Search for: All records

Abstract This perspective explores the imperative role of participatory research (PR) in advancing energy justice. We argue that using PR methods and principles at the intersection of energy and equity is a critical research advantage. Here, we contend that PR frameworks are integral to bridging the gap between energy justice theory and practice, emphasizing the need to move beyond decontextualized principles to address specific injustices related to race, class, gender, and coloniality. We present three energy justice case studies that used participatory approaches in diverse contexts: Amazon, Brazil; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; and Holyoke, Massachusetts, USA. These cases showcase the versatility of PR methods in understanding and addressing unique energy challenges within local communities. We highlight guiding principles of PR, emphasizing the importance of prioritizing community needs, respecting diverse expertise, building trust, designing for transparency and accountability, choosing appropriate methods, adapting and being flexible, and aiming for long-term collaboration. Lastly, our perspective suggests future directions for participatory energy justice research, including the potential for PR to inform multiscalar policy, practice, and advocacy. We underscore the importance of collaborations between university researchers and community organizations through citizen science, emphasizing the need for diverse disciplinary perspectives to effectively address complex energy justice challenges. 

This research article is a collaborative set of reflections and provocations stemming from the National Science Foundation (NSF) funded workshop on STS as a Critical Pedagogy, hosted online during the summer of 2021 by Shannon N. Conley and Emily York at James Madison University. The workshop occurred over four separate sessions, bringing together forty participants (including six undergraduate students who contributed as both facilitators and research assistants). Participants self-organized into panels, leading the workshop collective to engage a host of questions, challenges, methods, and practices related to STS and critical pedagogy. Questions included the following. What characterizes critical STS pedagogies? How are critical STS pedagogies enabled and constrained by our institutional and disciplinary locations? What makes STS pedagogies travel? How might we imagine STS pedagogies otherwise? How do our pedagogies shape our research and engagement in the world? How might we critically interrogate the boundaries between research, teaching, service, and engagement, and what becomes visible when we do so?