Representation and Inclusion - California Climate and Energy Collaborative

Barrier 1: Representation & Inclusion

Barrier Statement

Systemic inequities and power dynamics—such as privileging academic credentials over lived experience, relying on the same few individuals, or pursuing symbolic rather than genuine participation—undermine authentic, diverse, and trusted community involvement in decision-making.

Filterable Database

How communities are experiencing this barrier

View the details on what communities have shared with SLECC from across the state.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, Inland Deserts

Despite broad recognition of the need for inclusive climate action, marginalized communities, Tribes, and smaller local governments remain underrepresented in planning and decision-making. Structural barriers—including limited time, resources, childcare, transportation, and digital access—further restrict who can participate, while engagement processes often remain one-way, consultant-driven, or performative. These approaches over-rely on the same few individuals, create community fatigue, and fail to reflect cultural context or lived experience, undermining trust and the effectiveness of state-led programs.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area

Tribal Underrepresentation and Misaligned Engagement Pathways. Tribal governments are frequently treated like nonprofits rather than sovereign nations, limiting their influence in climate, land-use, and adaptation decisions. A lack of direct funding, culturally appropriate engagement approaches, and government-to-government relationship structures prevents meaningful Tribal participation and restricts access to ancestral lands and decision-making spaces.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area

Lack of Shared Standards for Accessible and Equitable Engagement. State agencies, local governments, consultants, and CBOs do not share consistent standards for what constitutes equitable engagement, leading to wide variation in quality and effectiveness. Insufficient translation, inaccessible technical materials, culturally mismatched messaging, and inconsistent accessibility practices prevent residents—especially non-English speakers—from fully participating in planning and policy processes.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Lack of imagination in disinvested communities: Communities with a history of disinvestment often lack exposure to examples of successful local climate/energy projects, which makes it harder for residents to envision transformative change. This gap reduces participation in planning because people can’t see themselves in proposed solutions.

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles

Unintended exclusion: Well-meaning efforts (like aiming for “indigenous-led” processes) often fail if there are no authentic relationships, treating diverse groups as a monolith and reinforcing mistrust

Local Solution Opportunities

SLECC stakeholders have brainstormed the following solution opportunities that can be taken by local leaders. Existing examples of progress or pathways to make further progress are highlighted if known.

Local Solution

Provide culturally rooted, multilingual engagement and communication. Local agencies deliver outreach materials and facilitation in residents’ preferred languages and cultural formats, going beyond basic translation to ensure relevance and accessibility. They also maintain open, multilingual communication channels that connect communities to state programs and elevate community priorities in planning and decision-making.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Spanish-language organizing as leverage: In one case, a community organizer intentionally spoke in Spanish at a board meeting to force board members to struggle with translation, highlighting neglect of a 1,000-member Spanish-speaking church. This action mobilized 200 residents to show up at a Saturday meeting and submit 115 letters of support, shifting the agency’s stance

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, Inland Deserts

Local Solution

Build long-term, community-centered regional partnerships that sustain engagement beyond project cycles. Local and regional CBO networks collaborate to share resources, reduce duplicative outreach, and prevent community fatigue, while agencies maintain full-cycle involvement with residents—pre-, during, and post-project. This approach prioritizes long-term relationships over transactional, grant-driven engagement and ensures continuity and trust across initiatives.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Community advisory boards can be used as a structure to allow continuous engagement outside of grant cycles

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, San Diego

Local Solution

Establish ongoing community advisory structures at local and regional levels. Create sustained boards and councils that ensure continuous input—especially from underrepresented communities—into climate and energy decisions, allowing community voices to guide policies beyond one-time engagement.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Fifth Climate Change Assessment – Inland Deserts Region: A model for participatory engagement that combines scientific research with locally led advisory groups and storytelling events to center lived experience

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area, Inland Deserts

State Solution Opportunities

SLECC stakeholders have brainstormed the following solution opportunities that can be taken by state leaders. Existing examples of progress or pathways to make further progress are highlighted if known.

State Solution

Require state-funded projects to demonstrate meaningful, early community partnerships. Applicants must show strong, representative partnerships—including with Tribal, immigrant, and marginalized groups—established at the start of project planning rather than as late-stage check-box activities, ensuring community priorities shape project design and outcomes.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area, San Diego

State Solution

Fund and invest in long-term, community-centered partnerships—beyond one-time events or grant cycles—to strengthen trust and collaboration between agencies, local governments, and community-based organizations (CBOs). Sustained relationship-building should include dedicated resources for translation, stipends, and culturally appropriate engagement, ensuring that partnerships remain continuous, equitable, and grounded in local priorities.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): Los Angeles, Inland Deserts

State Solution

Pilot programs that test new engagement approaches before solidifying procedures. State agencies prototype new engagement formats, learn from them, and iterate based on community feedback.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area

Solution Spotlight

No results found.

Help us strengthen our knowledge base!

Help us to expand our database. Either share new ideas, best practices or general feedback via this form, or click on a particular item to share additional feedback, information, examples of progress on that particular item.

Feedback Form

Additional Resources

Please share any additional resources you would like to include by emailing eecoordinator@civicwell.org.