�����Ƶ

1.1 Prioritize investment in communities that are on the front lines and are the hardest hit by the consequences of climate change, energy transition, and adaptation efforts.

Addressing climate change requires profound changes to American society. America must prioritize investment in both communities on the front lines, who will bear the brunt of climate change impacts, and communities that will be most severely affected by the transition to alternative energy sources and climate adaptation efforts. Without specific and targeted measures, historically marginalized communities will continue to experience disinvestment, neglect, and injustice.

Increasing investments to help these communities is an immediate priority. While some communities may find it easier to transition to wind, solar, geothermal, or nuclear energy compared with others, investing in all communities is crucial to foster diverse and resilient economies that are not solely reliant on the energy sector.3 These investments should encompass increased research funding as well as support for local businesses and community resources, including essential services like health care and housing.

Workforce development and job retraining programs can help realize a more just transition by creating opportunities for workers, their families, and all those displaced by climate impacts and the energy transition. In New Mexico, the government, the utilities, the Navajo Nation, and environmental organizations collaborated to develop the Energy Transition Act, which has allocated $40 million to community and workforce development. Also, the Public Service Company of New Mexico partnered with the Navajo Nation to provide scholarships to Navajo students for job training in advance of coal plant closures.4

In addition to economic development, communities will require infrastructure investment to respond to climate change. This requires significant financial resources, which are not equally available to all communities. Investments from agencies such as the Appalachian Regional Commission can provide improvements in infrastructure and educational institutions.5 Whenever possible, communities should have ownership in these projects, such as the 235-megawatt wind farm majority-owned by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in North Dakota. Investment in local adaptation is essential to communities already at the greatest risk of climate hazard or those located near existing sources of pollution. Retrofitting homes in low-income areas, such as through the Weatherization Assistance Program, creates green solutions that lower energy bills and decrease health risks from extreme heat.6

Planning new projects should include a comprehensive analysis of benefits and liabilities that incorporate the full range of potential impacts, including on the local environment, the economy, health, and social cohesion. Evaluating these benefits should include engaging in discussions with communities to understand local concerns, ideas, and interests while being mindful of potential power imbalances. Not all benefits or impacts are easily quantified; in these cases, additional measures must ensure that benefits are weighed appropriately. There are several examples of this approach to draw from, including a 2021 Army Corps of Engineers’ assessment that weighs social, environmental, and economic benefits and a 2023 research study of climate interventions that incorporates health.7

Promote funding for project codevelopment through public-private partnerships and federal incentives.

Frontline communities benefit when projects emerge through codevelopment, wherein community members and researchers or project developers participate as equals. Establishing more federal funding incentives for co-developing projects with frontline communities encourages businesses to create projects that actively seek input from communities throughout the project lifespan, decrease concerns over costs, and make funding applications more competitive to public and private funders.

Private-sector and philanthropic contributions can make codevelopment more feasible by providing technical expertise, job retraining, and resources for community resilience. These partnerships remain crucial for equitable support of communities disrupted by climate impacts, green energy transformations, or adaptation.

One such example is the Partnership for Resilience and Preparedness (PREP), which is a public-private partnership between the World Resources Institute, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the insurance company Swiss Re.8 Through its funding and technical support, PREP has helped build capacity for climate adaptation planning in several communities, including the Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw tribe in Louisiana, which is one of the first communities in the United States to be affected by climate-induced migration.9 The tribe is located on Isle de Jean Charles, a small island in the Gulf of Mexico that has lost over 98 percent of its land due to rising sea levels, coastal erosion, and subsidence.10 PREP helped the tribe develop an adaptation plan, build sustainable and elevated housing for residents, create job opportunities for those displaced, and preserve the tribe’s cultural heritage and identity.

Government incentives also encourage co-development. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 provides tax credits for projects in areas experiencing recent unemployment from a fossil fuel industry closure or transition. Other government incentives, such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, incentivize investments in infrastructure improvements that make business operations possible, such as incubators for green technology. In Baltimore, CDBG funds supported the creation of an incubator focused on sustainable manufacturing in collaboration with local communities. Housed at the University of Baltimore, this incubator has supported the development of several successful businesses that produce energy-efficient LEDs and manufacture lightweight materials for green infrastructure while also promoting economic growth in traditionally underserved neighborhoods.11
 

ReGenesis Institute: Fostering Relationships between Communities and Industry

The Arkwright and Forest Park communities in Spartanburg, South Carolina, are close to several significant sources of pollution, including two Superfund sites and the still-operational Solvay chemical plant. In addition to hazardous waste sites, these communities were left behind by revitalization attempts in other areas of Spartanburg in the 1970s. Disinvestment and disenfranchisement resulted in a lack of resources, including access to healthy food and health care. These problems were further exacerbated by poor infrastructure: the only road leading to the communities was often inaccessible and blocked by trains, isolating residents.

In 1998, local resident and later state representative Harold Mitchell Jr. founded the ReGenesis Institute to clean up and revitalize these communities after he experienced severe health issues from exposure to toxic chemicals, a common occurrence in Arkwright and Forest Park.12 The ReGenesis Institute partnered with state and local government and Solvay. Tensions between the communities and Solvay were initially high, but sustained and intentional trust-building made it possible for these groups to work collaboratively toward community development. This success is partially attributed to a mediator, Timothy Fields, and the focus on consensus-building rather than litigation.

Through the efforts of the ReGenesis Institute—with funding from the Environmental Protection Agency, Solvay, the City of Spartanburg, and many other public and private sources—the Arkwright and Forest Park communities have opened a community health center, a grocery store, and a community center. Cleanup efforts have repurposed previously contaminated sites as community infrastructure and green space. Further revitalization efforts in the Arkwright and Forest Park communities continue.

Endnotes

• 3Adie Tomer, Joseph W. Kane, and Caroline George, “,” Brookings Institution, February 23, 2021.
• 4Office of the Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, “,” press release, March 22, 2019. Commission cochair Patricia Vincent Collawn has been central to these activities, as has Commission member Hilary Tompkins. Jonathan P. Thompson for the Energy News Network, “,” New Mexico In Depth, September 2, 2022.
• 5Appalachian Regional Commission, “,” (accessed June 12, 2023); and Linda Lobao, Mark Partridge, Oudom Hean, Paige Kelly, Seung-hun Chung, and Elizabeth N. Ruppert Bulmer, (Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group, 2021).
• 6See U.S. Department of Energy, Office of State and Community Energy Programs, “,” (accessed June 21, 2023).
• 7R. D. James, Department of the Army, Office of the Assistant Secretary, “,” January 5, 2021; and Courtney Howard, Andrea J. MacNeill, Fintan Hughes, et al., “,” The Lancet Planetary Health 7 (3) (2023): e251–e264.
• 8See Partnership for Resilience and Preparedness, “,” (accessed June 12, 2023).
• 9Isle de Jean Charles Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw Tribe and National �����Ƶ of Sciences, (Isle de Jean Charles: Isle de Jean Charles Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw Tribe, 2019).
• 10Madaline King, “A Tribe Faces Rising Tides: The Resettlement of Isle de Jean Charles,” LSU Journal of Energy Law and Resources 6 (1) (2018): 13.
• 11AccelerateBaltimore 2022, “.”
• 12See Regenesis Institute, “,” (accessed June 12, 2023).

1.2 Build capacity for climate action by engaging diverse voices, removing barriers, and disseminating promising practices.

Frontline communities are often excluded from public and private project development decision-making, leading to conflict and adverse outcomes for communities and projects alike.13 These include industrial projects that produce harmful pollutants and land use projects that reduce the overall impacts of climate change yet often harm marginalized communities by increasing local risk, such as sea walls that increase the likelihood and severity of flooding locally.

Environmental justice is not just an outcome but a process that requires meaningful participation across all points of decision-making. Community members frequently possess know­ledge or skills that increase the project’s speed and effectiveness or remove issues with implementation, making their input not only ethically important but often crucial to a project’s success. Building capacity means assessing challenges to community member engagement and identifying resources and opportunities to address those barriers. Ultimately, impacted communities should have authority and ownership in project selection, but iterative engagement to strengthen community involvement and build trust are also important initial steps.

Establish positions focused on meaningful community engagement.

Companies and government bodies must create, fund, and maintain positions, such as director of community relations, focused on community engagement and inclusion. Establishing these positions before conceptualizing projects allows for early and ongoing community relationship-building and engagement.

Authentic engagement is built on trust, long-term relationships, and efforts to place everyone on an equal footing. Although engaging with communities can sometimes slow project development, many experts emphasize that this outreach accelerates projects in the long term by avoiding costly missteps and delays. Communities’ experience and local insight can provide a comprehensive view on project cost-benefit analysis.14 Companies should create processes that are proactive and participatory, that understand competing priorities, and that provide compensation for the time community members spend offering their perspective. For example, companies such as Southern California Edison have already implemented processes for involving communities throughout the lifespan of their projects, including consulting with communities during the planning process and incorporating their feedback.15

Remove barriers to meaningful participation.

Often the biggest barrier to community participation in selecting and codeveloping projects is not interest or insight but navigating the technical issues related to identifying and taking advantage of available funding opportunities. These difficulties can range from internet access to English translation to managing and reporting climate funding, and were among the most frequent barriers mentioned by the community engagement experts the Commission interviewed. Communities are often left on their own to make decisions about redevelopment plans, despite the availability of significant federal funding and resources.16

While the solutions that remove these barriers can be straightforward, they require ground-level implementation and demand significant resources. Partnerships between federal agencies, community organizations and other nonprofits, and local universities are crucial. In California, Climate Resolve’s Ready for Tomorrow program has secured more than $9 million in climate-related grant funding for local community action, including by providing translation services to Spanish and Chinese communities.17 In Alaska, the Denali Commission along with the Alaska Federation of Natives and Alaska Pacific University have helped distribute funds and provide project management to rural Alaskan communities.18

Amplify existing guidebooks on promising practices for authentic community engagement and encourage periodic revisions that incorporate input from communities.

Guidelines and successful examples help organizations to learn from prior experiences and integrate diverse voices into decision-making. These examples are necessary for demonstrating that engaging with communities about proposed actions and prioritizing environmental justice will strengthen proposals and improve outcomes—that this is not simply some burdensome and inefficient process. Increasing the visibility of these cases, such as through chamber of commerce gatherings, will encourage businesses and governments to integrate environmental justice into their practices.19 Philanthropy should support this work by funding periodic assessments to ensure that the guidebooks and promising practices are effective.

Many of these tools already exist. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides several resources on how businesses can engage with communities, including legal tools that provide information on environmental justice laws.20 The Department of Energy (DOE), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and independent organizations such as the Electric Power Research Institute have also created and shared similar guidebooks.21 These resources provide concrete steps and considerations for those interested in beginning to engage and codevelop climate-related projects with communities. The EPA also provides the EJScreen tool to help identify where frontline communities are located. As guidebooks are revised and new ones created, agencies should seek community input to help make these resources accessible to broad audiences.
 

San Onofre Community Engagement Panel: Creating Opportunities for Community Dialogue

In June 2013, Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas and Electric, the City of Anaheim, and the City of Riverside announced their decision to decommission the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. As several aspects of the decommissioning process affect the surrounding communities, including environmental impacts of decommissioning and the removal of spent fuel, the decommissioning team formed a Community Engagement Panel of volunteer representatives from affected communities.22

This Community Engagement Panel meets quarterly and gives the affected communities the opportunity to engage in open dialogue with Southern California Edison. Members of this panel represent diverse groups, including elected officials, environmental NGOs, administrators from school districts, local Indigenous groups, and nuclear professionals.23 These meetings, all of which are open to the public, serve the dual purpose of informing the public about the decommissioning process and allowing for feedback, concerns, and questions from the public.

Issues of local concern addressed by the Community Engagement Panel include storage of nuclear waste and radiation levels. Southern California Edison has responded to these concerns by making storage canisters more resistant to corrosion and providing real-time radiation level monitoring in their storage facilities. High levels of engagement from both the panel and Southern California Edison have been vital for building trust and giving community members a forum to frequently offer input on the decommissioning process.

Endnotes

• 13Angel Santiago Fernandez-Bou, J. Pablo Ortiz-Partida, Leticia M. Classen-Rodriguez, et al., “3 Challenges, 3 Errors, and 3 Solutions to Integrate Frontline Communities in Climate Change Policy and Research: Lessons from California,” Frontiers in Climate 3 (2021): 717554.
• 14Maria Tengö, Eduardo S. Brondizio, Thomas Elmqvist, et al., “,”&�Բ�����;AMBIO 43 (5) (2014): 579–591.
• 15Anna Valdberg and R. Olivia Samad, “,” May 2021.
• 16See .
• 17Climate Resolve, “,” (accessed June 12, 2023).
• 18The Denali Commission, (Anchorage: The Denali Commission, 2017).
• 19U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pacific Southwest/Region 9 EPA-909-R-09-001, (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2008).
• 20U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2022); and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “,” (accessed June 12, 2023).
• 21U.S. Department of Energy, “,” August 2022; World Bank Group, (Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group, 2019); Electric Power Research Institute, “,” Technical Brief 3002024572 (Palo Alto, Calif.: Electric Power Research Institute, 2022); and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, “” (Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2016).
• 22Decommissioning San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, “,” (accessed June 12, 2023).
• 23Chaired by Commission member David G. Victor.

1.3 Weave frontline communities and Indigenous Knowledge into research on controlling pollution and managing the impacts of climate change.

Many of the research projects necessary to advance climate solutions are occurring in frontline communities, creating both risks and opportunities for these communities. Without diverse community voices, climate research can unintentionally reinforce existing power imbalances or lead to policies that increase local vulnerability. To avoid these outcomes, research projects should incorporate frontline communities’ knowledge and interests to ensure that benefits resulting from the research extend to those most affected by climate actions, and to strengthen communities’ adaptation efforts. A study in 2017, for example, evaluated recent evidence of the interactions between climate change, air pollution, and health, highlighting how low-income and minority communities have higher exposure to air pollution, a finding that strengthened policy and funding efforts to assist these communities.24

Follow and expand existing promising practices for codeveloped research.

Climate researchers have been leaders in establishing appropriate practices for equitable research involving local communities.25 Still, many researchers in mitigation and adaptation fail to adequately involve local input. Strategies for effective codevelopment of research include establishing relationships with communities before planning projects, using culturally sensitive research collection techniques, maintaining transparency and accountability with local researchers, and sharing data after project completion. Climate researchers should share not only the outcomes of their projects, but also promising practices for broadening community codevelopment. Researchers should not avoid projects on more challenging mitigation and adaptation issues but should seek to address distributional impacts and consider trade-offs within their studies.

Prioritize funding to research projects that are codeveloped with local communities.

To minimize community harm and build trust, research funding from government agencies and philanthropy should prioritize projects that promote codevelopment with community members. Projects that give local community members authority in project design or oversight should be funded over those that only hold listening sessions or other late-stage engagements.26 One example that used this codevelopment framework is the Ikaagvik Sikukun (Land Bridge) Project, in which Indigenous communities in Alaska participated in developing the research questions, as well as in data collection and implementation.27

Microgrants are another model for effective community engagement: small community grants given by corporations or larger research grant recipients to invest in meaningful climate action within target communities. Microgrants not only offer direct benefits for the research project but also build trust between community members and corporations and help communities identify and learn to navigate other funding opportunities.28 The Solutions Project provides microgrants to community climate organizations predominantly led by women of color, hastening adoption of green energy technology and strengthening resilience.29

Recognize additional ways of knowing, such as Indigenous Knowledge.

We urgently need climate action, and increasing research speed at the necessary rate will ultimately require incorporating additional ways of examining and assessing the problems. Indigenous peoples have relationships with the land spanning millennia, giving them a deep understanding of how a changing climate has altered ecosystems.30 Indigenous Knowledge rooted in cultural practices, traditions, oral history, and language all document these changes. Despite a vast amount of valuable knowledge, Western scientists have often disregarded Indigenous science and observations. However, there is a growing recognition of the value of weaving Western and Indigenous Knowledge systems together.

Permafrost Pathways, a research initiative in Alaska, is a partnership between Western scientists and policy-makers, and Indigenous leaders and residents.31 The project aims to use Indigenous Knowledge in combination with Western science to monitor permafrost thaw, an issue that poses significant risks to both the regional landscape and the global climate. Permafrost Pathways is also working to cocreate adaptation strategies with participating communities.

Endnotes

• 24Hans Orru, K. L. Ebi, and Bertil Forsberg, “,” Current Environmental Health Reports 4 (5) (2017): 504–513.
• 25Maarten K. van Aalst, Terry Cannon, and Ian Burton, “,” Global Environmental Change 18 (1) (2008): 165–179.
• 26John Wiseman, Lara Williamson, and Jess Fritze, “,” International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management 2 (2) (2010).
• 27Ikaaġvik Sikukun, “,’” (accessed June 12, 2023).
• 28Rev. Jasmine Beach-Ferrara, “,” National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, August 23, 2017.
• 29The Solutions Project, “,” (accessed June 12, 2023).
• 30Gregory A. Cajete, “Indigenous Science, Climate Change, and Indigenous Community Building: A Framework of Foundational Perspectives for Indigenous Community Resilience and Revitalization,” Sustainability 12 (22) (2020): 9569.
• 31Alaska Institute for Justice, “,” June 8, 2022.