Search

“This mapping capacity not only enables examination of information based on objective (based on empirical evidence), comparable (quantitative), and visualizable (mapped) terms, it also puts this information in front of the analysts and decisionmakers in a form they cannot ignore.” 7; HOFFMAN, community science model: “In his mind, this model consists of (1) serving as a focal point for bringing together community residents, scientists, and policymakers; (2) serving to generate knowledge that can be a catalyst for change; and (3) developing methodologies and products that can be scalable—particularly for neighborhood use. The visualization of the problem through redlining maps is critical. … EJ at its core is about the spatial distribution of environmental benefits and burdens. Winling described redlining as the Rosetta Stone that unlocks an understanding of the spatial organization of most American cities. It “most definitely created a template” that would be built out over generations.” 15

Lee argues that EJ practice has long stagnated over an inability to properly define the concept of disproportionate (environmental and public health) impacts, but that national conversations on system racism and the development of EJ mapping tools have improved his outlook on the potential for better application of the concept of disproportionate impact. Lee identifies mapping tools (e.g. CalEnviroScreen) as a pathway for empirically based and analytically rigorous articulation and analysis of disproportionate impacts that are linked to systemic racism.

In describing the scope and nature of application of mapping tools, Baker highlights the concept of cumulative impacts (the concentration of multiple environmental, public health, and social stressors), the importance of public participation (e.g. Hoffman’s community science model), the role of redlining in creating disproportionate vulnerabilities, and the importance of integrating research into decision making processes.

Baker ultimately argues that mapping tools offer a promising opportunity for integrating research into policy decision making as part of a second generation of EJ practice. Key areas that Lee identifies as important to the continued development of more effective EJ practice include: identifying good models for quantitative studies and analysis, assembling a spectrum of different integrative approaches (to fit different contexts), connecting EJ research to policy implications, and being attentive to historical contexts and processes that produce/reproduce structural inequities.