*3.2. Market (Un)certainty and Observability of Benefits*

When considering barriers to farmer adoption of agrivoltaics, economic concerns were raised by participants only second to concerns described above regarding long-term planning for technical considerations. At a basic level, farming is a business, and is thus accompanied by a set of risks, uncertainties and investments. Participants explained that risk is especially unwelcome in the business of farming and that certainty in productivity and security in investment are vital. One participant articulated that the market unknowns are potentially more critical than the technical unknowns of agrivoltaics:

*There's a lot of unknowns for the producer in this as well. Having established markets, alleviating some of the unknowns and the risks are probably as much of a piece of this as anything. So, sketching out the long-term financial return of like, "Here's what these markets look like for livestock production." And what the guaranteed revenue is for solar panels, for instance. In terms of just making it happen out there in the field, there's some requirements to make that happen, but they aren't insurmountable, I wouldn't imagine.*

Others stressed the need for a secure market for an agrivoltaic system to be successful:

*You would probably want to package it more as, "Do we have a food and farm system in place that allows somebody to have solar and grow these crops that are tolerant to that condition?" And then importantly, "Do we have a market to send that stu*ff *to?" Because then all of a sudden it becomes this closed loop, kind of circular economy feel to it. But without that end market side of it, I think people would say, "That's great if you want to grow that stu*ff*."*

*As long as the market is there, I would think a lot of these things could work.*

As business owners, considerations of financial return and security in the marketplace are at the forefront of decision-making for farmers. For the majority of participants, the agrivoltaic innovation is unfamiliar and imposes constraints on business planning borne of unknowns and uncertainties. Building flexibility into the system to accommodate for changes in market conditions and farming practice could potentially alleviate some of the concern of uncertainty, as explained:

*If we're looking at a 25-year kind of investment with the solar panels and when you're talking about integrating them within the livestock species too, that market for livestock might look totally di*ff*erent within 10 years. So, implementing some flexibility there that if we're not going to run rabbits, maybe we're running something else in there in 20 years. But having some flexibility in the system that you could respond to the livestock markets in there as well, I think is important.*

Flexibility and adaptation to changing market conditions emerged as key elements to be incorporated into planning for an agrivoltaic system, highlighting again the temporal component to farmer decision-making and identifying concerns to be addressed for successful adoption. While the future unknowns of market acceptance of a product are difficult to ascertain, participants suggested that integrating flexibility into system design would reduce financial unease.

Coupled with concerns of a stable and reliable market for their product, were expectations for just compensation and tangible benefits from participation in an agrivoltaic project. When considering the adoption of the agrivoltaic innovation, participants also questioned if such an endeavor would be justified in terms of monetary gains. Participants perceived the adoption of such technology as an increased labor commitment and thus expected to reasonably gain from it. When asked if they would engage in an agrivoltaic project, one participant answered:

*Essentially, they would have to pay me if they wanted me to be there because it's so much work to remediate soil and bring it up to a productive level, especially if this has been formally row cropped conventionally. So, it would really depend on what it had been earlier, how much I trusted the people who were starting this operation, and how much I felt that there would be ease of incorporating it into my schedule. I also think that it's not free pasture, you know what I mean? Even if they didn't charge me a single thing, there would be a lot of investment. So, I'd be going for like- I don't even know-I almost want to see like co-ownership, we own this land together, you get the profits from the solar and I get whatever everything else is. Or putting the solar panels on my own farm and then I get the revenue from the solar panels.*

When judging the adoption of agrivoltaic innovation, participants expressed critical valuations of its worth and asserted that observable and substantial benefits would have to be derived in order for them to commit. Of the 10 farmers interviewed, four were already engaging with the technology and five others said they would get involved if they would derive more benefit than cost from it. Thus, the vast majority (nine of 10) of the farmers interviewed were open to using or already using agrivoltaics. Improving the agrivoltaic innovation to increase diffusion to these interested farmers will require establishment of just compensation for farmers, as explained by two solar grazers:

*The biggest misconception to clear up immediately when people start thinking about this is that it can be anything like free grass. Because there's so much commitment on my end, and the cost of setting up all that equipment is very high. The time and labor of going there and servicing the sheep is a big commitment.*

*I'm really trying to get out of is the idea that the farmer should be doing all this work for free. The solar firms are making—maybe not tons of money—but reasonable amounts of money o*ff *these investments. For them, they need to know that the performance guarantee is there, the sun has to shine on their panels, there shouldn't be interference with that. They need that steady assurance. And the farmers need to get paid for recognizing that there is a performance guarantee to meet.*

Participants explained that their willingness to be involved with the agrivoltaic innovation would be contingent on the near-term observability of direct benefits to them and the long-term certainty and security in the marketplace for their product. Observability is an innovation characteristic explained by Rogers (1962) that concerns the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to potential adopters. When assessing their potential adoption of agrivoltaics, agriculture sector experts framed their considerations in terms of direct and tangible benefits, suggesting that observability of benefits is a characteristic of the agrivoltaic innovation that is of decisive importance to adopters. As discussed by participants in Section 3.1, agrivoltaic contracts are currently recognizing the rights and duties of involved parties, and provide opportunity to establish legitimate, mutually beneficial partnerships. With nine of 10 farmers inclined to partake in an agrivoltaic partnership, the above concerns about economic uncertainty and gains are active considerations for all involved stakeholders in project development.
