Four birds with one stone? opportunities and challenges in adopting solar irrigation for a sustainable water-energy-food nexus with carbon credits

ABSTRACT

Carbon emission-led climate change affects food security. Although irrigation builds climate resilience and supports the stability of the water–energy–food (WEF) nexus, irrigation access and reliability are constrained by energy access, whereas increasing energy demand exacerbates carbon emissions. This feedback demonstrates the need to include carbon in the nexus, leading to a WEF–carbon (WEFC) nexus. Solar irrigation can be a four-way win, as it contributes to positive water, energy and food interactions without increasing carbon emissions. This paper empirically assesses farmer-owned solar irrigation in Gujarat, India, and identifies mechanisms for mainstreaming solar irrigation and stakeholders’ roles in the WEFC nexus.

KEYWORDS:

• Climate change
• solar irrigation
• WEF nexus
• carbon mitigation
• WEFC nexus
• field insights
• Gujarat
• India

Introduction

Climate change and water

Accumulating greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide through anthropogenic activities are forcing catastrophic climatic conditions. Diverse regions have shown vital signs of climate change resulting in unanticipated shifts in temperatures and precipitation patterns during the past few decades (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2023). Extreme rainfall events such as floods, cloud bursts, unseasonal rainfall and prolonged droughts affect critical water resources essential for sustaining the life and livelihood of billions of people across the globe. The impacts of climate change measured and modelled by scientists are largely confirmed by farmer and pastoralist communities who experience the tangible consequences (Bawa et al., 2010; Water and Energy Commission Secretariat, 2011). Climate change further puts the already-stressed water resources at the forefront of vulnerability – from scarcity due to droughts and reduced rainfall, hazards due to floods, and broader uncertainty for future planning.

The increasing water stress put tremendous pressure on agriculture and food security, as food and energy production depend on water access. This can be emphasized through statistics: for example, more than 70% of freshwater resources are used for producing food, and another 10% are used by the energy sector (International Energy Agency, 2016; World Bank, 2020). Water is a critical input for agricultural production and is important in food security and rural livelihood. This interconnectedness of resources demands integrated resource management approaches.

Water–energy–food nexus planning with the addition of carbon mitigation

The water–energy–food (WEF) nexus approach was developed to understand the interaction and co-dependence of critical resources, i.e. water, energy, and food. Albrecht et al. (2018) define the WEF nexus as a ‘systems-based perspective that explicitly recognizes water, energy, and food systems as both interconnected and interdependent’ (Albrecht et al., 2018, p. 1). For example, increasing water demand in agricultural or urban areas increases energy demand for pumping and treatment, further translating into water demand for energy generation. Similarly, higher land utilization for food production propelled the ‘green revolution’ in the 20th century and entailed additional irrigation access, which stressed available water resources and increased energy demand for transporting or pumping this water.

The increasingly recognized imperative of mitigating carbon adds new challenges to the WEF nexus, and carbon is the exogeneous factor affecting the WEF nexus balance. Theoretically, strong evidence of coupled water–carbon cycles and terrestrial carbon interaction with vegetation and food production exists (Evans, 2014; Gentine et al., 2019). The carbon-dependent energy sector is the leading contributor to anthropogenic carbon emissions in the atmosphere (Ritchie et al., 2022; see Figure 1b). There are multiple linkages between the WEF components and carbon, such as carbon emissions due to food production and stubble burning, atmospheric carbon capture through agriculture biomass and water resources, energy production-induced carbon emissions, and energy needs for carbon mitigation and adaptation.

Figure 1. Carbon as a new nexus component. (a) Conventional WEF nexus: conceptualization of interconnectedness of the three critical resources as discussed in water–energy–food nexus literature; (b) carbon linked to WEF: carbon as an externally linked component in the water–energy–food nexus that has critical linkages with each component of WEF nexus. Examples of linkages are indicated in the callout boxes thus indicating need for incorporating carbon within the nexus; (c) WEFC nexus: conceptualization of nexus with interconnected resources water–energy–food–carbon. Note: Readers of the print article can view the figures and tables in colour online at https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2024.2345494

For this paper, we can consider the specific case of the resource loop of carbon → food → water → energy → carbon (CFWEC; Figure 1). As discussed earlier, irrigation plays a critical role in climate change resilience for agriculture. However, farmers’ access to irrigation is constrained by access to water and the energy required to move the water. In the prevailing energy-supply matrix, where fossil fuels still fulfil most energy needs (including electricity), increasing energy access means higher carbon emissions, which drive climate change and can further impact irrigation needs. This carbon → food → water → energy → carbon loop spirals as a trap of intensified feedback (Figure 1). Higher carbon emissions to meet energy and irrigation demand for food will intensify global warming, exacerbating rainfall and temperature changes, and eventually leading to more carbon emissions and further stress on the WEF–carbon (WEFC) nexus.

Given the direct impact of energy use on carbon emissions, the interdependence of food and agricultural production on CO₂ and the interlinkages of water resources, climate and carbon, it is essential to endogenize carbon into the nexus approach and conceptualize the WEFC nexus. Accordingly, we expand on Albrecht et al. (2018, p. 1), defining the WEFC nexus as ‘a systems-based perspective that explicitly recognizes water, energy, food, and carbon systems as both interconnected and interdependent, which offers opportunities to enhance resource productivity, mitigate climate change, and pursue coupled water, energy, food, and carbon security’.

Within the WEFC nexus approach, we now focus on the ever-increasing atmospheric carbon concentration jeopardizing the WEFC nexus balance (the outward spiral in Figure 2(a) that starts from energy production). The energy → carbon link can be balanced by adopting less carbon-emitting energy production to bring the nexus into circular-feedback equilibrium, as shown in Figure 2. Solar energy for irrigation access (referred to as solar irrigation throughout the text) is the most promising avenue within agriculture for enhancing this equilibrium. This paper emphasizes the need to achieve a WEFC nexus steady state in the agriculture sector utilizing solar irrigation (see Figure 2b).

Figure 2. Equilibrating the spiral feedback. (a) The total atmospheric carbon concentration will keep increasing if carbon is not considered an integral part of the nexus. (b) Integrating carbon within the nexus changes the framework, and the carbon emission can be reduced to reach equilibrium.

Methodology and conceptual synthesis

We discussed the need to explicitly include carbon in integrated resource management frameworks such as the WEF nexus and identified solar irrigation as a promising approach for balancing the energy → carbon link in the agricultural context. In the subsequent sections, we will focus on solar irrigation. First, we review the technical and policy implementation literature on solar irrigation to provide a foundational understanding of the key concepts of solar irrigation. Second, we discuss our insights from intensive fieldwork involving interviews with solar irrigation adopters (farmers who installed solar panels for the irrigation pumps), other farmers (non-adopters), technical staff, and policymakers in Gujarat, India, who have experimented with solar irrigation in recent decades.

Field insights draw learnings from the lead author’s fieldwork from December 2021 to January 2022 at 22 sites across Gujarat. See Figure 3 for approximate site locations (marked with ‘X’).¹ During the fieldwork, 79 semi-structured interviews, reaching more than 200 participants, were conducted.² The stakeholders interviewed can be categorized into: (i) farmers/adopters (14: focused group discussion (FGD), 59: individual farmers), (ii) policymakers (8: Government/DISCOM employees or policy researchers), and (iii) officials from implementing agencies (7: engineers or field staff of the technical agencies).³ Research sites were strategically selected to cover diverse geographic and demographic conditions and solar irrigation pathways. As there was no prior field representation for the authors, interview subjects were selected through snowball sampling (asking current contacts to suggest others to contact as respondents) after discussions with local leaders. Both solar irrigation adopters and non-adopter farmer participants were selected for semi-structured interviews to understand the perceptions of both groups. The respondents were interviewed in-person individually or in focus groups of 5–15 men and women (in the case of farmers/adopters with similar experiences) during singular field visits to 22 strategically selected locations marked in Figure 3. Participants were asked about demographic, geographic, and agriculture practices as well as their perceptions and experiences with solar irrigation promotion and adoption, any changes observed in their agriculture practices since the adoption of solar irrigation, the challenges they face with solar irrigation, and what they think can be done to improve the adoption of solar irrigation. Subsequently, we analysed the semi-structured interview data, identifying the technical and policy challenges that limit the wider adoption and continued usage of solar irrigation. To shed light on the opportunities and challenges for solar irrigation adoption in Gujarat, we analysed the data and information from the fieldwork in a grounded theory framework, allowing inductive interpretation of findings from the empirical data based on ethnographic accounts instead of imposing theory and organizing results within preconceived categories (Glaser & Strauss, 1999). Finally, we conclude with a forward-looking prognosis of carbon mitigation through WEFC approaches centred on solar irrigation.

Figure 3. Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme feeders and the fieldwork locations in Gujarat. Sites marked with ‘X’ (field sites) were visited by the lead author (22 sites) as part of the ethnographic fieldwork. The other surveyed sites were not visited by the lead other. Thus, the insights compiled in major takeaways from the fieldwork and interviews & stakeholders’ role sections are based on these 22 sites. Sites indicated as (surveyed) are part of an ongoing household-level survey planned by the authors.

Review of different solar irrigation adoption attempts

Solar irrigation is mainly based on solar photovoltaic energy that converts solar radiation to electricity used for water withdrawal for irrigation. Decades-old solar photovoltaic technology has undergone significant advancements, enhancing its practicality. The surge in solar energy for irrigation results from improved solar photovoltaic system capacity and efficiency, substantial drops in photovoltaic panel prices, heightened competition among manufacturers, cost competitiveness with traditional pumps, and widespread adoption across various sectors amid increasing awareness (World Bank Group, 2018, p. 6).

Over the past decade, solar irrigation has become more accessible due to favourable technical and cost factors, supported by innovative policies. However, it is crucial to shift focus from addressing initial technology-related questions to addressing second-generation issues related to policies and financial mechanisms to fund them. These questions pertain to the long-term sustainability, scalability, and inclusivity of solar irrigation. The crux of these questions lies in structuring the right incentives and mechanisms for adoption through different subsidies and incentives that make policies financially viable, economically efficient, socially acceptable, and environmentally justified (the last item, in our view, should include carbon mitigation).

Solar irrigation pump promotion can encompass several alternate strategies, as suggested by Shah et al. (2018). These solar irrigation policies mainly revolve around components of market players, land ownership and/or subsidies (initial investment to encourage adoption). There is ongoing debate about the potential consequences of solar irrigation adoption (Beaton et al., 2019; Kishore et al., 2014; Sahasranaman et al., 2018; Shah et al., 2017, 2014). The possible unintended consequences noted in the literature are intensified groundwater depletion due to cheaper irrigation energy, changed cropping patterns from grains to cash crops which may affect food/nutrition aspects, or inefficient utilization of solar energy generation that can limit the real benefits of solar irrigation promotion. In this paper, we categorized various solar irrigation adoption pathways into three broad categories, as presented in Table 1, following the Ministry of New & Renewable Energy (2023) classification. We also identified key market players and financial incentives necessary for the ‘effective’ adoption of solar power for irrigation. By ‘effective’, we mean achieving higher adoption rates without significant unintended consequences to the water–energy–food–carbon nexus (WEFC nexus).

Table 1. Three major pathways of solar irrigation adoptions (also components of Pradhan Mantri Kisan Urja Suraksha evam Utthaan Mahabhiyan Scheme).

The following sections delve into the three solar irrigation promotion mechanisms outlined in Table 1, drawing insights from field experiences in Gujarat, India. The state has implemented policies for all three adoption types, providing valuable lessons.

Learnings for solar irrigation from Gujarat, India

This section presents the background understanding of solar irrigation, policy initiatives, and literature about solar irrigation in India and then narrows it down to the state of Gujarat.

Solar irrigation: a promising paradigm for India

India is an ideal place to adopt solar irrigation. First, most of India receives a significant amount of solar radiation annually. Second, the Indian agriculture sector depends heavily on groundwater-based irrigation for sustenance. Still as of 2021, more than 60% of cultivated land did not have adequate irrigation facilities and are mainly constrained by energy access for irrigation (World Bank, 2021). Third, on the energy and food demand side, it is estimated that annually, India will need an additional 50 TWh for irrigation activities by 2030 on top of 169 TWh in 2015 (Brookings India, 2018). As per the 2020 estimates, the power industry contributed 1.11 billion tons of CO₂ emissions in India (Crippa et al., 2021). With almost half the population dependent on the agriculture sector for livelihood and a high population to provide food security for, securing irrigation is key to building resilience against climatic changes. Fourth, as a developing country with the world’s highest population of 1.4 billion people, India is the world’s third-largest emitter of carbon dioxide after the USA and China. To change the carbon-emission path, India committed to the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5°C. This climate pledge is a significant step towards expanding the renewable energy portfolio, mainly through wind and solar energy (Vaidyanathan, 2021).

Attempts to test the true potential of solar irrigation in India

The government of India and different state governments have tried and tested several pilot schemes for solar irrigation promotion over the years (see Table 1 and Figure 4 for major developments). It started with the off-grid distribution of solar pumps to provide energy access for irrigation to remote locations. Then, pilot schemes tested innovative approaches to solar irrigation with utility-scale solar photovoltaic installation and distribution to community- and privately owned grid-connected/off-grid solar irrigation systems. A brief history of these schemes is compiled along with the typical cost of irrigation energy in Figure 4. Finally, the Government of India launched the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Urja Suraksha evam Utthaan Mahabhiyan (PM-KUSUM) scheme to further push the small-scale implementation to large-scale adoption of solar irrigation in 2019. The scheme intends to improve irrigation access and farmers’ income through solar-powered irrigation. As outlined in the scheme document, the scheme has four primary objectives: enhancing farmers’ income from agriculture, ensuring access to reliable power, decreasing the agriculture sector’s reliance on fossil fuels, and minimizing power subsidies to agriculture (Council for Energy, Environment and Water, 2021).

Figure 4. (a) Brief history of solar irrigation promotion in India, (b) current irrigation energy cost for different states of India (Rajan et al., 2020).

The scheme aimed to add solar and other renewable capacities of 25,750 MW by 2022 with the total central government financial support of Indian rupee (INR) 344 billion (United States dollars (USD) 4.45 billion, at 1 USD = 77.25 INR), including service charges to the implementing agencies. There are separate targets for each component, as indicated in Table 1. However, the targets are far from being achieved as of December 2023 (also refer to Ministry of New & Renewable Energy, 2023). The institutional and technical aspects of Components A and C are more complex than the straightforward implementation of the off-grid solar pumps required in Component B of the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Urja Suraksha evam Utthaan Mahabhiyan scheme. There are limited cases of all three components already being tried and tested to understand their prospectus within proximity. However, Gujarat provides an important case through which we can study the early attempts for all three types of solar irrigation promotion in the agriculturally dominant and water-scarce regions.

Untangling complex solar irrigation scenarios in Gujarat, India

Gujarat has experienced rapid agricultural development in the last few decades, led by agriculture expansion and irrigation promotion (Shah et al., 2009). The agrarian development of the state is credited to reliable and subsidized electricity access for groundwater extraction and irrigation. The subsidy not only burdens the government budget but also creates unintended negative incentives for groundwater depletion (referred to as ‘perverse subsidies’ by Shah, 2009 and subsequently by us as perverse incentives in the sections below). If not tackled effectively, the state’s current groundwater depletion rates will lead to greater vulnerability for agriculture and desertification of vast areas with increasing climate change threats in the region. The hypothesized spiral of the negative WEFC nexus shown in Figure 2(a) is very plausible for the state. Gujarat has previously enacted key reforms related to the WEF nexus. One was rationing the agriculture energy supply for 8 hours per day and metering the agriculture connections (Shah et al., 2009). A continuous 8-hour energy ration can be implemented during a day or night based on a pre-announced energy supply schedule.

Gujarat has a high solar energy promotion potential due to favourable weather conditions. The state jump-started solar energy development in 2009 with the ‘Gujarat Solar Power Policy 2009’, mainly to initiate rooftop and utility-scale solar plants. In 2015, the policy got a new mandate and was further scaled up as ‘Gujarat Solar Power Policy 2015’. In 2021, Gujarat was India’s third most solar-developed state, with a total installed photovoltaic capacity reaching 6052 MW of the national total of 46,246.8 MW (Gupta, 2021).

Agriculture energy consumption accounted for approximately 22% of total units sold in the state from 2013 to 2014 (Bhatt et al., 2019). Therefore, irrigation development has a high priority, and Gujarat’s sights were always set on realizing the solar potential for agriculture. Although solar irrigation technology sounds simple, our fieldwork revealed the complex nature of the different schemes in Gujarat with various financial mechanisms, land rights, social acceptability, and experiences of key institutions shaping the success of the cause. Here, we can chronologically discuss implementation of the solar irrigation schemes in Gujarat.

Off-grid solar pump distribution

After years of pilot projects and private and non-governmental organization push for off-grid solar pumps for irrigation purposes, the state enacted a five-year scheme for wider adoption of off-grid pumps in 2014. It installed more than 12,000 solar irrigation systems across the state. The scheme mostly targeted tribal and remote places where providing grid connection was difficult. The system used included: (1) 5 horsepower (hp) or 7.5 hp submersible motor and submersible pumps, (2) equivalent capacity solar photovoltaic structure, (3) cost associated with the installation of electronic equipment such as cables, (4) inverter (DC-AC) (if required), and (5) a small solar panel and battery to run a bulb near the installed panels for any nighttime operations. All hardware and installation services are provided with a fixed initial payment from the farmers of around INR 30,000 (US $388) for a 5-hp submersible pump-motor system and approximately INR 38,000 (US $492) for 7.5-hp systems, which were approximately 10% of the total cost of the installation with the rest covered through a direct, upfront subsidy.

In the interviews, farmers indicated they adopted the scheme due to lucrative benefits at little cost. Also, a key enabler for the scheme’s uptake was zero fuel costs and assured maintenance of systems for five years. However, fluctuating energy output based on weather conditions is a limiting factor. The scheme will be part of Component B of the Central government’s Pradhan Mantri Kisan Urja Suraksha evam Utthaan Mahabhiyan and may expand in the coming years.

Grid-connected solar pump distribution (Suryashakti Kisan Yojna)

The fieldwork’s most interesting and complex case was the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme piloted with almost 4500 grid-connected irrigation pumps. The scheme is India’s only large-scale implementation of component C (farmer-owned farmer-level grid-connected solar pumps). The scheme was technically and financially complex, with three key stakeholders being part of the shared responsibilities of maintaining and operating the systems:

State-supported power distribution companies made power purchase agreements with farmers and maintained the grid infrastructure.

Solar system installation companies were responsible for installing and maintaining solar power generation and evacuation to the grid.

Farmers were to utilize the power for solar pumps, irrigating according to their own choices and practices, and use the grid energy judiciously for irrigation to achieve the estimated financial targets, but they had to agree to clean the solar panels of dust and particulate matter for efficient electricity generation.

The scheme was for the existing or new grid-connected electric alternating current (AC) pumps without any cap on the pump size. It was required that 70% of farmers on a given electrical feeder agree to adopt the scheme. The financial mechanism constituted a 30% central government subsidy and a 30% subsidy by the state government. Forty percent was supposed to be farmers’ contributions, but to make it more lucrative for the farmers, the scheme was altered, and farmers were to pay just 5% up front, with the remaining 65% (farmers’ (=35%) + state government’s subsidy contribution (30%)) arranged through a loan for farmers assured by the government. The state government’s capital subsidy was converted into an ‘Evacuation Based Incentive’ (3.5 INR/unit sold up to 1000 units/kW installed/month). Thus, the loan recovered 65% of the capital cost, not 40%, and instead of capital subsidy, the state government contributed to the Equated Monthly Instalments. The scheme promised private benefits to farmers, such as reduced electricity cost, additional income, daytime irrigation, as well as societal welfare through environmental conservation, decentralized solar power generation, reduced transmission and distribution losses, and the opportunity to save water and electricity (Government of Gujarat, 2018). Suryashakti Kisan Yojna Scheme was implemented in 94 feeders, having more than 4500 connections with a cumulative capacity of more than 80 MW. (See Figure 3 for the feeder locations.)

Perhaps the most innovative feature of the scheme was to put an opportunity cost on water consumption for the farmers. In the current situation, farmers use highly subsidized irrigation electricity access and encounter minimal or negligible marginal expenses for extra pumping. Even for off-grid solar pumps there is zero marginal cost of pumping. Without marginal cost, farmers have no financial incentives for the efficient use of limited groundwater. Given that the farmers earn up to INR 7/kWh (for the initial 7 years and INR 3.50/kWh after 7 years) for each additional unit produced but not consumed, they are now hypothesized to have incentives to use irrigation more efficiently. (See Figure 5 for technical implementation schema.) An additional benefit of such a scheme is strengthening farmers’ drought resilience. Remuneration through selling solar energy (available without fail during drought) can provide farmers with a social security net to survive bad years for agriculture production.

Figure 5. Schema for grid-connected solar irrigation systems under Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme in Gujarat. (This figure is prepared by the authors, adapting the schema available in Government of Gujarat, 2018, p. 36).

Utility-scale solar power plants

This component envisages attracting private investment for solar irrigation promotion. The projects under this scheme were to establish a utility-scale (>0.5 MW) power plant on the agricultural land and allow farmers, corporations, or non-governmental organizations to establish solar energy plants that can provide energy to the grid, predominantly serving agriculture needs. This component is very much like traditional large-scale solar power plants and parks. Gujarat already has a few such plants active, and several were visited during the fieldwork. The owners of such plants have shown positive returns on investment and consider it financially lucrative. However, the sudden move to withdraw the subsidy by the Government of Gujarat after floating the request for proposals has made farmers and investors unhappy about the scheme and jeopardized further development with litigations and arbitration anticipated (Desai, 2021). The utility-scale irrigation systems require a very high initial investment. Large plants are mainly driven by the interest of operating a power plant business and not irrigation systems per se. Thus, this component is not of central interest in understanding solar irrigation for the WEFC nexus.

Major takeaways from the fieldwork and interviews

In Gujarat, there are over 1.5 million pumps with grid-connected, subsidized, and reliable three-phase electricity access for irrigation (Government of Gujarat, 2018) These connections are either metered, paying INR 0.60/kWh, or unmetered, having an annual flat tariff of INR 600–800/hp. During the fieldwork, interviews were conducted to explore the factors influencing farmers’ willingness to adopt solar irrigation. Adoption, in this context, refers to farmers accepting scheme conditions, implementing necessary technical and managerial measures, and innovating as required. We analysed the themes of reasoning that are in favour of solar irrigation adoption focusing on Type B and Type C, and those who are against solar irrigation. These themes were compiled by the authors from individuals’ responses to semi-structured interviews and focus group questions during fieldwork. The key insights emerging from the discussions with stakeholders are compiled in this section. (See Figures 6 and 7 for the brief lists of items discussed in this section.⁴)

Figure 6. Major takeaways related to solar irrigation from the fieldwork. Qualitative strength or importance of the challenges listed (+++ indicates very strong, ++ strong, + mild).

Figure 7. Major challenges related to grid-connected solar irrigation adoption identified through discussion with the stakeholders of Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme in Gujarat.

Key drivers for solar irrigation adoption and restraints (farmers’ perspectives)

In favour of solar irrigation

Daytime electricity

Off-grid and grid-connected solar irrigation adopters cite daytime electricity access as a primary incentive for adoption. The prospect of avoiding midnight fieldwork for irrigation is universally preferred by farmers and farm labourers, reducing safety risks associated with nighttime work.

12 hours of electricity a day

Gujarat receives 11–12 hours of sunshine for nearly 300 days annually, providing solar adopters with extended electricity access compared to the grid-connected farmers’ status-quo 8-hour rationed supply. This is a pivotal draw for solar irrigation, exemplified by a 3-acre grid-conneced solar irrigation farmer completing irrigation in a day with 12 hours of electricity, as opposed to 2 days with 8 hours, resulting in nearly 50% labour cost savings. However, off-grid solar pumps encounter challenges due to fluctuating solar outputs.

Monetary savings

Off-grid solar irrigation pump users enjoy no marginal costs or periodic billings, a notable advantage. Rising fuel prices render diesel pump-based irrigation financially unviable for farmers without prior grid connections, incentivizing the adoption of solar irrigation. For grid-connected farmers, aligning pumping behaviour with optimal irrigation cycles results in additional income rather than costs.

Concerns for carbon emissions were not among the priorities for farmers to adopt solar irrigation. Therefore, environmental concerns were not cited as an important driving factor for adopting solar irrigation.

Opposing solar irrigation

Farmers declining solar irrigation adoption expressed an inclination for a ‘wait and watch’ strategy, observing early adopters’ experiences with the technology and policies. Scepticism and challenges, listed in order of significance, impeded adoption. A thoughtful resolution of these concerns holds the potential to foster increased adoption rates.

Lack of trust in benefits of technology and scheme

Farmers cited a lack of trust in technology and policy benefits in their reasoning. Solar irrigation has been mostly tested through small pilot projects. Authors inferred from the farmers’ responses that it will likely need a wider implementation of solar irrigation for acceptance.

Limited local adaptation of schemes

In crafting schemes, planners often enforce stringent standards for uniform adoption across diverse regions, inadvertently limiting the potential for local adaptation. The Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme serves as an illustrative example, where farmers are constrained to installing solar photovoltaic panels exclusively on fields with grid-connected pumps. Paradoxically, this requirement offers no technical advantage but introduces heightened operational and maintenance challenges due to spatially scattered adoption. For example, farmers in southern Gujarat face challenges such as theft and vandalism due to the difficulty in monitoring scattered infrastructure.

Limited stakeholder consultation

Farmers in the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme expressed concerns that their opinions and suggestions for the scheme’s success had been ignored. The methods they would have preferred (e.g. structure designs and location of the installed hardware, consolidated installation of solar panels, training of locals as technicians, etc.) were not implemented, leading to the unsuccessful adoption of solar irrigation in certain areas. Our contention is that engagement with local interests is vital for refining pilot schemes and effectively scaling up policies.

Peer effects

The new technology adopters learn from each other and tend to follow their early adopting peers’ experiences. Initial pilot projects for promoting solar irrigation, such as the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme in Gujarat, have generated both strong support and opposition. Among the 22 sites visited by the authors, farmers at 8 locations expressed that not everyone could realize the positive monetary gains promised by the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme and a few have incurred huge negative bills. Such experiences have increased scepticism about solar irrigation pumps among the peers.

Financial limitations

Even after huge subsidies, the remaining installation cost of solar systems can limit solar irrigation adoption for farmers with limited savings and access to credit at reasonable rates.

Technical limitations

Limited local technical capabilities to troubleshoot solar irrigation pump technical challenges and perform maintenance limit adoption. The solar irrigation pump systems are often out of service for a prolonged time due to a lack of local technical knowledge to address operation and maintenance (O&M) problems. These are further discussed in the next section on technical issues.

Wastage of land

Setting up a solar photovoltaic unit with solar panels requires significant land resources. Currently, most adopters have sufficiently large land holdings to leave a parcel uncultivated for setting up the solar photovoltaic units. However, based on the farmers’ interviews it became apparent that small and marginal farmers cannot afford to sacrifice land for the purpose of installing solar photovoltaic units.

Land ownership and lease challenges

Some non-adopters identified that they are not the legal owners of the land they are cultivating, and the legal owners (usually migrated family members) are not interested in investing in the adoption of solar irrigation. There is a detachment of owner and operator from decision-making on agriculture practices. Given the land’s cultivators may not have the right to complete the necessary paperwork, it is difficult to adopt solar irrigation unless the landowner and the cultivator foresee private benefits.

Technical issues indicated by the stakeholders

Grid maintenance and evacuation failure issues (grid-connected solar)

The Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme (grid-connected solar pumps) often failed when the electricity grid infrastructure was not upgraded with better hardware. As a result, complicated circuits often fail during peak hours of solar radiation caused by high-voltage fluctuations. These ‘tripped systems’ cannot evacuate the solar energy generated to the grid, defeating the purpose of harnessing solar energy.

Failing inverters (grid-connected solar)

An employee of one of the operations and maintenance contractors for the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme noted that almost two-thirds of the inverters (devices used to convert DC power to AC and evacuate to the grid) have failed within 3 years in the feeder he was maintaining in south Gujarat region. The insurance company currently bears the cost and shall continue to for the first seven years as per their contract with farmers and DISCOMs. However, as the systems are planned to function for 25 years, frequent failure of inverters will lead to huge costs for the farmers and make the systems unviable to maintain and operate.

Metering issues (grid-connected solar)

Farmers have expressed grievances regarding the frequent occurrence of burnt-out electricity meters. As a result, there is a lack of proper accounting for the energy generated, evacuated, and consumed within the system. The improper accounting often led to lost interest in maintaining the systems and keeping track of financial incentives.

Copper cable thefts (all types of solar)

Initially, there was an assumption that solar panels installed in open fields would be particularly vulnerable to theft. However, experiences from south Gujarat have revealed that the primary target for miscreants are the copper cables connecting the solar panels. The surge in copper prices within the scrap market has motivated miscreants to profit from easily obtained money by cutting off the cables and selling them as scrap. Farmers who have encountered vandalized structures have emphasized that once these connecting cables are stolen, the solar panels become nothing more than shelter roofs. Hence, there is an urgent requirement for technical innovations that can make thefts more difficult, if not entirely impossible.

Waste of surplus energy generation (off-grid solar)

Off-grid solar installations are typically utilized for only 60–100 days out of the approximately 300 days of sunshine available in the region. Presently, farmers are not allowed to divert the surplus generation of solar energy for anything other than irrigation. However, if provisions were made to allow or divert the excess energy, it could offer the benefit of free electricity for domestic use. For instance, during an interview, a farmer expressed interest in repurposing their solar photovoltaic modules for household electricity use or to power farm machinery other than pumps.

Opportunities for solar irrigation policy innovation

Designing financial incentives

Solar irrigation pump adoption is critically restricted by the cost of hardware. Designing appropriate subsidy and credit access models with shared financial and maintenance responsibilities among the stakeholders is subject to local needs and socioeconomic challenges. Also, insurance against any untoward damages to the costly systems is necessary for the sustainability of the systems. The banking and insurance sectors can be leveraged here.

Understanding irrigation needs

As indicated by the farmers, the primary reason for solar irrigation adoption is daytime energy access (valued even higher than the monetary benefits). Farmers want to avoid a status-quo irrigation schedule and eliminate nighttime irrigation. However, if the government decides to alter the rationing policy and allow daytime irrigation access on the conventional grid connections, the solar schemes might not remain attractive for the farmers.

Allowing consolidated adoption

Farmers installing individual solar photovoltaic units at the farm level face frequent theft and operational issues, especially when residing away from their fields. In the south Gujarat region, farmers suggest that consolidating solar photovoltaic units in one location under the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme could eliminate theft and operational challenges. However, the scheme, in its current format, does not permit such consolidation.

Cooperatives

Timely maintenance poses a recurring challenge for individual farmers. Forming cooperatives or collective organizations enables farmers to collectively address maintenance needs. Cooperatives offer a platform for pooling resources, expertise, and efforts, facilitating more efficient and coordinated maintenance operations. Additionally, collective representation provides increased negotiating leverage with maintenance contractors, enabling farmers to secure more favourable terms and services.

Identifying ideal irrigation pump size and solar capacity

In Gujarat, each agriculture connection is assigned a ‘sanctioned capacity’, permitting farmers to legally use pumps up to a specified horsepower. Under the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme, farmers with an X hp sanctioned capacity were entitled to solar photovoltaic modules of 1.25X kW capacity (e.g. 10 hp capacity would entitle 12.5 kW of modules), creating incentives to apply for higher sanctioned pump sizes without using them for irrigation. Some influential farmers had consolidated generation capacities of up to 500 kW. Oversizing aims to balance income generation against pump usage, but micro-level corrections are needed for appropriate solar installation. Policymakers face the dilemma of whether allowing such ‘oversizing’ is an efficient use of subsidies. Capping solar photovoltaic sizes limits solar irrigation adoption, whereas debates arise over pump size and associated solar capacity inadequacies.

Allowing solar energy use beyond irrigation

For higher utilization of the solar photovoltaic assets, utilization beyond irrigation can be important from an efficient resource utilization perspective, especially in the case of off-grid solar. The energy generated from the solar pumps should be allowed/facilitated to be diverted to the domestic or farm machinery usage if not grid connected.

The key points described in this section are compiled in Figure 6. Schemes like Suryashakti Kisan Yojna have technical, sociopolitical, financial, and targeting challenges along with some spillover effects too. These are compiled in Figure 7.

Stakeholders’ role: converging the divergent views

Stakeholder interviews and our literature review suggest significant variation in the key stakeholders’ perspectives and interests in promoting solar irrigation. However, the key to unlocking solar irrigation pumps’ potential requires effective incentives for planners to incorporate a win–win situation for all the stakeholders, in our opinion. This section compiles the authors’ opinions about stakeholders’ roles in actively engaging in effective solar irrigation adoption based on the authors’ learnings from the fieldwork and stakeholder interviews. The stakeholders are categorized as follows, with our interpretations based on interviews (see also Appendix A discussing the roles with detailed anecdotes) and based on our review of current literature.

Policymakers and planning agencies

They can be central or state governments, ministries, or think-tanks tasked to frame a policy that can promote solar irrigation and tackle and contain the WEFC nexus spiral (Figure 2). Their responsibility is perceived as designing policies with checks and balances, managing financial flow, and considering the WEFC nexus approach. The key rationales include clearly defining the objectives of solar irrigation schemes, following an integrated approach across ministries, promoting wider and just adoption, choosing appropriate mechanisms and financial incentives, building trust, and allowing flexibility to accommodate local needs.

Solar irrigation implementers

These companies and organizations implement civil work for on-ground implementation. In addition, they are tasked with processing government and agencies’ subsidies to build infrastructure and connect with the end-users and consumers. They can be sub-categorized into (1) power distribution companies mandated to look after electricity distribution at scale, and (2) solar and electricity O&M companies contracted to implement the infrastructure specific to solar irrigation pumps. Power distribution companies address technical needs, provide a social context through existing on-field connections, act as a communication link between farmers and policymakers, build trust, and play a role in training farmers. Solar infrastructure providers focus on O&M of systems, addressing farmers’ concerns, training farmers, and building trust.

Adopters (farmers)

As the final consumers of solar irrigation systems, adopters’ (in case of solar irrigation pumps, farmers’) approval and acceptance of solar-powered systems are essential for promoting solar irrigation as a potent option to tackle WEFC nexus challenges. Farmers are seen as key players in assessing and optimizing resource use in their fields, actively participating in the installation and design of solar irrigation schemes and maintaining the systems for long-term sustainability. Premature disposal of solar modules due to inadequate maintenance is highlighted as contributing to the environmental cost of solar-powered agriculture.

Figure 8 compiles the various aspects discussed in this section, providing a comprehensive overview of the roles and responsibilities of planners, implementers, and adopters in the context of solar irrigation adoption in Gujarat.

Figure 8. Stakeholders’ role in solar irrigation pump adoption based on authors’ interpretation and field insights.

Conclusion

Solar irrigation is a promising avenue for policymakers to address current and future interrelated water, energy, and food challenges while addressing carbon mitigation objectives, which we refer to as the WEFC nexus. Gujarat and other states of India and South Asia are progressively pushing solar energy to enable groundwater-based irrigation. By critically analysing the scope and impact of solar irrigation promotion Gujarat, this paper establishes the need to expand the WEF nexus framework to the WEFC nexus. Our methodological approach, based on in-depth fieldwork and qualitative analysis coupled with our interpretations of the roles of three key stakeholders (solar irrigation pump scheme planners, implementers, and adopters), offers unique insights into the on-the-ground challenges related to scaling solar irrigations pump in Gujarat, India and elsewhere. Our contention is that the planners should identify needs and incorporate integrated WEFC planning approach, implementers need to act as bridge to provide technical and contextual understanding between planners and farmers, and adopters need to take the ownership of the systems and maintain them. This nuanced understanding is pivotal for informed decision-making, effective implementation strategies, and critical coordination among the stakeholders in the context of solar irrigation pumps. However, this approach is limited by robust data-based evaluation of schemes like Suryashakti Kisan Yojna to better understand the impact of solar irrigation promotion in groundwater-critical regions like Gujarat. Given that the electrical connections for the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme have been metered, the energy consumption data can provide significant insights into solar irrigation’s impact on farmers’ productivity as a key indicator of the viability of the WEFC nexus. Were these data to be made available, incentive-compatible behavioural changes could be assessed, as expected by the policy planners.

Without addressing the adoption challenges and incorporating the integrated WEFC nexus approach, solar irrigation can potentially be maladaptive, i.e. increased threats of accelerated groundwater depletion, inefficient allocation of subsidies and perverse incentives for inefficient energy generation, and a build up solar photovoltaic waste. If not set in a broader approach to resource sustainability, solar irrigation promotion may only be partially successful in providing reliable irrigation or may fail to achieve a win–win–win–win situation for water, energy, food, and carbon.

Acknowledgements

We thank Professor Michael Jacobson and Dr Emily Pakhtigian (both from Pennsylvania State University) for their critical input. We thank Professor Tushaar Shah (International Water Management Institute) for scholarly support. The fieldwork would not have been possible without the logistical support of Dr M. C. Patel and N. S. Patel Arts (Autonomous) College, Anand, India. We also thank the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation for insights gained during the mid-term evaluation of the Solar Irrigation for Agriculture Resilience Project, and Ms Erin Trouba (MS, Rural Sociology, Pennsylvania State University) for her suggestions on the manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplementary data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2024.2345494

Additional information

Funding

The authors acknowledge grant support from the Institute of Energy and the Environment at Pennsylvania State University for solar irrigation fieldwork and survey in India and partial additional support from the Maurice K. Goddard Chair Endowment and Project PEN0 4816 Accession number 7003839 (of the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture).

Notes

1. Here, the sites are defined as clusters of farmers with shared electricity feeders. In some cases, the feeder can cut across multiple villages. As long as the interviews were conducted within geographic proximity, these farmers are considered on one site.

2. The interviewing author shares the native language and cultural norms with the interviewed stakeholders. No interpreter or translator was required during the interview process.

3. The authors’ Institutional Review Board approval restricts disclosure of the interview responses; however, the analyses are based on findings from intensive fieldwork.

4. Supplementary materials including field photographs which give visual insights related to the field observations discussed in this section can be viewed in the online supplemental data at 10.1080/02508060.2024.2345494.

Appendix A

This appendix elaborates on the perspectives presented in the ‘Stakeholders’ Role: Converging Divergent Views’ section of the main text. The insights and opinions shared herein derive from the authors’ engagements with stakeholders on solar irrigation policies and implementations, coupled with the authors’ perspectives from the water–energy–food–carbon nexus. Stakeholders for solar irrigation adoption are categorized into three groups: planners, implementors, and adopters (farmers).

Planners’ role (planning agencies)

We assume that the role of the planners will be limited to designing policies with the right checks and balances and managing financial flow. For better planning of solar irrigation promotion, the planners need to consider the WEFC nexus approach. This means that changes in one of the WEFC components may destabilize the nexus and cause unintended outcomes.

The key rationales of such agencies are as follows:

Clearly define objectives of solar irrigation promotion schemes

Promoting solar irrigation yields benefits like carbon reduction, improved access, and farmer income. Yet, trade-offs exist, such as potential groundwater depletion from free energy access. Scheme goals must prioritize aspects: higher irrigation access (food), reduce conventional energy consumption and hence carbon emissions (energy, carbon), or efficient groundwater use (water). This decision depends on the local context.

Follow an integrated approach

The development of solar irrigation necessitates coordination among various resource ‘gatekeepers’, such as relevant agencies and ministries. However, determining the primary responsibility for solar irrigation initiatives can be confusing within ministerially segregated bureaucratic structures. It is unclear whether it falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Agriculture or Water Resources, the Ministry of Energy/Renewable Energy, or the Ministry for Climate Change. Although integrated approaches (such as WEFC nexus) are crucial, their implementation is challenging due to a lack of coordination among different ministries and their focused agenda. Therefore, establishing coordination mechanisms among these agencies is essential for effectively implementing and adopting solar irrigation projects.

Promote solar irrigation for wider and just adoption

Essential for broader promotion, this approach maximizes economies of scale, reducing solar photovoltaic system costs and fostering local technical expertise. It empowers rural youth with skills for an energy transition. Fieldwork highlights youth’s pivotal role; for instance, brothers from ‘Shirdi Kampa’ initiated a solar installation business after the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme exposure. Local entrepreneurial growth becomes a positive spillover effect of wider clean energy adoption. However, without outreach to marginalized farmers, solar irrigation won’t achieve equitable access.

Choosing the right mechanism and financial incentives

Planners decide which of the three components of the solar irrigation promotion, (i) off-grid, (ii) grid-connected, and (iii) utility scale is/are appropriate under the local context. However, renewable energy adoption still depends on financial support and mechanisms shared with the end consumers, the farmers, in the case of solar irrigation.

Building trust and allowing feedback

As described in the section detailing about the “Utility-scale solar power plants”, the sudden withdrawal of the subsidy-led promise led to huge disinterest among the farmers and small-scale industry owners interested in contributing private wealth to promote solar irrigation. Such loss of interest and trust deficit will hamper future efforts for WEFC nexus or climate policies. Also, farmers have complaints regarding the technical and financial estimations used by the planners in framing the policies. For example, the policy document for the Suryashakti Kisan Yojna scheme assumes a solar photovoltaic efficiency of 6 kWh/kW/day. However, most farmers do not see this rising above 4–5 kWh/kW/day. Moreover, assumptions about their existing motor and pump efficiency and electricity consumption are unrealistic. Farmers sometimes use 20–25-year-old and retrofitted motors that consume way higher electricity than new high-efficiency motors used for estimations.

Allowing flexibility to accommodate local needs in the policies

Large-scale adoption in the varied landscape, demography, and climatic conditions needs adaptable approaches. For instance, in Gujarat, solar hardware theft is an issue just in south Gujarat (indicated with blue place markers in Figure 3). Other regions do not face such rampant theft issues. Here, thefts could have been minimized if the scheme allowed farmers to install their panels near their residences or at a community location.

Implementers’ role (power distribution companies, solar and electricity O&M companies)

Implementers are the end-user’s first face and point of contact and link them to policymakers. For solar irrigation, there are mainly two implementors.

Power Distribution Companies or the existing electricity agencies

Address technical needs

As highlighted in the section on “Technical issues indicated by the stakeholders”, many technical innovations must be addressed for effective solar irrigation adoption. Therefore, the onus to make the systems work will largely lie on the technically able power distribution companies and existing electricity agencies.

Provide social context to the planners

Field-level challenges are arising and will continue evolving as wider solar irrigation adoption propagates. Distribution companies have a local network of technicians to engineers who understand the local socioeconomic and technical difficulties. They should help with the local context for the appropriate policy planning and execution.

Act as a communication link

It is imperative for these agencies to function as active liaisons, facilitating effective communication between end-users, primarily farmers and policymakers. By assuming this role, the agencies can bridge the gap between the needs and concerns of the farmers and the decision-making processes at the policy level. In addition, this communication channel enables policymakers to better understand the on-ground realities and challenges farmers face while also ensuring that farmers’ voices and perspectives are considered when formulating policies and strategies.

Building trust

During the fieldwork, the farmers’ trust in the power distribution companies and implementing agencies was crucial in adopting solar irrigation pilot schemes like Suryashakti Kisan Yojna. North Gujarat farmers credited the power distribution company officials for the scheme’s success. But simultaneously, they are blamed for all the failures of solar irrigation by the south Gujarat farmers.

Training the adopters

Implementers, especially the implementation agencies, need to promote local stakeholders and local engagement to train the farmers. Engagements shall facilitate potential knowledge exchange amongst all the stakeholders.

Solar infrastructure providers

Operations and maintenance of the systems

Farmers have raised concerns about maintenance issues, including delays in addressing grievances, unavailability of replacement components, and poor quality of components and hardware. To address these concerns, farmers interact with solar infrastructure providers and maintenance companies, which creates farmers’ experiences and perceptions about the viability of solar irrigation. In addition, these companies should actively train and educate farmers on the efficient use of solar photovoltaic systems, provide basic troubleshooting guidance, and have a full technical support staff available to address any grievances promptly.

Apart from the O&M, infrastructure providers should also work as a communication link and build trust among the stakeholders.

Adopters’ role (farmers)

Taking ownership and showing unity to address shortcomings of the schemes

Farmers are well-suited to assess and optimize the use of resources in their fields and, therefore, should be actively involved in the installation and design of solar irrigation schemes. It is also important for farmers to take ownership of solar systems and properly maintain the systems for their long-term sustainability.

Maintaining the systems for long-term benefits

The premature disposal of solar modules and hardware resulting from inadequate maintenance of solar irrigation systems can contribute to the environmental cost of solar-powered agriculture. To ensure the long-term sustainability of these systems, end-users, particularly farmers, have a crucial responsibility to use them efficiently. This includes regular cleaning and ensuring the systems are shade-free to optimize their performance.

Figure 8 compiles the discussion in this section.