Integrating the Human Sciences to Scale Societal Responses to Environmental Change: Proceedings of a Workshop (2023)
Chapter: 3 Overview of Challenges: Identifying Gaps and Needs That Prevent Real and Sustained Change
3
Overview of Challenges: Identifying Gaps and Needs That Prevent Real and Sustained Change
INTRODUCTION
The workshop’s third session was moderated by Fernando Sanchez-Trigueros, a Planning Committee Member who is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Native American Studies, Assistant Professor in the Department of Environmental Studies, and Director of the Elouise Cobell Land and Culture Institute at the University of Montana. This session discussed human sciences-related challenges and gaps hindering sustained change.
Sanchez-Trigueros began by acknowledging the importance of incorporating Earth Systems Science with the human sciences to better understand environmental change and its impact on communities. At the same time, he recognized that, to effectively respond to environmental change and its impacts, one must prioritize significant challenges and needs within the human sciences. Sanchez-Trigueros noted the focus of this session was on convening a diverse range of disciplines to reflect on the challenges of integration. He stated that the goal of the session was to identify the existing gaps and unmet needs that must be addressed to facilitate real and sustained change in the face of environmental challenges.
Three panelists offered their expertise on the topic. Deborah Balk, a Professor at the City University of New York’s (CUNY’s) Marxe School of Public and International Affairs and Director of the CUNY Institute for Demographic Research, discussed the importance of understanding populations and places as the basis for preparing communities for future environmental changes. Direlle Calica, Director of the Institute for Tribal Government at Portland State University, spoke on the unique challenges faced by tribal communities in the context of their specific environmental change-related needs. Gabrielle Wong-Parodi, an Assistant Professor in the Department of Earth System Science at Stanford University, addressed the question of how the human sciences, as a set of discrete disciplines, can be mobilized to better meet community needs; her insights shed light on potential strategies and solutions for bridging the gap between research and practical applications in the context of addressing community response to environmental challenges.
MOBILIZING HUMAN SCIENCES DISCIPLINES TO BETTER MEET COMMUNITY NEEDS
Balk addressed the question: What do people need to understand about populations and places to prepare communities for future environmental changes? She emphasized that, despite the uncertain future, specific aspects of global change are certain to happen. In the social sciences, for example, urbanization is an accepted,
significant trend because future population growth will occur primarily in urban areas. She mentioned the aging population as another demographic certainty, although the rate at which populations age varies. Therefore, estimating population risk becomes a crucial aspect of improving the existing knowledge base. Balk also suggested that the variability in weather patterns and increasing temperatures be considered as another notable “certainty.” She framed her presentation in terms of the challenges and related uncertainties faced by communities in low-lying coastal areas.
Balk pointed out two essential facts needed for an understanding of humans’ overall susceptibility to environmental change: one in ten people live in low-lying coastal areas, and the largest cities in most countries are found in such vulnerable regions.1 Based on research findings gathered in Vietnam, Balk provided examples in which spatial data were utilized in place of census data to determine at-risk populations, and noted that the accuracy and depth of the results of such analyses vary depending on the underlying data, which often have irregular administrative units and varying spatial resolutions.2 Balk noted that survey data are harder to retrofit because they typically do not have associated geocodes indicating spatial scale. Urban, low-lying coastal areas have experienced the fastest population growth over the past 30 years, particularly in regions at imminent risk—with Asian cities heavily influencing global population-growth averages.3 She explained that these evolving estimation methodologies are constantly improving and could apply to various climate-related hazards; although transparency is necessary if those living in at-risk communities are to educate themselves on using these emerging analytic tools and comprehending the estimation methods behind them.
Balk’s research identified the top 10 at-risk counties based on population analysis and shed light on population-growth patterns in delta areas and low-lying coastal regions found primarily in southern and southeastern parts of the United States. The vulnerability experienced in these areas is a result of the built environment, with the level of vulnerability varying across spatial scales. For instance, Florida contains a large number of low-lying areas. Balk stated that approximately 13 percent of the 3,000 counties in the lower 48 states have land areas in low coastal elevation zones, posing a risk to around 34 million people. The concentration of population exposure is notable, with approximately 55 percent of total exposure occurring in the top 25 counties with the highest population exposure to low-elevation coastal zones.4 She highlighted the need to undertake targeted interventions and proactive measures in the most vulnerable counties, to mitigate the risks posed by climate change and protect the millions of people residing in these areas.
Balk explained that risk exposure varies by race, ethnicity, geographic location (e.g., the urban-rural divide), and historical marginalization. Factors such as housing tenure and the age of structures also contribute to vulnerabilities. Balk noted that increasingly large numbers of older adults residing in coastal states, particularly in Florida, are more vulnerable to environmental hazards. With respect to the inequities faced by low-income renters and homeowners affected by flooding and hurricanes, Black and Hispanic populations are more likely to rent or own houses in low-lying coastal zones, raising concerns about climate change’s impact on affordable housing opportunities.
Balk stressed the importance of examining the availability of public data. Retrofitting data is necessary, and spatially delineated hazards can be effectively addressed using remote sensing and environmental data. However, challenges remain when it comes to dealing with uncertain aspects of hazards like storm paths, which require further improvements. Enhanced descriptions and thematic-rich data, developed in collaboration with national statistical offices, can provide place-based findings on vulnerability and contribute to collaborations with communities.
___________________
1 McGranahan, G., Balk, D., & Anderson, B. (2007). The rising tide: Assessing the risks of climate change and human settlements in low elevation coastal zones. Environment and Urbanization, 19, 17–37.
2 MacManus, K., Balk, D., Engin, H., McGranahan, G., & Inman, R. (2021). Estimating population and urban areas at risk of coastal hazards, 1990–2015: How data choices matter. Earth System Science Data, 13(12), 5747–5801.
3 McGranahan, G., Balk, D., Colenbrander, H. E., & MacManus, K. (2023). Is rapid urbanisation of deltas undermining adaptation to climate change? A global review of population and built-up area in risk-prone coastal areas. Environment and Urbanization, 35, 2.
4 Tagtachian, D., & Balk, D. (2022, April). Uneven vulnerability: Characterizing population composition and change in the low elevation coastal zone in the United States with a climate justice lens, 1990–2020. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the Population Association of America.
She noted that it is crucial to work both bottom up and top down, iterating and articulating between data types to meet the needs of communities:
I’m recommending that we should be working bottom up and top down at the same time, which will allow us the greatest possibility for iterating between different types of data to optimize the kind of data that different communities need. We also need to find deficits that can be addressed frequently within these larger statistical systems that we, as a collective, pay for and therefore should demand that [the data] work for the communities that need them.
In conclusion, Balk emphasized the increasing availability of data, making it possible to understand an expanding number of uncertainties. By utilizing and enhancing data sources, communities can better prepare for future environmental hazards and address the vulnerabilities faced by various populations and places.
INTEGRATING INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS
Calica shared her perspectives on understanding and incorporating environmental knowledge possessed by Indigenous people. She explained that the Institute for Tribal Government at Portland State University5 was set up to address the critical impact areas that affect tribes in terms of governing their constituencies and locations. The Institute serves as a resource for tribal governments and elected officials and is similar to state legislatures “in terms of the breadth of work that they do in the space of governing their constituencies, their locations, and so forth.”
Calica discussed the interconnectedness of tribal worldviews and their participation—through policy, academia, and science—in intergovernmental processes related to the environment. She emphasized the value of using the Indigenous worldview as a lens when considering tribes and Alaska Natives in the United States, and she went on to acknowledge that Indigenous communities, with their diverse identities and histories, are not monolithic. As an attorney working with various tribes across the country, Calica has helped to address emerging issues related to climate change and the intersection between climate and infrastructure. She highlighted the importance of understanding the fundamentals of tribal governance and spirituality, which are inherently connected in many Indigenous and tribal communities. Native laws and principles are often passed down through songs, ceremonies, and traditional teachings, which Calica said emphasizes the governance-spirituality relationship and promotes intergenerational connectivity. Sovereignty and self-determination were discussed as fundamental aspects of tribal governance, as tribes seek to control their own destinies and make decisions related to food, shelter, and basic needs such as clean water and security. Calica emphasized that these “unwritten laws” carried through generations in songs, ceremonies, and traditional teachings extend beyond individuals and encompass families, communities, and regions, shaping the governance structures of tribes and their relationship to nation-states:
But then we also start to think of the fundamentals of sovereignty; with that means the ability to make decisions and control the destiny, our own destiny, and self-determination as human beings—the ability to elect to live in and associate with who we want, [to make] the decisions to eat the foods [that] we’d like to eat, to live in the types of dwellings we’d like to live in, and to have our basic needs met.
Additionally, Calica discussed various aspects of her work with tribes and Indigenous communities. She emphasized the importance of stewarding lands and resources, highlighting the interconnectedness of resources and the relationship between humans and the environment. Regarding Indigenous teachings, she mentioned the responsibility to speak for resources that cannot themselves speak about observed regional changes, such as shifts in the timing and volume of subsistence food gathering due to climate change impacts like drought and flooding. Calica went on to talk about challenges faced by Indigenous communities due to climate change, including not only the relocation of tribal villages due to sea-level rise but also shifts in gathering seasons. Indigenous communities often function as early indicators of environmental changes, which eventually affect nontribal communities; for this reason, there is a growing demand to integrate traditional ecological and environmental knowledge into climate change-related considerations.
___________________
5 More information about the Institute for Tribal Government is available at https://www.pdx.edu/tribal-government/
Calica highlighted the criteria and long-term perspectives of tribal natural resource management plans, which consider the well-being of multiple generations. She mentioned growing climate change-related pressures on tribes, such as catastrophic wildfires and aging infrastructure. Indigenous communities already dealing with housing shortages and other challenges now face additional concerns, such as ensuring access to cool environments during heatwaves as well as protection from floods and poor air quality.
Calica advocated for an ongoing exploration of creative solutions, including building subdivisions with distributive energy generation and water security (i.e., ensuring water access in an emergency event). Indigenous knowledge is currently being utilized to address housing-related challenges and to make use of local resources and climate conditions. To effectively tackle these challenges, Calica emphasized the relevance of tapping into intergenerational knowledge and diversity within Indigenous communities and of building partnerships and networks. She also mentioned the need to promote critical collaborations with academic partners, as well as the importance of leveraging resources available from organizations such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, to ensure the representation and involvement of tribal voices in decision-making processes.
She concluded by emphasizing the resilience of tribal communities and their ability to identify opportunities within challenges when working toward solutions and improvements for their communities.
CONSIDERING WAYS TO AUGMENT THE HUMAN SCIENCES DISCIPLINES TO MEET COMMUNITY NEEDS
Wong-Parodi then discussed ways that the human sciences can better meet community needs. Drawing upon her work, she shared insights that can help to co-create responses to global environmental change with and for communities—particularly those on the front lines of climate change experiencing the “first and worst impacts.” She emphasized five key points: community, diversity, actionability, education, and incentives.
In terms of “community,” Wong-Parodi discussed how human sciences could better orient themselves toward meeting community needs. She highlighted the “Our Communities, Our Bay” project,6 which involves a randomized controlled trial to test physical and message-based interventions to reduce exposure and encourage pro-health behaviors related to smoke infiltration, flooding, and heat. She explained how community-engaged research has improved the designs and results of viable solutions. She pointed out the importance of consulting with exposure scientists and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory for implementing structural improvements that reduce wildfire smoke infiltration and improve interior comfort in buildings during extreme temperatures. She also acknowledged the challenges of collaborating with renters and undocumented households and of seeking approval from landlords or building managers for interventions, both of which may lead to tensions and potential rent increases.
Wong-Parodi stressed the value of diversity on multiple scales. Diversity includes not only working with populations that represent diverse lived experiences but also forming research teams made up of people with diverse backgrounds (e.g., disciplines, experiences, skill sets, perspectives, and sociodemographic characteristics). Diverse teams can better represent the communities they serve. In addition, Wong-Parodi highlighted the advantage of diverse methodological approaches that go beyond surveys, including interviews, observations, and focus groups, all designed to complement quantitative methods. She referenced the existing systems of (non-)diversity7 and the importance of addressing these disparities.
Wong-Parodi identified actionability as a key aspect of human sciences studies, with a focus on centering community needs and ensuring research outcomes are useful and usable. As an example, she described the Flood Wise Communities study in the Gulf Coast of the United States, which tested various ways of engaging with communities using a co-created decision-support tool for the purpose of adaptation planning.8 She mentioned
___________________
6 More information about Our Communities, Our Bay is available at https://www.ourcommunitiesourbay.org/project
7 Medin, D., Ojalehto, B., Marin, A., & Bang, M. (2017). Systems of (non-)diversity. Nature Human Behavior, 1(0088), 1–5.
8 More information is available at https://glisa.umich.edu/project/making-gulf-communities-more-resilient/
the growing field of actionable knowledge and, in this same context, referred to a recent publication authored by Jagannathan and colleagues as a relevant source.9
Wong-Parodi discussed education as a crucial factor when it comes to advancing interdisciplinary, participatory, and community-engaged research that supports academics, professionals, and practitioners as the next generation of boundary spanners. She advocated for integrating research, education, and practice to enable human sciences disciplines to translate their work into actionable results for communities. To illustrate the benefits of interdisciplinary training, Wong-Parodi drew from her experience at Stanford University, based on models of service learning, as a way to change perspectives and training in human sciences.
In terms of incentives, she provided insights into the academic perspective, particularly regarding appointments, promotions, and tenure. She noted that evaluation criteria in academia are often too narrow, focusing on the amount of funding an individual brings in or the quality of peer-reviewed publications, while neglecting the time and effort required for participatory work or policy-related contributions. She called for a cultural shift in academic institutions toward placing a higher value on the contribution of community-engaged research. To support her arguments while acknowledging the importance of considering community capacity and context when implementing incentives, Wong-Parodi referred to Philip Nyden’s 2003 work “Academic Incentives for Faculty Participation in Community-based Participatory Research.”10
Aimed at highlighting ways to improve the ability of the human sciences to meet community needs, Wong-Parodi’s discussion emphasized the importance of community engagement, diversity, actionability, education, and incentives. Her insights shed light on both the challenges faced as well as the opportunities available for improvement when it comes to addressing global environmental change and co-creating solutions with communities.
PANEL DISCUSSION
During the question-and-answer session, a teacher of climate communication raised concerns about Indigenous communities in the South Pacific being uncomfortable with the label “climate refugees” and sought clarification on the reasons behind this sentiment. Calica explained that Indigenous communities have meaningful relationships with their lands and resources. She discussed how Indigenous people’s kinship with their surroundings fosters an intergenerational connectedness to a sense of place. It is challenging for these communities to detach themselves from their deeply integrated relationship with their surroundings, which hold immense cultural and familial significance for them. Balk discussed the discomfort expressed by the classification of Indigenous communities and peoples as “vulnerable” or “refugees.” She highlighted the disconnect experienced by Indigenous populations following imposed resettlement. Balk proposed the use of alternative, less-pejorative terms like “circular migrant” or other co-created labels that more accurately capture the experiences of these communities.
The discussion also touched upon the recent Rights of Nature11 legislation, proposed by an Indigenous peoples’ nonprofit in North Carolina called 7 Directions of Service, which is specifically related to the Haw River ecosystem. The question was raised as to whether this approach holds promise in terms of challenging currently embedded methods of environmental control and addressing climate change-related concerns. Sanchez-Trigueros broadened the question to encompass the benefits of involving communities in passing legislation to address environmental and climate challenges. Calica then reflected on the importance of incorporating both cultural responsiveness and place-based knowledge into these processes.
___________________
9 Jagannathan, K., Emmanuel, G., Arnott, J., Mach, K. J., Bamzai-Dodson, A., Goodrich, K., Meyer, R., Neff, M., Sjostrom, K. D., Timm, K. M. F., Turnhout, E., Wong-Parodi, G., Bednarek, A. T., Meadow, A., Dewulf, A., Kirchhoff, C. J., Moss, R. H., Nichols, L., Oldach, E., Carmen Lemos, M., & Klenk, N. (2023). A research agenda for the science of actionable knowledge: Drawing from a review of the most misguided to the most enlightened claims in the science-policy interface literature. Environmental Science & Policy, 144, 174–186.
10 Nyden, P. (2003). Academic incentives for faculty participation in community-based participatory research. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 18(7), 576–585.
11 More information about the proposed Rights of the Haw River Ecosystem Act, H.B. 795, and Rights of Nature laws is available at https://7directionsofservice.com/rights-of-nature
In response to a question seeking examples of traditional and Indigenous knowledge used in implementation and regulation processes, Calica explained how the governance of a reservation mirrors its relation to the cultural practice of “first foods,” which involves prioritizing foods—water, proteins, starches, and other resources—in a specific order. Calica discussed the impact of decisions involving reservation governance, emphasizing the chronological integration of priorities with authentic governance practices that align with values and principles, carry lessons from the past, and ensure intergenerational continuity. She also highlighted the importance of building coalitions and partnerships with local governments, academic institutions, and other stakeholders to collaboratively address questions of regulation.
Another question for Calica inquired about the biggest challenges faced by Indigenous communities when entering upon environmental work, particularly in terms of law and policy, and how to amplify ethical and structural interventions. In response, Calica suggested offering a “sampler” of Indigenous worldviews to aid in understanding the lens through which people from diverse backgrounds perceive academic or legal issues. In addition, she mentioned the significance of interpreting law and policy through a tribal perspective and the shifting of the federal consultation sector to include Indigenous perspectives, thereby creating spaces for sharing and mutual understanding.
The conversation then shifted to a consideration of the need for a massive outreach program to educate individuals, houses of worship, and native and Indigenous groups about available funding and programs related to energy-efficiency upgrades, appliances, electric vehicles, solar tax credits, and rebates. Wong-Parodi acknowledged that, although awareness of these opportunities is increasing, communities often lack the capacity and resources to take advantage of them due to barriers such as prohibitive costs, particularly in smaller municipalities or rural areas.
In response to a question about the devaluing of qualitative, descriptive, and narrative information compared to quantitative data in public policy decisions, Wong-Parodi highlighted the increasing number of journals publishing research articles that utilize mixed methods. Wong-Parodi stressed the importance of translating scientific information into actionable, usable terms for community members at all levels—while at the same time recognizing the importance of both qualitative information and intangible, difficult-to-quantify aspects. Calica discussed the value of complementing quantitative data with qualitative, descriptive information, acknowledging the existing data gap and the efforts being made to address it.
The session ended with panelists addressing the best practices for recruiting diverse voices and ensuring that all are heard in the context of community-based research. Wong-Parodi suggested cooperating with front-line communities, allowing them to function as project ambassadors and “go out and recruit their own members of the community.” The panelists emphasized the virtues of maintaining transparency and of ensuring that stakeholders become comfortable with both understanding data and supplementing quantitative data with various qualitative and collaborative methods.
