My Summer Research: The Executive Summary

This post provides a more in-depth overview of my summer research project, “A Systems Comparison of Four Community-Based Energy Conservation Programs.” Read it if you are really interested in my research; otherwise, you might find it rather boring.

Since the energy crisis of the 1970s, there have been many community-based efforts to encourage American citizens to conserve energy.  Many energy conservation advocates have focused on the energy used in American homes, which contributes roughly 21% of the United States’ carbon dioxide emissions (EPA, 2010) and amounts to roughly 22% of the energy used for services (LBL, 2011).  Because most American homes have low efficiency and consume large amounts of energy, residential conservation is often toted as the “low hanging fruit” of the energy sector.  However, although conservation is theoretically a good option to reduced energy demand, conservation-focused campaigns have yet to substantially reduce the consumption in the residential sector (Wang, 2011).

Social scientists have conducted extensive analysis on efforts to promote conservation and efficiency in the residential sector, examining the topic through many different disciplinary lenses including public policy, technological development, sociology, psychology, economics, and social work.  This research reveals a broad array social, economic, technological, and behavioral factors that have prevented the effective implementation of residential energy conservation measures.  Much of this research is already being used to develop better energy conservation programs for residential communities (Fuller et al., 2010, p. 7).  

However, several aspects of the community-based energy conservation campaigns remain controversial in the social science literature, and few programs have achieved substantial energy savings or high participation rates from community members.  In addition, most previous research narrowly analyzed only a few factors of community-based energy conservation campaigns and did not consider the overall systemic interactions of all variables or important larger feedback processes.

Systems modeling can help to illuminate these missing systemic interactions and feedback processes, and can likely provide much deeper explanations as to why energy conservation programs have not rapidly proliferated.  In the tradition of system dynamics, these models do not explain problems in terms of bi-variable linear causality, but rather attribute observed behavior to feedback processes of the entire system.  Through a method called “group model building,” the lead modeler facilitates a process through which various stakeholders within the system collaborate to create a qualitative systems representation of the problem at hand.  This inclusive process leads to shared understanding and a growing awareness of the hidden feedbacks that lead to the observed behavior.  These qualitative models can later be quantified to create dynamic computer simulation models.

This summer, I will conduct a comparative case study design of four community-based energy conservation programs.  My project will focus on Weatherize DC project in Washington, DC, Cooperative Energy Futures in St. Paul, MN, Energize Corvalis in Corvalis, OR, and the Baltimore Neighborhood Energy Challenge in Baltimore, MD.   I will spend approximately two weeks with each organization, observing how each program functions, the effectiveness of each the program, and how community stakeholders and organization staff view the project.  I will also engage each program in a series of group model building sessions to elucidate the mental models of organizational staff.  Through these sessions and my observations, each energy conservation program will create develop its own qualitative systems model.  If data is available, these models will later be quantified.

I hypothesize that my research will show that there is a trade-off between program participation rates and per-capita energy savings.  Community-based programs that focus on small concessions, pledge-based approaches should achieve the highest participation rates, but they should also have the lowest relative energy savings of all of the approaches.  In contrast, programs that focus on single-action large improvements in efficiency (ie, entire house weatherization retrofits) should yield the lowest participation rates but the highest per-capita energy savings.

Below is the 2 x 2 comparative case study design for my summer research project. Please note that the programs do not rigidly fall within the categories; each program conducts a certain amount of work that targets behavior change and physical improvements in efficiency.  However, I believe that my categorizations capture the main focus of each particular program.

	Small concessions programs	Single-action programs
Primarily pledge-based behavior changes (curtailment)	Energize Corvalis’ “Communities Take Charge!” Initiative	Baltimore Neighborhood Energy Challenge
Primarily physical efficiency improvements	Cooperative Energy Futures / Summer of Solutions Twin Cities	WeatherizeDC

Through the different central program focuses in each my four case studies, I hope to directly examine the relationship between program participation and energy savings.  I also hope that the models developed with each program will yield new systemic insights towards how to increase community engagement and energy savings in any program.

Sources:

Fuller, M.C., Kunkel, C., Zimring, M., Hoffman, I., Soroye, K.L., & Goldman, C. (2010). Driving Demand for Home Energy Improvements. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.  Retrieved from http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/driving/drivingdemand.html

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. (2011). [Graphic illustration of estimated U.S. energy usage by sector].  Estimated U.S. Energy Use in 2009: ~94.6 Quads. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.grist.org/i/assets/llnl-energy-flow-2009.jpg

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2010). Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 – 2008. Washington, DC. U.S. EPA # 430-R-10-006.  Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads10/US-GHG-Inventory-2010_ExecutiveSummary.pdf

Wang, Ucilia. (2011, April 4). Building Energy Efficiency Is a Hard Market to Crack.  Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/04/idUS349709974520110404

A Summer of Research and Traveling: My Search for Sustainability Hits the Road

This summer, I am conducting a research project on four different community-based energy conservation initiatives. I will travel extensively through this comparative case study, as I will spend approximately two weeks with energy conservation programs in Baltimore, Washington DC, Minneapolis, and Corvallis OR. In each location, I hope to learn how each program organizes and empowers citizens to conserve energy. In addition, I hope to observe and learn from each city's unique history, architecture, and culture. I am very excited to share my summer experiences with you through this blog.

My research will primarily focus on building qualitative system dynamics models for each program.  To create these models, I plan to use a participatory technique called “group model building.”  In this technique, the program members themselves will do most of the model building and I will merely facilitate the sessions.  This will hopefully lead to team learning and systemic understanding, as group model building sessions allow participants to see the interrelated nature of many different variables and describe feedback processes in great detail.

In many ways, my summer research is highly unorthodox.  By using group model building rather than statistical analysis to examine the dynamics energy conservation, I am taking a subjective view in a field that typically consists of empirical, objective studies.  In addition, most group model building sessions are conducted by a 3-5 person team, with different tasks and realms delegated for each person. For my research, I am “flying solo,” and will thus need to train program members in basic modeling skills as I go. While having only one person direct group model building sessions may be difficult, it also provides a high level of flexibility, as I will not have to consult anyone else before going “off script” and changing the session’s design.

Ultimately, I hope to accomplish two things through this project.  First, I seek to gain a better understanding of the various strategies possible in promoting energy conservation.  By spending close to two weeks with each energy conservation program, I expect to gain a solid understanding of its strengths, weaknesses, and overall dynamics.  Second, I desire to hone my skills as a model builder and group facilitator.  I believe that the technique of group model building has a huge potential to help progressive organizations achieve their goals of implementing positive social change, especially for groups dealing with complex “messy” issues.  By using this technique throughout the summer, I hope to learn how systems modeling can move from an academic exercise conducted by experts into a useful tool readily accessible to any group.

There is no guarantee that I will succeed in either of these goals.  However, I know my chances of success will be much higher with the support of my mentors, family, and friends.  Therefore, I am plan to blog regularly as my research progresses.

Ideally, this blog will become a running narrative of my all of my summer experiences. I encourage comments, as I would love to see this blog stimulate new conversations about energy conservation, systems modeling, and community organizing.  Thanks for reading, and I hope you enjoy my search for sustainability.

If you are interested in reading more about the details of my research project, please see my next post “My Summer Research Project: The Executive Summary.”