Whole systems? What's that?
When multiple-order negative impacts are not considered: the example of the solar revolution in Australia.
Setting the scene
Before progressing to the article proper, take a few minutes to view this recent news report from Australia’s ABC1, then find a quiet corner somewhere close to reflect on the absurdity. When you feel a bit better, read on.
Whole systems?
The concept of “whole systems” is central to the points I make below and the key reason the present state of waste in the solar industry is so appalling. So I’ll start with a brief explanation, some critiques, and why “whole systems thinking” is so useful, if applied with awareness.
“Whole systems” is a rhetorical “systems thinking” device applied in sustainable development, as well as many innovation and change initiatives, especially for the transformation of networks, organizations, and communities; and our material economy with its multiple-order upstream and downstream impacts. It has been applied effectively in many initiatives as a way of challenging the primacy of linear thinking. So far so good.
The reality of thinking in whole systems is that it is difficult, if not impossible, to conceive of what is a whole system. So much of the world system is not visible or coherent to most of us. That’s why in complexity-based change, we use system mapping, and notional, contingent system boundaries and system graining to see how a transformation might play out in different layers, intersections and scales at varying degrees of detail.
Some critics say that the concept of whole systems is meaningless, largely because of the way it is considered in change. Dave Snowden of Cynefin fame is highly skeptical of its use and recommends against using the term, preferring to deal with the adjacent possible2 in a more bounded systems approach. Australian economist, Nicholas Gruen, in a recent interview was scathing in his critique of systems thinking and whole systems 3. I appreciate why they take their positions: the rhetoric of whole systems has been extensively misused. Many change practitioners use the language of whole systems to describe their intent, but then proceed in a linear fashion. Or they apply the concept in vague ways showing that they don’t know what they mean by whole systems nor understand how many individual rational choices create new emergent patterns that are contrary to purpose - but that’s another topic for another time.
Generally, I don’t agree with these critiques - I think they are a negative reaction to poor and thoughtless application of the concept in practice, peppered with a simplistic application of “straw man” arguments in an unhelpful way.
I believe we need a prompt to help us shift to a way of thinking that is different to that applied in a linear, single-outcome, problem-solving, simplistic approach to the world’s complex problems: an application that often make things worse. And if that useful prompt is the concept of whole systems, then I’m in favour. I’d add, however, the caveat that the concept of “whole systems” should be used in the context of exploration, hypothesis development and self-aware sensemaking to avoid so-called unintended consequences4 , or just snapping back to a linear approach. Just don’t be too vague in your application of the term and don’t get carried away with the rhetoric! And keep your cosmic interpretations of whole systems to yourself as a general rule.
The case of renewable energy systems in Australia
I want to examine the whole systems concept further by looking at a case where failure to consider whole systems has resulted in downsides and unintended consequences: the case of renewable energy systems, particularly solar energy systems and large-scale solar in Australia. In Australia, we have been wildly successful in rolling out renewable energy systems: on domestic, commercial and industrial rooftops; and in large-scale solar farms. The contribution of renewable energy into the national grid is growing at pace. South Australia consistently operates at above 100% renewables contribution, and regularly exports excess electricity to other States. Electric vehicle use is quickly rising, as is the move to whole-house and whole-building electrification, on the promise of increasing quantity of renewable energy at low cost. The Federal Government’s target of 80% renewable contribution to Australia’s electricity system by 2030 is arguably achievable, even with current development bottlenecks and grid limitations.
Yet the renewables industry is an industry that has neglected to think in whole systems, and this failure has created a raft of cascading negative impacts, with recent news items and related social media posts highlighting system failures including:
increasing wastage of functioning solar PV panels, driven by system upgrades to take advantage of lower cost battery storage systems.
limited solar PV panel recycling rates, causing redundant panels to be directed to landfill; illegally dumped; or sent overseas to create waste problems in poor communities.
insurance companies replacing entire systems when only a small percentage of solar PV panels have been subjected to storm damage.
insufficient legal and technical support to divert functioning solar PV panels for re-use.
incompatibilities of used solar panels with new technologies.
permanent loss of critical metals from the material stream.
insufficient material flow of redundant non-functioning panels to make recycling procedures viable.
lack of development of a mandatory product stewardship scheme for solar PV panels.
I will add to that list a few more multiple-order impact issues:
Land clearing to facilitate development, especially clearing of old-growth native forests and woodland.
Lack of consultation with communities affected by the impact of the development, creating a backlash to renewable energy development.
Consideration of negative biodiversity effects.
And our hope for such technology is to lead to a more sustainable world - not creating more problems than we have solved. All of these problems are emblematic of the failure to at least try to think in whole systems and prevent for negative system impacts. The drive to cash-in on the solar revolution, with a single-minded focus on installation is successfully accelerating installation, yet leaving considerable waste and multiplying negative impacts in its wake - and all the while claiming that they are just unintended consequences.
Project work in circular solar
In the latter half of 2024 and in early 2025, I participated in two projects framed to shed light on these issues:
The Smart Energy Council/Queensland Government solar PV panel reuse trial5. I prepared a report on the state of solar panel re-use in Australia as one of the three trial projects.
The Circular PV Alliance assessment tool to certify the circularity of large-scale solar farms 6. I reviewed the assessment tool drafts and made recommendations for improvement after each iteration; then conducted an independent third party assessment of CPVA’s evaluation of a solar farm.
My participation in these projects gave me insight into what’s wrong with the current system of renewable energy development that need to be urgently addressed by both Government and Industry.
The report for the Smart Energy Council has not been officially released yet, waiting for all three parts of the solar PV panel reuse trial to be completed. The report contained the results of a rapid desktop review of current academic and industry literature on solar PV panel reuse and recycling. One hundred and twenty-seven documents were accessed and analyzed, with special focus on thirty-two Australian documents with high-relevance to solar PV panel reuse. Issues and recommendations from the literature were categorized in terms of policy, technical, economic, reverse logistics and capability themes. The literature review was supported by a validation process with project’s Advisory Group and additional experts.
Insights
Across the five themes, twenty problematic issues were identified in the literature, with fifty-eight discrete recommendations for change. I sorted these into nine high-priority areas based on Advisory Group feedback:
Enforce an end to landfilling of solar PV panels.
Establish a consistent national approach for mandatory product stewardship
Establish standards for reuse to build consumer trust in the emerging second-hand solar PV panel market.
Extend the Small-scale Technology Certificates (STC) program to allow for reuse of solar PV panels.
Extend CEC solar PV panel accreditation time limits.
Develop collection and transport protocols for safe handling, stacking, and transport of decommissioned solar PV systems.
Establish a centralized, fit-for-purpose database that captures all solar PV panel installations and removals.
Provide financial incentives to encourage business and residential consumers to purchase properly tested, repaired and refurbished solar PV systems.
Develop more recovery facilities and collection points across urban, regional and remote Australia.
The recent articles in Australian media reinforce these findings and stress the urgent need for action.
Based on the findings of the report I prepared, plus the more recent articles, I can unequivocally say that the inability to design for whole systems has contributed to the situation where solar panel recycling is limited, most redundant functioning panels are not re-deployed, and valuable functioning panels end up as waste.
In my opinion, it demonstrates that participants in the renewable energy field are so focussed on the roll-out, that they neglected to consider the multi-order system effects of their decisions. This is more than likely due to the mistaken belief that because they contribute to the growth of renewable energy, they are inherently acting sustainably. They are not.
I expect this from the mainstream business-as-usual sector; but to see this in the renewables sector is disappointing. Even a cursory bit of low-grade, vague, almost-whole-system-thinking could have avoided this unsatisfactory system state.
In response, the CPVA initiatives creating a circular certification platform is a timely innovation that will certainly introduce a degree of whole-system thinking to the large-scale solar industry. I hope that ongoing advocacy from the SEC and the supporting ecosystem of academic and industry leaders gain traction in driving implementation of these recommendations, especially towards a mandatory product stewardship scheme for solar PV panels.
Our Federal, State and Territory Governments and industry must do better than the current state of affairs. Time to step up, for the sake of the whole system - even if that’s contentious and difficult to do!
Note: I understand (via Darren Johannesen of SEC) that that the Queensland Government will soon release the desktop report as well as the reports of the solar PV panel reuse trials. I also understand that once that happens, the SEC will place all the trial reports on their website for public access. I further understand that the SEC is in the process of sharing outcomes with other Australian State Governments. I’d like to share the report with subscribers, but I won’t until it has been officially made public.
Version 1.0 June 20 2025
ABC News: The Business (2025). Millions of solar panels dumped as upgrades surge. Thursday 12th June 2025.
Snowden, D. (2023). Advanced Cynefin Workshop, Melbourne Business School University of Melbourne, August 10, 2023.
Gruen, N. (2025). Nicholas Gruen’s weekly Substack, June 7th, 2025
“So-called” because from a systems perspective, there is no such thing as an unintended consequence. Whatever designers or developers unleash on the world inevitably changes due to socio-technical emergent system effects. When a proponent of a development describes an outcome as an unintendend consequence, is demonstrating their linear thinking through blame-shifting!
Parnell, M. (2024). Solar Module Product Stewardship Reuse Desktop Study. Smart Energy Council.
Circular PV Alliance: https://www.circularpv.com.au/