Search for: All records

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10160680 

Research Computing and Data (RCD) professionals play a crucial role in supporting and advancing research that involve data and/or computing, however, there is a critical shortage of RCD workforce, and organizations face challenges in recruiting and retaining RCD professional staff. It is not obvious to people outside of RCD how their skills and experience map to the RCD profession, and staff currently in RCD roles lack resources to create a professional development plan. To address these gaps, the CaRCC RCD Career Arcs working group has embarked upon an effort to gain a deeper understanding of the paths that RCD professionals follow across their careers. An important step in that effort is a recent survey the working group conducted of RCD professionals on key factors that influence decisions in the course of their careers. This survey gathered responses from over 200 respondents at institutions across the United States. This paper presents our initial findings and analyses of the data gathered. We describe how various genders, career stages, and types of RCD roles impact the ranking of these factors, and note that while there are differences across these groups, respondents were broadly consistent in their assessment of the importance of these factors. In some cases, the responses clearly distinguish RCD professionals from the broader workforce, and even other Information Technology professionals. 

Cities seek nuanced understanding of intraurban inequality in energy use, addressing both income and race, to inform equitable investment in climate actions. However, nationwide energy consumption surveys are limited (<6,000 samples in the United States), and utility-provided data are highly aggregated. Limited prior analyses suggest disparity in energy use intensity (EUI) by income is ∼25%, while racial disparities are not quantified nor unpacked from income. This paper, using new empirical fine spatial scale data covering all 200,000 households in two US cities, along with separating temperature-sensitive EUI, reveals intraurban EUI disparities up to a factor of five greater than previously known. We find 1) annual EUI disparity ratios of 1.27 and 1.66, comparing lowest- versus highest-income block groups (i.e., 27 and 66% higher), while previous literature indicated only ∼25% difference; 2) a racial effect distinct from income, wherein non-White block groups (highest quintile non-White percentage) in the lowest-income stratum reported up to a further ∼40% higher annual EUI than less diverse block groups, providing an empirical estimate of racial disparities; 3) separating temperature-sensitive EUI unmasked larger disparities, with heating–cooling electricity EUI of lowest-income block groups up to 2.67 times (167% greater) that of highest income, and high racial disparity within lowest-income strata wherein high non-White (>75%) population block groups report EUI up to 2.56 times (156% larger) that of majority White block groups; and 4) spatial scales of data aggregation impact inequality measures. Quadrant analyses are developed to guide spatial prioritization of energy investment for carbon mitigation and equity. These methods are potentially translatable to other cities and utilities.