Developing and Assessing
Ideas for Social and
Behavioral Research to
Speed Efficient and Equitable
Industrial Decarbonization
_____
Heather Kreidler, Rapporteur
Board on Environmental Change
and Society
Division of Behavioral and
Social Sciences and Education
Board on Energy and
Environmental Systems
Division on Engineering and
Physical Sciences
Proceedings of a Workshop
NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Contract Number 68HERC19D0011, Task Order Number 68HERC23F0276), the National Science Foundation (Grant No. 2240463), and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (Grant No. G-2022-19534). Support for the work of the Board on Environmental Change and Society is also provided by a grant from the National Science Foundation (Award Number BCS-2055602). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-72140-0
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-72140-7
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/27815
This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2024 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Developing and Assessing Ideas for Social and Behavioral Research to Speed Efficient and Equitable Industrial Decarbonization: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/27815.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
WORKSHOP PLANNING COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPING AND ASSESSING IDEAS FOR SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH TO SPEED EFFICIENT AND EQUITABLE INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION1
SUSAN F. TIERNEY (Chair), Senior Advisor, Analysis Group
SANYA R. CARLEY, Presidential Distinguished Professor of Energy Policy and City Planning, Stuart Weitzman School of Design, and Faculty Co-Director, Kleinman Center for Energy Policy, University of Pennsylvania
EMILY GRUBERT, Associate Professor of Sustainable Energy Policy, and Civil and Environmental Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Notre Dame
ASEEM PRAKASH, Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, University of Washington, Seattle
UDAYAN SINGH, Energy Systems Analyst, Argonne National Laboratory
DAVID G. VICTOR, Professor of Innovation and Public Policy, School of Global Policy and Strategy, University of California, San Diego
ELKE U. WEBER,2 Gerhard R. Andlinger Professor in Energy and the Environment, Princeton University
Staff
DANIEL TALMAGE, Study Director
THOMAS THORTON, Board Director
CATHERINE WISE, Program Officer
JOSHUA LANG, Program Coordinator
___________________
1 Manijeh Berenji, University of California, Irvine, resigned from the committee December 27, 2023.
2 Member, National Academy of Sciences
BOARD ON ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE AND SOCIETY
KRISTIE L. EBI (Chair), University of Washington, Seattle
BILAL M. AYYUB, University of Maryland
LISA DILLING, University of Colorado Boulder
KENNETH GILLINGHAM, University of Colorado Boulder
KATHARINE L. JACOBS, University of Arizona
STEPHEN H. LINDER, University of Texas
GARY E. MACHLIS, Clemson University
MICHAEL ANTHONY MENDEZ, University of California, Irvine
ASEEM PRAKASH, University of Washington, Seattle
BENJAMIN K. SOVACOOL, Boston University
MICHAEL P. VANDENBERGH, Vanderbilt University Law School
CATHY L. WHITLOCK,1 Montana State University
Staff
THOMAS THORNTON, Board Director
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Sciences
BOARD ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
SUSAN F. TIERNEY (Chair), Analysis Group
LOUISE BEDSWORTH, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
T.J. GLAUTHIER, TJG Energy Associates
PAULA GLOVER, Alliance to Save Energy
DENISE GRAY, LG Energy Solution Michigan Inc.
JENNIFER R. HOLMGREN,1 LanzaTech
JOHN KASSAKIAN,1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MICHAEL LAMACH, Trane Technologies (Retired)
CARLOS MARTÍN, Harvard University
GORDON VAN WELIE,1 ISO New England
DAVID G. VICTOR, University of California, San Diego
Staff
K. JOHN HOLMES, Senior Director and Scholar
ELIZABETH ZEITLER, Associate Director
BRENT HEARD, Program Officer
KASIA KORNECKI, Program Officer
CATHERINE WISE, Program Officer
REBECCA DEBOER, Research Associate
JASMINE VICTORIA BRYANT, Research Assistant
KAIA RUSSELL, Program Assistant
HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Manager
JAMES ZUCCHETTO, Senior Scientist
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering
This page intentionally left blank.
Reviewers
This Proceedings of a Workshop was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published proceedings as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this proceedings:
COSTA SAMARAS, Carnegie Mellon University
EDSON SEVERNINI, Carnegie Mellon University
PAVITRA SRINIVASAN, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the content of the proceedings nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this proceedings was overseen by BENJAMIN PRESTON, The RAND Corporation. He was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this proceedings was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the rapporteur and the National Academies.
This page intentionally left blank.
Preface
Interest in decarbonizing various sectors of the U.S. economy has produced a rich body of scholarly research, policy studies, and practitioner reports on technology pathways and scenarios, with a particular focus on the power sector, vehicles, and buildings. The research on nontechnological issues associated with decarbonization is much sparser in general, and this is particularly true for the difficult-to-decarbonize industrial sector. Given the complicated social, political, and economic contexts in which industrial decarbonization efforts occur—including not just decision makers and workers involved in the firms undergoing change, but also the communities in which transitions are occurring—better understanding of the human elements of such changes is badly needed.
In February 2024, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine hosted a public workshop designed to inform the development of ideas for a national interdisciplinary social sciences research agenda relating to an efficient and equitable clean energy transition in the U.S. industrial sector. The sponsors of the workshop—the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation—asked the National Academies to appoint a small planning committee to work with National Academies’ staff to plan for and support the workshop. This early stage included two elements: (a) soliciting and commissioning several papers aimed at outlining key societal challenges and needs that require social science insights and tools to build a social compact for industrial decarbonization; and (b) inviting an interdisciplinary group of social scientists, engineers, community members, and experts from industry and government to participate in a workshop to weigh in on the social science research needs on these issues.
After generating myriad ideas for potential topics for the two-day workshop, the selected panels identified a range of subject areas for discussion, including: siting processes around regional hubs, workforce issues related to industrial transitions, community engagement in industrial decarbonization projects, social factors involved in and impacted by technology choices, environmental justice considerations in industrial decarbonization, issues affecting public trust in government policies and programs affecting industrial decarbonization activities, and governance and decision making in businesses involved in transitioning to lower-carbon investments and operations. The panels discussing these topics produced richly informative and insightful comments and helped to provide a record identifying strengths and gaps in the existing social science literature on these issues.
Thanks go to many people: the members of the planning committee, for their indispensable investment of time, expertise, and guidance in developing the workshop in an expedited time frame; the workshop panelists,
paper authors, commentators, and staff of the National Academies, all of whom contributed to the success of the workshop; and the sponsors for their interest in supporting interdisciplinary social science research on the important human considerations for an efficient and equitable clean energy transition in the U.S. industrial sector.
Susan F. Tierney
Planning Committee Chair
Contents
ORGANIZATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS
2 Social Science Issues Associated with the Siting of Infrastructure for Industrial Decarbonization
A SOCIAL SCIENCE FRAMEWORK TO ASSESS INDUSTRIAL HUB-SITING OUTCOMES
NAVIGATING CREDIBILITY, DEFINING PROBLEMS, BALANCING TRADE-OFFS, AND UNRAVELING HISTORICAL CONTEXTS
4 Just Process for Equitable Industrial Decarbonization: A Social Science Research Agenda
NAVIGATING EQUITY AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION: INSIGHTS AND CHALLENGES
THE ROLE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE IN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FOR INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION
ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES ON COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE BENEFITS FOR INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION
PERSPECTIVES ON INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION INITIATIVE-RELATED MANDATES, INCENTIVES, AND CHALLENGES
UNRAVELING THE POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENGINEERING DIMENSIONS
NAVIGATING EQUITY, COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT, AND GLOBAL IMPACTS IN INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION
NAVIGATING EQUITY AND JUSTICE IN RESEARCH AND DECISION MAKING
FUTURE RESEARCH AREAS FOR INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION: INSIGHTS FROM PANEL DISCUSSIONS
INTEGRATING SOCIAL SCIENCES INTO ENGINEERING EDUCATION FOR HOLISTIC PROBLEM SOLVING
INTEGRATING PROCESS AND OUTCOMES INTO SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH
THE HUMAN ELEMENT IN INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION AND RESEARCH FUNDING
NAVIGATING THE RISKS OF MISSION-DRIVEN RESEARCH IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
FINAL THOUGHTS: BEYOND PEER-REVIEWED RESEARCH
MEASURING AND NAVIGATING THE COMPLEX LANDSCAPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
NAVIGATING THE TENSION: PROCEDURAL JUSTICE CHALLENGES AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
ADDRESSING PLACE-SPECIFIC CHALLENGES IN INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION: SOCIAL SCIENCE INSIGHTS
EXPLORING THE NEXUS OF JUSTICE AND RAPID DECARBONIZATION
DECODING METRICS: UNRAVELING DYNAMICS IN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE
8 Trust and Cooperation Between Governments and the Public
TRUST AND SKEPTICISM IN INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION PROJECTS
TRUST IN GOVERNMENT AT MULTIPLE LEVELS
TRUST AND JUSTICE IN POLICY: INSIGHTS FROM CALIFORNIA
EXPLORING TRUST IN SOCIAL SCIENCE
COMMUNITY BENEFIT AGREEMENTS: ACCOUNTABILITY FOR TRUST AND ENGAGEMENT
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND TRUST: INSIGHTS FROM SOCIAL SCIENCE
TRUST IN INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
9 Considering Firm and Industry Responses to Decarbonization Goals
DRIVING DECARBONIZATION: THE ROLE OF POLICY ON ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR
INSIGHTS FROM CORPORATE INITIATIVES AS WELL AS STATE AND CITY CLIMATE ACTIONS
CONSIDERATIONS FOR CARBON PRICING TO ADDRESS DISTRIBUTIONAL IMPACTS
EXPLORING ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND GOVERNANCE INTEGRATION INTO DECARBONIZATION STRATEGIES
EXPLORING SCOPE 3 EMISSIONS DISCLOSURES AND ENGAGING YOUNG TALENT IN SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVES
BROADENING EXPECTATIONS, UNDERSTANDING MARKET ADOPTION, AND ADVOCATING FOR RESPONSIBLE ACTION
CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEVELOPING A RESEARCH AGENDA
This page intentionally left blank.
This page intentionally left blank.
Acronyms and Abbreviations
| BANANA | “build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything” |
| CBA | Community Benefit Agreement |
| CBP | Community Benefits Plan |
| CCS | carbon capture and storage |
| CCU | carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration |
| CEQ | Council on Environmental Quality |
| CO2 | carbon dioxide |
| DAC | direct air capture |
| DOD | Department of Defense |
| DOE | Department of Energy |
| DSIRE | Database for State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency® |
| ELCA | environmental lifecycle assessment |
| EO | executive order |
| EPA | Environmental Protection Agency |
| ESG | environmental, social, and governance |
| GAO | Government Accountability Office |
| IDRIC | Industrial Decarbonisation Research and Innovation Centre |
| IEDO | Industrial Efficiency and Decarbonization Office |
| LCA | lifecycle assessment |
| METI | Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry |
| NIMBY | “not in my backyard” |
| NWF | National Wildlife Federation |
| PM | particulate matter |
| RFF | Resources for the Future |
| SCLA | social lifecycle assessment |
| STEER factors | social, technical, environmental, economic, and regulatory factors |
| VOC | volatile organic compound |
| WISE | Water Insecurity Experiences |
