Constructing Valid Geospatial Tools for Environmental Justice (2024) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 A Conceptual Framework for Building Composite Indicators
3 A Conceptual Framework for Building Composite Indicators
Pages 51-72
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 51... ...
CEJST attempts to identify which census tracts meet this condition by combining data measures across its "categories of burden"2 to indicate if the census tract is considered disadvantaged. This chapter provides a foundation for a structured iterative process for constructing tools that calculate composite indicators, such as CEJST and other environmental justice (EJ)
|
From page 52... ...
One tool, California's CalEnviroScreen,3 is used to direct investment of proceeds from the state's greenhouse gas Cap-and-Trade Program toward disadvantaged communities.4 It is also central to multiple municipal and state programs and planning, including incorporation of EJ into the general plans of California municipalities, CalEPA's Environmental Justice Enforcement Task Force, the California Air Resources Board's Community Air Protection Program, and to identify vulnerabilities for tracking progress related to implementing the human right to water (Lee, 2020)
|
From page 53... ...
of various environmental or socioeconomic stressors for communities across the country, but it does not categorize or label "environmental justice" communities or "disadvantaged" communities. California's CalEnviroScreen and SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities8 have hybrid functions.
|
From page 54... ...
Evaluating the robustness and validity of such choices is discussed in Chapters 6 and 7, respectively. USE OF COMPOSITE INDICATORS Composite indicators are widely and increasingly used to reflect multidimensional concepts such as well-being (Salzman, 2003)
|
From page 55... ...
, communities, and other affected parties. CONSTRUCTING COMPOSITE INDICATORS Building a national-scale EJ tool (such as CEJST)
|
From page 56... ...
. Guidance for Constructing Composite Indicators The OECD Pocket Guide to Composite Indicators and Scoreboards (Saisana et al., 2019)
|
From page 57... ...
Community engagement and partnership are necessary at every step of the process. (See the next section of this chapter for more details on community engagement strategies.)
|
From page 58... ...
Questions to ask include: What main uncertainties underlie the composite indicator? This can involve the basic concept definition, indicator selection (e.g., wrong or missing indicators)
|
From page 59... ...
The widely cited Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide (OECD and JRC, 2008) provides a comprehensive guide to the decisions involved in each step.
|
From page 60... ...
Therefore, careful design, testing, and workshopping of user interfaces can result in increased use and functionality of geospatial tools.
|
From page 61... ...
capture the spatial nonstationarity (heterogeneity) within the aggregate spatial unit using local spatial models (see Fotheringham and Sachdeva, 2022)
|
From page 62... ...
For example, Census Designated Places (CDP) could provide finer spatial resolution and alignment with specific communities such as colonias, Tribal lands, and other densely settled unincorporated places.13 Census tract data could be augmented with other administrative units to capture population heterogeneities, but doing so may require addressing issues associated with coverage at a national scale and mixing of units with different population ranges.
|
From page 63... ...
. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND PARTNERSHIPS Composite indicator construction is intricate, multifaceted, and value laden and, therefore, cannot be reduced to a purely formulaic approach.
|
From page 64... ...
: • Community buy-in and support for the process, program, and results; • Increased enthusiasm and support for shared goals; • Development of new and larger networks based on deeper understanding between interested and affected parties; • Improved community education around important issues; • Improved community advocacy and accountability for decision makers; • Increased sense of empowerment and self-determination among communities; • Increased and stronger community partnerships rooted in trust and authentic communication; and • Potential improved community outcomes. Community engagement also provides means to allow communities to help define themselves, empowers them with opportunities to influence how their own data or data about them might be properly and respectfully used, and to help identify, for example, any unintended consequences associated with the use of a tool (e.g., as a result of being labeled or defined a certain way)
|
From page 65... ...
recommended protocols for community engagement, but community engagement practices should be rooted in community-created principles such as the Jemez Principles for Democratic Organizing (Solis, 1997) and the Principles of Environmental Justice.a 4.
|
From page 66... ...
. Unfortunately, "community engagement" is commonly little more than a survey or a single community meeting from which input received is later ignored.
|
From page 67... ...
differ- to how we capacity for ently about address the transforma the issue issue tive solu tions Activities Closed-door Fact sheets Public com- Community MOUs with Community meetings Open houses ment organizing community- driven Misinforma- Presenta- Focus and advo- based orga- planning tion tions groups cacy nizations Consensus Systematic Billboards Community House meet- Community building Videos forums ings organizing Participa Surveys Interactive Citizen tory action workshops advisory research Polling committees Participatory Community Open plan- budgeting forums ning forums Coopera with citizen tives polling Resource 100% 70-90% 60-80% 50-60% 20-50% 80-100% allocation Systems Systems Systems Systems Systems Community ratios admin admin admin admin admin partners and community 10-30% 20-40% 40-50% 50-70% driven Promotions Consultation Community Community processes and public- activities involvement partners ideally gen ity erate new value and resources that can be invested in solutions NOTE: MOU = memorandum of understanding. SOURCE: Gonzalez, 2019.
|
From page 68... ...
The principles in the documents inform organizations on how they might hear directly from the interested and affected parties with whom they seek partnerships. There is solid evidence that community engagement can improve health and social outcomes, particularly for disadvantaged communities, although which model of engagement is most effective can vary (Cyril et al., 2015; Haldane et al., 2019; Milton et al., 2012)
|
From page 69... ...
The principles, along with the En vironmental Justice Principlesa developed during the First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit in 1991, are used as best practices when working with communities, particularly marginalized communities dispro portionately affected by environmental and social injustices. Table 3.2.1 below is an overview of the Jemez Principles and provides example applications for EJ tools such as CEJST.
|
From page 70... ...
to determine a single value intended to reflect the condition being measured. Sound composite indicators are developed with a clearly defined purpose and intended audience and reflect real-world conditions.
|
From page 71... ...
Effective community engagement is part of a comprehensive composite indicator construction process that not only validates approaches used in the composite indicator but can also result in trust in the tool and improved outcomes. Recognizing the importance of community engagement in composite indicator construction, the committee developed a vision for EJ tool development (Figure 3.2)
|
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.