Climate Resilience and Democratic Governance in Central America’s Northern Triangle (Excerpts)

BY: CYNTHIA ARNSON

---

This piece is comprised of excerpts from Professor Arnson’s work originally published at the Wilson Center.

---

Introduction [1] 

The Northern Triangle—El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—has long been characterized by its overlapping crises of governance, violence and insecurity, and lack of economic opportunity. This article explores the impacts of extreme weather events on this region and the efforts of local communities to build resilience in the face of the increasingly brutal impacts of climate change.  

 In 2022, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that “the countries of Central America consistently rank highest in the world for risks associated with extreme weather,” in which, “devastating hurricanes and floods…alternate with extended periods of drought.” International organizations, such as the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), have played key roles in calling attention to the ways that catastrophic weather events have deepened the socio-economic vulnerability of populations in the Northern Triangle, particularly with respect to agriculture and food security. 

The Northern Triangle lies within the Central American Dry Corridor, an ecosystem of dry tropical forest that stretches across Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, and into southern Mexico, where extended periods of drought alternate with periods of intense rain. The FAO notes that 44 percent of the territory of El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua lies within the Dry Corridor, an area with approximately 11.5 million people, more than half of whom are engaged in agriculture and the small-scale farming of basic food grains. The Dry Corridor experienced five years of consecutive drought from 2015-2019, with devastating effects on commercial agriculture and employment, subsistence farming, and food security. In 2019 alone, the United Nations World Food Program and the FAO reported that drought followed by heavy rains had “destroyed more than half of the maize and bean crops of subsistence farmers,” affecting 2.2 million people and leaving 1.4 million in need of “urgent food assistance.” 

In addition to drought and extreme rainfall, hurricanes and tropical storms have pummeled Central America with increasing frequency in recent years. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported that the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season broke the record for “the highest number of tropical/ subtropical storms in a single year,” laying bare the effects of warming oceans and air temperatures on storm frequency and intensity. 

In November 2020 — compounding the devastating health impacts of COVID-19 — the region was hit by the ferocious back-to-back hurricanes, Eta and Iota. High winds, flooding, and landslides killed scores of people, displaced at least 1.5 million people, and destroyed tens of thousands of homes along with crops and livestock. All told, more than 7.5 million people were affected, according to the International Federation of the Red Cross and insurance companies estimated total damages at $9 billion. 

The Importance of Local Actors [2] 

Across the Northern Triangle, rural campesino, Indigenous, and Afro-descendant communities are the most vulnerable to climate change due to their dependence on natural resources and/or social vulnerability. Due to socio-ecological pressures, these groups have developed adaptation and resilience strategies at the local level. State policies vis-à-vis economic growth that are rooted in the exploitation of nature, coupled with the disorderly and uncontrolled expansion of cities, hinder climate resilience: of communities, nations, and the entire region. Political, economic, and international actors must support the climate actions of communities, and promote structural changes in ecological, economic, social, and political arenas. Even if communities are the most vulnerable to climate change, they must not bear the principal responsibility for solving the crisis, especially when they face socio-ecological and political conditions that threaten their dignity and very survival. 

There must be a more comprehensive vision that moves beyond just greenhouse gas emissions, and accounts for the social, economic, and political factors that produce such emissions and their sociological impacts. Such a vision must legitimize community leaders as central political actors in local, national, and regional decision-making procedures regarding climate change, overcoming the perception of these communities as backward or opposed to development.  

To prevent historical power relations from drowning out the voices of Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendants, campesinos, and women, it is necessary to move towards a new model of transformative governance. This means including actors with alternative views of what socio-ecological objectives are desirable and for whose benefit. Transformative governance can lead to resistance, as the focus is on producing fundamental ecological, social, economic, and political change that questions current power hierarchies and development models. The goal is to foster a more equitable, sustainable resilience, based on long-term transformations and the inclusion of voices that historically have been silenced. 

El Salvador [3] 

In 2021, El Salvador ranked 103rd in the Global Climate Risk Index (GCRI), a measure of the level of exposure and vulnerability to extreme weather events between 2000 and 2019.[4] In response, organizations like Catholic Relief Services (CRS) have been quite active in El Salvador, particularly regarding projects integrating soil and water management to increase agricultural yields. Two CRS projects—in the departments of Ahuachapán department and Chalatenango—illuminate the dynamics that facilitate or restrict community participation in local decision making on issues of resilience or adaptation.  

Successful projects that have improved the capacity of local farmers to act in an organized fashion and strengthened leadership skills have generated a sense of belonging to the territory. The construction of a common language—through training, information, continuous education, and putting lessons into practice—has been fundamental. Also important has been the scaling up of organizational capacities, beginning with pre-existing organizations in each area and the mapping of actors present in each territory. Such scaling has created new spaces for nurturing transparent and fruitful relationships, transferring technologies and knowledge, influencing programs and plans, and creating value chains for the marketing of produce. 

The challenges for achieving sustainable participation are two-fold. For external actors, the challenge for achieving sustainable participation over time is to understand the specific dynamics in each territory with respect to land tenure, natural resource management, pre-existing forms of association, and the exercise of power. For residents of each territory, the challenge is to be open to new ways of farming, caring for the forest, and relating to the environment, as well as include women, youth, and children in decision-making processes through intergenerational dialogue. 

In both Ahuachapán and Chalatenango, local farmers and strategic partners have incorporated agricultural knowledge, generated a learning community, and promoted informed participation as the foundation for decision making. Both departments count on an extensive presence of governmental and non-governmental institutions that work on environmental, climate change, and water resource management issues. One key take-away from this inquiry is that actions based on a paternalistic or welfare-oriented (asistencialista) approach, or that are implemented in a disjointed, biased manner without taking into account the specific characteristics of the territories, negatively impact governance in the face of climate change.  

El Salvador has made significant progress in strengthening the regulatory and institutional framework that makes it possible to address the effects of climate change in a timely, efficient manner. That said, the economic resources and the capacities of state institutions and, above all, municipalities are insufficient to deliver results of the scale that is needed.   

Honduras 

The Global Adaptation Initiative Index ranks Honduras 113 out of 185 countries in climate change vulnerability but a far lower rank of 177 out of 192 in readiness or ability to deal with climate change and improve resilience.[5] Thus, while Honduras is exposed to risk, the situation is worsened by low resilience and capacity to deal with climate change, again pointing to low levels of capacity in governance. 

When communities achieve solid local governance and capacity, they are better equipped to manage extreme weather events. Correlations between climate interventions and local governance include:  

1. Poor Governance Increases Vulnerability. Honduras is more vulnerable to extreme weather events than countries with similar exposure This is partly due to the lack of ability to adapt and cope with such events, which demonstrates how fragility, corruption, and low institutional capacity increase vulnerability. The conditions in the Dry Corridor and the vulnerability to hurricanes have long been known, but Honduras has struggled to develop a comprehensive climate response. Reducing a natural disaster to simply a weather event is a mistake. The “second disaster”—caused by poor disaster management—contributes to the overall catastrophe. 

2. Drivers of Vulnerability. Climate change exposes underlying problems with respect to resilience, capacity, and governance. Lempira’s unpredictable rainfall worsens farming conditions, but so do increased production costs or the lack of access to loans, investments, and solutions. In Olancho and the Mosquitia region, the problems of deforestation, illegal logging, drug trafficking, and forest fires have long been rampant. These systemic and criminal issues are beyond the control of small local communities and require a broader governmental response. 

3. Inclusive Participation Strengthens Governance. Future climate interventions should involve all relevant local stakeholders, as collaboration with the municipality and community leaders is crucial to ensure ownership and sustainability beyond the duration of a project’s funding. Participation in designing and implementing interventions strengthens local governance, democratic practices, and community-based collective action.  

4. Deforestation Due to Lack of Regulation and Governance. The current Xiomara Castro government has launched ambitious forest protection and conservation initiatives in Olancho and the Mosquitia area. These initiatives could be a game changer, but it is still too early to predict long-term effects. The state’s historical inability to control and regulate expansive cattle ranching, illegal logging, drug trafficking, and forest fires also reflects how poor governance, rather than the number of cattle, has been the main problem.  

5. The “Social Trap” and Collective Action Problems. The situation in Honduras can be viewed as a “social trap” where political actors struggle to collaborate on needed reforms due to power struggles, mutual distrust, and low capacity for dialogue and consensus-building. While the need for climate solutions is urgent, well-intended projects and reforms carried out too hastily may not have the desired effect or sustainability. A reform strategy emphasizing “deep democratization” might prove more effective through a long-term perspective aimed at building the social foundations for reform, enhancing the capacity of institutions, and empowering communities and civil society to defend their interests. 

6. Building Governance through Existing Structures and Co-Creation. Solid local governance structures and democratic practices are not built overnight; they are learned over years of civic engagement. From a donor perspective, more funds might actually reach the communities suffering from extreme climate events if donors are more flexible with bureaucratic requirements. A more community-based approach involving local NGOs, municipalities, and councils with local presence and knowledge would contribute to ownership and sustainability. 

7. Urgency Versus Long-Term Solutions. Many civil society and political actors find themselves in a constant crisis mode. When too many issues are urgent and resources are scarce, the result can be too many band-aid solutions. Even if long-term plans are in place, changing circumstances make it hard to stick to any plan, agreement, or timeline. Climate initiatives must balance attending to urgent issues while maintaining stakeholder engagement to build consensus and establish solid agreements. 

Guatemala [6] 

The Western Highlands are located in the northwestern part of Guatemala and are inhabited mainly by Mam, K’iche’ and Kaqchiquel indigenous populations. More than a third of the region is still covered by pine and/or oak forests.[7] The preservation of these forest stands is strategic: important rivers originate there, serving as important water recharge zones that supply water not only to surrounding communities, but to cities and other parts of the country.[8] 

The conservation of biodiversity and forest cover in the upper regions of the Western Highlands are essential for Guatemala’s hydrological equilibrium. Ancestral governance structures have provided one of the main mechanisms for the protection of these areas and constitute a central pillar of climate resilience. In the highlands, the majority of forested areas are on either local government or communal lands. At times, the local governments cede the right to use and manage the forests in their jurisdiction to the communities. Whether this happens or not depends on specific power relations within each territory. Where the communal governance of forests is more consolidated, as in Sololá, Totonicapán and Quetzaltenango, there is less deforestation. 

When the indigenous peoples of the highlands administer communal and municipal forests, they do so according to their own ancestral government structures. The communal governance of forests is a central feature of community organization and a source of territorial political power for many indigenous communities of the altiplano. These communal systems have proven to be more efficient and sustainable than those of the state or the private sector; this is because governance is based on rules, culture, and traditional knowledge that establish benefits and collective responsibilities as well as sanctions when responsibilities are not met. 

Over the last two decades, the traditional relationship between the Western Highland communities and the forests has been changing. The reasons for this include pressure from environmentalists to transform communal forests into protected areas; the logic of the extractive economy; and the continued expansion of urban areas. These dynamics fail to account for the dependency and socio-ecological connection between communities and the forest; The forest is not only a biophysical space for ecosystem services, but also a social space that binds the life of the community with the territory. 

New government cooperation projects and mechanisms to regulate the forestry sector (such as forestry incentive programs) have triggered power struggles between ancestral and local government structures of governance and authority. The struggle is rooted in different conceptions of the territory and its forests. Consolidating these conflicting approaches can allow communities to take advantage of incentives without fear of losing access to the forests, a central part of their identity, history, and political power. 

[1] Climate Resilience and Democratic Governance in Central America’s Northern Triangle, pages 8-11 

[2] Ibid pages 57-59 

[3] Ibid pages 90-93 

[4] Ibid page 70 

[5] Ibid pages 100-101 

[6] Ibid pages 177-179 

[7] Ibid page 156 

[8] Ibid page 156 

Agriculture and Energy Synergies: Unlocking the Potential of Agrivoltaics in Sicilian Vineyards

BY: FEDERICA LEVENI

---

Federica Levini is a young professional specializing in renewable energy and sustainable development. She graduated from the Johns Hopkins SAIS in 2024 with a Master of Arts in International Affairs (MAIA), where she focused on the intersection of environmental sustainability, energy and development. She is currently Technical Consultant at FAO Perù, overseeing environmental projects at national and regional levels, supporting governance, sustainability, and climate resilience initiatives.

---

The rapid expansion of global photovoltaic system installations over the past decade underscores the urgency of addressing pressing challenges: meeting rising energy demands, combating climate change, and advancing environmental sustainability. This shift gains particular momentum in the context of the European Union's REPowerEU Plan, launched in response to global geopolitical pressures such as the Ukraine conflict. The plan accelerates the adoption of renewable energy, supported by the Renewable Energy Directive (RED), which sets binding targets for renewables across the EU. Italy, leveraging its southern regions' abundant solar resources, has actively embraced this transition, fostering the development of photovoltaic projects to meet these ambitious goals. The surge in solar energy deployment raises pressing questions about land use, as large-scale photovoltaic systems often overlap with agricultural spaces. This creates a critical tension between the need for sustainable energy and the preservation of agricultural productivity—a core challenge in achieving a just transition. Agrivoltaics, which integrate solar energy production with farming, present a promising solution to balance these competing demands, enabling renewable energy expansion while supporting environmental and social equity. Without the adoption of agrivoltaics, land competition could intensify, resulting in diminished agricultural output, increased food insecurity, and social tensions in farming-dependent regions. Agrivoltaics in Sicilian vineyards, with a particular focus on its sustainability in comparison to conventional photovoltaic systems, offer a unique case study into the potential benefits of this approach.

The exponential growth in global photovoltaic system installations over the past decade reflects an urgent response to pressing challenges, such as escalating energy demands, climate change, and environmental sustainability. In light of global geopolitical events, especially the Ukraine conflict, the European Union has introduced the REPowerEU Plan, which aims to accelerate the adoption of renewable energy sources across the EU. The Renewable Energy Directive (RED) represents a central pillar of this endeavor, establishing binding targets for the EU's renewable energy share. Italy, along with other EU member states, has demonstrated a commitment to the expansion of its renewable energy capabilities. Specifically, these efforts have been shown in several photovoltaic projects, aimed at utilizing Italy's geographical advantages, especially in the southern regions, in order to harness its ample solar energy potential. Despite the promising prospects of solar photovoltaic systems as a renewable energy source, a notable challenge arises from the substantial land requirements, which frequently overlap with agricultural areas. This highlights a fundamental competition between solar energy and agriculture, both dependent on the same primary source: the  sun. It is within this context that agrivoltaics emerge as a compelling solution. 

Agricoltaics in Sicilian vineyards, with a particular focus on its sustainability in comparison to conventional photovoltaic systems, offer a unique case study into the potential benefits of this approach. Agrivoltaics, or agro-photovoltaics, are photovoltaic systems designed to integrate solar energy production with agricultural or pastoral activities, ensuring land use continuity and minimizing conflicts between energy generation and food production. The idea is to find a synergy between electricity production and agriculture. Specifically, agrivoltaic (APV) was conceptualized as a solution to the increasing land competition between food and energy production.1  As demand for renewable energy sources to mitigate climate change increases, the expansion of solar PV installations competes with agriculture. This competition is particularly marked in regions in high demand for both food production and renewable energy development. The challenge is to achieve a balance between the need to increase energy security and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, on the one hand, and the need to ensure food security for a growing population, on the other. The increasing demand for solar energy requires either a large area of land or the realization of a very large number of small or medium-sized plants, which have a much higher cost of energy.2  With the projected addition of two billion more individuals to the global population by 2050, the demand for energy and food production is expected to increase by 47% and 60%, respectively, in order to meet the anticipated needs.3 By combining solar PV installations with agricultural activities, agrivoltaic systems can make more efficient use of available land, especially when it is limited. 

Agrivoltaics can be classified into two main categories: independent systems in open fields and integrated systems within enclosed structures. In open fields, panels can be mounted close to the ground, facilitating permanent grassland and animal grazing. Alternatively, they can be positioned higher (over 2.1 meters) to allow machinery passage and crop cultivation underneath. This is known as advanced agrivoltaics. A multitude of studies have investigated the efficacy of agrivoltaics, with varied results depending on the type of terrain, the crop and the climate. 

From a commercial standpoint, several pilot plants are under development and numerous companies are directing their efforts toward vineyard agrivoltaics. Sun’Agri is an example. The pioneering Nidolères estate in Tresserre, Pyrénées-Orientales (France), took the lead in 2018 by installing photovoltaic panels on 4.5 hectares of vineyards. Since 2017, the Aspres region, known for its strong viticultural tradition and low-yield, high-quality wines, has faced the challenges of climate change and worsening droughts, leading to significant agricultural abandonment. To counter this, agrivoltaics has emerged as a key strategy to rejuvenate vineyards– demonstrating the capacity to enhance land productivity by up to 70%. This offers a range of advantages, including the mitigation of climate change impacts and the improvement of water balance in arid regions. 

Despite its promising prospects, agrivoltaic wine production is still in its early stages, with several pilot projects emerging recently.

In Italy, fossil fuels remain the main energy source. Natural gas and oil dominate Italy’s electricity mix. Renewables, like solar PV, account only for 8.9% of the total energy supply. Nonetheless, 30% of the energy produced in the country is made of renewable energy sources. This huge disparity is due to the fact that Italy imports approximately 80% of its total energy supply (4), despite a decreasing trend as a response to the war in Ukraine. The role of renewable energy in the country has undergone a period of accelerated growth over the past decade. Solar PV has represented a significant proportion of this growth, with 33% of the renewable electricity generation. This has been made possible by the falling cost of solar panels, which have become a cost-effective source of new electricity generation, but also to the aggressive incentives program introduced by the Italian Government in 2005, known as “Conto Energia”. This scheme accelerated solar technology adoption, allowing Italy to exceed EU targets. 5 Following the conclusion of the “Contro Energia” in 2013, the sector experienced a period of relative stagnation, characterized by a decline in the number of installations, with the majority of these being for domestic purposes. By 2023, Italy had installed a total of 30.28 GW of solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity, with 5.23 GW added that year.6  Despite recent regulatory changes driving capacity additions, Italy still lags behind the required annual installation rate of 12 GW to meet its 2030 targets. 

Italy has considerable potential for solar energy production (Figure 1), particularly in the southern regions and islands, with Sicily at the forefront. 

Figure 1: Direct normal irradiation, Italy. 

Source: World Bank Group

Notwithstanding the higher solar potential in the southern regions, photovoltaic installations are distributed throughout the country. A review of data provided by the Gestore dei Servizi Energetici (GSE) in June 2020, with updates until the end of 2019, revealed that Lombardy (in the north) had the highest absolute number of installations, with over 135,000 out of a total of 880,000 installations across the country. 

Additionally, Italy is one of the largest agricultural producers in the EU, with the agricultural sector accounting for about 2% of GDP.7 Despite the mountainous terrain being unsuitable for farming, approximately 4% of the population is employed in this sector. According to ISTAT (8), the utilized agricultural area is approximately 12.8 million hectares, or 41.8% of the entire national surface area. Italy's geographical characteristics present a significant potential for agrivoltaics. Unlike countries with extensive deserts or large tracts of unused land suitable for vast photovoltaic deployment, Italy's land is predominantly utilized. Moreover, as a leader in the agricultural sector, the nation heavily depends on farming. 

Italy ranks among the EU countries with the highest direct energy consumption in food production, following France and Germany. Energy costs constitute over 20% of variable expenses for farms, with even higher percentages observed in certain production sub-sectors.9

The unique combination of land scarcity, a significant agricultural sector and abundant solar radiation renders Italy an ideal candidate for the extensive implementation of agrivoltaic technology. In 2023, the Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA) developed a regional-scale map of national agrivoltaic potential (Figure 3) with the objective of assisting public administrations in planning sector development. This map employs criteria focused on minimizing land use while optimizing energy and agricultural production. 10

Figure 3: Areas potentially exploitable for agrivoltaics, Italy

Source: ENEA, 2023

The pioneering development of agrivoltaic systems in Italy commenced with the establishment of the first installations by REM TEC S.r.l. in 2011. The Agrovoltaico system was conceived in 2004 and represents a significant advancement in the integration of sustainable energy and agriculture. This optimizes electrical energy production and enhances safety measures during extreme weather events. Furthermore, the PV mounting structures are designed to minimize shading effects on crops and facilitate the operation of conventional agricultural machinery beneath them. 

2.2.3 - Legislation on Agrivoltaic 

Agrivoltaics is gaining increasing attention in Italy. The National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR) allocates a significant amount of financial resources (EUR 1.10 billion) to increase the share of energy produced from renewable energy sources. In particular, one of the measures included in the Plan incentivizes the spread of agrivoltaic systems of medium and large dimensions.11

While there are certainly some benefits to this system, the prospect of expanding photovoltaic farms in Sicily has raised concerns among local residents, particularly regarding the potential impact on agriculture. A number of stakeholders, including representatives of local energy communities, have expressed discontent the risks to traditional agricultural livelihoods caused by solar panel deployment. 12 These sentiments illustrate the multifaceted socio-economic and environmental considerations that are intertwined in the discourse surrounding the expansion of renewable energy in Sicily. 

Despite its limited diffusion, numerous studies have consistently underlined the significant benefits that agrivoltaic installations can bring in terms of crop yield, quality and quantity. These benefits extend to reducing CO2 emissions, conserving water and combating desertification. PV coverage also offers potential protection against adverse weather conditions like hail, frost, and heavy rainfall, while in periods of intense radiation, it can mitigate water stress by reducing crop evapotranspiration (13):the process by which water moves from the soil and plants into the atmosphere. The installation of an agro-photovoltaic plant in Sicily, with a production capacity of 1.04 GW, is expected to generate around 1300 GWh per year, reducing greenhouse gas emissions by around 0.8 million tonnes of CO2.14 Furthermore, agrivoltaic has the potential to optimize the utilization of Sicily's agricultural land, enabling the cultivation of crops and the generation of solar energy at the same time. These systems could facilitate the most efficient use of land and contribute to the advancement of sustainable development. With the growing interest and investment in renewable energy projects in Sicily– including the construction of large-scale solar plants– integrating agrivoltaics into the region's agricultural landscape represents a promising avenue for enhancing energy and food security while simultaneously promoting economic growth and environmental sustainability.

3.2 Potential for Solar Energy and Agriculture

Sicily is the region with the highest potential for solar energy in Italy, and it is likely to be one of the highest in the EU, with a total mean capacity factor, which is the measure of the energy produced by a solar plant compared to its maximum output, of approximately 19%. The geographically privileged position of Sicily provides an average of 2,500 hours of sunshine per year. Three of the ten sunniest cities in Europe are situated on the island, with Palermo averaging 340 hours of sunshine per month. Reflecting the national trend, solar photovoltaic technology is widely adopted across the island, with every municipality hosting at least one installation. 

3.3 Wine Production in Sicily and Potential for Agrivoltaic

Sicily is the leading region in Italy in terms of vineyard surface area, with 98,992 hectares, ranking it tenth globally.

Grapevines require ample sunlight and warmth in order to produce excellent wine. However, when temperatures become excessively high, it leads to a loss of acidity, increased sugar content, and a lack of fruity aromas. In the traditional approach, vines were shielded by trellises positioned on the sunset side, facilitating mutual shading due to the close proximity of rows, typically about 80 cm apart. However, the transition from manual to mechanized harvesting, while decreasing operational expenses, necessitates wider row spacing at least 2.5m apart– thereby eliminating self-shading. Consequently, vines are exposed to increased heat, leading to decreased yields.15 The French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA) provides a concerning projection: if average temperatures were to rise by an additional 2 degrees, by 2050, 56% of the current wine-producing regions worldwide could disappear.16 The most identified effects of climate change on winemaking include earlier grape ripening, leading to increased sugar content and alcohol levels (+1.5% alcohol in 30 years), as well as the development of aroma precursors, altering the taste of wine and reducing its acidity.17 The rising temperatures in southern Italy, attributed to climate change, present a growing challenge to wine production in Sicily. The region's wine industry is facing the threat of extreme dry heat which jeopardizes its continued development even leading to frequent sunburn on grapes. These climatic shifts not only pose obstacles to business as usual but also impact grape quality and yield. Indigenous grape varieties, which are of great significance to Sicily's winemaking heritage, are particularly susceptible to heat stress.18 This has led to reduced yields, a deterioration in grape quality and an increased risk of sunburn, resulting in wines with undesirable flavors. Last year alone, 40% of the grapes were lost due to high temperatures.19 

3.4 Cost-Benefit Analysis of APV vs PV on a Vineyard in Sicily

In order to assess the financial viability of implementing an agrivoltaic system for wine production in Sicily, I have undertaken the creation of a case study. The approach involves conducting a cost-benefit analysis, with a comparison of the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) between a traditional photovoltaic system (PV) and an agrivoltaic configuration (APV) on a vineyard in Sicily. LCOE is a calculation to allow financial analysts to compare different energy-producing technologies. Importantly, consistency will be ensured across key parameters such as location, installed capacity, interest rate, project life, and discount rate in this case study. 

Here are the key assumptions that guide the analysis: 

• The area available for the installation of the plant is 20 hectares.

• The wine variety cultivated is Nero d’Avola, yielding 125 quintals per hectare. 

• The total installed capacity of the power plant is 10MW.

• The capacity factor of solar in Sicily is 19%.20

• The project lifespan is 30 years.21 

• The Operation and Maintenance (O&M) rate is 2%.22

• The discount rate, calculated using the weighted average cost of capital (WACC), is 7%.23

Based on literature review, we can create two models differing only in initial investment costs (CAPEX) and the operational expenses (OPEX). The photovoltaic (PV) model suggests an estimated cost of €9 million, derived from an assessment of the total cost, which indicates that a 1 megawatt solar farm typically costs between €833,000 and €1 million.24 For the purposes of this analysis, an average price of €900,000 per MW was chosen. Regarding operational costs, OPEX expenditures for solar projects typically vary between €5 and €9 per kilowatt. In this model, a projected rate of €7 per kilowatt was utilized, resulting in a total of €70,000 for the 10MW installation.25 As mentioned above, the APV model exhibits disparities primarily in CAPEX and OPEX. For a 10MW agrivoltaic system, the approximation is a CAPEX increase of approximately 20%, leading to a value of €11 mln. This escalation can be attributed to the elevated costs associated with specialized components such as cables laid at a minimum depth of one meter to ensure uninterrupted agricultural operations, as well as the utilization of specialized modules, bifacial panels, or transparent products, alongside sophisticated mounting systems.26 However, it is noteworthy that expenses related to other components such as cables, inverters, and transformer stations remain consistent across both project typologies. In similar projects it was observed that OPEX associated with APV systems exhibited a notable reduction compared to conventional PV installations, with a discernible discrepancy of 13%, as indicated by experiences in Germany.27 This difference in operating costs is mainly due to the reduced annual land costs, maintenance, mowing and surveillance costs associated with APV. The lower maintenance costs associated with agrivoltaic systems can be attributed to  farmers already engaging in activities such as mowing the grass, which reduces the overall expenses. Additionally, since farmers are able to generate income from the land, the owner of the agrivoltaic plant is not required to pay as much. The only additional income required is that derived from leasing the building rights, which in turn reduces the overall land costs. The OPEX value considered in this model is then €60,000 per year. However, it is worth noting that the repair and maintenance costs are comparatively higher for agrivoltaics.

Results

Based on the analysis of the data, the traditional PV model demonstrates a LCOE value of €0.09 per kilowatt-hour (kWh), indicating that the cost of generating one kilowatt-hour of electricity with the solar PV amounts to €0.09. As anticipated, the LCOE associated with agrivoltaics exceeds that of conventional photovoltaic systems, standing at €0.11 per kilowatt-hour. The average price of electricity in Sicily's bidding zone is 10.30 cents per kilowatt hour.28 This indicates that photovoltaic is more financially advantageous than agrivoltaics, although the discrepancy in costs between them and the market price is not significant. Nevertheless, it is crucial to acknowledge that the advantages of agrivoltaic systems extend beyond the scope of LCOE calculations.

Agrivoltaics has emerged as a highly effective method for enhancing land use efficiency, with the Land Equivalence Ratio (LER) serving as a key metric to quantify this efficiency. The LER was originally derived from intercropping practices in agriculture and is used to measure the efficiency of integrating agricultural and electricity production systems. Simulation studies conducted in Emilia Romagna, Italy, demonstrate the substantial benefits of agrivoltaics for land productivity. The consistently high LER values, exceeding 1, indicate that agrivoltaic scenarios are more effective than separate cultivation (of maize in this case) and electricity production using ground-mounted PV systems. Agrivoltaics can increase the productivity of a given land area by up to 70% by combining energy and crop production, maximizing electric energy production while optimizing land use.29

Figure 4: Increase in Land Use Efficiency with an agrivoltaic system

Source: Fraunhofer ISE, 2020

The concurrent utilization of land in agrivoltaics not only enhances land productivity but also presents additional benefits for landowners. In the conventional photovoltaic setup, farmers typically sell their land to contractors, receiving monetary compensation but forfeiting potential income from farming activities. In contrast, agrivoltaics offer the possibility of dual revenue streams for farmers, with income derived from both land use and energy production. Although the landowner may not directly own the solar installation, they may be able to benefit from electricity discounts, which would effectively reduce their expenses. Furthermore, the above-mentioned simulation showed that the reduction in radiation had a significant impact on the simulated mean soil temperature, evapotranspiration, and water balance, as illustrated in Figure 5. Across all observed years, the mean soil temperature exhibited a consistent decrease under agrivoltaic conditions compared to full light conditions (Figure 5a), with an average difference of 1°C.30

Figure 5. (a) Mean values of simulated soil Temperature (°C) in rooted layer, (b) seasonal evap-transpiration (mm). The box plots represent the data variability within the agrovoltaic scenario for each simulation year. The red squares indicate simulated values in FL. 

Source: S. Amaducci et al., 2018

In the specific case study presented here, agrivoltaics implemented in vineyards across Sicily offer numerous additional benefits. It is widely acknowledged that weather factors such as temperature, solar radiation, and water availability strongly influence grapevine growth and development, impacting ultimately on yield and wine quality.31  As temperatures rise, plant water demand increases, yet the availability of irrigation water supply is decreasing. This dual challenge has had a detrimental impact on viticulture over recent decades. Although the grapevine is a drought-tolerant species, it requires a significant amount of water to complete its growth cycle, which coincides with the driest months.32 Recent research conducted by Italia Solare has demonstrated the efficacy of shading in reducing water consumption by up to 20%.33 In recent years, the region has experienced elevated temperatures, which have posed significant challenges for winemakers. This has resulted in a notable decline in productivity, with an approximate 40% reduction observed last year, attributed to sunburn and water stress. In the scenario outlined, this translates to a reduction from 125 quintals per hectare of Nero d’Avola to 87.5, resulting in an estimated total production of 1,750 quintals, as opposed to the previous 2,500. In light of these challenges, various studies (34) have proposed the implementation of cover crops as a means of alleviating the adverse impacts of climate change. Agrivoltaics represent an intelligent solution, effectively enhancing plant productivity while simultaneously generating renewable energy. The precise increase in productivity is contingent upon the specific vineyard varieties, the type of agrivoltaic system, and climatic conditions. Further research is necessary to identify the specific factors influencing productivity. Nevertheless, it is evident that there is a positive correlation between vineyard productivity and the integration of agrivoltaics in a region where temperatures and droughts are increasing.  

Conclusion

The exploration of agrivoltaics in Sicilian vineyards presents a promising avenue for unlocking agriculture and energy synergies. By integrating solar PV installations with traditional agricultural practices, this innovative approach offers a sustainable solution to address challenges posed by climate change, energy demands, and food insecurity. Despite the higher initial capital expenditure associated with agrivoltaics, the potential benefits are numerous. These include augmented energy production, enhanced crop yield and quality, and enhanced resilience against adverse weather conditions. Additionally, agrivoltaic systems have shown benefits over the water resource management, which is key for wine production. Over the long run, these advantages prove to be more profitable for vineyard owners. In the climate of growing and escalating consequences toward climate change, reforms and innovations like in agrivoltaics. Additionally, in order to maintain its leading position in the wine industry, Italy must adopt innovative solutions. Agrivoltaics emerges as the optimal solution, offering a multifaceted approach to safeguarding and enhancing wine productivity and quality. Furthermore, agrivoltaics enhances the resilience of agricultural communities and ecosystems in the context of an evolving climate landscape. By embracing agrivoltaic practices, Italy can not only mitigate the adverse impacts of climate change but also contribute to fostering a more sustainable and resilient future for both the environment and the farming community across the country.

---

References 

1. Dinesh H., Pearce J.M., The potential of agrivoltaic systems, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 54, 2016, Pages 299-308, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.024 

2. Di Francia, G.; Cupo, P. A Cost–Benefit Analysis for Utility-Scale Agrivoltaic Implementation in Italy. Energies 2023, 16, 2991. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16072991

3. Davey, C., The Advantages and Disadvantages of Agrivoltaics, 12 October 2021, Earth.org, https://earth.org/agrivoltaics/ 

4. International Energy Agency, Italy 2023 Energy Policy Review, 2023, https://www.iea.org/countries/italy 

5. Bianco, V., Cascetta , F., & Nardini, S., Analysis of technology diffusion policies for renewable energy. The case of the Italian solar photovoltaic sector. 2021, Elseiver - Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessment https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101250 

6. Bellini E., Italy’s annual new solar additions hit 5.23 GW in 2023, PV Magazine, 20 February 2024, https://www.pv-magazine.com/2024/02/20/italy-added-5-23-gw-of-new-solar-in-2023/ 

7. International Trade Administration, Italy - Country Commercial Guide, 2022, https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/italy-agricultural-sector 

8.ISTAT, Struttura e caratteristiche delle unità economiche del settore agricolo, 2021, https://www.istat.it/it/archivio/236288 

9. Matarazzo, A., Arfo’, S., Arcuria, S., Mertoli, F., Zerbo, A., Scuderi, A., The Agro-Photovoltaic Sector as a Possible Implementation Tool in the Sicilian Energy Transition. 2024 In: Lagioia, G., Paiano, A., Amicarelli, V., Gallucci, T., Ingrao, C. (eds) Innovation, Quality and Sustainability for a Resilient Circular Economy. AISME 2022. Circular Economy and Sustainability. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-55206-9_16 

10. Agenzia nazionale per le nuove tecnologie, l'energia e lo sviluppo economico sostenibile (ENEA), Energia: ENEA mappa l’agrivoltaico italiano, 2023, https://www.media.enea.it/comunicati-e-news/archivio-anni/anno-2023/energia-enea-mappa-l-agrivoltaico-italiano.html 

11. Di Francia, G.; Cupo, P. A Cost–Benefit Analysis for Utility-Scale Agrivoltaic Implementation in Italy. Energies 2023, 16, 2991. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16072991

12. Bertelli M., Can sunny Sicily become a clean energy hub for Europe? Some residents need convincing, Euronews, 9 May 2023

13. Matarazzo, A., Arfo’, S., Arcuria, S., Mertoli, F., Zerbo, A., Scuderi, A., The Agro-Photovoltaic Sector as a Possible Implementation Tool in the Sicilian Energy Transition, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-55206-9_16  

14. Matarazzo, A., Arfo’, S., Arcuria, S., Mertoli, F., Zerbo, A., Scuderi, A., The Agro-Photovoltaic Sector as a Possible Implementation Tool in the Sicilian Energy Transition, 2024 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-55206-9_16  

15.  Chaire Paysage et énergie (ENSP), Agrivoltaics in wine growing areas, 2022, https://www.citego.org/bdf_fiche-document-3087_en.html 

16. Boroli, How does global warming affect wine?, 31 May 2023, https://www.boroli.it/en/global-warming-andwine/#:~:text=Starting%20with%20cultivation%20techniques%2C%20grapevines,and%20negatively%20affects%20fruity%20aromas. 

17. Chaire Paysage et énergie (ENSP), Agrivoltaics in wine growing areas, 2022, https://www.citego.org/bdf_fiche-document-3087_en.html 

18. Andrade S., Wildfires force Sicilian winemakers to grapple with climate change, The Washington Post, 31 August 2023,https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2023/08/31/wildfires-sicily-wine-climate-change/ 

19. ANSA, Assovini, in Sicilia calo di produzione ma la qualità non è compromessa, 2 August 2023, https://www.ansa.it/canale_terraegusto/notizie/vino/2023/08/02/assovini-in-sicilia-calo-produzione-ma-qualita-non-compromessa_f9c8970e-ab6b-4713-84be-0f4483f8f3ca.html

20. Calculated through Renewables.ninja 

21.  The industry standard for most solar panels' lifespans is 25 to 30 years. https://www.forbes.com/home-improvement/solar/how-long-do-solar-panels-last/#:~:text=When%20you're%20doing%20your,for%2025%20years%20or%20more. 

22. Following similar solar PV projects

23.Calculated as: 15 year euro 3,26% + premium project 2,5% = 5,76%; WACC: 5,76% x 70% debt + 10% x 30% = 7,0% 

24. Coldwell Solar, How Much Investment Do You Need For A Solar Farm?, https://coldwellsolar.com/commercial-solar-blog/how-much-investment-do-you-need-for-a-solar-farm/ 

25. Wiser, Ryan H., Mark Bolinger, Joachim Seel, Benchmarking Utility-Scale PV Operational Expenses and Project Lifetimes: Results from a Survey of U.S. Solar Industry Professionals, 2020, https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/benchmarking-utility-scale-pv 

26. Bellini E., Italy’s annual new solar additions hit 5.23 GW in 2023, PV Magazine, 20 February 2024, https://www.pv-magazine.com/2024/02/20/italy-added-5-23-gw-of-new-solar-in-2023/ 

27. Chalgynbayeva, A.; Gabnai, Z.; Lengyel, P.; Pestisha, A.; Bai, A. Worldwide Research Trends in Agrivoltaic Systems—A Bibliometric Review. Energies 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020611

28. https://thingler.io/country/Italy

29. Chalgynbayeva, A.; Gabnai, Z.; Lengyel, P.; Pestisha, A.; Bai, A. Worldwide Research Trends in Agrivoltaic Systems—A Bibliometric Review. Energies 2023, https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020611

30. Amaducci, S., Yin, X., & Colauzzi, M., Agrivoltaic systems to optimise land use for electric energy production. Applied Energy, 2018,. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.081  

31. Mirás-Avalos, J.M.; Araujo, E.S. Optimization of Vineyard Water Management: Challenges, Strategies, and Perspectives. Water 2021, 13, 746. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13060746 

32. Idem

33. Italia Solare, 5 falsi miti su fotovoltaico e agricoltura, https://www.italiasolare.eu/fotovoltaico-e-agricoltura/

34.  Peng, J.; Wei, W.; Lu, H.-C.; Chen, W.; Li, S.-D.; Wang, J.; Duan, C.-Q.; He, F. Effect of Covering Crops between Rows on the Vineyard Microclimate, Berry Composition and Wine Sensory Attributes of ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ (Vitis vinifera L. cv.) Grapes in a Semi-Arid Climate of Northwest China. Horticulturae 2022, https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8060518

Beyond Ventriloquism – Authentic Representation in Development and Humanitarian Aid

BY: JULIANA ZHOU

---

Juliana Zhou has spent two decades moving across 5 countries in 3 continents as an immigrant, and speaks Japanese, Chinese and English. She focused on Development, Climate and Sustainability issues in SAIS. Due to living as a minority for most of her life, she cares about supporting those from vulnerable communities to live with dignity. She has used her personal experiences to publish a novel about the lives of immigrants in Japan, which explored themes such as cultural and linguistic adaptation, loss of homeland, belonging, and marginalization. She is a CPA with experience in financial and management consulting; additionally, she serves on the board of a DC based organization that promotes the well-being of refugees in US. She holds a Masters in International Public Policy from Johns Hopkins SAIS, a M.S. in Accounting from American University, and a B.A. in Economics from University of Toronto.

---

I.     Introduction

My interest in ventriloquism – the act of a speaker speaking through a puppet - and its impact on aid predates my time at SAIS. I spent two decades moving from one country to another. My childhood marked by frequent relocations and the attendant losses sensitized me to the vulnerabilities of displacement as an aid recipient in Asia, where I encountered the callous behavior of some aid workers. These workers frequently talked over me, disregarded my expressed needs, and reacted with anger when they felt their authority was challenged. I remember a particularly egregious scene where a human rights worker received monetary payment from my family for a service that he was to perform, then quit the job before doing the work, refused to return the money and cut off all communication. I was stunned and hurt because I had trusted them when they came to ‘help’, and that trust was betrayed. Gradually, I realized that the power imbalance, coupled with the language barriers faced by immigrants and refugees, created a dynamic where aid workers could easily dominate the conversation. They became, in essence, ventriloquists, speaking over the very people they were meant to assist. The subjects of aid were reduced to mere puppets, their voices replaced by those of their ventriloquist.

At a human rights panel that I attended in Japan as an adult, a compelling point was made about the difficulty of those deeply entrenched in a problem to articulate their experiences in real-time. Children unable to attend school, for instance, often lack the means to voice their struggles. Their plight is typically publicized by third parties – social workers and researchers – who, despite their good intentions, inevitably bring their own perspectives to the table. The researcher, for instance, is usually an upper-to-middle class person with at least a college education. These individuals can offer valuable insights, but their accounts do not fully capture the subjective and visceral lived reality of those directly affected by the issue. These experiences led me to pay attention to how aid workers portray their beneficiaries, including instances of ventriloquism. I became interested in exploring how aid workers can “hear” and accurately represent their beneficiaries’ experiences, and the conditions under which the beneficiaries can effectively speak and be heard. 

In this article, I analyze the issue of ventriloquism in development and humanitarian aid. The article proceeds as follows. The first section introduces my motivations in examining this topic. The second section offers an analysis of Gayatri Spivak’s classic article: “Can the subaltern speak?”, where Spivak demonstrates that marginalized groups are ventriloquized by both Western authorities and indigenous elites. The third section presents comparable formations of ventriloquism in development. The final section suggests methods for moving away from ventriloquism and towards more authentic empowerment for the beneficiaries, specifically mentioning listening, seeing, walking, and learning. 

II. Can the Subaltern Speak?

The issue of authentic representation has been discussed by post-colonial philosopher Gayatri Spivak in her article, “Can the Subaltern Speak?”. Spivak focuses on the practice of sati in India, where widows were forced to self-immolate at their husbands' funerals. These women, nameless and erased from official records, had no means to voice their experiences. Spivak defines the ‘subaltern’ as marginalized groups who are denied social mobility. She concludes that “the subaltern cannot speak”. 1 The subaltern is instead spoken for by domestic authorities and Western intellectuals, who doubly ventriloquizes her. The domestic authorities stated in official records that “the women actually wanted to die”, while Western intellectuals countered with a claim to defend the women’s free will, by presenting themselves as benevolent agents who intervene to save the women from traditional practices that require elimination. 2 However, the women were not exactly granted free will: both imposed their own interpretations of the widows’ desires and needs. When pouring over the records of East India Company on sati, one never encounters the women’s testimony: one cannot put together their conscious 'voice'. 3  The subaltern cannot be comprehended within traditional bounds of knowledge, because their traces have been epistemically obliterated. 

Essentially, Spivak argues that true representation is impossible within unequal power structures. She discusses how political and religious leaders, and scholarship - including Western scholarship- marginalize subaltern voices. She questions the very notion of representation, arguing that misrepresentation inevitably occurs because any data that has been selected by third parties would have been recontextualized and reframed by that very process. She introduces "epistemic violence," referring to the exclusion of subaltern perspectives from history and knowledge. 4 The article had a lasting impact on disciplines of postcolonial studies, history, anthropology, sociology, and development studies, among others. Its major weakness is that though it raised ethical questions about limitations in representing others, and concluded that “the subaltern cannot speak”, it does not answer what then should be done to realize their authentic representation. Critics ask whether Spivak achieved anything other than a theoretical paralysis – a moral defeat - of authentic representation and effective intervention.5 The article leaves the reader to grapple with the conflict between the desire to act to help subaltern groups, and an awareness of the potential for harm caused by those actions. 

III. Development Ventriloquism

In this section, I demonstrate a similar process of ventriloquism within the development context. My central suggestion is that development at times produces scenarios in which the development practitioners’ substitute their own judgments for those of the beneficiaries they aim to assist, while claiming to represent the recipient’s voice. This is ‘development ventriloquism’. 

Macroenvironment: The issue of development ventriloquism has macro and micro components. On the macro level, in recent years, the World Bank, IMF, and other major development actors have promoted "partnerships”. This shift coincided with a move away from top-down approaches like Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) towards more "country-driven" development strategies“.6 Nevertheless, power imbalances and inequalities within the global development system still exist that sometimes limit the extent of genuine partnership. Below, I draw on historical and contemporary cases to demonstrate development ventriloquism. 

Inadvertent development ventriloquism: Khader critiques the concept of "inadvertent ventriloquism" in development work, where practitioners inadvertently impose their own views on the communities they aim to assist.7 He analyzed a case where a missionary in Africa claimed that the Lombaba women wanted to end polygamy, which he linked to HIV/AIDS. However, polygamy at the time was seen as a socioeconomic asset in the region, while missionaries strongly disapproved of polygamy.8 The author questions the authenticity of this narrative, suggesting Oliver may have unconsciously imposed his own views, rather than listening to what the women themselves were saying, an example of "inadvertent development ventriloquism." 9 This form of ventriloquism may stem from practitioners underestimating beneficiaries' capacity; overvaluing their own expertise; confirming pre-existing assumptions; and seeking validation for their views.10

Turning an experience into a story: Aid workers are at risk of simplifying their beneficiaries’ complex lived experiences into narratives that align with their own objectives, while sacrificing contradictory, complex, or uncategorizable data. The chaotic nature of the beneficiaries’ lived experiences may be smoothened into stories about either the subjects as victims, or as empowered agents taking control of their lives with the help of aid. I recall a conflict at an exhibition for Syrian refugees in Japan. A Syrian man objected to being labeled a ‘refugee’, finding the term undignified and connoting helplessness. He emphasized that he had voluntarily chosen to leave Syria instead of being forced to, and preferred to be identified by his name instead of as a “refugee”. The exhibition organizer, however, saw the term ‘refugee’ as crucial for acknowledging the injustice he had suffered under the Assad regime. This led to a heated exchange, with the organizer ultimately dismissing the man's concerns as a politically motivated one potentially indicating support for the Assad regime. In this case, the organizer represented the man in a way by which he did not wish to be represented by, by ventriloquizing his experiences and projecting her own narrative onto them.

Speaking about, for, or with: To expand on the concept of ‘speaking’ in development, the concept as applied to development practitioners is ambiguous, as it may refer to speaking about the poor (through research and advocacy), for the poor (by voicing their concerns in official contexts), or with the poor (in partnerships).11 However, each of these approaches has its own set of problems. Speaking for the poor can create a paternalistic dynamic where the speaker assumes to know what the poor need, while speaking with the poor can be hindered by language barriers and power inequalities. For instance, despite Christian Aid’s efforts to give displaced people in Mali a voice, the agency alienated and offended them by partnering with the mayor of the town who spoke only French, a language that many didn’t understand and viewed as elitist and colonial.12 A double ventriloquism is formed here, similar to the dynamic portrayed by Spivak, where subalterns are ventriloquized by both Western authorities and local elites. 

‘Telling your own story’: Aid agencies increasingly emphasize a fourth approach: enabling others to speak for themselves or ‘helping our beneficiaries to tell their own stories’.13 While it assumes “speaking” is inherently empowering, this assumption often fails in practice. Firstly, recounting traumatic experiences can be upsetting, time-consuming, and invasive.14 Secondly, accurately translating and conveying nuanced cultural meanings across languages and contexts is challenging.15 Thirdly, participants may not be or feel free to ‘tell their own story’ in politically and militarily volatile situations with potential safety risks.16 Finally, the dynamics of power between beneficiaries and aid workers - whom the beneficiaries depend on for resources - influences how beneficiaries tell their ‘story’ and may compromise its authenticity.17 Without a nuanced deliberation of these factors, those intending for the beneficiaries to ‘tell their own story’ may inadvertently misinterpret and misrepresent the beneficiaries.

Choosing to not speak: Literary critic Jean Franco makes a case for interpreting some subaltern silence as intentional secrecy and a deliberate act of defense and control, rather than a passive effect of marginalization. 18 By hiding through silence, subalterns might protect themselves from what they perceive as misrepresentation or extraction, make them invulnerable to outside scrutiny, and regain a degree of control over how they are represented, which includes not being represented.19 This highlights the complexity of subaltern agency, where silence is not always an absence of voice, but an act of resistance. Focusing on having someone ‘tell their own story’, though valuable, can lead to premature satisfaction with a ‘story’ that is expressed on the surface, and a consequent neglect of what is not expressed. 

IV. Suggestions to Avoid Ventriloquism 

In this section, I describe several ideas on moving towards more authentic representation. I focus on methods and mindsets for one-on-one or one-to-group interactions here. These relationships differ from macro level development encounters in that development projects usually involve navigating between multiple and heterogeneous beneficiary needs, instead of a binary relationship. A pertinent question to ask is how to change institutional incentives to discourage macro level ventriloquism. Nevertheless, I focus on interpersonal interactions here because they are what I have control over as an individual. 

Listening: If the argument that representations of subalterns by third parties inevitably leads to some misrepresentation is accepted as having a degree of validity, then it follows that those serious about supporting subaltern groups without ventriloquizing them should shift away from attempting to represent their voices. The primary focus should not be on representing the subalterns as best as possible, but on listening as best as possible. Acknowledgement of the possibility of misrepresentation can itself be taken as a response that comes from having listened. In initial stages of a project, aid workers can consider speaking less. To listen, the beneficiary has to speak without being weighed down by our expectations, assumptions, and projections.

Seeing: To facilitate listening, make a conscious effort to ‘see’ the beneficiaries’ concrete specifics and peculiarities. It is easy to go into a situation and start talking about ideas on what to do if the beneficiaries are perceived as figures onto which we project our generalized knowledge. It is less easy to consider the specifics of a particular beneficiary. Pausing before speaking is valuable because if we have not prepared a conclusion, and the beneficiaries see this, the beneficiaries feel freer to speak however they want. When the aid worker tries to immediately force the interaction to a place where they can provide an answer-to-go, like a frozen meal-to-go, I think this leads to ventriloquism and makes the interaction poor, though s/he may seem eloquent and efficient in that brief moment. 

Walking: This idea draws on The Walking Interview as a Biographical Method (WIBM) by O’Neill and Roberts (2019). When meeting the beneficiary, the meeting need not take place in a room with a desk. To mitigate the power inequality between the aid worker and the beneficiary, they can meet and walk to somewhere side-by-side, possibly going to a place that the participant frequents, allowing them to view and experience the same sensory experiences.20 This disrupts the power imbalance of a traditional meeting, in which the aid worker and the beneficiary are separated by a physical barrier – the desk they sit at - and a metaphorical barrier, where the aid worker is the one who establishes the setting of the meeting.21 Disrupting these barriers may lead to more natural speech from the beneficiary. By seeing and hearing what the beneficiaries see and hear, the aid worker is given space to come closer, and this may help to develop empathy at a level that is more equal. One thing to keep in mind here is to connect, but not conflate yourself with the beneficiary. An awareness of the beneficiary as a separate individual should be maintained while attempting to connect.

Role Playing: As an alternative method to disrupt the power structure inherent in traditional interactions and enhance the effectiveness of practitioners, I suggest initiating role play activities for critical conversations. Practitioners can play the role of a beneficiary, preferably within the context of a project they are involved in, and interact with other staff in mock meetings, discussions, and outreach sessions. Practitioner ‘beneficiaries’ will gain insight into their emotions when placed in a vulnerable position, and reflect on any discomfort or difficulties experienced during interactions with aid workers. 

V. Conclusion

In this article, I described issues with ventriloquism – misrepresentation of marginalized voices - and how this affects development, and suggested several methods to mitigate this. It is partially a result of my attempt to take a negative experience and turn it into something meaningful. While institutional change is crucial, individual aid workers can make a difference by shifting from speaking for beneficiaries to truly listening and understanding their experiences. I do not want anyone to recall me the way I recall the aid workers that I had met, and I want to not betray the trust that any beneficiary has placed in me. It is not easy to approach the vulnerabilities of others. There should be patience for the trial-and-error process that people go through as human beings to speak to, hear, and understand another human being before finding a solution.

Bibliography

1. Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the Subaltern Speak? In C. Nelson, & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Urbana/Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 39

2. Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the Subaltern Speak? In C. Nelson, & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Urbana/Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 28

3. Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the Subaltern Speak? In C. Nelson, & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Urbana/Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 28

4. Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the Subaltern Speak? In C. Nelson, & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Urbana/Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 77

5. Morton, S. (2003). Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. London: Routledge.

6. Contu, A. and Emanuela, G. (2014). NGOs Management and the Value of ‘Partnerships’ for Equality in International Development: What’s in a Name? Human Relations 67 (2): 205–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726713489999

7. Khader, S. J. (2011). Beyond Inadvertent Ventriloquism: Caring Virtues for Anti‐paternalist Development Practice. Hypatia 26 (4): 743. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01167.x.

8. Khader, S. J. (2011) Beyond Inadvertent Ventriloquism: Caring Virtues for Anti‐paternalist Development Practice. Hypatia 26 (4): 747. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01167.x.

9. Khader, S. J. (2011). Beyond Inadvertent Ventriloquism: Caring Virtues for Anti‐paternalist Development Practice. Hypatia 26 (4): 744. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01167.x.

10. Khader, S. J. (2011). Beyond Inadvertent Ventriloquism: Caring Virtues for Anti‐paternalist Development Practice. Hypatia 26 (4): 744. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01167.x.

11. Wright, K. (2018). Helping Our Beneficiaries Tell Their Own Stories?’ International Aid Agencies and the Politics of Voice within News Production. Global Media and Communication 14 (1): 85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742766518759795.

12. Wright, K. (2018). Helping Our Beneficiaries Tell Their Own Stories?’ International Aid Agencies and the Politics of Voice within News Production. Global Media and Communication 14 (1): 98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742766518759795.

13. Wright, K. (2018). Helping Our Beneficiaries Tell Their Own Stories?’ International Aid Agencies and the Politics of Voice within News Production.  Global Media and Communication 14 (1): 86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742766518759795.

14. Wright, K. (2018). Helping Our Beneficiaries Tell Their Own Stories?’ International Aid Agencies and the Politics of Voice within News Production. Global Media and Communication 14 (1): 89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742766518759795.

15. Baker, M. (2006) Translation and Conflict. London; New York: Routledge

16. Baker, M. (2006) Translation and Conflict. London; New York: Routledge

17. Baker, M. (2006) Translation and Conflict. London; New York: Routledge

18. Franco, J. (2010). Moving from Subalternity: Indigenous Women in Guatamala and Mexico, Can the Subaltern Speak? Reflections on the History of an Idea, ed. Rosalind C. Morris, New York: Columbia University Press, 213-24.

19. Franco, J. (2010), Moving from Subalternity: Indigenous Women in Guatamala and Mexico”, Can the Subaltern Speak? Reflections on the History of an Idea, ed. Rosalind C. Morris, New York: Columbia University Press, 217.

20. O’Neill, M. and Roberts, B. (2019). Walking Methods: Research on the Move. London: Routledge.

21. Murphy, D. (2022). Walking, Talking, Imagining: Ethical Engagement with Sex Workers. Ethics and Social Welfare 16 (2): 224. https://doi.org/10.1080/17496535.2022.2033809.

Announcing the 2024-25 ANNUAL Theme: Escalating Consequences

SAIS Perspectives Editorial Team

As shown by recent events, climate change is quickly becoming a real and immediate threat. We invite contributors to explore the principle of ‘Escalating Consequences’ through a range of interdisciplinary lenses, both critical and hopeful. Whether your passion is development or security, human rights or finance, we want to uplift your ideas about consequences of climate change. We want to hear about the ideological and the technical, the theory and the practice, and offer our readers deeper insight into the many nuances, contradictions, and possibilities of the consequences of climate change. Click here to submit for publication.

Escalating Consequences

As recent studies have shown, the consequences of climate change are real and immediate. 2024 has so far been the hottest year on record, with the world seeing temperatures well over 2° Fahrenheit warmer than the global average. High nighttime temperatures, urban heat islands, lack of air conditioning, and other factors have led to thousands of deaths throughout the summer due solely or in part to the lethal temperatures. According to the WHO, heat stress is the leading cause of weather related deaths, and the number of people exposed to extreme heat has increased exponentially in the 21st century.

This theme looks to address the looming disaster that is climate change. These can include questions and prompts such as:

- How can the developing world mitigate the effects of climate change that are currently happening?

- How do we grapple with domestic and international climate migration?

- The relationships between the developing and developed world, and how to avoid green colonialism.

- Climate solutions in response to escalating effects.

Potential futuristic technologies that can mitigate the effects of worsening natural disasters such as hurricanes.

- Intergovernmental organizations and their work to assist those most affected by recent disasters.

This theme gives the opportunity to speak about potential solutions or write about what governments’ actions or inactions in regards to alleviating the problem. Submissions can discuss potential technologies that they learn about in other concentrations (such as Security and Statecraft or Technology and Innovation) that could help to assist those most affected by current climate change effects or those that are imminent. This theme looks to move toward a viable future that needs to be implemented soon in order to preserve as many peoples’ livelihoods and lives as possible.