More Like this

1. Chapter 80 - Experimental and behavioral economics to inform agri-environmental programs and policies.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.hesagr.2021.10.006  

   Palm-Forster, L. & ( October 2021 , Handbook of agricultural economics)

   Agricultural and applied economists have begun routinely using behavioral and experimental economics tools to answer important questions about agri-environmental policies and programs. These tools offer valuable insights into decision-making that can advance our economic understanding of human behavior and inform evidence-based policies. However, conducting robust economic experiments on agri-environmental topics presents unique challenges that can make implementation of these studies difficult and limit the applicability of results. This chapter provides a practical guide for researchers regarding best practices for applying experimental and behavioral economics to agri-environmental research focused on producer decision-making. We begin with a brief overview of how insights from behavioral economics have contributed to related literatures over past decades and highlight how economic experiments have been used to answer important research questions in those domains. We describe the types of economic experiments used to answer policy-relevant questions and carefully consider the advantages and limitations of each method in various contexts. We also highlight important trade-offs between control, context, and representativeness to consider when determining the most appropriate type of experiment to conduct. The chapter emphasizes five contemporary issues related to conducting robust experimental economics studies: replicability, statistical power, publication bias, farmer and rural landowner recruitment, and detection of heterogeneous treatment effects. To assist researchers in addressing each issue, we outline best practices and we offer recommendations for researchers, editors, reviewers, and funders. We also discuss research ethics and community engagement. Finally, we present a framework for prioritizing future economics research that can inform agri-environmental programs and policies. 

   more » « less
2. COVID-19 and Housing Security in Remote Alaska Native Communities

   Nicewonger, Todd E. ; McNair, Lisa D. ; Fritz, Stacey ; Supple, Laura ; Criss-Carboy, Laura ( November 2023 , Virginia Tech Publishing)

   Nicewonger, Todd E. ; McNair, Lisa D. ; Fritz, Stacey (Ed.)

   https://pressbooks.lib.vt.edu/alaskanative/ At the start of the pandemic, the editors of this annotated bibliography initiated a remote (i.e., largely virtual) ethnographic research project that investigated how COVID-19 was impacting off-site modular construction practices in Alaska Native communities. Many of these communities are located off the road system and thus face not only dramatically higher costs but multiple logistical challenges in securing licensed tradesmen and construction crews and in shipping building supplies and equipment to their communities. These barriers, as well as the region’s long winters and short building seasons, complicate the construction of homes and related infrastructure projects. Historically, these communities have also grappled with inadequate housing, including severe overcrowding and poor-quality building stock that is rarely designed for northern Alaska’s climate (Marino 2015). Moreover, state and federal bureaucracies and their associated funding opportunities often further complicate home building by failing to accommodate the digital divide in rural Alaska and the cultural values and practices of Native communities.[1] It is not surprising, then, that as we were conducting fieldwork for this project, we began hearing stories about these issues and about how the restrictions caused by the pandemic were further exacerbating them. Amidst these stories, we learned about how modular home construction was being imagined as a possible means for addressing both the complications caused by the pandemic and the need for housing in the region (McKinstry 2021). As a result, we began to investigate how modular construction practices were figuring into emergent responses to housing needs in Alaska communities. We soon realized that we needed to broaden our focus to capture a variety of prefabricated building methods that are often colloquially or idiomatically referred to as “modular.” This included a range of prefabricated building systems (e.g., manufactured, volumetric modular, system-built, and Quonset huts and other reused military buildings[2]). Our further questions about prefabricated housing in the region became the basis for this annotated bibliography. Thus, while this bibliography is one of multiple methods used to investigate these issues, it played a significant role in guiding our research and helped us bring together the diverse perspectives we were hearing from our interviews with building experts in the region and the wider debates that were circulating in the media and, to a lesser degree, in academia. The actual research for each of three sections was carried out by graduate students Lauren Criss-Carboy and Laura Supple.[3] They worked with us to identify source materials and their hard work led to the team identifying three themes that cover intersecting topics related to housing security in Alaska during the pandemic. The source materials collected in these sections can be used in a variety of ways depending on what readers are interested in exploring, including insights into debates on housing security in the region as the pandemic was unfolding (2021-2022). The bibliography can also be used as a tool for thinking about the relational aspects of these themes or the diversity of ways in which information on housing was circulating during the pandemic (and the implications that may have had on community well-being and preparedness). That said, this bibliography is not a comprehensive analysis. Instead, by bringing these three sections together with one another to provide a snapshot of what was happening at that time, it provides a critical jumping off point for scholars working on these issues. The first section focuses on how modular housing figured into pandemic responses to housing needs. In exploring this issue, author Laura Supple attends to both state and national perspectives as part of a broader effort to situate Alaska issues with modular housing in relation to wider national trends. This led to the identification of multiple kinds of literature, ranging from published articles to publicly circulated memos, blog posts, and presentations. These materials are important source materials that will likely fade in the vastness of the Internet and thus may help provide researchers with specific insights into how off-site modular construction was used – and perhaps hyped – to address pandemic concerns over housing, which in turn may raise wider questions about how networks, institutions, and historical experiences with modular construction are organized and positioned to respond to major societal disruptions like the pandemic. As Supple pointed out, most of the material identified in this review speaks to national issues and only a scattering of examples was identified that reflect on the Alaskan context. The second section gathers a diverse set of communications exploring housing security and homelessness in the region. The lack of adequate, healthy housing in remote Alaska communities, often referred to as Alaska’s housing crisis, is well-documented and preceded the pandemic (Guy 2020). As the pandemic unfolded, journalists and other writers reported on the immense stress that was placed on already taxed housing resources in these communities (Smith 2020; Lerner 2021). The resulting picture led the editors to describe in their work how housing security in the region exists along a spectrum that includes poor quality housing as well as various forms of houselessness including, particularly relevant for the context, “hidden homelessness” (Hope 2020; Rogers 2020). The term houseless is a revised notion of homelessness because it captures a richer array of both permanent and temporary forms of housing precarity that people may experience in a region (Christensen et al. 2107). By identifying sources that reflect on the multiple forms of housing insecurity that people were facing, this section highlights the forms of disparity that complicated pandemic responses. Moreover, this section underscores ingenuity (Graham 2019; Smith 2020; Jason and Fashant 2021) that people on the ground used to address the needs of their communities. The third section provides a snapshot from the first year of the pandemic into how CARES Act funds were allocated to Native Alaska communities and used to address housing security. This subject was extremely complicated in Alaska due to the existence of for-profit Alaska Native Corporations and disputes over eligibility for the funds impacted disbursements nationwide. The resources in this section cover that dispute, impacts of the pandemic on housing security, and efforts to use the funds for housing as well as barriers Alaska communities faced trying to secure and use the funds. In summary, this annotated bibliography provides an overview of what was happening, in real time, during the pandemic around a specific topic: housing security in largely remote Alaska Native communities. The media used by housing specialists to communicate the issues discussed here are diverse, ranging from news reports to podcasts and from blogs to journal articles. This diversity speaks to the multiple ways in which information was circulating on housing at a time when the nightly news and radio broadcasts focused heavily on national and state health updates and policy developments. Finding these materials took time, and we share them here because they illustrate why attention to housing security issues is critical for addressing crises like the pandemic. For instance, one theme that emerged out of a recent National Science Foundation workshop on COVID research in the North NSF Conference[4] was that Indigenous communities are not only recovering from the pandemic but also evaluating lessons learned to better prepare for the next one, and resilience will depend significantly on more—and more adaptable—infrastructure and greater housing security. 

   more » « less
3. Situating Engineering Education in a World Impacted by COVID-19

   De Pree, Thomas ; Appelhans, Sarah ; Cheville, Alan ; Akera, Atsushi ; Shuey, Melissa ( July 2021 , ASEE annual conference exposition)

   null (Ed.)

   In June 2020, at the annual conference of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), which was held entirely online due to the impacts of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2), engineering education researchers and social justice scholars diagnosed the spread of two diseases in the United States: COVID-19 and racism. During a virtual workshop (T614A) titled, “Using Power, Privilege, and Intersectionality as Lenses to Understand our Experiences and Begin to Disrupt and Dismantle Oppressive Structures Within Academia,” Drs. Nadia Kellam, Vanessa Svihla, Donna Riley, Alice Pawley, Kelly Cross, Susannah Davis, and Jay Pembridge presented what we might call a pathological analysis of institutionalized racism and various other “isms.” In order to address the intersecting impacts of this double pandemic, they prescribed counter practices and protocols of anti-racism, and strategies against other oppressive “isms” in academia. At the beginning of the virtual workshop, the presenters were pleasantly surprised to see that they had around a hundred attendees. Did the online format of the ASEE conference afford broader exposure of the workshop? Did recent uprising of Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests across the country, and internationally, generate broader interest in their topic? Whatever the case, at a time when an in-person conference could not be convened without compromising public health safety, ASEE’s virtual conference platform, furnished by Pathable and supplemented by Zoom, made possible the broader social impacts of Dr. Svihla’s land acknowledgement of the unceded Indigenous lands from which she was presenting. Svihla attempted to go beyond a hollow gesture by including a hyperlink in her slides to a COVID-19 relief fund for the Navajo Nation, and encouraged attendees to make a donation as they copied and pasted the link in the Zoom Chat. Dr. Cross’s statement that you are either a racist or an anti-racist at this point also promised broader social impacts in the context of the virtual workshop. You could feel the intensity of the BLM social movements and the broader political climate in the tone of the presenters’ voices. The mobilizing masses on the streets resonated with a cutting-edge of social justice research and education at the ASEE virtual conference. COVID-19 has both exacerbated and made more obvious the unevenness and inequities in our educational practices, processes, and infrastructures. This paper is an extension of a broader collaborative research project that accounts for how an exceptional group of engineering educators have taken this opportunity to socially broaden their curricula to include not just public health matters, but also contemporary political and social movements. Engineering educators for change and advocates for social justice quickly recognized the affordances of diverse forms of digital technologies, and the possibilities of broadening their impact through educational practices and infrastructures of inclusion, openness, and accessibility. They are makers of what Gary Downy calls “scalable scholarship”—projects in support of marginalized epistemologies that can be scaled up from ideation to practice in ways that unsettle and displace the dominant epistemological paradigm of engineering education.[1] This paper is a work in progress. It marks the beginning of a much lengthier project that documents the key positionality of engineering educators for change, and how they are socially situated in places where they can connect social movements with industrial transitions, and participate in the production of “undone sciences” that address “a structured absence that emerges from relations of inequality.”[2] In this paper, we offer a brief glimpse into ethnographic data we collected virtually through interviews, participant observation, and digital archiving from March 2019 to August 2019, during the initial impacts of COVID-19 in the United States. The collaborative research that undergirds this paper is ongoing, and what is presented here is a rough and early articulation of ideas and research findings that have begun to emerge through our engagement with engineering educators for change. This paper begins by introducing an image concept that will guide our analysis of how, in this historical moment, forms of social and racial justice are finding their way into the practices of engineering educators through slight changes in pedagogical techniques in response the debilitating impacts of the pandemic. Conceptually, we are interested in how small and subtle changes in learning conditions can socially broaden the impact of engineering educators for change. After introducing the image concept that guides this work, we will briefly discuss methodology and offer background information about the project. Next, we discuss literature that revolves around the question, what is engineering education for? Finally, we introduce the notion of situating engineering education and give readers a brief glimpse into our ethnographic data. The conclusion will indicate future directions for writing, research, and intervention. 

   more » « less
4. Summary Report: 3rd Annual Workshop on Resilient Supply of Critical Minerals, 9-10 August 2023, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, Missouri, USA, 36 pages

   Locmelis, Marek ; Clark, Shelby ; Moats, Michael ; Awuah-Offei, Kwame ; Fitch, Mark ; Krolikowski, Alanna ; Fikru, Mahelet ( November 2023 , Missouri S&T)

   On August 9-10, 2023, the Thomas J. O’Keefe Institute for Sustainable Supply of Strategic Minerals at Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T) hosted the third annual workshop on ‘Resilient Supply of Critical Minerals’. The workshop was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and was attended by 218 participants. 128 participants attended in-person in the Havener Center on the Missouri S&T campus in Rolla, Missouri, USA. Another 90 participants attended online via Zoom. Fourteen participants (including nine students) received travel support through the NSF grant to attend the conference in Rolla. Additionally, the online participation fee was waived for another six students and early career researchers to attend the workshop virtually. Out of the 218 participants, 190 stated their sectors of employment during registration showing that 87 participants were from academia (32 students), 62 from the private sector and 41 from government agencies. Four topical sessions were covered: A. The Critical Mineral Potential of the USA: Evaluation of existing, and exploration for new resources. B. Mineral Processing and Recycling: Maximizing critical mineral recovery from existing production streams. C. Critical Mineral Policies: Toward effective and responsible governance. D. Resource Sustainability: Ethical and environmentally sustainable supply of critical minerals. Each topical session was composed of two keynote lectures and complemented by oral and poster presentations by the workshop participants. Additionally, a panel discussion with panelists from academia, the private sector and government agencies was held that discussed ‘How to grow the American critical minerals workforce’. The 2023 workshop was followed by a post-workshop field trip to the lead-zinc mining operations of the Doe Run Company in southeast Missouri that was attended by 18 workshop participants from academia (n=10; including 4 students), the private sector (n=4), and government institutions (n=4). Discussions during the workshop led to the following suggestions to increase the domestic supply of critical minerals: (i) Research to better understand the geologic critical mineral potential of the USA, including primary reserves/resources, historic mine wastes, and mineral exploration potential. (ii) Development of novel extraction techniques targeted at the recovery of critical minerals as co-products from existing production streams, mine waste materials, and recyclables. (iii) Faster and more transparent permitting processes for mining and mineral processing operations. (iv) A more environmentally sustainable and ethical approach to mining and mineral processing. (v) Development of a highly skilled critical minerals workforce. This workshop report provides a detailed summary of the workshop discussions and describes a way forward for this workshop series for 2024 and beyond. 

   more » « less
5. Findings Report: Workshop on Resilient Supply of Critical Minerals

   Locmelis, Marek ; Lueking, Angela ; Moats, Michael ; Awuah-Offei, Kwame ; Alagha, Lana ; Fitch, Mark ; Krolikowski, Alanna ; Clark, Shelby ( October 2021 , NSF Workshop Reports)

   null (Ed.)

   On August 2-3, 2021, the Thomas J. O’Keefe Institute for Sustainable Supply of Strategic Minerals at Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T) hosted the NSF-funded virtual workshop ‘Resilient Supply of Critical Minerals’. The workshop was convened via Zoom and attracted 158 registrants, including 108 registrants from academia (61 students), 30 registrants from government agencies, and 20 registrants from the private sector. Four topical sessions were covered: A. Mineral Exploration and Source Diversification. B. Supply Chain and Policy Issues. C. Improving Mineral Recycling and Reprocessing Technologies. D. Technological Alternatives to Critical Minerals. Each topical session was composed of two keynote lectures and followed by a breakout session that was designed to identify promising pathways towards increasing critical supply chain resilience in the United States. During each breakout session, participants were asked to address five questions: Q1. What are the roadblocks that affect the resilient supply of critical minerals? Q2. What are the most pressing research needs? Q3. What opportunities can lead to the fastest and biggest impact? Q4. What skills training is required to meet future workforce demands? Q5. What other questions should be asked, but are commonly overlooked? Several issues that limit critical mineral supply chain resilience in the United States were identified and discussed in all breakout sessions, including: 1. Insufficient understanding of domestic critical minerals resources. To address this issue, workshop participants highlighted the need for (i) more geologic research to identify new and evaluate existing resources; and (ii) a qualitative and quantitative assessment of critical minerals that may be recovered as by/co-products from existing production streams. 2. Technical limitations of current mineral processing and recycling technologies. To address this issue, workshop participants highlighted the need for (i) innovative mineral processing technologies, including more environmentally friendly chemicals/solvents, and (ii) automated recycling technologies for appliances and e-waste. Participants also highlighted the need for a centralized and simplified way to collect recyclable materials, and incentives for the public to participate in recycling. 3. Long permitting processes for mining and mineral processing operations, with often unpredictable outcomes. To address this issue, workshop participants suggested the development of new critical mineral focused policies with faster processing times and more transparent / predictable decision-making processes. 4. The negative public image of mining and mineral processing operations. To address this issue, workshop participants suggested to design public outreach / education initiatives and to include local communities into decision-making processes. 5. Limited availability of a critical mineral workforce. To address this issue, workshop participants suggested an increased focus on critical mineral specific skill training in higher education institutions, and advanced training of the existing workforce. 

   more » « less