The Energy Rights Project is a social science study that investigates 1) how people understand energy systems, 2) how people access and use energy in their homes, 3) how organizations shape understanding of energy systems and everyday access to energy, and 4) how policy shapes relationships between energy users, energy providers, and energy assistance organizations.
The Energy Rights Project has three main objectives:
To collect data and provide analysis that is useful for energy service organizations (ESOs) and policymakers.
a) We publish quarterly publicly-available newsletters about our research activities and findings, for example.
b) Our survey data is available for use upon request.
c) We are interested in developing reports for/with organizations.
To provide an archive of material that can lend insight into household energy use, the struggle to secure access, and what can be done to address common problems related to energy affordability and security.
a) We publish a monthly “media brief” with stories our research team are reading related to COVID-19.
b) We collect reports and scholarly articles on energy in society.
c) We make all our research protocols and documentation available for public use.
To help educate people about energy - through our research activities and also by working with other organizations.
a) The Energy Vulnerability Pedagogy Project provides lesson plans for K-12 and college-level instruction.
b) We also have material from the Spring 2020 Energy Vulnerability Lab
c) We are currently working with ESOs to develop material for community use.
HISTORY OF THE PROJECT
The Energy Rights Project is a spin-off from Climate Ready Philly, a public education initiative based in Philadelphia. Some of the earliest findings from Climate Ready Philly indicated that people were struggling to keep their energy bills affordable and that they were interested in learning more about the politics and practices that could increase household efficiency. After receiving a National Science Foundation grant in early 2019, Alison Kenner -- in partnership with collaborators at the Energy Coordinating Agency -- began studying energy assistance in the U.S. Mid-Atlantic region, and Philadelphia specifically. (Some pilot ethnographic work was conducted in 2018 with a grant from Drexel University.) While our primary focus is on energy service organizations that use federal programs to ensure low-income households can afford utilities,since the COVID-19 pandemic, our work has become more comparative as we analyze how different U.S. states and regulatory bodies address energy needs during the pandemic. You can learn more about our projects here.
Our core research activities involve:
-Ethnographic surveys of household energy users
-Open-ended interviews with household energy users
-Semi-structured interviews with energy experts
-Participant observation at public meetings, workshops, and energy conferences
-Policy and media analysis
You can learn more about the details of these projects here.
As of March 2021, our research team includes Ali Kenner (PI), James Adams (University of California, Irvine), Briana Leone (Drexel University), Andrew Rosenthal (Drexel University), and Morgan Sarao (Drexel University). Previous research team members are Madeline Delvescovo and Sarah Stalcup, both Drexel University alums. B.J. McDuffie, community outreach coordinator at Energy Coordinating Agency, facilitates our community-based research. Additionally, we have benefited greatly from participation in the Transnational STS COVID-19 project and have in the past collaborators with members of that collective.
This project is funded by a National Science Foundation standard grant in the Division of Social and Economic Sciences Science and Technology Studies program. The grant period began April 1, 2019 and concludes March 31, 2022. You can read the award announcement here. The proposal is available upon request.
We would like to thank Kora Fortun for designing the Energy Rights Project logo. We would also like to thank Daniel Drexler for setting up our research platform and Renato Vasconcellos Gomes and the Revax team for site and systems administration. We are also grateful to Eliza Nobles, a former research team member who helped establish the project before moving on in her career.
Administrative support is provided by Irene Cho, Rachel Koresky, and Deborah Smith.
We would also like to thank the PECE Design Team for advising on digital architecture.
The Platform for Experimental, Collaborative Ethnography (PECE: pronounced “peace”) is an open source (Drupal-based) digital platform that supports multi-sited, cross-scale ethnographic and historical research. The platform links researchers in new ways, enables new kinds of analyses and data visualization, and activates researchers’ engagement with public problems and diverse audiences. PECE is at the center of a research project that explores how digital infrastructure can be designed to support collaborative hermeneutics.
PECE provides a place to archive and share primary data generated by scholars in the empirical humanities and social sciences, facilitates analytic collaboration, and encourages experimentation with diverse modes of publication. It encourages users to experiment with digitally-mediated interdisciplinary collaboration, provides opportunities to involve students in humanities research as it progresses, and quickens the public availability of humanities research in an open access form. PECE also enables experimentation with new forms of peer review for humanities research, and functions as a portal to a suite of open source tools useful for humanities research, including tools developed in data science for other scientific communities.
The PECE project extends from work in cultural anthropology over the last few decades that foregrounds how cultural critique, innovation, and change emerge, and the significance of the genre forms through which culture is expressed (Marcus and Fischer 1986; Clifford and Marcus 1986). This thread of work in cultural anthropology has drawn on literary and language theory to address the significance of genre forms both in everyday enactment of culture in different settings, and in scholarly representations of culture. PECE extends this thread of work into the digital domain through a platform design that reflects critical insight from theories of language, literature, and ethnography, built out organically with original ethnographic material. Thus, while designed to reflect critical theory, PECE is also ethnographically grounded, collaborative in nature, and expressly experimental: the platform is designed to permit change as called for by evolving ethnographic engagements. This entwined development process has been challenging but has proven robust, allowing us to identify needs and explore computational possibilities from within humanities work, learning about and building the kinds of tools that are critical when ethnographers work collaboratively, especially on complex topics involving multiple sites, scales, and actors, and many different kinds of “data”.
We developed PECE aware of long-standing effort, often experimental in tenor, to integrate new technologies and media into the work and expression of cultural analysis. Gregory Bateson and Margaret Mead’s stunning work with photography, as both a research tool and means of conveying their analysis, is exemplary in this regard (Bateson and Mead 1942; Jacknis 1988). The history of filmmaking in the conduct and expression of cultural analysis has also laid important ground, generating impressive methodological debates and innovation, and a body of work that literally provides different angles on matters of interest and concern to cultural analysts. Digital tools and modes of presentation add still other possibilities for getting at and sharing understanding of how “culture” works, in historical, geographic, political, economic, and media contexts, always in need of deeper or alternative ways of understanding. The goal of PECE could therefore be described as kaleidoscopic, enriching cultural analysis through use of an ever-evolving array of techniques and technologies – which, together, multiply perspective, give texture to insight, and animate reflexivity.
Design of the PECE platform has been oriented by “design logics” that translate critical theoretical commitments drawn from cultural, social, and language theories into digital terms (Fortun et al, forthcoming). One PECE design logic is drawn from Derridean historian of biology Hans-Jörg Rheinberger's conception of how experimental systems work in the sciences, as a play between limits and openness (Rheinberger 1998); another is drawn from James Clifford’s’ writing about how juxtaposition works in both surrealist art and ethnography (Clifford 1981); yet another is drawn from Gregory Bateson's description of what happens when different scales or orders of communication are crossed, resulting in double binds that sometimes produce pathology, sometimes creativity (Bateson 2000 ). These design logics travel with all instances of PECE, built-in and also expressed (see adjacent tab for a detailed articulation of PECE’s “Design Logics”). Such expression lays ground, we hope, both for work with PECE on its own terms, and for contrasting, alternative platform designs.
The constantly evolving needs of various instances of PECE such as The Asthma Files (a collaborative research project (on worsening asthma incidence and air quality globally) focused with shared questions linking project participants) and the Disaster-STS Research Network (an international network connecting researchers around the world studying how disasters of different types, in different regions of the world, are anticipated and managed) also orient the design of the platform.
The development of PECE has also been motivated by an array of concerns that we have come to refer as “substantive logics.” Substantive logics are reasons–theoretical, practical, and political–for investing in a given project. These logics often multiply as a project matures, and different collaborators bring different logics to a project. Substantive logics for PECE, for example, include the complex, pluralized knowledge demands of environmental health, but also the need for infrastructure supporting open sharing of research data, as now required by many journals and funders (the European Union and the US National Science Foundation, for example). New expectations for “open science” have technical requirements, while also calling out questions about how researchers should relate to each other, to those they study and work with, to their funders (often taxpayers), and to society writ large (at a moment that many consider to be a time of ecological, intellectual, and political crisis). The need for projects that work out the latter–what can be called the social contract of contemporary research–is another of PECE’s substantive logics.
Articulations that further detail PECE’s intellectual genealogies and interventions can be found here.
PECE is thus an intensively customized, open source content management system that has been built to address the global challenge of creating research infrastructure to support deeply interdisciplinary and international research that addresses complex problems such as global environmental health and disaster prevention, response, and recovery. Such problems have dimensions that require the integration of data and analysis from the humanities, social and natural sciences, and engineering, and thus will require robust digital infrastructure for humanities researchers, designed to be interoperable with research infrastructure developed for other fields.
We think of PECE as a triptych, with space for archiving, analysis, and crafted expression of ethnographic insight. Importantly, the middle space – for collaborative analysis – is where we’ve focused and invested most: here, especially, is where “collaborative hermeneutics” is being worked out. PECE’s design group has now developed and tested multiple digital functions that enable ethnographic collaboration. In the next phase of the project, we will refine existing functions and develop others, through side-by-side development of diverse ethnographic projects on separate platforms. To ensure such interoperability, we have also worked closely with data scientists (at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute), and within the Research Data Alliance (RDA), an international initiative to enhance capacity to archive, preserve, analyze, and share data within and across research communities.
PECE was built and is governed by a group of interdisciplinary scholars at University of California Irvine, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, and Steven’s Institute of Technology. It is currently hosted at University of California Irvine. It can be freely downloaded at GitHub and installed locally to support different kinds of projects.