Excepted that the turbines onboard slow down the wing by adding drag. This issue is not really studied in current wind energy because current wind turbines do not have secondary rotors.
Why not name a (crosswind) “drag-based” wing (with secondary turbines onboard) as a “lift-drag-based” wing, and a (crosswind) “lift-based” wing (yoyo system) as a “drag-lift-based” wing (the first qualifier being predominant)?
Indeed as I mentioned the paper indicates that "AWE drag power systems can harvest up to 16/27 of the power available in the wind " and "AWE lift power systems can harvest up to 4/27 of the power available in the wind ", “AWE lift power systems” being yoyo systems. The used terminology is exactly the opposite in the field of current wind energy, although these values correspond well to the respective limits of lift devices (for example three- bladed HAWT) and drag devices (for example Savonius-type).
I think the AWE logic is a bit different because AWES fly and are tethered, while current wind turbines don’t fly. AWE works (or doesn’t work) in near 3 D while current wind turbines work in near 2 D.