10

Workshop Wrap-Up

Susan Tierney, Planning Committee Chair, expressed gratitude for the panelists’ insightful contributions and acknowledged the audience’s ongoing interest in industrial decarbonization. The concluding session of the workshop summarized key takeaways—many pointing to possible future directions for discussion and action—and a closing invitation for further input and discussion from the participants. Tierney focused on identifying clusters of insights to help shape a social science research agenda that will inform future work by sponsors and others in the field.

CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEVELOPING A RESEARCH AGENDA

Rather than explicitly developing a research agenda, Tierney shared some of her key takeaways regarding the current needs in specific areas.

Data:

• Emphasizing novel and community-relevant data highlighting the importance of communities contributing information on matters significant to them;
• Considering multi-dimensional impacts on people—jobs, co-production of relevant data, etc.; and
• Determining units of analysis—households, communities, firms, and supply chains.

Definitions:

• Defining terms such as “disadvantaged” and “co-benefits”;
• Investigating whether certain terms, such as those discussed (e.g., “disadvantaged” and “co-benefit”) are value-laden or carry pejorative connotations in specific communities; and
• Recognizing the importance of social scientists in delineating boundaries and guiding research agendas in this domain.

Methods of Analysis:

• Emphasizing the importance of collaborative efforts—involving communities, researchers, governments, and companies—in shaping the focus of studies and analyses;
• Promoting the co-production of the research agenda;

• Investigating methods to integrate social factors (e.g., noneconomic and nontechnical factors) into computational models;
• Evaluating peer-reviewed versus non-peer-reviewed information and assigning value to diverse types of research irrespective of peer-review status; and
• Implementing social lifecycle assessment.

Metrics:

• Measuring and assessing cumulative impacts; and
• Examining variance in baseline conditions.

Decision Tools:

• Exploring methodologies for assigning weights to various impact types in population designation (e.g., disadvantaged populations, populations of color);
• Investigating the incorporation of additional place-based standards and values into decision-making processes, acknowledging the complexity this introduces for government decision making;
• Balancing standardized decision making with an understanding and respect for the variations observed across geographical locations; and
• Evaluating the effectiveness of various financial incentives for specific actors.

Engagement Tools:

• Analyzing outcomes and effectiveness of Community Benefit Plans (CBPs) and Community Benefit Agreements and how these tools might be used for compliance, motivation, etc.;
• Exploring connections between local and regional engagement; and
• Considering various aspects of public and community engagement.

Knowledge Creation:

• Investigating the importance of trust;
• Exploring the tension between urgency in addressing climate change and the need to engage in public processes;
• Assessing whether the identification of remediation projects by environmental justice communities leads to a sense of justice;
• Scrutinizing the implications of enduring government support for initiatives and numerous regulatory standards and probing whether the level of support signifies approval versus challenges in the change-instigation process; and
• Addressing the implications of the effectiveness of private versus public commitments on outcomes.

Influence of Funding Availability on Research:

• Considering the impact of funding availability on the selection of research topics; and
• Exploring the influence of Department of Energy technology areas, CBPs, and theoretical frameworks.

FOSTERING INNOVATIVE PERSPECTIVES IN SOCIAL SCIENCE

Tierney invited participants to contribute individual perspectives or insights beyond what was discussed over the course of the workshop. She encouraged the expression of thoughts and/or ideas that may not have been addressed during the preceding sessions.

• Exploring Skill Adaptability: The first day’s discussion on education and training caught Planning Committee Member Udayan Singh’s attention—specifically the emphasis on the adaptability of skills in certain occupations. Singh highlighted the potential for leveraging existing tools and replicating them across industries, and expressed optimism about the prospect—especially in fields like hydrogen production.

• The Role of Humanities: Panelist Jennifer Hirsch highlighted the recurrent acknowledgment of the significance of the humanities—distinct from behavioral science and economics—in shaping a comprehensive social science and humanities agenda. A humanities-based focus involves envisioning diverse futures beyond incremental changes, particularly in terms of addressing the shift away from a petro-centric and fossil fuel-centered future. Hirsch underscored the role of humanities in fostering broad engagement that extends beyond community involvement.
• Reevaluating Place Attachment: Hirsch pointed out that the concept of place attachment was extensively discussed during the workshop, with a focus on the prevalent Western cultural reliance on quantitative data. She reflected on the potential shift towards relying on both quantitative and qualitative data, thus challenging the prevailing notion that factors that cannot be measured do not hold value.
• Prioritizing Social Science for Decarbonization: Planning Committee Member Aseem Prakash noted the need for prioritizing a social science agenda for decarbonization. Prioritizing social science will necessitate asking and exploring questions about the distribution of benefits and costs, perceptions of injustice, and the trade-offs between speed and participatory approaches. He suggested identifying core themes and deriving sub-questions as the next step.
• Focusing on Race: Hirsch observed the absence of the consideration of race in many federal tools, raising questions about the role of social science in highlighting the role of race when it is not explicitly incorporated into such tools. Expanding on the discussion of race as a crucial data point and a component of decision-making tools, Tierney said research could be enhanced by examining whether other proxies for race are portrayed accurately or inaccurately because such proxies play a significant role in shaping perspectives and decisions. Acknowledging Hirsch’s point about the challenges introduced when race or ethnic diversity are not considered in many tools, Prakash highlighted the existence of proxies strongly correlated with race and suggesting a focus on identifying and addressing current and cumulative disadvantages associated with specific populations.
• Gender Disparities: Prakash noted the absence of substantial discussion on gender, emphasizing its significance as a structural construct with asymmetric impacts on climate change policies. He stressed the need to address gender-related structural inequalities, citing examples like the impact of subsidies for electric vehicles, which are predominantly purchased by men.
• Global Perspectives: Prakash underscored the importance of recognizing global interconnectedness by broadening the focus beyond the United States. He advocated for considering how insights and research agendas developed for the American context might be applicable internationally, especially in countries like China, India, Indonesia, and South Africa—all of which contribute significantly to emissions. He noted the importance of considering the global–local nexus in understanding the social science aspects of decarbonization.

Tierney closed the workshop by expressing gratitude to all participants for their active engagement, highlighting that their valuable contributions will have a lasting impact beyond the workshop.

This page intentionally left blank.