While elections around the world in 2024 produced results, they did little to heal societies’ divisions.
From politics to planning, there’s turf war being waged in most countries. In their respective camps, both sides gather armies and arguments, preparing for combat with those seeking to ‘steal their future’.
Is it unrealistic to attempt to ‘find common ground’ in today’s polarised world? Are there alternatives to simply trying to ‘educate the other side’ into agreement or surrendering to their views? How could we have meaningful engagement on the local issues that matter most in constructive ways that create a win-win and avoid the raging war of words playing out in politics and social media?
Let’s take the recent issue of solar farms. Norfolk now has applications for over 17,000 acres of solar on farmland (that’s only just smaller than Sandringham). The proposed sites are pitting energy security and food security against one another. Quite literally, the landscape is being drawn up as a battlefield – two sides: “energy production versus food production”, “panels versus parsnips”, “cables versus cows”. Locked into combat like the Norfolk Voldemort and Potter, one side can’t live while the other survives.
Need it really be so antagonistic? Rather than the cycles of conflict via the consultation processes, how could we involve communities to participate in co-design – shaping the best solution to take into account the broadest set of considerations?
We only need to look across the North Sea to find one of the best bottom-up examples of participative, grass-roots design in the Polders region of the Netherlands.
From a geographic perspective – how would it look if solar energy and farming literally shared common ground. Could they be designed as mutually beneficial – in such a way to enhance agricultural production? The technical answer is yes – and as solutions go, it’s not even very new.
Agrivoltaics uses solar to help agricultural production usually by raising or spacing panels to enable access. The approach dates back from the 1970s, but now employs more up-to-date methods (like those featured by the Earthshot Prize winner). The design depends on the context – e.g. the lie of the land and type of farming. It’s been very popular with fruit growers, but can also be used to provide necessary shade for other crops and livestock.
In some cases it has helped farmers use up to 70% less water and increased crop yields. Most of the examples are outside the UK – but that’s neither to do with our access to technology nor our farming. The optimum design is the best outcome for multiple factors, not just one. Agrivoltaics may cost more than a “straightforward” solar farm, but by enabling food and energy production to coexist, there could be faster planning decisions, better outcomes for farmers, and happier communities.
And why stop there? Schemes could also take account of enhancing biodiversity, reduce visual impact (via transparent or non-reflective panels) and support rural regeneration.
Imagine if these sites were combined with on-site food production facilities (with no need to worry where the power’s coming from) providing rural employment and expanding the benefits further. I make it sound easy, but like so many other complex problems, it’s often the ‘soft’ stuff (like enabling effective collaboration between people) that is actually ‘hard’. The technology is all there; it needs the right process and mindset.
Co-design might feel ambitious. It involves sharing power, opening to new ideas, and evolving outcomes beyond the original proposals. It means local government and developers enabling community participants to have an active role in decision making, not just a token voice.
When I first came to Norwich five years ago, I innocently asked a local councillor whether they’d considered Citizens’ Assemblies. They rolled their eyes: “Oh no, you’re one of those types are you?” Those in power tend to grip it tightly, but it makes them less effective in bringing the change they claim to want.
We don’t have to accept the black-and-white trade-offs offered up in consultation processes. East Anglia could be the exemplar of a just transition by encouraging proactive participation on how these vital projects can be optimally designed in the local context.
All it takes is being prepared to open up to the broader field of perspectives and designing the brightest future for us all.