Constructing Valid Geospatial Tools for Environmental Justice (2024) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
8 Recommendations
8 Recommendations
Pages 189-202
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 189... ...
Each step of the tool development process has been validated internally for statistical robustness and externally through community engagement to ensure legitimacy. Information about data inputs, indicator construction methods, and community engagement processes are thoroughly documented.
|
From page 190... ...
Tool developers will be more familiar with the innermost components of the model as important aspects of composite indicator construction, and in fact, the description of the conceptual framework in Chapter 3 discusses those components first. However, because community engagement, documentation, and validation are central to building a transparent, trustworthy, and legitimate tool, this chapter begins with those topics.
|
From page 191... ...
Chapter 3 highlights the crucial role of community engagement throughout the entire process of constructing composite indicator-based EJ tools. It also discusses the wide spectrum of community engagement models that could be employed and the need for transparency and honesty in choosing the appropriate model.
|
From page 192... ...
to be responsive to different and potentially opposing needs, attitudes, and priorities; and (c) to inform decision making in multiple sectors, tool developers will need to consult experts in community engagement and rely on, for example, advisory panels to help design appropriate programs tailored for an individual tool.
|
From page 193... ...
Thorough documentation of all tool components and approaches is vital to ensure proper tool use, to help decision makers understand where and how the tool may be accurate and what kinds of uncertainties should be expected, and to know when tool results need to be supplemented with other types of information. Good documentation makes the strengths and weaknesses of the tool clear to interested and affected tool users or community members and provides guidance regarding how best to use the tool to inform decision making.
|
From page 194... ...
, validation methodologies need to be applied throughout the construction of a tool to determine how well the tool relates to real-world conditions. Recommendation 3: Validate tool development and evaluative processes throughout the construction of an environmental justice tool using approaches such as ground truthing, convergent validation, and community validation to ensure that the tool's indicators and results reflect lived experiences.
|
From page 195... ...
Chapter 3 discusses the challenge of measuring and identifying concepts such as community disadvantage through EJ tools such as CEJST and the construction of composite indicators -- reducing a multidimensional concept into a single value. Composite indicator construction involves a set of carefully considered interlinked decisions, starting with a clear definition of the concept being measured.
|
From page 196... ...
A future data strategy that will incorporate the state of the art and practice in composite indicator construction includes • Defining the concept to be measured and developing a description of its multiple facets or dimensions. • Selecting the indicators that measure each dimension.
|
From page 197... ...
Selecting indicators and datasets for any tool requires a careful and structured approach to composite indicator construction, as described in Recommendation 4 and includes a systematic scan of available data. In the case of CEJST, the indicators and corresponding datasets appear reasonable; however, they represent only a small subset of the wide range of possible federal and national datasets that could be used to inform an EJ tool (see Appendix D for examples)
|
From page 198... ...
If indicators of racism are not used, explicitly factor race and ethnicity as indicators when measuring community disadvantage. Using measures of racism allows tool developers to identify disadvantage being placed on people of color or certain ethnicities.
|
From page 199... ...
Tool developers can work with representatives of communities of color and subject-matter experts to revisit existing empirical data and consider the metrics, quantitative data, and qualitative data that reflect community lived experiences. While CEQ develops measures of racism to be incorporated directly into CEJST, supplemental analysis comparing the distribution of race/ethnicity indicators and CEJST outputs could help CEQ tool developers gain a greater understanding of how well CEJST captures community disadvantage in its current formulation.
|
From page 200... ...
Constructing a composite indicator requires numerous modeling decisions, each of which includes multiple plausible options based on scientific knowledge, available data, and community preferences. These modeling decisions can independently and conjointly influence which communities the tool identifies as disadvantaged.
|
From page 201... ...
For example, even before any changes to the tool construction are made, CEQ could expand the current documentation of CEJST, thereby improving communication with interested and affected parties and tool users by explaining design processes and decisions, including descriptions and rationale for all major indicator construction components, and describing robustness analysis and results. It can begin to expand its community engagement efforts to create the community partnerships that provide forums and opportunities to identify local EJ issues, identify the indicators and datasets for measuring them, and determine whether tool results reflect community lived experiences.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.