution with system typologies, and multiscale outcomes encompassing benefits and challenges, including critical technical and regulatory considerations.

This review is structured to comprehensively address these areas. Section 2 details the fundamental concepts and classification of agrivoltaic systems. Section 3 thoroughly examines the multifaceted benefits and synergies of agrivoltaics across energy, agricultural, environmental, and economic domains. Section 4 critically discusses the technical, sociopolitical, regulatory, and economic challenges hindering widespread adoption. Section 5 presents various regional case studies and applications, highlighting diverse implementation strategies. Finally, Section 6 identifies future research directions, technological advancements, and policy needs essential for unlocking the full potential of agrivoltaics.

2 Agrivoltaic systems: concept and classification

The fundamental concept underpinning agrivoltaics lies in its ability to significantly optimize overall land productivity by fostering synergistic benefits between energy generation and crop cultivation (Dupraz et al., 2011). This core principle was first conceptualized in the early 1980s by Goetzberger and Zastrow, who pioneered the exploration of the harmonious coexistence of solar energy conversion and plant growth (Goetzberger and Zastrow, 1982). The increasing recognition of AV systems as a multidisciplinary solution for integrated energy and agriculture systems underscores a growing scientific consensus regarding their vital role in future sustainable development (Asa’a et al., 2024).

The primary objective of agrivoltaics is to maximize these beneficial synergies, thereby enhancing the resilience of the food–energy–water nexus and minimizing competition for land resources (Abubakar et al., 2025). This maximization of overall land productivity is often quantified through the land equivalent ratio (LER). An LER value greater than 1 signifies superior land-use efficiency, indicating that a higher total output (both energy and agricultural yield) is achieved from the same area compared to managing these systems separately (Garrod et al., 2024; Maity et al., 2025). A detailed explanation of LER and its multifaceted benefits is provided in Section 3.

Achieving optimal land-use efficiency in AV systems necessitates meticulous and site-specific design considerations. Key technical aspects, such as the strategic placement, optimal density, height, tilt angle, and spacing of PV modules, are critical to ensure balanced sunlight exposure for crops while maximizing energy production. These intricate design choices inherently demand a multidisciplinary approach to effectively harness the synergies between energy and food production (Asa’a et al., 2024). It is paramount to recognize that the ideal design configuration varies significantly based on factors like the specific crop type, local climate conditions, and existing agricultural practices, a comprehensive discussion of which is presented in Section 5 (Ukwu et al., 2025).

The physical implementation of agrivoltaics manifests in several distinct configurations (Figure 2). Common schematics include ground-mounted PV modules with sufficient spacing to allow for crop cultivation and elevated stilt-mounted arrays designed to ensure unhindered access for standard farming equipment and activities underneath (Majumdar and Pasqualetti, 2018). Early experimental groundwork for this formalized understanding was established through detailed studies conducted in Montpellier, France, in 2013, which notably utilized stilt-mounted PV modules (Dinesh and Pearce, 2016). Another significant configuration involves greenhouse-integrated PV modules, where solar structures are directly incorporated into the greenhouse roof, enabling precise control over the internal microclimate crucial for optimizing crop growth in controlled environments (Abubakar et al., 2025).

Figure 2

Figure 2. Schematic representations of various agrivoltaic farm configurations: (a) ground-mounted PV modules with crop spacing for farming machinery, (b) stilt-mounted PV modules providing ground access beneath solar arrays, and (c) single-axis tracker panels oriented at 90° to allow ample space for large agricultural equipment.

Given the burgeoning diversity and complexity of agrivoltaic installations globally, a standardized classification system is critically needed for effective comparison and benchmarking of existing installations and their performance across varied geographical regions and agricultural practices (Willockx et al., 2020). Such a system is essential for informing new legislation schemes by systematically considering various crucial factors, including:

● Application: the specific agricultural use (e.g., arable crops, livestock grazing, horticulture).

● System design: technical aspects such as fixed-tilt arrays, single-axis, or dual-axis tracking systems.

● Farming type: the nature of the agricultural activity, whether it involves shade-tolerant crops, open-field cultivation, or greenhouse farming.

● PV structure: the physical configuration of the solar panels, such as ground-mounted, stilt-mounted, or integrated into building envelopes.

● Flexibility: the system’s capacity for adjustment, like variable shading levels or adaptable heights (Willockx et al., 2020).

This systematic approach to classification facilitates robust data collection, enables direct comparisons between different AV systems, and supports the development of coherent policies and incentive programs based on common, measurable metrics, thereby accelerating the widespread adoption and sustainable scaling of agrivoltaics (Asa’a et al., 2024).

3 Benefits and synergies of agrivoltaics

Agrivoltaic systems (AV) deliver substantial benefits across energy, agricultural, environmental, and economic domains, due to the inherent synergy of co-locating solar PV power generation with agricultural cultivation (Adomavičius et al., 2025; Pascaris, 2021). A core strength of AV lies in its ability to significantly enhance overall land productivity, a metric often quantified by the LER (Abubakar et al., 2025; Maity et al., 2025; Widmer et al., 2024). An LER greater than 1 indicates superior land-use efficiency, signifying that the combined output (both energy and agricultural yield) from a given area surpasses what could be achieved by managing these systems separately. Studies consistently report optimistic LER values, with some reaching as high as 1.52, underscoring the remarkable balance between energy and crop production fostered by AV systems (Garrod et al., 2024). The following subsections elaborate on these diverse benefits and the underlying synergies.

3.1 Energy production and performance

Agrivoltaic systems significantly bolster renewable energy production and contribute directly to carbon mitigation by offsetting reliance on fossil fuels and reducing associated carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions (Jamil and Pearce, 2025; Scarano et al., 2025). As photovoltaic power plants (PVPPs) continue to be among the most cost-effective global solar energy sources, their integration into agricultural landscapes through AV systems enables substantial contributions to national energy grids while simultaneously maintaining or enhancing agricultural output (Adomavičius et al., 2025).

The potential for energy generation from agrivoltaics is substantial. Projections indicate that converting all lettuce cultivation areas in the United States to agrivoltaic systems could increase total solar power generation by an impressive 40 to 70 GW (Dinesh and Pearce, 2016). In Japan, implementing AV systems in rice paddies at a 28% panel density could generate 284 million MWh/year, supplying approximately 29% of the nation’s total electricity demand in 2018 (Gonocruz et al., 2021). Canadian research utilizing vertically mounted bifacial solar modules suggests that agrivoltaic systems could meet at least 84% of the total national electricity needs in three provinces by 2030, with 90% of this being green, emission-free electricity. Specifically, a geospatial analysis in Canada found that just 1% of current agricultural land dedicated to agrivoltaics could fulfill a quarter to over a third of the country’s electrical energy requirements (Jamil et al., 2024; Khoja et al., 2025). In the Phoenix Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) of the USA, a half-density panel distribution on private agricultural lands within the APS service territory demonstrated the capacity to generate 8 times the current residential energy demand and 3.4 times the total energy requirements across residential, commercial, and industrial sectors (Majumdar and Pasqualetti, 2018).

A key synergistic benefit of agrivoltaics is the enhanced efficiency of PV modules. The presence of crops contributes to a cooling effect through transpiration and shading, which can improve PV module efficiency and lead to higher electricity yields, especially in hot climates (Williams et al., 2023). The subsequent cooling of the PV modules resulting from this microclimate modulation can boost power conversion efficiency by 5% to 22% when PV modules are placed on or in contact with water (aquavoltaics) (Pringle et al., 2017) and by up to 2.1% when micro-encapsulated phase change materials (MEPCMs) are attached to the module backs. While conventional solar PV farms may produce roughly double the electricity output per unit area compared to full-density agrivoltaic setups due to spacing considerations, the overall land productivity remains superior in AV systems (Dinesh and Pearce, 2016).

The unit electricity generation quantity for a bifacial module with a 32% shading ratio, as observed in South Korea, can be estimated using polynomial regression (Kim et al., 2023) (Equation 1):

$\begin{array}{ll}{E}_{32B}=0.4169+0.0211I-0.0003I^2+0.0134X_1-0.0424X_2+0.0008{\displaystyle X_2^2}-0.2788X_3& (1)\end{array}$

where E_32B is the unit electricity generation quantity (kWh/m²/day), I is solar radiation, and X₁ (relative humidity), X₂ (evapotranspiration rate), and X₃ (temperature) are other climate-related variables. This highlights the importance of precise modeling for optimized energy output within these integrated systems.

Beyond generation, agrivoltaics offers opportunities for enhanced energy management and grid support. Managing excess electricity generated by off-grid hybrid renewable energy systems is both a challenge and an opportunity (Vaziri Rad et al., 2023). Potential solutions include battery storage, converting electricity into renewable fuels like hydrogen and anhydrous ammonia, or utilizing it for desalination technologies to produce freshwater, thereby fostering a truly circular economy within the system (Jamil and Pearce, 2025). Furthermore, excess energy generated during peak sunlight hours can be fed back into the electrical grid, contributing to overall energy efficiency and grid stabilization (Zhang et al., 2025).

3.2 Agricultural productivity and microclimate moderation

The presence of PV panels in agrivoltaic systems fundamentally modifies the microclimate underneath them, leading to a range of direct and indirect advantages for crop growth and overall agricultural resilience, particularly in arid or hot regions (Abubakar et al., 2025; Gomez-Casanovas et al., 2023; Trommsdorff et al., 2022). These systems are increasingly recognized for their capacity to foster resilience in agricultural practices by effectively modulating environmental stressors like extreme heat and water scarcity (Scarano et al., 2025; Barron-Gafford et al., 2019).

Agrivoltaic systems exert a notable influence on thermal conditions. The strategic shading provided by PV panels effectively reduces maximum air and soil temperatures during hot periods, offering significant advantages for crops cultivated in drylands or temperate climates experiencing heat stress (Barron-Gafford et al., 2019; Adeh et al., 2018; Weselek et al., 2021). Temperature reductions of up to 3°C–5°C have been consistently observed within agrivoltaic greenhouses compared to conventional structures, demonstrating their capacity for climate modulation (Kashif et al., 2025). This cooling effect can critically extend growing seasons and alleviate crop heat stress, potentially enabling cultivation in climates otherwise deemed unsuitable (Marrou et al., 2013; Jamil and Pearce, 2025). Conversely, PV panels can also contribute to warmer nighttime temperatures, which provides a crucial benefit by helping to protect vegetation from frost damage and ice crystal formation during sensitive blooming stages (Pandey et al., 2025b). Furthermore, a notable synergy exists as crop transpiration provides a cooling effect to the PV modules, potentially increasing their electricity generation by approximately 1% annually (Williams et al., 2023). This reciprocal relationship is a core advantage of agrivoltaic design, where agricultural activity directly enhances energy production.

Beyond thermal regulation, AV systems significantly enhance water resource management and soil health. PV panels decrease evapotranspiration rates, leading to increased soil moisture retention by mitigating direct solar radiation and reducing air temperatures (Adeh et al., 2018; Barron-Gafford et al., 2019; Mouhib et al., 2024). This enhanced water availability is particularly beneficial in water-stressed regions, with some studies demonstrating a remarkable reduction in crop water use by approximately 50% in crops like chicory (Scarano et al., 2025). The physical structure of AV installations also helps reduce wind speed, mitigating soil erosion and runoff, further optimizing water usage and providing direct environmental control for agriculture (Randle-Boggis et al., 2025; Dinesh and Pearce, 2016).

The light environment, specifically the photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) reaching crops, is meticulously managed within AV systems. While PV panels inherently reduce incident PAR, system design can be precisely optimized to balance energy generation with specific crop light requirements (Riaz et al., 2022; Ukwu et al., 2025). Importantly, the partial shading from panels can increase the proportion of diffuse light, which is often more beneficial for plant photosynthesis than direct sunlight, especially in horticultural production (Sollazzo et al., 2025; Li and Yang, 2015). Advances in photovoltaic technology, such as semitransparent and wavelength-selective modules, offer novel opportunities for spectral tuning. For instance, organic photovoltaics (OPVs) and dye-sensitized solar cells (DSSCs) are specifically engineered to allow desired light wavelengths essential for photosynthesis to pass through while converting other wavelengths into electricity. Emerging perovskite technologies have demonstrated the ability to promote radicchio growth by selectively filtering blue light and enriching red light, thereby beneficially influencing seedling photomorphogenesis (Allard, 2025). Similarly, multilayer polymer films (MPFs) can act as spectral splitters, contributing to improved biomass yield and enhanced photosynthesis rates in various crops. Technologies like luminescent solar concentrators (LSCs) and spectral beam splitting are actively being investigated for their potential to precisely manage light distribution, optimizing conditions for both energy production and plant growth (Shalom et al., 2023; Sollazzo et al., 2025). The average photosynthetic transmittance (APT) quantifies the transmission of photosynthetically active radiation and is given by (Equation 2):

$\begin{array}{ll}\text{APT}=\frac{\int T(\lambda )S(\lambda )P(\lambda )d\lambda }{\int S(\lambda )P(\lambda )d\lambda }& (2)\end{array}$

where T(λ) is the panel’s spectral transmittance, S(λ) is the incident solar spectrum, and P(λ) is the plant’s photosynthetic action spectrum (Stallknecht et al., 2023). APT values of 60%–65% have shown acceptable yields for basil and petunia, while tomatoes typically require APT >65%. This precise control over the light spectrum and intensity directly contributes to optimized crop performance within AV systems.

Beyond microclimate modulation, AV systems provide direct physical protection for crops and livestock. PV panels can shield crops from adverse extreme weather events, including hail, strong winds, and excessive solar radiation, which significantly reduces physical damage and improves crop quality and marketability (Willockx et al., 2024; Jamil and Pearce, 2025). For livestock, the shading from PV panels offers crucial thermal comfort, reducing heat stress in grazing animals such as dairy cows and potentially leading to improved milk production (Sharpe et al., 2021; Jamil and Pearce, 2025). Research on agrivoltaic sheep has shown higher-quality wool production (Adomavičius et al., 2025), and vertical agrivoltaic facilities integrated with cow farming have not shown modifications to meadow functioning or animal behavior. Although less extensively studied, preliminary evidence suggests that the altered microclimates and physical barriers within AV systems may also influence pest and disease dynamics, potentially reducing the need for pesticide applications (Kashif et al., 2025). This physical protection enhances both the yield stability and quality of agricultural products.

The ultimate impact on crop productivity varies widely depending on the crop’s shade tolerance and the specific system configuration (Pandey et al., 2025b; Asa’a et al., 2024). While shade-intolerant crops may experience yield reductions if not properly managed, many crops exhibit remarkable benefits. Research has shown impressive yield increases for various crops, including eggplants (50% higher yield and better quality in France) (Dubrovska and Dubrovskis, 2025; Deboutte, 2023) and grapes (20% to 60% higher yields in southern France) (Deboutte, 2024). Other fruits and vegetables successfully grown in agrivoltaic systems include tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, celery, fennel, spinach, lamb’s lettuce, and green beans (Dinesh and Pearce, 2016). For rice, studies in Japan and South Korea demonstrate that 80% to 90% of conventional rice production can be maintained under agrivoltaic systems with shading rates between 27% and 39% (Gonocruz et al., 2021; Kim et al., 2023). Significant yield increases have also been reported for celeriac (31.9% to 48%) (Jamil and Pearce, 2025), potatoes (11%–12%) (Sollazzo et al., 2025), and winter wheat (3%).

Many studies have shown an increase in crop yield (including basil, broccoli, celery, chiltepin peppers, corn/maize, lettuce, potatoes, spinach, and tomatoes) with partial shading from agrivoltaics (Jamil et al., 2024). Leafy greens such as lettuce and spinach have demonstrated high yields even with a PV coverage rate of approximately 50% (Zhang et al., 2025). Berries are identified as a high-potential crop group for AV systems due to their shade tolerance, and panels can effectively replace hail nets and plastic covers in berry production (Hermelink et al., 2024; Trommsdorff et al., 2022). Tomatoes and bell peppers also remain key focus crops in AV research (Widmer et al., 2024; Asa’a et al., 2024). In tropical climates, mungbean genotypes have shown improved performance, including increased pod and seed numbers, particularly under east–west-oriented PV systems, underscoring the importance of panel orientation in AV system designs (Ukwu et al., 2025). Beyond quantity, crop quality can also be enhanced, with observations of greener kales and Swiss chard, longer bean stems improving marketability, and increased protein content in spinach and basil (Randle-Boggis et al., 2025). These multifaceted impacts underscore the potential of AV systems to enhance land-use efficiency by enabling simultaneous food and energy production (Miskin et al., 2019).

The crop yield in tons per hectare, a standard metric for agricultural output, can be calculated based on the fresh weight of individual plants and plant density (Dinesh and Pearce, 2016) (Equation 3):

$\begin{array}{ll}{Y}_{\text{Tons}/\text{Ha}}=W\times d/100& (3)\end{array}$

where W is the fresh weight of the plant (g), and d is the plant density per square meter. This quantifiable approach enables precise evaluation of the impacts of integrated agrivoltaic systems on agricultural yields.

3.3 Economic advantages

Agrivoltaic systems demonstrate robust economic viability, primarily by providing diversified and substantial revenue streams for farmers (Adomavičius et al., 2025; Dinesh and Pearce, 2016; Kim et al., 2023). The synergistic combination of solar-generated electricity and shade-tolerant crop production can lead to an increase in economic value from farms exceeding 30% compared to conventional monoculture agriculture. Quantitative analyses highlight this potential: a half-density agrivoltaic stilt-mounted array can generate over $17,000/Ha/year for a farmer. In the Phoenix MSA of the USA, farmlands with half-density panels are estimated to generate approximately 600 MWh/acre per year, significantly surpassing the energy required for crop production (Majumdar and Pasqualetti, 2018). Furthermore, a model suggests that an additional income of $6,000/acre per year could be realized if a utility company installs the panels and provides 1 cent/kWh to farmers, potentially recouping the land sale price within 2 years for 50% of agricultural land sales. The economic feasibility of rice cultivation in agrivoltaic systems in South Korea has also been demonstrated, showing high overall profitability (Kim et al., 2023).

The inherent economic viability of agrivoltaics lies in its ability to establish dual income streams derived from both crop sales and electricity generation. This significantly enhances overall farm profitability and builds resilience against market fluctuations (Schindele et al., 2020; Kumdokrub and You, 2025; Pandey et al., 2025b). By offering a stable additional revenue source from electricity sales, AV diversifies farmers’ income and reduces sole reliance on fluctuating crop prices (Cuppari et al., 2021). This acts as a crucial hedge against inflation and agricultural risks, such as those posed by extreme weather events that can lead to substantial crop losses (Jamil and Pearce, 2025). While initial capital costs for AV systems can be a considerable barrier, often being 23.81% to 38% higher than traditional ground-mounted PV systems due to more complex substructures and height requirements (Vezzoni, 2025; Abubakar et al., 2025; Bauknecht, 2025), innovative cost reduction strategies are emerging. Advancements in low-cost, open-source racking systems and distributed manufacturing are expected to significantly reduce installation expenses and enhance accessibility for farmers. For example, open-source designs for vertical swinging wood-based solar photovoltaic racking systems are actively being developed to lower costs (Jamil et al., 2024). Additionally, the potential for reusing PV modules, sourced from decommissioned utility-scale PV plants, presents a viable avenue for further cost reduction, making AV more economically attractive. Studies confirm that reused PV modules can still maintain high energy output, making them a practical and sustainable option for AV systems (Nieto-Morone et al., 2025).

Regional case studies further underscore the strong economic potential of agrivoltaics. Research in Germany indicates that AV systems can be economically competitive with conventional agriculture, particularly for high-value crops (Feuerbacher et al., 2022). In India, techno-economic evaluations consistently highlight the profitability of various AV designs in hot arid ecosystems (Poonia et al., 2022). An analysis of AV in olive groves in the Mediterranean region suggests the potential to generate over 560,000 jobs, demonstrating significant employment opportunities (Kumdokrub and You, 2025).

Moreover, a comprehensive case study at Cornell University, employing both mixed-integer non-linear programming (MINLP) and fractional programming (FP) models, has provided detailed insights into the environmental performance of agrivoltaic systems compared to traditional farming methods (Kumdokrub and You, 2025). Figure 3 presents the environmental performance of agrivoltaic (AgV) configurations for various crop types (barley, oat, wheat, cabbage, potato, soybean, tomato) and farm locations, contrasting them with traditional practices. Key findings from the environmental models are as follows: 1) Traditional farming scenarios resulted in baseline operational emissions ranging from approximately −19.23 to −21.41 million metric tons of CO₂eq, with corresponding unit benefits from −55.74 to −116.20 metric tons of CO₂eq/m³, depending on the crop’s irrigation requirements. 2) The MINLP environmental model (model M.3) demonstrates that AgV applications significantly offset emissions. In the “forced AgV” scenario, where agrivoltaics is applied to all land, it led to an 111.83% environmental offset (23.71 million metric tons of CO₂eq) compared to the traditional scenario’s average emissions. The “AgV” scenario, which optimally assigns agrivoltaics, achieved a slightly higher offset of 114.63% (29.33 million metric tons of CO₂eq). This is largely because environmental optimization prioritizes solar panels, which contribute to emission reduction, over crop cultivation activities that generate emissions through machinery and irrigation. 3) The FP environmental models (model M.4), ranging from “Min 0%” to “Min 90%” minimum cropland allocation, consistently show that AgV outperforms conventional land use practices in terms of environmental benefits. For instance, in the “Min 0%” scenario, where land is predominantly allocated to PV structures, solar panels alone generated 29.33 million metric tons of CO₂eq in environmental benefits. 4) However, a notable trade-off is observed: as more land is allocated to crop cultivation within AgV systems, the total operational emissions offsets tend to decrease. For example, operational emissions offsets improved by 104.32% at 10% cropland allocation but only by 23.13% at 90% cropland allocation, when compared to traditional practices. 5) The environmental unit benefits per unit of irrigation suggest that to maintain better performance than traditional farming, cropland allocation should optimally not exceed 60% of the land. Beyond this threshold, while economic value might increase, the environmental benefits per unit of water consumed become less effective.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Environmental outcomes of agrivoltaics in a Cornell University case study (Kumdokrub and You, 2025).

Collectively, these findings highlight that agrivoltaics offers substantial environmental benefits, primarily driven by solar energy generation, underscoring its potential to mitigate climate change impacts and enhance sustainable land use.

3.4 Environmental co-benefits

Agrivoltaics extends its contributions significantly to broader environmental sustainability, moving beyond just renewable energy generation (Scarano et al., 2025). By generating clean electricity, AV systems directly reduce reliance on fossil fuels, thereby lowering carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from energy production (Pandey et al., 2025a; Mazzeo et al., 2025). A compelling study suggests that agrivoltaic systems in the Mediterranean region alone could lead to an annual reduction of approximately 4 million metric tons of CO₂ emissions, highlighting their substantial climate mitigation potential (Jamil and Pearce, 2025). Furthermore, the direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with AV systems are often significantly lower than the emissions offset by the generated PV electricity, thereby enabling net negative GHG emissions from integrated agri-food production and electricity generation (Pandey et al., 2025b).

Beyond climate mitigation, AV systems offer profound benefits for soil health and biodiversity. This is achieved through enhanced soil moisture retention and reduced soil erosion observed under AV installations, which directly contribute to healthier soil ecosystems (Adeh et al., 2018). The shading provided by PV panels creates favorable microclimates that promote robust soil microbial activity, which is crucial for efficient nutrient cycling and long-term carbon sequestration (Krasner et al., 2025; Magarelli et al., 2025). This fosters conditions that support regenerative agriculture practices by significantly enhancing the soil’s capacity to store atmospheric carbon (Towner et al., 2022; Jamil and Pearce, 2025).

Additionally, agrivoltaic installations actively promote biodiversity by providing shaded habitats for various species and supporting pollinator populations when managed with native vegetation or pollinator-friendly plants (Walston et al., 2022). These sites can serve as vital stepping stone biotopes within agricultural landscapes, enhancing ecological connectivity and overall species diversity (Ludzuweit et al., 2025). Studies have demonstrated that agrivoltaics can increase pollinator supply threefold compared to pre-solar agricultural land uses (Walston et al., 2021). These wide-ranging environmental co-benefits underscore agrivoltaics’ role as a holistic and innovative solution for a sustainable future.

4 Challenges and considerations

Despite their numerous benefits, the widespread adoption of agrivoltaic systems faces several technical, sociopolitical, and regulatory challenges.

4.1 Technical challenges

While many crops thrive under partial shade, excessive shading can negatively impact photosynthesis and plant growth (Shukla et al., 2022; Dinesh and Pearce, 2016). Studies show that rice yield is highly correlated with solar radiation, especially during the reproductive and ripening stages. The allowable upper limit of shading rate for agrivoltaic installations for rice in Japan ranges from 27% to 39% to sustain at least 80% of the rice yield. Figure 4 demonstrates this relationship.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Relationship between average grain weight and shading rate for rice crops in agrivoltaic systems, illustrating the impact of panel shading on agricultural productivity (Gonocruz et al., 2021).

The relationship between average grain weight (W_ij) and shading rate (S_ij) can be analyzed using a regression model (Gonocruz et al., 2021) (Equation 4). The simplified model, after removing non-significant terms, uses estimated parameters:

$\begin{array}{ll}{W}_{ij}=\widehat{\alpha }+a_j+\widehat{\beta }{S}_{ij}+{ϵ}_{ij}& (4)\end{array}$

where $\widehat{\alpha }=24.3$, $\widehat{\beta }=-15.3$, and the standard deviation of a_j = 4.4, and ${ϵ}_{ij}$ is an error term. The 95% confidence interval for the upper limit of the shading rate that complies with the MAFF condition (80% yield) was estimated to be 27%–39% (Gonocruz et al., 2021).

Determining the optimal density, height, tilt angle, and spacing of PV modules is critical to balance energy generation with crop growth (Santra et al., 2017). For instance, the German Heggelbach AV system design features a vertical clearance of 5 m and a width clearance of up to 19 m to accommodate machinery (Trommsdorff et al., 2021).

Dust and soiling generated by modern farming equipment can diminish PV module power output (Dinesh and Pearce, 2016). This necessitates periodic cleaning or the use of self-cleaning glass surfaces to maintain optimal electricity output. Crop specificity is also a factor, as not all crops are equally suited for agrivoltaic applications. While shade-tolerant crops like lettuce, eggplants, and grapes have shown success, shade-intolerant crops like maize may experience reduced stem height, leaf area, and photosynthesis rates under shade. For certain crops like tomatoes, even modest shading can reduce yield, indicating a strong desire for high PAR transmission (Stallknecht et al., 2023). Global studies show contradictions regarding yield impact; for instance, some report a 30% increase in crop yield under AV systems, while others, like greenhouse AV setups, show yield reductions of up to 64% for specific crops (Abubakar et al., 2025). This variability underscores the need for crop-specific optimization, including cultivar selection, water and nutrient management, and crop protection strategies (Widmer et al., 2024).

4.2 Structural integrity and wind loads

AV systems, while offering numerous benefits, introduce significant structural engineering challenges, particularly concerning their resilience to high-intensity wind loads. The vulnerability of elevated solar arrays to highly turbulent and gusty winds necessitates robust designs to prevent structural failure, including phenomena like torsional galloping (Aly and Clarke, 2023). Accurate estimation of these design wind loads is paramount for balancing sustainability with the resilience of solar panels (Aly, 2016). A significant impediment to widespread deployment is the current lack of comprehensive guidance or codified standards for evaluating wind loads on solar panel structures, especially for the unique configurations found in AV systems. This absence can lead to either overestimation, hindering economic feasibility, or underestimation, risking costly structural failures.

4.2.1 Limitations of traditional wind load assessment

Traditional wind tunnel testing, though foundational, often faces significant limitations in replicating the complex turbulence characteristics of real-world atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) flows, particularly the large-scale, low-frequency turbulence crucial for accurate peak pressure measurements (Aly and Khaled, 2024; Aly, 2023). These conventional wall-bounded wind tunnels typically generate integral length scales of turbulence that are much smaller than those observed in full-scale conditions, leading to discrepancies in predicted aerodynamic loads and an underestimation of peak pressures. For instance, previous small-scale wind tunnel experiments often underestimate peak pressures due to lower Reynolds numbers and incomplete turbulence simulation, with their resulting mean pressure coefficient predictions being 25% to 300% lower than full-scale data. This deficiency is starkly illustrated by comparisons where wall-bounded wind tunnels fail to capture the complete turbulence spectrum, especially at larger scales, and their pressure predictions significantly diverge from full-scale measurements. These scaling issues also contribute to inconsistencies in wind load results among different studies and hinder codification efforts.

4.2.2 Advanced methodologies for accurate wind load estimation

To overcome the inherent challenges of traditional methods and enhance the consistency and reliability of peak wind load estimations, advanced methodologies have been developed.

4.2.2.1 Open-jet testing: replicating real-world turbulence

Open-jet testing facilities, such as the LSU WISE open-jet facility, uniquely generate a full turbulence spectrum at larger spatial scales and elevated Reynolds numbers ranging from approximately 0.5 million to 1 million (Figure 5). This approach provides a more realistic simulation of atmospheric turbulence (Aly and Khaled, 2024; Aly, 2023). It produces integral length scales approximately 10 times larger than traditional methods (up to 6.21 m compared to 0.2–0.6 m in wall-bounded tunnels) and yields peak pressures 25% to 300% higher than small-scale tests, aligning closely with full-scale field data (Figure 6). Open-jet testing allows for precise control and measurement of crucial flow parameters, such as mean velocity and turbulence intensity, aligning well with theoretical predictions for optimal testing zones. This large-scale testing has proven crucial for accurately capturing peak pressures and understanding Reynolds number effects on aerodynamic behavior, particularly for high-rise buildings where large-scale models show significantly higher peak pressure coefficients than smaller models.

Figure 5

Figure 5. The LSU WISE open-jet wind lab with a scaled building model positioned for aerodynamic testing. This advanced setup is crucial for simulating realistic atmospheric boundary layer turbulence and high Reynolds number flows, enabling accurate assessment of wind loads on structures like agrivoltaic systems.

Figure 6

Figure 6. The challenges in replicating real-world atmospheric turbulence in traditional wind tunnels, leading to underestimation of peak pressures, are critical for accurately assessing wind loads on AV systems (Aly, 2023; Aly and Khaled, 2024). Panel (a) illustrates the Lack of large-scale turbulence (low frequency turbulence) in wall-bounded laboratory testing: (a) scale 1:300 (the high turbulence flow matches with the target), (b) scale 1:10 (the high turbulence flow does not match with the target), and (c) normalizing the frequency (x-axis) using the flow integral length scale. Using the flow integral length scale to normalize the frequency can be misleading as it conceals the lack of turbulence (an issue common in previous wall-bounded studies). Panel (b) presents a Comparative analysis of mean pressure coefficients on the roof of the 1:100 UWO wind tunnel model and full-scale TTU data: (a) full-scale TTU at approximately 90°, (b) full-scale TTU at approximately 0°, (c) UWO at 90°, and (d) UWO at 0° AOA. The contrast highlights that Field pressures are 25–300% higher than those obtained from small-scale testing, but the open-jet results are consistent with the full-scale results. This underscores the potential advantages of large-scale open-jet testing in bridging the gap between model-scale and full-scale aerodynamic behavior.

4.2.2.2 Computational fluid dynamics: simulating complex dynamics

CFD simulations serve as an effective complementary approach for assessing wind loads on solar panels. CFD enables full-scale simulations that overcome geometric scaling constraints inherent in physical wind tunnel testing, providing continuous data on wind loads across structural components and the entire flow field. These sophisticated simulations, particularly when incorporating large eddy simulations (LESs) for turbulence closure, are crucial for accurately capturing the complex dynamics of peak wind loads on AV structures (Aly, 2016; Aly and Bitsuamlak, 2013).

Understanding dynamic wind effects such as torsional galloping and vortex shedding is critical for solar panels, as these can lead to structural failure even at wind speeds less than code-compliant design speeds (Aly and Clarke, 2023; Rohr et al., 2015; Vaziri Rad et al., 2023). Transient solvers in CFD provide detailed insights into these complex flow phenomena. The repeated development and shedding of vortices correlate directly to the peaks and lulls in aerodynamic force coefficients, indicating severe dynamic loading. As depicted in Figure 7a, a contour plot of CFD (with LES) velocity magnitude around a 1:1 scale solar panel illustrates the detailed wind flow patterns that contribute to these loads.

Figure 7

Figure 7. (a) Velocity magnitude (m/s) around a full-scale solar panel obtained from CFD analysis using LES. (b) Three-second peak normal force coefficients for solar panel models evaluated computationally (CFD 1:1) and experimentally at scale ratios of 1:5, 1:10, 1:20, and 1:30, compared with the mean, standard deviation (STD), and peak values derived from the complete force time histories. This figure demonstrates the consistency of the 3-s peak load method across different scales and simulation/experimental approaches (Aly, 2016).

Crucially, studies employing experimentally validated CFD simulations have demonstrated that existing building standards, such as ASCE 7–10 and ASCE 7–16, often underestimate the wind loading of solar panels, a finding consistent with observed real-world damage from windstorms. Conversely, the most recent ASCE 7–22 edition, while including load provisions for fixed-tilt ground-mounted solar panels, has been found to greatly overestimate these loads, hindering the economic affordability of solar energy (Figures 8a, b) (Aly and Clarke, 2023; Aldoum and Stathopoulos, 2020). This inconsistency underscores the urgent need for further research and improved codification that accurately accounts for dynamic wind effects on solar tracking systems (SATs). Integrating machine learning (ML) with CFD offers a promising avenue to address these challenges, enabling rapid and accurate prediction of pressure and velocity distributions (up to 10,000 times faster without sacrificing accuracy), which can significantly enhance the design process for resilient AV systems. Optimal stow positions for SATs, such as −15° during wind events, have been identified as a strategy to reduce damage based on these advanced simulations.

Figure 8

Figure 8. (a) Understanding dynamic wind effects like vortex shedding. (b) Evaluating discrepancies in wind load estimations by existing codes (e.g., ASCE 7–10/7–16 vs. ASCE 7–22) is crucial for the robust design of solar panels (Aly and Clarke, 2023a).

4.2.2.3 The 3-s peak load approach: ensuring consistency

To enhance the consistency and reliability of peak wind load estimations for solar panel structures, the 3-second (3-s) peak load analysis method has been developed and validated (Aly, 2016). This technique involves segmenting time history data into multiple 3-s full-scale durations and computing the mean of the peak values within these segments.

A critical finding for agrivoltaic structural design is that this 3-s method yields remarkably consistent peak normal force coefficients across a wide range of model scales (1:30, 1:20, 1:10, and 1:1) for both computational (CFD) and experimental (wind tunnel) investigations. This consistency stands in stark contrast to traditional methods of calculating peak values from entire time histories, which often produce inconsistent results across different geometric scales. Figure 7b vividly illustrates this improved alignment, emphasizing the method’s reliability for robust AV structural design. The reliability of the 3-s peak method stems from its ability to align the high-frequency components of wind velocity spectra with full-scale data (Aly, 2016; Tieleman et al., 1996), representing a significant advancement toward standardizing wind load assessments for solar panels in agricultural settings.

4.2.3 Conclusion for structural resilience

In conclusion, accurately estimating wind loads on agrivoltaic systems remains a complex challenge. However, adopting advanced aerodynamic testing and simulation methodologies, along with innovative data analysis techniques such as the 3-s peak load approach, is crucial to overcoming issues with geometric scaling and turbulence representation. These advanced methods have demonstrated superior capability in replicating real-world wind conditions and capturing complex dynamic effects, providing more accurate insights than traditional approaches. The 3-s peak load method, in particular, has shown remarkable consistency across different scales and between experimental and computational methods, paving the way for more reliable design load estimations and accelerating the codification of wind loads on agrivoltaic systems. This integrated approach is essential for ensuring the structural integrity and long-term resilience of agrivoltaic installations in diverse wind environments.

Although implementing advanced assessment methods requires initial investment, this cost is justified by the significant long-term economic savings achieved by preventing catastrophic wind damage and avoiding the conservative overdesign mandated by inconsistent existing codes. Moreover, the reliability and scale consistency of methods like the large-scale open-jet testing approach ensure their broad applicability for generating accurate design loads across varying wind climates and geographical regions.

4.3 Sociopolitical and regulatory barriers

The development of agrivoltaics often encounters conflicts with local land-use policies and can face resistance from communities concerned about the conversion of agricultural land (Willockx et al., 2020; Fayette Alliance, 2024; Pascaris, 2021). Public opinion plays a significant role, as areas deemed culturally or historically important, or those used for recreational activities, show low public approval for PV development (Majumdar and Pasqualetti, 2019). Concerns about energy justice arise when rural communities perceive renewable energy projects as imposing a “rural burden” without equitable distribution of benefits (Ko, 2025; Taylor et al., 2025). Community-based energy governance, as seen in Japan, can foster energy democratization and increase local support by involving citizens in the planning and operation of AV projects (Koga et al., 2025). Fair profit sharing, community consultation, and addressing social concerns like land tenure and food security are essential for widespread adoption (Taylor et al., 2025; Bukchin-Peles and Eitan, 2025; Cotton et al., 2025). The visual impact of AV systems on the landscape can also affect public preferences (Zeddies et al., 2025; Zeddies et al., 2025). Studies show that while some designs (e.g., grassland or viticulture AV) may be more visually acceptable, large-scale open-field PV (often perceived as “solar deserts”) can face opposition. Agrivoltaics that integrate well with existing agricultural aesthetics and functionality are generally better received (Bıŕo-Varga et al., 2024).

Existing legal frameworks in the USA show no consequential conflicts regarding solar energy support and agricultural land use at the national level, but state and local governments are critical in shaping the sociopolitical context for agrivoltaics diffusion (Pascaris, 2021). State-level policies, such as Massachusetts’ SMART program, impose specific system design requirements (e.g., raised racking systems, panel spacing) and regulatory hurdles that can discourage development. Aligning laws on energy and agricultural land use is instrumental for diffusion. Robust and transparent governance frameworks are fundamental for the successful implementation and sustainability of AV projects (Anyene et al., 2025). Clear policies addressing the integration of agrivoltaics with agricultural land use and energy generation are crucial. Long-term, coherent policy strategies that align with both energy and agricultural sector goals are needed to facilitate investment and mainstream AV. The integration of stakeholder views, from farmers to policymakers, through approaches like SWOT-AHP analysis, is vital for identifying and assessing priorities among strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (Di Domenico et al., 2025).

Successfully developing and operating agrivoltaic systems requires coordination among diverse stakeholders, including farmers, researchers, solar developers, and local government authorities (Swanson, 2025). Initial challenges include regulatory barriers and implementation costs, while operational challenges involve managing diverse interests. Public–private partnerships are highlighted as beneficial for overcoming these challenges.

The increasing deployment of solar panels raises concerns about waste management and recycling at the end of their useful life. Projections suggest that solar energy waste could total 78 million tons by 2050 (Fayette Alliance, 2024). Challenges include the need for specialized labor for panel removal and the high cost of recycling compared to landfill disposal. Adequate storage and recycling facilities for solar waste are not yet fully developed, necessitating policies that ensure developers bear decommissioning costs. There is also a lack of standardized design approaches for integrating complex AV systems, particularly in multistory buildings, as well as an insufficient understanding of long-term maintenance requirements and life cycle implications (Zhang et al., 2025).

4.4 Economic barriers

One of the most significant barriers is the high initial cost of AV systems, which can be 38% or even 23.81% higher compared to traditional ground-mounted PV systems due to more complex substructures and increased height requirements (Abubakar et al., 2025; Bauknecht, 2025). To overcome this, substantial policy support, such as feed-in tariffs (FITs) specifically designed for agrivoltaics, is required. FITs guarantee renewable energy producers an above-market price for electricity, providing stable revenue streams essential for attracting investment.

5 Case studies and regional applications

Agrivoltaics research and implementation are gaining momentum globally, with notable advancements in various regions.

Japan has actively explored agrivoltaics, particularly for rice production. A case study investigated the influence of photovoltaic systems on paddy-field rice productivity, observing factors like fertilizer application, temperature, and solar radiation (Gonocruz et al., 2021). The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries (MAFF) in Japan sets specific conditions that crop yield should not fall below 80% of normal conditions. Recent policy reforms aim to relax the “temporary use” requirement for agricultural land for PV installations, potentially facilitating long-term AV projects and promoting community-based energy governance (Koga et al., 2025; Taylor et al., 2025).

The Phoenix MSA in the USA has been identified as a prime location for agrivoltaic development to meet increasing energy demand while preserving agricultural land (Majumdar and Pasqualetti, 2018). Analysis showed significant energy generation potential from private and State Trust agricultural lands, far exceeding crop production energy use. Key crops considered include alfalfa, cotton, barley, corn, and durum wheat. While a comprehensive federal legal framework for agrivoltaics is still developing in the United States, states like Massachusetts have introduced guidelines and incentive programs that define agricultural solar tariff generation units, promoting dual land use (Williams et al., 2025; Taylor et al., 2025). Research focuses on utilizing multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) and GIS to identify suitable locations for AV installations, especially in rural areas, to avoid land-use conflicts (Hauger et al., 2025).

Germany has been a leader in this area, adopting legislation in May 2021 (DIN SPEC 91434) that defines the combined land use for agriculture and PV electricity generation, explicitly prioritizing farming activities (Deutsches Institut für Normung, 2021; Trommsdorff et al., 2024; Hauger et al., 2025). This standard sets a maximum crop loss at 66% of the reference yield without PV installation, ensuring genuine dual use (Vezzoni, 2025; Dupraz, 2024). Germany’s agricultural land potential for agrivoltaics has been estimated for different scenarios, with total potential electrical capacities ranging from 193 GWp for grains to 217 TWh/year for general agriPV scenarios (Maier et al., 2024). The APV-RESOLA project in Germany has assessed the technical feasibility and designed an agrivoltaic system near Lake Constance. This design allows wide machine employment with 5 m vertical and 19 m width clearance. Crops like potato, celeriac, clover grass, and winter wheat were cultivated, showing good LERs and indicating advantages under dry and warm conditions (Trommsdorff et al., 2021).

The South Korean government has promoted agrivoltaic systems since 2017 with its “Renewable Energy 3020” plan. A multimodeling framework was developed and validated with real rice production data to estimate potential rice and energy production under agrivoltaic systems. This framework integrates environmental databases, solar energy generation, crop production, and “what-if” analysis modules (Kim et al., 2023).

France has also implemented regulations that specify requirements for agricultural yield maintenance and the ability for farmers to continue their activities (Vezzoni, 2025). Italy published comprehensive guidelines in June 2022, stipulating a maximum land area occupation ratio (LAOR) of 40%, requiring agricultural activity to continue, and a minimum of 60% energy production compared to a conventional PV system (Ministero della transizione ecologica, 2022; Di Francesco et al., 2024). Compliance with these terms is essential for accessing national recovery and resilience funds earmarked for agrivoltaics, demonstrating a strong governmental push for integrated solutions.

Agrivoltaics research spans diverse geographies and agricultural products. Scientists from Flanders (Northern Belgium) have contributed valuable research (Adomavičius et al., 2025). A study in Flanders, Belgium, found that the theoretical production potential of agrivoltaics could cover over four times Flanders’ current annual electricity demand (Reher et al., 2025). Canadian scientists have studied agrivoltaic sheep, demonstrating financial viability and higher-quality wool production. Various fruits and vegetables, including tomatoes, cucumbers, eggplants, peppers, celery, fennel, spinach, lamb’s lettuce, and green beans, have been successfully grown in agrivoltaic systems. In hot arid Western India, different options for agrivoltaic systems and suitable crops have been discussed, emphasizing the need for local adaptation and experimental testing (Santra et al., 2017). International collaboration, such as through the IEA PVPS Task 13, plays a vital role in sharing best practices and harmonizing performance indicators for bifacial PV tracking systems in AV applications (Ovaitt et al., 2024).

To provide a clearer comparative view of global AV implementation strategies, Table 1 summarizes the core technical and policy parameters discussed in this section.

Table 1

Table 1. Summary of core parameters for key global agrivoltaic case studies and regional applications.

6 Future outlook and research gaps

The rapid progress in agrivoltaics research underscores its significant potential, but further efforts are needed to ensure its sustainable and widespread adoption.

6.1 Technological advancements and integration

Future research should continue to push the boundaries of AV technology. This includes the application of artificial intelligence (AI) for dynamic control strategies that adapt to real-time solar intensity, crop needs, and market conditions, optimizing both energy generation and crop productivity (Magarelli et al., 2025; Fumey et al., 2023; Agyekum, 2024). AI can also enhance predictive modeling of microclimates and crop responses, leveraging digital twin frameworks for genomic-based optimization of agrivoltaic greenhouse systems (Zohdi, 2021).

The Internet of Things (IoT) is crucial for enhanced, high-resolution monitoring of microclimate conditions (temperature, humidity, light spectrum), soil parameters (moisture, nutrients), and plant growth (biomass, yield), facilitating data-driven decision-making and precision agriculture within AV systems (Rahman et al., 2025; Zito et al., 2024).

Continued exploration of advanced PV materials, such as perovskite and quantum dot technologies, is needed to further optimize spectral selectivity and transparency for diverse crop requirements and improve overall system efficiency (Allard, 2025; Sollazzo et al., 2025). Research on LSCs should also be expanded for their potential in spectral tuning. Further research is needed to refine spectral beam splitting technologies and to understand how diffuse light, often enhanced under PV panels, impacts plant growth and photosynthesis across various crops (Shalom et al., 2023).

6.2 Crop-specific and commercial-scale studies

Existing studies predominantly focus on a limited range of crops, such as tomatoes and leafy greens (Kashif et al., 2025; Mazzeo et al., 2025). There is a pressing need for research on a wider variety of crops, including ornamentals, herbs, berries, and flowering plants, to better understand their specific physiological responses to varying shading conditions and tailored light spectra (Magarelli et al., 2024; Ukwu et al., 2025). Furthermore, more commercial-scale integration studies are needed, particularly concerning the optimization of resource usage (water, nutrients, pesticides) and their implications for overall crop quality and long-term ecosystem health (Pandey et al., 2025b). The economic feasibility and social acceptance of AV on different farm scales and for diverse agricultural enterprises require more empirical data (Feuerbacher et al., 2022). This includes detailed studies on tropical crops, as much existing research comes from temperate regions (Randle-Boggis et al., 2025).

6.3 Refined modeling and data collection

The development of more sophisticated simulation models that accurately predict the complex interactions between PV systems, microclimates, and diverse crop responses is crucial (Mazzeo et al., 2025; Zohdi, 2021). These models should be validated with extensive field data collected from a wider range of geographical and climatic zones (Pandey et al., 2025b). There is also a need for open-source global databases of agrivoltaic facilities to facilitate data sharing and analysis among researchers and stakeholders (Hauger et al., 2025). The creation of low-cost, open-source PAR sensors could significantly enhance the monitoring capabilities required for such comprehensive data collection (Rahman et al., 2025). Additionally, future research should address the soiling rates of PV panels in agricultural environments and develop effective cleaning methods to maintain optimal energy performance (Khoja et al., 2025).

6.4 Socioeconomic and policy advancements

Future research should also delve deeper into the socioeconomic impacts of agrivoltaics, including comprehensive economic assessments that account for all costs and benefits and detailed studies on social acceptance and energy justice issues (Feuerbacher et al., 2022; Zeddies et al., 2025; Ko, 2025; Koga et al., 2025; Plumhans, 2025). Policy research should focus on developing flexible and supportive policy instruments, incentives, and legal frameworks that encourage AV adoption while safeguarding agricultural productivity and ensuring equitable benefits for local communities (Vezzoni, 2025; Williams et al., 2025). This includes exploring mechanisms for fair profit sharing and addressing local resistance to large-scale projects (Taylor et al., 2025; Bukchin-Peles and Eitan, 2025; Cotton et al., 2025). Educational campaigns and training programs are essential to increase awareness and build local expertise (Abubakar et al., 2025).

6.5 Integrated design and system resilience

Research into predictive maintenance and adaptive control systems for AV installations is needed to enhance their long-term operational resilience and efficiency (Zohdi, 2021). This includes developing methods to reuse PV modules effectively, contributing to a more circular economy in the solar industry (Nieto-Morone et al., 2025). There is also a need for standardized design approaches for integrating complex AV systems, particularly in multistory buildings. However, insufficient understanding of long-term maintenance requirements and life cycle implications still remains (Zhang et al., 2025).

The expanding academic focus on AV is clearly represented by the exponential growth in publications, with a significant increase in studies in recent years, reaching 421 papers in 2023 and 432 papers in 2024 (Di Domenico et al., 2025). This growth confirms the growing attention to combining renewable energy production and agricultural sustainability. Research themes in AV are diverse, with most studies (66.2%) focusing on energy and systems, followed by agriculture (19.6%), reflecting the foundational aim of generating renewable energy while maximizing land-use efficiency (Abubakar et al., 2025).

Ultimately, a multidisciplinary strategy that combines energy and conservation policy is essential to ensure that renewable energy contributes to a sustainable future for both climate and biodiversity (Kafumu and Ojija, 2025).

Figure 9 visually synthesizes the core research gaps and future directions highlighted in this section, emphasizing the interconnectedness of technological advancements, crop-specific studies, refined modeling, socioeconomic considerations, integrated design, and the rapid growth of agrivoltaics research. This schematic underscores the multidisciplinary approach required to drive sustainable adoption and innovation in the field.

Figure 9

Figure 9. Key thematic areas in future outlook and research gaps in agrivoltaics summarizing technological, agronomic, socioeconomic, modeling, design, and research growth perspectives.

7 Conclusion

Agrivoltaics emerges as a profoundly efficient and innovative hybrid technology, uniquely positioned to concurrently address the escalating global demands for food and energy while mitigating critical land-use conflicts and climate change impacts. This comprehensive review highlights its transformative potential, underscoring how these systems substantially optimize land productivity and significantly enhance agricultural resilience. By effectively modulating microclimates and conserving water resources, AV systems provide crucial environmental benefits. Furthermore, they offer remarkable economic advantages to farmers, diversifying income streams and fostering greater profitability, reflecting the escalating scientific interest and widespread recognition of agrivoltaics as a multifaceted and sustainable solution, evidenced by the rapid growth in research publications in recent years. The review demonstrates impressive dual benefits across diverse applications, including substantial increases in yields for many shade-tolerant crops and compelling large-scale energy generation potential across continents. Advanced photovoltaic technologies, including bifacial modules and emerging semitransparent and wavelength-selective solar cells, are continuously enhancing both energy output, sometimes boosting efficiency by up to 22%, and the precise control of light spectra essential for photosynthesis. Environmentally, these systems contribute to carbon mitigation, with an estimated annual reduction of approximately 4 million metric tons of CO₂ emissions in regions like the Mediterranean, and significantly enhance biodiversity by tripling pollinator supply in some contexts.

Despite these compelling advantages, the widespread adoption of agrivoltaics faces considerable hurdles. Initial capital costs remain a significant barrier compared to traditional PV systems. Technical complexities include optimizing shading rates and managing the trade-off between energy and agricultural yield, alongside the need for improved solutions for PV module soiling. Furthermore, critical challenges exist in establishing robust waste management and recycling frameworks for solar panels as the volume of decommissioned components rises rapidly. Sociopolitical and regulatory issues, such as land-use conflicts, public acceptance, and the current lack of comprehensive and consistent codified standards for evaluating wind loads—where existing standards can either significantly underestimate or overestimate loads by hundreds of percent—also impede progress.

AV systems face substantial structural engineering challenges, particularly concerning their resilience to high-intensity wind loads. Inconsistencies in existing building standards lead to either dangerous underestimation or economically prohibitive overestimation of loads, posing risks to both resilience and affordability. Traditional wind tunnel testing, while foundational, possesses significant limitations in replicating the complex and large-scale turbulence characteristics of real-world atmospheric boundary layer flows, frequently leading to a substantial underestimation of peak pressures due to difficulties in replicating real-world atmospheric turbulence. To overcome these analytical shortcomings and better capture dynamic wind effects like torsional galloping, advanced methodologies such as open-jet testing and sophisticated CFD simulations are essential. These advanced techniques enable the generation of more realistic atmospheric turbulence and allow for accurate prediction of peak wind loads, offering crucial insights for robust structural design. Furthermore, the 3-s peak load analysis method has demonstrated crucial consistency across different scales and investigation methods, establishing a reliable basis for standardized, codified structural design of AV systems. The integration of ML with CFD further promises to accelerate the design process by enabling rapid and accurate predictions of pressure and velocity distributions. These advanced methodologies intend to ensure structural resilience and long-term economic viability. The primary cost justification is that accurate assessment prevents costly structural failures observed in real-world windstorms and avoids the economic burden caused by the significant load overestimation found in standards, which hinders affordability. By enabling lighter, safer, and more economical designs, the advanced assessment offsets initial costs over the system’s life cycle.

The current research landscape, with over two-thirds of studies focusing on energy systems and only one-fifth on agriculture, underscores a need for more balanced investigation into agronomic responses. To fully realize the transformative potential of agrivoltaics, concerted interdisciplinary research and policy innovation are paramount. Future efforts must integrate advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things for dynamic control, real-time monitoring, and predictive modeling, including the development of digital twin frameworks for genomic-based optimization. This requires expanding the development of refined modeling tools and establishing comprehensive, open-source data repositories across diverse geographical and climatic zones. Crucially, there is a pressing need for extensive, crop-specific studies on a wider variety of agricultural products, coupled with commercial-scale integration studies that optimize resource usage beyond water, encompassing nutrients and pest management. Policy advancements must focus on developing flexible, supportive incentives and clear legal frameworks that encourage adoption while safeguarding agricultural productivity, ensuring equitable benefits for local communities, and establishing robust end-of-life management strategies for PV components. By fostering collaboration among diverse stakeholders and implementing tailored, holistic approaches, agrivoltaics can play a pivotal role in establishing more resilient, sustainable, and economically viable agricultural and energy sectors globally.

Author contributions

AA: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This research was supported by the Institute for Energy Innovation through the Research for Energy Innovation 2024-II (Phase II) program.

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The author AA declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Author disclaimer

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the supporting institutions.

References

Abubakar S. I., See C. H., Sukki F. M., Mahendiran R., Sundaram S., Abidin M. I. Z., et al. (2025). Deploying Agrivoltaics in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Sustainable Pathway Towards Energy-Food Security-Challenges and Opportunities: A Review. IEEE Access 13, 87810–87833. doi: 10.1109/access.2025.3568717

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Adeh E., Selker J., and Higgins C. (2018). Remarkable agrivoltaic influence on soil moisture, micrometeorology and water-use efficiency. PloS One 13, e0203256. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203256

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Agyekum E. B. (2024). A comprehensive review of two decades of research on agrivoltaics, a promising new method for electricity and food production. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments 72, 104055. doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2024.104055

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Anyene C. C., Udorah D. O., Nsofor P. S., and Nwakuba N. R. (2025). Prospects of Agrivoltaics as a Sustainable Mitigation Solution to the Nomadic Cattle Rearing Crisis in Nigeria: A Review. Agricultural Science and Food Processing 2 (4), 148–172. doi: 10.62762/ASFP.2025.763200

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Aldoum M. and Stathopoulos T. (2020). Wind loads on low-slope roofs of buildings with large plan dimensions. Eng. Structures 225, 111298. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111298

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Allard C. (2025). Semi-transparent perovskites promote radicchio growth. Nat. Rev. Materials 10, 250. doi: 10.1038/s41578-025-00796-0

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Aly A. M. (2016). On the evaluation of wind loads on solar panels: The scale issue. Solar Energy 135, 423–434. doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2016.06.018

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Aly A. M. (2023). Breaking boundaries in wind engineering: LSU WISE open-jet facility revolutionizes solar panel and building design. Appl. Sci. 13, 12546. doi: 10.3390/app132312546

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Aly A. M. and Bitsuamlak G. (2013). Aerodynamics of ground-mounted solar panels: test model scale effects. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 123, 250–260. doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2013.07.007

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Aly A. M. and Clarke J. (2023). Wind design of solar panels for resilient and green communities: CFD with machine learning. Sustain. Cities Soc. 94, 104529. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2023.104529

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Aly A. M. and Khaled M. F. (2024). Open-jet testing: investigating turbulence and geometric scale effects on surface pressures in the atmospheric boundary layer. Phys. Fluids 36, 085139. doi: 10.1063/5.0231093

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Aly A. M. and Whipple J. (2021). Wind forces on ground-mounted photovoltaic solar systems: A comparative study. Appl. Solar Energy 57, 444–471. doi: 10.3103/S0003701X21050030

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Asa’a S., Reher T., Rongé J., Diels J., Poortmans J., Radhakrishnan H., et al. (2024). A multidisciplinary view on agrivoltaics: Future of energy and agriculture. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 200, 114515. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114515

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Barron-Gafford G., Pavao-Zuckerman M., Minor R., Sutter L., Barnett-Moreno I., Blackett D., et al. (2019). Agrivoltaics provide mutual benefits across the food–energy–water nexus in drylands. Nat. Sustainability 2, 848–855. doi: 10.1038/s41893-019-0364-5

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bauknecht M. (2025). Electricity market design for 100% renewable energy in Germany - challenges and solutions. In E3S Web Conferences 636, 3003. doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/202563603003

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bíro-Varga K., Sirnik I., and Stremke S. (2024). Landscape user experiences of interspace and overhead agrivoltaics: A comparative analysis of two novel types of solar landscapes in the Netherlands. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 109, 103408. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2023.103408

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bukchin-Peles S. and Eitan A. (2025). A survey of farmers’ perceptions and considerations for adopting agrivoltaics in Israel. Agric. Syst. 230, 104453. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2025.104453

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chopdar R., Sengar N., Giri N., and Halliday D. (2024). Comprehensive review on agrivoltaics with technical, environmental and societal insights. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 197, 114416. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114416

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Cotton M., Langford S., Kuria A., and Parkhill K. (2025). A technology to solve the water-energy-food crisis? Mapping sociotechnical configurations of agrivoltaics using Q-methodology. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 119, 103872. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2024.103872

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Cuppari R., Higgins C., and Characklis G. (2021). Agrivoltaics and weather risk: A diversification strategy for landowners. Appl. Energy 291, 116809. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.116809

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Deboutte G. (2023). Eggplants grow 50% more under solar panels. PV Magazine. https://www.pv-magazine.com/2023/01/25/eggplants-grow-50-more-under-solar-panels/ (Accessed December 10, 2025).

Google Scholar

Deboutte G. (2024). Agrivoltaics can increase grape yield by up to 60%. PV Magazine. https://www.pv-magazine.com/2024/11/29/agrivoltaics-can-increase-grape-yield-by-up-to-60/ (Accessed December 10, 2025).

Google Scholar

Deutsches Institut für Normung (2021). Din spec 91434, “agri-photovoltaik-anlagen - anforderungen an die landwirtschaftliche hauptnutzung”. Available online at: https://www.din.de/de/wdc-beuth:din21:337886742.

Google Scholar

Di Domenico G., Colantoni A., Bianchini L., Cecchini M., Gallucci F., and Di Stefano V. (2025). Agrivoltaics systems potentials in Italy: State of the art and swot–ahp analysis. Sustainability 17, 925. doi: 10.3390/su17030925

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Di Francesco A., Fabiani G., Rossi G., Ferrari M., Tilli F., and Castrucci G. (2024). Italian guidelines for agrivoltaic systems: A critical analysis of regulations and the first technical insights for future implementations. Sustainability 16, 804. doi: 10.3390/su16020804

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dinesh H. and Pearce J. (2016). The potential of agrivoltaic systems. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 54, 299–308. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.024

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Adomavičius V., Simkonienė G., and Dedenok A. (2025). Review of the latest achievements in agrivoltaics. In Engineering for Rural Development: 24th International Scientific Conference Proceedings, Jelgava, Latvia, May 21-23. Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies. pp. 919–925. doi: 10.22616/ERDev.2025.24.TF190

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dupraz C. (2024). Assessment of the ground coverage ratio of agrivoltaic systems as a proxy for potential crop productivity. Agroforest Syst. 98, 2679–2696. doi: 10.1007/s10457-023-00906-3

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dupraz C., Marrou H., Talbot G., Dufour L., Nogier A., and Ferard Y. (2011). Combining solar photovoltaic panels and food crops for optimising land use: Towards new agrivoltaic schemes. Renewable Energy 36, 2725–2732. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2011.03.005

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Fayette Alliance (2024). Solar energy systems: Statement on PLN-ZOTA-24-00003. Letter to Chair Forester and Members of the Planning Commission, Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, August 15.. https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Solar-Energy-Systems.pdf.

Google Scholar

Feuerbacher A., Herrmann T., Neuenfeldt S., Laub M., and Gocht A. (2022). Estimating the economics and adoption potential of agrivoltaics in Germany using a farm-level bottom-up approach. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 168, 112784. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112784

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Fumey D., Lopez G., Persello S., Juillion P., Hitte V., Elamri Y., et al. (2023). Dynamic agrivoltaics, climate protection for grapevine driven by artificial intelligence. In 22nd GiESCO International Meeting Proceedings, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA. Available online at: https://ives-openscience.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Session-13_Fumey_Dynamic-agrivoltaics.pdf.

Google Scholar

Garrod A., Hussain S. N., and Ghosh A. (2024b). The technical and economic potential for crop based agrivoltaics in the United Kingdom. Solar Energy 277, 112744. doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2024.112744

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Goetzberger A. and Zastrow A. (1982). On the coexistence of solar-energy conversion and plant cultivation. Int. J. Solar Energy 1, 55–69. doi: 10.1080/01425918208909875

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gomez-Casanovas N., Mwebaze P., Khanna M., Branham B., Time A., DeLucia E., et al. (2023). Knowns, uncertainties, and challenges in agrivoltaics to sustainably intensify energy and food production. Cell Rep. Phys. Sci. 4, 101518. doi: 10.1016/j.xcrp.2023.101518

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gonocruz R. A., Nakamura R., Yoshino K., Homma M., Doi T., Yoshida Y., et al. (2021). Analysis of the rice yield under an agrivoltaic system: A case study in Japan. Environments 8, 65. doi: 10.3390/environments8070065

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hauger S., Lieb V., and Glaser R. (2025). Spatial potential analysis and site selection for agrivoltaics in Germany. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 213, 115469. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2025.115469

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hermelink M. I., Maestrini B., and de Ruijter F. J. (2024). Berry shade tolerance for agrivoltaics systems: A meta-analysis. Scientia Horticulturae 330, 113062. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2024.113062

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zeddies H. H., Christoph P. M., and Matin Q. (2025). Agrivoltaics increases public acceptance of solar energy production on agricultural land. Land Use Policy 156, 107604. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107604

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Irtaza H. and Agarwal A. (2018). CFD simulation of turbulent wind effect on an array of ground mounted solar PV panels. J. Institution Engineers (India): Ser. A 99, 205–218. doi: 10.1007/s40030-018-0283-x

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Jamil U., Hickey T., and Pearce J. M. (2024). Solar energy modelling and proposed crops for different types of agrivoltaics systems. Energy 304, 132074. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.132074

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Jamil U. and Pearce J. M. (2025). Regenerative agrivoltaics: integrating photovoltaics and regenerative agriculture for sustainable food and energy systems. Sustainability 17, 4799. doi: 10.3390/su17114799

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kafumu D. W. and Ojija F. (2025). Biodiversity and renewable energy in a warming world: Pathway to mitigate climate change while preserving ecosystem. Sustain. Soc. Dev. 3, 3228. doi: 10.54517/ssd3228

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kashif M., Thakur A. K., Ahsan T. A., Islam M. S., Hossain M. I., Qarony W., et al. (2025). Food-energy-water nexus with agrivoltaics integration in greenhouses for sustainable food production: A review. Energy Nexus 19, 100469. doi: 10.1016/j.nexus.2025.100469

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Khoja I.-U.-R., Saand A. S., Jamali M. I., Koondhar M. A., Albasha L., Aoudia M., et al. (2025). A comparative review: floating photovoltaic, agrivoltaics, and ground-mounted PV systems. IEEE Access 12, 30335–30353. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3547438

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kim S., Kim S., and An K. (2023). An integrated multi-modeling framework to estimate potential rice and energy production under an agrivoltaic system. Comput. Electron. Agric. 213, 108157. doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2023.108157

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ko I. (2025). “Rural exploitation” in solar energy development? A field survey experiment in South Korea on solar energy support in rural areas. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 119, 103837. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2024.103837

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Koga H., Bouzarovski S., and Petrova S. (2025). Energy democratisation through agrivoltaics? The territorialisation dynamics of community-based energy governance in Japan. Sustainability Sci. 20, 1257–1275. doi: 10.1007/s11625-025-01634-6

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Krasner N., Fox J., Armstrong A., Ave K., Carvalho F., Li Y., et al. (2025). Impacts of photovoltaic solar energy on soil carbon: A global systematic review and framework. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 208, 115032. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.115032

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kumdokrub T. and You F. (2025). Techno-economic and environmental optimization of agrivoltaics: A case study of Cornell University. Appl. Energy 384, 125436. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2025.125436

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Li T. and Yang Q. (2015). Advantages of diffuse light for horticultural production and perspectives for further research. Front. Plant Sci. 6. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00704

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ludzuweit A., Paterson J., Wydra K., Pump C., Müller K., and Miller Y. (2025). Enhancing ecosystem services and biodiversity in agrivoltaics through habitat-enhancing strategies. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 212, 115380. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2025.115380

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Magarelli A., Mazzeo A., and Ferrara G. (2025). Exploring the grape agrivoltaic system: climate modulation and vine benefits in the Puglia Region, Southeastern Italy. Horticulturae 11 (2), 160. doi: 10.3390/horticulturae11020160

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Magarelli A., Mazzeo A., and Ferrara G. (2024). Fruit crop species with agrivoltaic systems: A critical review. Agronomy 14, 722. doi: 10.3390/agronomy14040722

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Maier R., Lütz L., Risch S., Kullmann F., Weinand J., and Stolten D. (2024). Potential of floating, parking, and agri photovoltaics in Germany. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 200, 114500. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114500

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Maity R., Kumarasamy S., and Razak A. A. (2025). Solar agrivoltaics design: Critical factors and key considerations. Malaysian J. Sustain. Agric. (MJSA) 1, 16–20. https://myjsustainagri.com/archives/1mjsa2025/1mjsa2025-16-20.pdf

Google Scholar

Majumdar D. and Pasqualetti M. J. (2018). Dual use of agricultural land: Introducing ‘agrivoltaics’ in phoenix metropolitan statistical area, USA. Landscape Urban Plann. 170, 150–168. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.10.011

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Majumdar D. and Pasqualetti M. J. (2019). Analysis of land availability for utility-scale power plants and assessment of solar photovoltaic development in the state of Arizona, USA. Renewable Energy 134, 1213–1231. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2018.08.064

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Marrou H., Guilioni L., Dufour L., Dupraz C., and Wery J. (2013). Microclimate under agrivoltaic systems: is crop growth rate affected in the partial shade of solar panels? Agric. For. Meteorology 177, 117–132. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.04.012

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mazzeo D., Di Zio A., Pesenti C., and Leva S. (2025). Optimizing agrivoltaic systems: A comprehensive analysis of design, crop productivity and energy performance in open-field configurations. Appl. Energy 390, 125750. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2025.125750

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ministero della transizione ecologica (2022). Impianti agri-voltaici: Pubblicate le linee guida. Available online at: https://www.mase.gov.it/notizie/impianti-agri-voltaici-pubblicate-le-linee-guida.

Google Scholar

Miskin C., Toney M., Lee S., Loik M., Yan L., Chen S., et al. (2019). Sustainable co-production of food and solar power to relax land-use constraints. Nat. Sustainability 2, 972–980. doi: 10.1038/s41893-019-0388-x

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mouhib E., Fernández-Solas Á., Pérez-Higueras P. J., Fernández-Ocaña A. M., Micheli L., Almonacid F., et al. (2024). Enhancing land use: Integrating bifacial PV and olive trees in agrivoltaic systems. Appl. Energy 359, 122660. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.122660

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nieto-Morone M.-B., Muñoz-García M.-Á., Pérez López D., Bernal-Basurco C., García Rosillo F., and Alonso-García M. (2025). Agrivoltaics: integration of reused PV modules. Agronomy 15, 730. doi: 10.3390/agronomy15030730

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ovaitt S., Kinzer A., Boyd M., Jones J., Deline C., and Macknick J. (2024). “Viewfactor and raytracing for agriPV modeling.,” in Tech. Rep. NREL/PR-5K00-86631 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO (United States).

Google Scholar

Pandey G., Lyden S., Franklin E., and Harrison M. T. (2025a). Agrivoltaics as an SDG enabler: trade-offs and co-benefits for food security, energy generation and emissions mitigation. Resour. Environ. Sustainability 19, 100186. doi: 10.1016/j.resenv.2024.100186

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Pandey G., Lyden S., Franklin E., Millar B., and Harrison M. T. (2025b). A systematic review of agrivoltaics: productivity, profitability, and environmental co-benefits. Sustain. Production Consumption 56, 13–36. doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2025.03.006

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Pascaris A. S. (2021). Examining existing policy to inform a comprehensive legal framework for agrivoltaics in the U.S. Energy Policy 159, 112620. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112620

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Plumhans L.-A. (2025). Nothing sweet about agrivoltaics? Discussions on the territorial adequacy of agrivoltaics in Reunion Island. Sustainability Sci. 20, 1277–1291. doi: 10.1007/s11625-025-01668-w

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Poonia S., Jat N., Santra P., Singh A., Jain D., and Meena H. (2022). Techno-economic evaluation of different agri-voltaic designs for the hot arid ecosystem India. Renewable Energy 184, 149–163. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.11.074

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Pringle A. M., Handler R., and Pearce J. (2017). Aquavoltaics: Synergies for dual use of water area for solar photovoltaic electricity generation and aquaculture. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 80, 572–584. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.191

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rahman M. M., Jamil U., and Pearce J. M. (2025). Open-source photosynthetically active radiation sensor for enhanced agricultural and agrivoltaics monitoring. Electronics 14, 2225. doi: 10.3390/electronics14112225

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Randle-Boggis R., Barron-Gafford G., Kimaro A., Lamanna C., Macharia C., Maro J., et al. (2025). Harvesting the sun twice: Energy, food and water benefits from agrivoltaics in East Africa. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 208, 115066. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.115066

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Reher T., Lavaert C., Ottoy S., Martens J. A., Van Orshoven J., Cappelle J., et al. (2025). Room for renewables: A GIS-based agrivoltaics site suitability analysis in urbanized landscapes. Agric. Syst. 224, 104266. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2025.104266

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Riaz M., Imran H., Alam H., Alam M., and Butt N. (2022). Crop-specific optimization of bifacial PV arrays for agrivoltaic food-energy production: The light-productivity-factor approach. IEEE J. Photovoltaics 12, 572–580. doi: 10.1109/JPHOTOV.2021.3136158

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Rohr C., Bourke P. A., and Banks D. (2015). Torsional instability of single-axis solar tracking systems. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Wind Engineering, Porto Alegre, Brazil. Corpus ID: 54039606. pp. 21–26. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:54039606

Google Scholar

Santra P., Pande P. C., Kumar S., Mishra D., and Singh R.. (2017). Agri-voltaics or solar farming: The concept of integrating solar PV based electricity generation and crop production in a single land use system. International Journal of Renewable Energy Research 7 (2), 694–700. doi: 10.20508/ijrer.v7i2.5582.g7049

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Scarano A., Curci L., Semeraro T., Calisi A., Lenucci M., Santino A., et al. (2025). Agrivoltaics as a sustainable strategy to enhance food security under water scarcity. Horticulturae 11, 401. doi: 10.3390/horticulturae11040401

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Schindele S., Trommsdorff M., Schlaak A., Obergfell T., Bopp G., Reise C., et al. (2020). Implementation of agrophotovoltaics: Techno-economic analysis of the price-performance ratio and its policy implications. Appl. Energy 265, 114737. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114737

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Shalom B., Mittelman G., Kribus A., and Vitoshkin H. (2023). Optical and electrical performance of an agrivoltaic field with spectral beam splitting. Renewable Energy 219, 119438. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.119438

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sharpe K., Heins B., Buchanan E., and Reese M. (2021). Evaluation of solar photovoltaic systems to shade cows in a pasture-based dairy herd. J. Dairy Sci. 104, 2794–2806. doi: 10.3168/jds.2020-18821

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Shukla A., Kumar M., and Shukla A. (2022). A review of agri-voltaic system in India: Opportunities and constraints. Int. J. Environ. Climate Change 12, 1134–1142. doi: 10.9734/ijecc/2022/v12i1030909

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Singh S. (2021). Energy crisis and climate change: Global concerns and their solutions. In Singh P., Singh S., Kumar G., and Baweja P. (Eds.), Energy: Crises, challenges and solutions. Wiley, Ch. 1, pp. 1–17. doi: 10.1002/9781119741503.ch1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sollazzo L., Mangherini G., Diolaiti V., and Vincenzi D. (2025). A comprehensive review of agrivoltaics: multifaceted developments and the potential of luminescent solar concentrators and semi-transparent photovoltaics. Sustainability 17, 2206. doi: 10.3390/su17052206

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Stallknecht E. J., Herrera C. K., Yang C., King I., Sharkey T. D., Lunt R. R., et al. (2023). Designing plant–transparent agrivoltaics. Sci. Rep. 13, 1903. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-28484-5

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Stathopoulos T., Zisis I., and Xypnitou E. (2012). “Wind loads on solar collectors: a review,” in Proceedings of structures congress 2012(Chicago, Illinois), 1169–1179.

Google Scholar

Swanson T. (2025). Beyond solar farms: A case study of the motivations, challenges, and benefits associated with developing agrivoltaics at Jack’s Solar Garden. Master's thesis, University of Arizona.

Google Scholar

Taylor M., McDonnell N., Davies P., and Trück S. (2025). Scaling agrivoltaics: planning, legal, and market pathways to readiness. Sustainability Sci. 20, 1237–1256. doi: 10.1007/s11625-025-01668-w

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Tieleman H., Surry D., and Mehta K. (1996). Full/model scale comparison of surface pressured on the Texas Tech experimental building. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodynamics 61, 1–23. doi: 10.1016/0167-6105(96)00042-6

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Time A., Gomez-Casanovas N., Mwebaze P., et al. (2024). Conservation agrivoltaics for sustainable food-energy production. Plants People Planet 6 (3), 558–569. doi: 10.1002/ppp3.10481

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Towner E., Karas T., Janski J., Macknick J., and Ravi S. (2022). Managed sheep grazing can improve soil quality and carbon sequestration at solar photovoltaic sites. Authorea. doi: 10.1002/essoar.10510141.1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Trommsdorff M., Dhal I. S., Özdemir Ö. E., Ketzer D., Weinberger N., and Rösch C. (2022). Agrivoltaics: Solar power generation and food production. In Solar energy advancements in agriculture and food production systems Elsevier, pp. 159–210. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-89866-9.00012-2

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Trommsdorff M., Dhal I., Özdemir Ö., Ketzer D., Weinberger N., and Rösch C. (2024). Agrivoltaics: opportunities for agriculture and the energy transition. a guideline for Germany. (3rd ed.). Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE. https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/ise/en/documents/publications/studies/APV-Guideline.pdf.

Google Scholar

Trommsdorff M., Kang J., Reise C., Schindele S., Bopp G., Ehmann A., et al. (2021). Combining food and energy production: design of an agrivoltaic system applied in arable and vegetable farming in Germany. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 140, 110694. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110694

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Turnley J., Grant A., Schull V., Cammarano D., Sesmero J., and Agrawal R. (2024). The viability of photovoltaics on agricultural land: Can PV solve the food vs fuel debate? J. Cleaner Production 469, 143191. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.143191

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ukwu U. N., Muller O., Meier-Grüll M., and Uguru M. I. (2025). Agrivoltaics shading enhanced the microclimate, photosynthesis, growth and yields of vigna radiata genotypes in tropical Nigeria. Sci. Rep. 15, 1190. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-84216-3

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Valentín D., Valero C., Egusquiza M., and Presas A. (2022). Failure investigation of a solar tracker due to wind-induced torsional galloping. Eng. Fail Anal. 135, 106137. doi: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2022.106137

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Vaziri Rad M., Kasaeian A., Niu X., Zhang K., and Mahian O. (2023). Excess electricity problem in off-grid hybrid renewable energy systems: a comprehensive review from challenges to prevalent solutions. Renewable Energy 212, 538–560. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.05.073

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Vezzoni R. (2025). Farming the sun: the political economy of agrivoltaics in the European Union. Sustainability Sci. 20, 1257–1276. doi: 10.1007/s11625-024-01601-7

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Walston L., Barley T., Bhandari I., Campbell B., McCall J., Hartmann H., et al. (2022). Opportunities for agrivoltaic systems to achieve synergistic food-energy-environmental needs and address sustainability goals. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 6. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2022.932018

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Walston L., Li Y., Hartmann H., Macknick J., Hanson A., Nootenboom C., et al. (2021). Modeling the ecosystem services of native vegetation management practices at solar energy facilities in the Midwestern United States. Ecosystem Serv. 47, 101227. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101227

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Weselek A., Bauerle A., Hartung J., Zikeli S., Lewandowski I., and Högy P. (2021). Agrivoltaic system impacts on microclimate and yield of different crops within an organic crop rotation in a temperate climate. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 41, 59. doi: 10.1007/s13593-021-00714-y

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Widmer J., Christ B., Grenz J., and Norgrove L. (2024). Agrivoltaics, a promising new tool for electricity and food production: A systematic review. Renewable Sustain. Energy Rev. 192, 114277. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2023.114277

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Williams H., Hashad K., Wang H., and Zhang K. (2023). The potential for agrivoltaics to enhance solar farm cooling. Appl. Energy 332, 120478. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.120478

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Williams H., Wang Y., Yuan B., Wang H., and Zhang K. (2025). Rethinking agrivoltaic incentive programs: A science-based approach to encourage practical design solutions. Appl. Energy 377, 124272. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124272

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Willockx B., Reher T., Lavaert C., Herteleer B., Van de Poel B., and Cappelle J. (2024). Design and evaluation of an agrivoltaic system for a pear orchard. Applied Energy 353 (Part B), 122166. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.122166

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Willockx B., Uytterhaegen B., Ronsijn B., Herteleer B., and Cappelle J. (2020). A standardized classification and performance indicators of agrivoltaic systems. In Proceedings of the 37th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition (EUPVSEC 2020), 1995–1998. doi: 10.4229/EUPVSEC20202020-6CV.2.47

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zeddies H., Parlasca M., and Qaim M. (2025). Agrivoltaics increases public acceptance of solar energy production on agricultural land. Land Use Policy 156, 107604. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107604

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhang Y., Chen T., Gasparri E., and Lucchi E. (2025). A modular agrivoltaics building envelope integrating thin-film photovoltaics and hydroponic urban farming systems: A circular design approach with the multi-objective optimization of energy, light, water and structure. Sustainability 17, 666. doi: 10.3390/su17020666

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zito F., Giannoccaro N., Serio R., and Strazzella S. (2024). Analysis and development of an IoT system for an agrivoltaics plant. Technologies 12 (7), 106. doi: 10.3390/technologies12070106

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zohdi T. I. (2021). A digital-twin and machine-learning framework for the design of multi-objective agrophotovoltaic solar farms. Comput. Mech. 68, 357–370. doi: 10.1007/s00466-021-02035-z

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar