Search for: All records

Abstract Harnessing scientific research to address societal challenges requires careful alignment of expertise, resources, and research questions with real‐world needs, timelines, and constraints. In the case of place‐based research, studies can avoid misalignment when grounded in the realities of specific locations and conducted in collaboration with knowledgeable local partners. But literature on best practices for such research is underdeveloped on how to identify appropriate locations and partners. In practice, these research‐design choices are sometimes made based on convenience or prior experience—a strategy labeled opportunism. Here we examine a deliberative and exploratory approach in contrast to default opportunism. We introduce a general framework for scoping place‐based opportunities for research and engagement. We apply the framework to identify climate‐adaptation planning decisions, rooted in specific communities, around which to organize research and engagement in a large project addressing coastal climate risks in the Northeast US. The framework asks project personnel to negotiate explicit project goals, identify corresponding evaluation criteria, and assess opportunities against criteria within an iterative cycle of listening to needs, assessing options, prioritizing actions, and refining goals. In the application, we elicit a broad range of objectives from project personnel. We find that a structured process offers opportunities to collaboratively operationalize notions of equity and justice. We find some objectives in tension—including equity objectives—indicating trade‐offs that other projects may also need to navigate. We reflect on challenges encountered in the application and on near‐term costs and benefits of the exploratory process. 

Microplastics (MP) have been proposed as a vector for pathogenic microorganisms in the freshwater environment. The objectives of this study were (1) to compare the fecal indicator growth in biofilms on MP and material control microparticles incubated in different wastewater fractions and (2) to compare MP biofilm, natural microparticle biofilm, and planktonic cell susceptibility to disinfection by peracetic acid (PAA). Biofilms were grown on high‐density polyethylene, low‐density polyethylene, polypropylene MP or wood chips (as a material control) and incubated in either wastewater influent or pre‐disinfection secondary effluent. Reactors were disinfected with PAA, biofilms were dislodged, and fecal coliform and E. coli were cultivated. Fecal indicators were quantifiable in both MP and wood biofilms incubated in the wastewater influent but only on the wood biofilms incubated in secondary wastewater effluent. More fecal coliform grew in the wood biofilms than MP biofilms, and the biofilms grown on MP and woodchips were more resistant to disinfection than planktonic bacteria. Thus, it may be possible to refer to the disinfection literature for fecal indicators in biofilm on other particles to predict behavior on MP. Treatments that remove particles in general would help reduce the potential for fecal indicator bypass of disinfection.