18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Landowner decisions regarding utility-scale solar energy on working lands: a qualitative case study in California

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Mitigating the predicted impacts of climate change requires rapid expansion of renewable energy production, including Utility-Scale Solar Energy (USSE) on an unprecedented scale. In the US, a significant share of planned USSE targets working lands—particularly farms and ranches—yet the decision factors informing private landowners’ decisions to host USSE on their lands are little understood. Our research addresses this gap through a qualitative case study of working lands in California’s San Joaquin Valley and San Francisco Bay Area, based on 60 interviews with farmers and ranchers, solar developers, and community and government organizations. Applying land system science and agricultural decision-making theory, we find that landowner decisions to host USSE are based on profit-maximization, water availability, visual and ecological landscape values, and agricultural land preservation ethic. Solar interest varies across landowner types, with farmers typically maximizing operational income while maintaining agricultural production, and ranchers often prioritizing lifestyle-related landscape benefits. The current feasibility of integrating solar with agriculture appears to be low beyond sheep grazing, with benefits and drawbacks discussed in detail. Optimal areas for future USSE development include farmlands with declining water availability, lands without permanent crops or high amenity value, and regions with energy-intensive agricultural operations. Study findings can inform state land use planning and community engagement by solar developers.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic

          The kappa statistic is frequently used to test interrater reliability. The importance of rater reliability lies in the fact that it represents the extent to which the data collected in the study are correct representations of the variables measured. Measurement of the extent to which data collectors (raters) assign the same score to the same variable is called interrater reliability. While there have been a variety of methods to measure interrater reliability, traditionally it was measured as percent agreement, calculated as the number of agreement scores divided by the total number of scores. In 1960, Jacob Cohen critiqued use of percent agreement due to its inability to account for chance agreement. He introduced the Cohen’s kappa, developed to account for the possibility that raters actually guess on at least some variables due to uncertainty. Like most correlation statistics, the kappa can range from −1 to +1. While the kappa is one of the most commonly used statistics to test interrater reliability, it has limitations. Judgments about what level of kappa should be acceptable for health research are questioned. Cohen’s suggested interpretation may be too lenient for health related studies because it implies that a score as low as 0.41 might be acceptable. Kappa and percent agreement are compared, and levels for both kappa and percent agreement that should be demanded in healthcare studies are suggested.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities.

            Conservationists are far from able to assist all species under threat, if only for lack of funding. This places a premium on priorities: how can we support the most species at the least cost? One way is to identify 'biodiversity hotspots' where exceptional concentrations of endemic species are undergoing exceptional loss of habitat. As many as 44% of all species of vascular plants and 35% of all species in four vertebrate groups are confined to 25 hotspots comprising only 1.4% of the land surface of the Earth. This opens the way for a 'silver bullet' strategy on the part of conservation planners, focusing on these hotspots in proportion to their share of the world's species at risk.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Book: not found

              Climate Change 2021 – The Physical Science Basis : Working Group I Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

              The Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) provides a comprehensive assessment of the physical science basis of climate change. It considers in situ and remote observations; paleoclimate information; understanding of climate drivers and physical, chemical, and biological processes and feedbacks; global and regional climate modelling; advances in methods of analyses; and insights from climate services. It assesses the current state of the climate; human influence on climate in all regions; future climate change including sea level rise; global warming effects including extremes; climate information for risk assessment and regional adaptation; limiting climate change by reaching net zero carbon dioxide emissions and reducing other greenhouse gas emissions; and benefits for air quality. The report serves policymakers, decision makers, stakeholders, and all interested parties with the latest policy-relevant information on climate change. Available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Environmental Research Communications
                Environ. Res. Commun.
                IOP Publishing
                2515-7620
                May 25 2022
                May 01 2022
                May 25 2022
                May 01 2022
                : 4
                : 5
                : 055010
                Article
                10.1088/2515-7620/ac6fbf
                e9f8339a-69e7-4d6f-a69e-1b268026a3c2
                © 2022

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article