To address the driving forces of climate change and to ensure society has reliable and plentiful energy, considerable amounts of new energy infrastructure will need to be built in scores of communities over the near future. Democratic societies give communities considerable authority, influence, and autonomy on land-use decisions and regulatory policy making. Involving community members and stakeholders in decision making about facility siting and hosting is vital to minimize local opposition. But while there is much written about how to engage communities successfully, there is comparatively little attention given to understanding the civic capacities communities need to be able to participate. This paper reviews literatures on civic capacity and presents a new taxonomy based on six categories: leadership, knowledge, resources, civic engagement, social capital, and culture. It then proposes a systems framework to convey how capacities are developed and employed in collaborative decision making processes about siting and hosting energy facilities. Project sponsors, regulators, stakeholder groups, and communities can use these insights to better prepare and empower communities to participate as equal partners in conversations about energy facility siting.

Nuclear power is being promoted as a safe and reliable energy source that can contribute to the decarbonization goals of nations and states. A great deal of recent attention is on the role of small modular reactors and micro-reactors for providing heat and electricity. To be impactful, many hundreds of these small capacity reactors would have to be deployed rapidly. Consequently, hundreds of communities in a wide variety of settings would need to host reactors. This is a formidable challenge. Multiple criticisms have been leveled against proponents' claims that this challenge will be met, including economic factors. A review of the literature about small modular reactors and micro-reactors found that both advocates and critics largely ignore the challenge of community acceptance. Drawing upon the literature into the siting of other kinds of controversial facilities, this review identified obstacles and opportunities for decision processes that seek community acceptance. It explores the relevance of those insights to the siting of small capacity reactors. While some communities are likely to embrace the opportunity to host reactors, experiences across a range of facility siting efforts reinforces the conclusion that site-specific community opposition is likely to be another major obstacle to large-scale deployment of small capacity nuclear reactors thereby jeopardizing their potential contribution to decarbonization.

Crafting a successful plan to store nuclear waste in the United States from commercial nuclear reactors and defense-related activities has been stymied by multiple technical, social, and political challenges. Recent focus has returned to the role of consent to site a deep geologic repository and interim storage facilities. However, what "consent" means has been left quite vague. We report on an empirical investigation using Q method to identify perspectives about how a consent-based siting process should be designed for one or more deep geologic repositories. We recruited twelve individuals deeply engaged with policy and regulatory questions associated with managing nuclear waste in the United States. Results reveal four perspectives: get to yes expediently, seek acceptance by gaining trust, promote inclusion and transparency for informed community choice, and develop legitimacy for the process and outcomes. Each perspective includes features meant to ensure that core concepts of consent are addressed in a process to site one or more deep geologic repositories: self-determination, understanding, and voluntariness. We discuss how perspectives emphasize them in different ways. We also highlight how perspectives reveal preferences for responding to three challenges raised by the socio-political context: what is the scope of the problem to be addressed, how the process can be protected from external pressure, and how to proceed in a context of social distrust. The perspectives suggest many areas of agreement about how a consent-based process should be designed. However, key differences are also revealed which pose a significant challenge for those that will be responsible for designing a process that achieves the promise of consent.

Multisectoral models of regional bio-physical systems simulate policy responses to climate change and support climate mitigation and adaptation planning at multiple scales. Challenges facing these efforts include sometimes weak understandings of causal relationships, lack of integrated data streams, spatial and temporal incongruities with policy interests, and how to incorporate dynamics associated with human values, governance structures, and vulnerable populations. There are two general approaches to developing integrated models. The first involves stakeholder involvement in model design -- a participatory modeling approach. The second is to integrate existing models. This can be done in two ways: by integrating existing models or by a soft-linked confederation of existing models. A benefit of utilizing existing models is the leveraging of validated and familiar models that provide credibility. We report opportunities and challenges manifested in one effort to develop a regional food, energy, and water systems (FEWS) modeling framework using existing bio-physical models. The C-FEWS modeling framework (Climate-induced extremes on the linked food, energy, water system) is intended to identify and evaluate response options to extreme weather in the Midwest and Northeast United States thru the year 2100. We interviewed ten modelers associated with development of the C-FEWS framework and ten stakeholders from government agencies, planning agencies, and non-governmental organizations in New England. We inquired about their perspectives on the roles and challenges of regional FEWS modeling frameworks to inform planning and information needed to support planning in integrated food, energy, and water systems. We also analyzed discussions of meetings among modelers and among stakeholders and modelers. These sources reveal many agreements among modelers and stakeholders about the role of modeling frameworks, their benefits for policymakers, and the types of outputs they should produce. They also identify challenges to developing regional modeling frameworks that couple existing models and balancing model capabilities with stakeholder preferences for information. The results indicate the importance of modelers and stakeholders engaging in dialogue to craft modeling frameworks and scenarios that are credible and relevant for policymakers. We reflect on the implications for how FEWS modeling frameworks comprised of existing bio-physical models can be designed to better inform policy making at the regional scale.

There is a rapidly growing need to communicate to the public and policymakers on the nature and impact of climate change and its associated extremes, which manifest themselves across essential Food-Energy-Water Systems (FEWS). The complexity of this nexus demands analytical tools that can capture the essence of FEWS with the climate system, which may be difficult to stage and implement from a computationally efficient point-of-view. Reduced Complexity Models (RCMs) can synthesize important facets of a system quickly and with less dependence on difficult-to-assign inputs. We report on the development of an RCM framework for the FEWS nexus, to serve as a basic research tool in facilitating parameter sensitivity experiments as well as a means to establish more insightful dialogue with stakeholders through joint scenario construction. Three stand-alone and coupled models at the basin scale have been configured using Stella Architect software to simulate: 1) major flows and storage of water, 2) power plant operations and subsequent impacts on river reaches; and 3) nitrogen (N) mobilization and transport from atmospheric and landmass sources to riverine receiving waters. The Delaware River Basin is chosen for a contemporary simulation test case. Modeled results are calibrated and validated using observed stream gauge data, indicating reliable model performance at the monthly and annual time steps (0.57 < NSE < 0.98). A set of single and multi-factor climate, technology, and policy experiments are then explored using the RCM framework. Basin-scale system sensitivities are investigated across a set of intensified climate extremes, revealing the crucial roles of sewage treatment and energy infrastructure for climate resilience, significant exacerbations as well as mitigations of thermal and N pollution under opposing climate extremes, and important tradeoffs between river temperature and electricity production that are explored with technology and policy scenarios.

Change to global climate, including both its progressive character and episodic extremes, constitutes a critical societal challenge. We apply here a framework to analyze Climate-induced Extremes on the Food, Energy, Water System Nexus (C-FEWS), with particular emphasis on the roles and sensitivities of traditionally-engineered (TEI) and nature-based (NBI) infrastructures. The rationale and technical specifications for the overall C-FEWS framework, its component models and supporting datasets are detailed in an accompanying paper (Vörösmarty et al., this issue). We report here on initial results produced by applying this framework in two important macro-regions of the United States (Northeast, NE; Midwest, MW), where major decisions affecting global food production, biofuels, energy security and pollution abatement require critical scientific support. We present the essential FEWS-related hypotheses that organize our work with an overview of the methodologies and experimental designs applied. We report on initial C-FEWS framework results using five emblematic studies that highlight how various combinations of climate sensitivities, TEI-NBI deployments, technology, and environmental management have determined regional FEWS performance over a historical time period (1980–2019). Despite their relative simplicity, these initial scenario experiments yielded important insights. We found that FEWS performance was impacted by climate stress, but the sensitivity was strongly modified by technology choices applied to both ecosystems (e.g., cropland production using new cultivars) and engineered systems (e.g., thermoelectricity from different fuels and cooling types). We tabulated strong legacy effects stemming from decisions on managing NBI (e.g., multi-decade land conversions that limit long-term carbon sequestration). The framework also enabled us to reveal how broad-scale policies aimed at a particular net benefit can result in unintended and potentially negative consequences. For example, tradeoff modeling experiments identified the regional importance of TEI in the form wastewater treatment and NBI via aquatic self-purification. This finding, in turn, could be used to guide potential investments in point and/or non-point source water pollution control. Another example used a reduced complexity model to demonstrate a FEWS tradeoff in the context of water supply, electricity production, and thermal pollution. Such results demonstrated the importance of TEI and NBI in jointly determining historical FEWS performance, their vulnerabilities, and their resilience to extreme climate events. These infrastructures, plus technology and environmental management, constitute the “policy levers” which can actively be engaged to mitigate the challenge of contemporary and future climate change.

Climate change continues to challenge food, energy, and water systems (FEWS) across the globe and will figure prominently in shaping future decisions on how best to manage this nexus. In turn, traditionally engineered and natural infrastructures jointly support and hence determine FEWS performance, their vulnerabilities, and their resilience in light of extreme climate events. We present here a research framework to advance the modeling, data integration, and assessment capabilities that support hypothesis-driven research on FEWS dynamics cast at the macro-regional scale. The framework was developed to support studies on climate-induced extremes on food, energy, and water systems (C-FEWS) and designed to identify and evaluate response options to extreme climate events in the context of managing traditionally engineered (TEI) and nature-based infrastructures (NBI). This paper presents our strategy for a first stage of research using the framework to analyze contemporary FEWS and their sensitivity to climate drivers shaped by historical conditions (1980–2019). We offer a description of the computational framework, working definitions of the climate extremes analyzed, and example configurations of numerical experiments aimed at evaluating the importance of individual and combined driving variables. Single and multiple factor experiments involving the historical time series enable two categories of outputs to be analyzed: the first involving biogeophysical entities (e.g., crop production, carbon sequestered, nutrient and thermal pollution loads) and the second reflecting a portfolio of services provided by the region’s TEI and NBI, evaluated in economic terms. The framework is exercised in a series of companion papers in this special issue that focus on the Northeast and Midwest regions of the United States. Use of the C-FEWS framework to simulate historical conditions facilitates research to better identify existing FEWS linkages and how they function. The framework also enables a next stage of analysis to be pursued using future scenario pathways that will vary land use, technology deployments, regulatory objectives, and climate trends and extremes. It also supports a stakeholder engagement effort to co-design scenarios of interest beyond the research domain.

Climate risks are motivating adaptation with local municipal actors becoming key participants in a complex web of climate risk communication. Some cities have created civil service positions focused on climate resilience. We conducted interviews with six such individuals in four U.S. Atlantic coast cities to investigate how they think about and negotiate communication challenges associated with implementation of climate resilience strategies. We grounded our study in the Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF), which despite its longevity and wide usage has rarely been used to understand the role of government actors. We found substantial complexity in how these government representatives develop both amplifying and attenuating communication strategies as they often simultaneously reach multiple audiences holding different perspectives. They are familiar with and employ risk communication practices. However, they report needing to modify their efforts as climate adaptation issues and goals evolve over time, and experiment in situations, such as discussions of retreat, where established communication practices provide insufficient guidance. In order to develop a deeper understanding of the governmental risk communication actors, we suggest four potential avenues for taking advantage of the strengths of SARF as a framework for connecting and integrating with other models and theories. We also propose several directions for research based on the challenges these practitioners are finding in their work to facilitate adaptation to climate risks. The activity of government actors is rich in its applied risk communication practice and its challenges offer new questions to expand our thinking about the SARF and risk communication more broadly.

Over the past four decades, the promise of public participation to improve decisions, obtain legitimacy, and build capacity for risk decision making and management has had a mixed record. In this article, we offer a narrative of how public participation has evolved in the United States and we examine prospects for its future. We trace three forces that have had significant impact on practice: an emergent emphasis on democratic deliberation, a transition from dichotomous thinking about science versus politics to an integrated perspective, and the recognition that different parties to the decision-making process bring valid epistemological contributions. The promise of public participation in risk decision making is challenged by loss of trust in institutions and individuals and by broad socio-political dynamics that are weakening democratic values and processes. These include the scarcity of attitudes and aptitudes supportive of public participation among both individuals and institutions; an anti-democratic political atmosphere that promotes disrespect; pursuit of private interests over the common good; failure to appreciate the limitations of dialogue and learning; underutilization of existing knowledge; and insufficient knowledge of how context matters. We end by offering several suggestions for focusing further research and improving practice.

Citizen engagement plays a vital role in US environmental decision making and planning and is embedded in tradition, law, and regulation. It can lead to better decisions and more legitimacy for those decisions, as well as to developing citizenship skills. The question of what works in varied contexts has dogged both scholars and practitioners. Recent scholarship and practice has focused on integrating technical analysis and democratic deliberation – involving community members and scientists in collaborative dialogue. It is also recognized that citizen engagement needs to be responsive to stakeholder preferences and local contexts. What works in one place may not work someplace else. Key challenges include: a scarcity of attitudes and aptitudes supportive of democratic engagement; powerful private interests subsuming the common good; deep distrust of institutions; and the underutilization of knowledge about “good” practice. Additional research efforts should focus on overcoming these challenges in a variety of contexts.

We highlight issues relevant to a consent-based siting process for energy facilities with the intent to inform government officials, planners, and stakeholders on potential critical issues and challenges associated with such a process. In this paper we trace the history and meaning of "consent" in the academic literature associated with medical ethics, research ethics, international development, and political theory. We identify key themes and challenges to consider in the design of a consent-based process for energy-related facilities. Successful design and implementation of a consent-based process that communities and stakeholders find legitimate, effective, and practical will require careful reflection and attention to procedures for operationalizing core principles of consent and addressing challenges that can undermine them.

In the US alone, there are over 200 tools that support climate adaptation planning, along with a large number of case studies documenting their use. Case studies frequently document positive results. Systematic assessment of processes can provide important benefits, including justification for action and expenditures, promotion of learning and adaptive management, accountability, and ensuring "fit" with other goals. There are very few such assessments in the context of climate adaptation planning, despite of the emphasis on the development and use of planning tools by federal and state agencies, university researchers, and non-profit organizations. We undertook an effort to assess the outcomes resulting from fourteen applications of the Vulnerability, Consequences, and Adaptation Planning Scenarios (VCAPS) process, which we helped develop and implement. VCAPS is designed to facilitate information exchange, co-production of knowledge, and stakeholder collaboration while helping communities appraise climate change-related risks and devise strategies to manage them. Using qualitative interviews we explored the perceived value and the measurable performance outcomes of VCAPS at both individual and community scales occurring 3-10 years after the processes were conducted, allowing participants to take a broader view of "success" and reflect on how different forms of success emerged over time. Although the assessment of each case is based on a small number of interviews, we learned that VCAPS informed plans and decisions of municipalities, informed actions and decisions of other public and private actors, generated broader support for subsequent actions, helped efforts to secure/seek funding for climate adaptation actions, developed material resources to support planning, and promoted learning among participants. This assessment also reinforces prior work showing that deliberative planning tools/processes are conducive to developing adaptive capacities; processes should be closely coordinated with regular governance activities to impact policy and action; adequate time for deliberation needs to be budgeted; participants need support to "think outside the box" and consider adaptation strategies that are both incremental and transformational as well as highlight potential undesirable consequences of adaptation; and processes, like VCAPS, produce actionable outcomes when participants agree on the immediacy of the issue. We conclude with observations about the need for evaluation of participatory processes and the challenges of defining success of tools to support municipal climate change adaptation planning.

Stories of climate change impact underreports the voices of ordinary people emerging with firsthand experience of living closest to the land, even though there are myriad justifications for this approach. We aimed to record personal accounts of perceptions and implications of climate change in rural villages in Himachal Pradesh, India. We applied a modified ethnographic strategy informed by techniques for eliciting life histories from residents with regard to perceived climate changes. While residents reported shorter winters and decreased precipitation and attributed these changes to human activity, the stories revealed nuanced impacts and vulnerabilities, including real rifts in the social fabric and of secondary hardships that have lasting consequences beyond expected predictions. These stories have been preserved and shared via an Instagram platform as a means for amplifying underrepresented voices.