東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁 到查詢結果 [ null ]

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Just Maps? Exploring the Development...

Emrick, Claire,

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Just Maps? Exploring the Development and Use of Environmental Justice Mapping Tools in the United States /

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Just Maps? Exploring the Development and Use of Environmental Justice Mapping Tools in the United States // Claire Emrick.
作者:	Emrick, Claire,
面頁冊數:	1 electronic resource (109 pages)
附註:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 86-03.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International86-03.
標題:	Environmental justice. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=31557778
ISBN:	9798384104100

Just Maps? Exploring the Development and Use of Environmental Justice Mapping Tools in the United States /
Emrick, Claire,

Just Maps? Exploring the Development and Use of Environmental Justice Mapping Tools in the United States /Claire Emrick. - 1 electronic resource (109 pages)

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 86-03.

The disparate distribution of environmental risks and benefits is well documented in the United States. In response, interactive mapping tools that attempt to represent and address environmental justice (EJ) issues have proliferated in recent years. By synthesizing socioeconomic and environmental data into a user-friendly interface, EJ mapping tools can inform advocacy and policy decisions that benefit disadvantaged communities. Numerous studies have contributed to the development and assessment of the indices and datasets found in these mapping tools, while other articles have highlighted approaches to and lessons learned from single cases of EJ mapping tool development. However, only a few studies have begun to explore EJ tools across multiple cases to understand broader trends in how EJ mapping tools are developed and used in practice. Through a survey, a document-analysis informed database, and interviews with tool developers, my research investigates these questions: How are EJ mapping tools developed and used in the United States? How and in what ways does engagement impact the development and use of EJ mapping tools?I identified 153 examples of local, regional, and statewide EJ mapping tools across 38 states. Of the 60 tools represented by survey respondents, 86.7 percent sought input on the tool from a wide range of stakeholders including members of the public, academics and researchers, non-profits, and state, local, and regional governments. From indicator selection to design changes to ground truthing of data, developers highlighted numerous ways that feedback influenced the tool before, during, and after the development process. While the results suggested that efforts are being made to involve communities and stakeholders in the process, most EJ mapping tools were developed in a top-down, expert-driven manner, leaving decision-making power with the developer and limiting the potential for true community ownership of the resulting tools.With EJ mapping tools increasingly used to inform policy decisions, I argue that every methodological choice is a political act that calls for meaningful involvement, and ideally leadership, from the stakeholders and communities that these tools represent. In addition to improvements to the tool, collaborative processes can lead to relational benefits such as greater trust and lasting relationships with participants. Developers should consider opportunities for prioritizing collaborative and community-led development processes, involving stakeholders and community members early in development, applying additional resources towards equitable engagement, improving transparency about development and engagement processes, and valuing the engagement process as much as the resulting tool. Ultimately, no EJ mapping tool will be a perfect representation of the complexities and intersectionality of community characteristics and environmental impacts, but done well, development of these tools can model procedural and distributive justice, acknowledge and incorporate local perspectives, and build community capacity to address EJ issues and advocate for their rights.

English

ISBN: 9798384104100Subjects--Topical Terms:

528369
Environmental justice.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Community engagement

Just Maps? Exploring the Development and Use of Environmental Justice Mapping Tools in the United States /
LDR:04653nmm a22004453i 4500 001 2431977
005 20250624125423.5
006 m o d
007 cr|nu||||||||
008 261011s2024 miu||||||m |||||||eng d
020 $a 9798384104100
035 $a (MiAaPQD)AAI31557778
035 $a AAI31557778
040 $a MiAaPQD $b eng $c MiAaPQD $e rda
100 1 $a Emrick, Claire, $e author. $3 3821032
245 1 0 $a Just Maps? Exploring the Development and Use of Environmental Justice Mapping Tools in the United States / $c Claire Emrick.
264 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2024
300 $a 1 electronic resource (109 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 86-03.
500 $a Advisors: Ashcraft, Catherine M. Committee members: Rosan, Christina D.; Levine, Dovev L.
502 $b M.S. $c University of New Hampshire $d 2024.
520 $a The disparate distribution of environmental risks and benefits is well documented in the United States. In response, interactive mapping tools that attempt to represent and address environmental justice (EJ) issues have proliferated in recent years. By synthesizing socioeconomic and environmental data into a user-friendly interface, EJ mapping tools can inform advocacy and policy decisions that benefit disadvantaged communities. Numerous studies have contributed to the development and assessment of the indices and datasets found in these mapping tools, while other articles have highlighted approaches to and lessons learned from single cases of EJ mapping tool development. However, only a few studies have begun to explore EJ tools across multiple cases to understand broader trends in how EJ mapping tools are developed and used in practice. Through a survey, a document-analysis informed database, and interviews with tool developers, my research investigates these questions: How are EJ mapping tools developed and used in the United States? How and in what ways does engagement impact the development and use of EJ mapping tools?I identified 153 examples of local, regional, and statewide EJ mapping tools across 38 states. Of the 60 tools represented by survey respondents, 86.7 percent sought input on the tool from a wide range of stakeholders including members of the public, academics and researchers, non-profits, and state, local, and regional governments. From indicator selection to design changes to ground truthing of data, developers highlighted numerous ways that feedback influenced the tool before, during, and after the development process. While the results suggested that efforts are being made to involve communities and stakeholders in the process, most EJ mapping tools were developed in a top-down, expert-driven manner, leaving decision-making power with the developer and limiting the potential for true community ownership of the resulting tools.With EJ mapping tools increasingly used to inform policy decisions, I argue that every methodological choice is a political act that calls for meaningful involvement, and ideally leadership, from the stakeholders and communities that these tools represent. In addition to improvements to the tool, collaborative processes can lead to relational benefits such as greater trust and lasting relationships with participants. Developers should consider opportunities for prioritizing collaborative and community-led development processes, involving stakeholders and community members early in development, applying additional resources towards equitable engagement, improving transparency about development and engagement processes, and valuing the engagement process as much as the resulting tool. Ultimately, no EJ mapping tool will be a perfect representation of the complexities and intersectionality of community characteristics and environmental impacts, but done well, development of these tools can model procedural and distributive justice, acknowledge and incorporate local perspectives, and build community capacity to address EJ issues and advocate for their rights.
546 $a English
590 $a School code: 0141
650 4 $a Environmental justice. $3 528369
650 4 $a Environmental studies. $3 2122803
650 4 $a Geography. $3 524010
650 4 $a Natural resource management. $3 589570
653 $a Community engagement
653 $a EJ mapping tools
653 $a Geographic information systems
653 $a Procedural justice
653 $a Social vulnerability
690 $a 0619
690 $a 0477
690 $a 0366
690 $a 0528
710 2 $a University of New Hampshire. $b Natural Resources. $e degree granting institution. $3 3821033
720 1 $a Ashcraft, Catherine M. $e degree supervisor.
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 86-03.
790 $a 0141
791 $a M.S.
792 $a 2024
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=31557778