As with any large infrastructure push, renewable energy (RE) expansion can bring unintended consequences for the communities living in and around project sites, such as reducing access to arable land, disrupting livelihoods, and reshaping local economies. In Sujanpura, Gujarat, with the construction of a solar power plant, for instance, pastoralists have lost their grazing grounds. Families now spend INR 200–300 a day on hay for their livestock—fodder that was once freely available in the commons.
Renewable energy stakeholders—including developers, procurers, and investors—are increasingly recognising the importance of people centricity in their projects. Many are adopting more inclusive decision-making processes, exploring co-beneficial land use models, and prioritising sustained community engagement.
However, while progress is being made, some questions remain: What does a just and responsible energy transition actually look like? And can renewable energy business models be truly people-centric?
At the Responsible Renewable Energy Summit 2025 held in New Delhi, Smarinita Shetty—co-founder and CEO of India Development Review—moderated a panel discussion on how renewable energy businesses can balance climate action with community well-being. This session was modelled on the lines of our podcast ‘On the Contrary by IDR (OTC), which features unlikely conversations on topics that affect our future. The aim is to bring together leaders and experts with differing views to help everyone arrive at a new, shared understanding of issues.
To achieve this, the panel featured key stakeholders representing three important perspectives in the space—that of developers, investors, and communities. It comprised Dr Arul Shanmugasundaram, executive director of operations at Ayana Renewable Power; Pinaki Halder, director of national programmes at Landesa India; and Radhica Kanniganti, ESG leader at Wipro. Captured in this article are insights and perspectives from the three experts.
A people-centric RE model
Arul: As a developer, our intent is to address the concerns of the different stakeholders and make sure that their interests are taken care of. It is therefore important, even prior to bidding or deploying any equity capital, to conduct an ESIA [environmental and social impact assessment] of the area. At Ayana, we have found this assessment to be helpful because it also mitigates our risks and protects us from any environmental violations, while giving us a higher assurance of return. Ultimately, our investors care about assurance of return without an impact on the local environment.
Radhica: Buyers in the RE space occupy a very powerful position. As companies transition to renewable energy, they are in a great place to influence the developers. Given that we work extensively with underserved communities at our foundation [Wipro Foundation], we make sure that on the business side as well, all our energy procurement is responsible and just. We therefore tend to go with a developer who aligns with these values.
Before procuring RE, it is certainly essential to do a nature capital valuation. But we also do a social impact evaluation. This really helps us understand what we are doing, what is acceptable, and where we need to pivot. We conduct an assessment to see the effect of the project on water, air, land, as well as the communities. It is important to ensure that we are not creating new problems as we try to solve old ones.
Pinaki: The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) Act was passed in 2013 to ensure that people and communities are minimally impacted during land acquisition. It introduced four key concepts that are important pillars in a just transition to RE. First is consent—before any land acquisition, a private project requires 80 percent consent from the affected families, and a public–private project requires 70 percent. Second, it established better mechanisms for compensation. Third, it instituted a framework for rehabilitation and resettlement. And last, it introduced a social impact assessment that is used to measure the potential outcome and impact of an acquisition. And social impact assessments cover all the grammars of well-being.
So, there are already elements of people centricity in this act. Essentially the act exists to ensure that land procurement is seen through a lens where the affected community is considered a component of the development process.
Current solutions need to go beyond monetary compensation
Arul: It is commonly believed that compensation from a land acquisition might provide one with more capital than their land could have generated over the years. However, this overlooks an important factor—loss of land also means loss of livelihood for many.
A farmer now no longer works on his land on a daily basis. Suddenly, he’s idle the whole day. How can he be engaged or employed? This is why it’s important to encourage local employment when building these RE projects, and assess how local livelihoods can be continued. A solar plant has several non-skilled jobs such as security, cleaning, and trimming of grass where locals can be engaged.
One of the things that Ayana has been doing in all its plants is building a skill development centre during the execution phase. It’s a permanent facility where we train people for two or three months to build skills useful in the solar projects space. Fifty percent of these trainees are women, and we ensure they procure employment at a solar plant. At the end of the day, the measure of success is the placement, not just the training. But we’re not doing renewable solar everywhere. For example, in Gadag, we have a wind project. Here we have taken a slightly different approach, and introduced training for digital skills. Since it’s a Tier-III city, digital skills can provide new employment opportunities to people. But it is essential that developers account for this loss of livelihood.
Pinaki: Land ownership is viewed as a [marker of] social status—it carries additional value for one’s social position. Loss of land also leads to a loss of this social capital.
Enhancing employability has to account for marginalised communities.
As Arul mentioned, people might receive good compensation, but in most cases their livelihood is compromised. Discussions across various sites have also revealed a common challenge—while some may have financial compensation in their bank accounts, they often struggle with finding meaningful ways to use it.
Upskilling and reskilling are therefore critical. The key question is, how can developers, promoters, and financiers innovate to enhance employability through skill development? It requires coordination with government departments and schemes. And enhancing employability has to account for marginalised communities, particularly women. There has to be a mission statement to make RE development more equitable.
This also includes addressing co-benefits, which can be both monetary and non-monetary. In a recent conversation with Arul, we explored the role of local self-governments, especially panchayats, in integrating company investments into broader community development plans. This could include infrastructure projects, access to drinking water, human development initiatives, and skill-building efforts that align with existing departmental schemes. So, there are various ways in which we can build new initiatives. We can start on a small scale and then, based on the impact, we can scale it.
Radhica: I think what has really fuelled this transition to RE is the race towards net zero. A lot of companies have committed to net-zero targets by 2040 or 2050. And this kind of RE transition is one big way to get there. While the community gets compensation, it has to be kept in mind that those who are earning their livelihood from the land cannot be ignored. The social impact assessment report has to be published in the local language and made available to all public institutions within the locality, including the administrative offices. We cannot overlook the most disadvantaged community that otherwise would be a partner in the development process. As companies transition to RE, they are in a great position to influence how and where they get their energy from.
People-centric approaches face structural challenges
Arul: There are challenges around socio-cultural structures, financial inclusion, and long-term development as we seek to build responsibly.
- Socio-cultural structures: One challenge we encounter is the patriarchal structures that exist in a lot of these regions. Land ownership for women is not recognised. And when a company like ours enters the system, and we tell them that we need the sisters to sign or the daughters to sign, it is met with a lot of resistance. We then insist on a dialogue with them and help them understand.
- Financial inclusion: A lot of times, people don’t have bank accounts or PAN cards. They are also not connected to any welfare schemes. During the registration and leasing process, we insist on building some of these.
- Skilling projects: Often, it is hard to ascertain what skilling projects should be introduced. I was in discussions with a local leader on early childhood education. They showed me pictures of beautiful, well-maintained schools and Anganwadi centres. And then they mentioned that, despite this infrastructure, they don’t have any teachers. So how do we solve for that? Where do we find these teachers? Because if teachers already exist, you can upskill them or reskill them. But when you don’t have teachers to begin with, how do you build that out? I don’t know the answer yet, but these things do present us with interesting opportunities. It is important that we don’t stick to the short term. Longevity in terms of benefits needs to be ensured.
- Long-term development: We want to go for long-term development. People perceive CSR in a certain way. They ask us to build a temple or contribute to a festival. But most companies have very specific teams with specific goals. So we have to explain to people that this is not something we can do. We want to build something sustainable that can contribute to the community’s development year on year. These types of investments vary from location to location. It cannot be a general approach across the board.
There has been considerable progress, but more needs to be done
Radhica: Forums like these serve to create awareness about what can be possible. A lot of times people don’t know what the impacts of RE projects are, and so these forums are very useful.
From a buyer’s perspective, currently a lot of focus is on sustainable supply chains. There is a shift to sustainable procurement and suppliers. Companies have started looking at the entire value chain in terms of the impact it has, and this gives me hope. There is a huge focus on not just sustainability within the organisation but also outside it—with suppliers and procurers. This has changed how we engage with our suppliers in general.
We’re now looking at the entire value chain and all of the various impacts it has. An ideal partnership would be between a corporate and a developer working on these projects together. Simultaneously, the people who are affected should be considered partners in the development process.
Pinaki: As Arul mentioned, leasing is the way of the future. It ensures that the land stays with the farmer. The LARR Act also provides for a negotiation settlement, which ensures that communities get maximum compensation.
Things are moving in a positive direction. If there is one thing I’d like to emphasise on with developers, promoters, and financiers, it is the importance of education on the land procurement process. It’s also crucial to explore ways in which land-losing and land-dependent communities can become empowered stakeholders. This includes engaging local institutions, women’s groups, Panchayati Raj institutions, and community clubs meaningfully.
Connecting these three dots—people centricity, business viability, and utility scale—is a significant challenge. The model must prioritise people while also being commercially viable and scalable. However, I’m optimistic, as we’re seeing more progress in this direction. Agrivoltaics is a promising example of concurrent land use. The key now is figuring out how to scale such models effectively—that’s the vision for the future.
Arul: From a developer’s perspective, we should not only look at financial benefits but also overall development of the community. As long as we keep that in mind, we can arrive at solutions.
—
Know more
- Read this article to learn more about the business case for renewable energy.
- Read this framework to learn how to make renewable energy people centric.
