Measuring environmental (in)justices: Insights from a systematic literature review on methodological approaches

  • Jacqueline Loos*
  • , Charlotte Gohr
  • , Noelia Zafra-Calvo
  • , Gonzalo Cortés-Capano
  • , Anna Lena Tonninger
  • , Henrik von Wehrden
  • *Korrespondierende/r Autor/-in für diese Arbeit

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungBegutachtung

Abstract

Environmental (in)justice research uses various conceptual frameworks and methodological approaches, leading to fragmentation across contexts and disciplines. Our systematic review provides a methodological overview of how environmental (in)justice has been studied in 421 English-language scientific articles. Most studies approach environmental (in)justice from a quantitative and interdisciplinary perspective, primarily using purposive sampling, secondary data, and GIS/remote sensing tools with an emphasis on distributive justice. Although there is a notable diversification over time in data collection and analysis, there is a strong geographic bias with short-term, locally focused, and limited actor involvement, though actor diversity is growing over time. We identified eight thematic clusters with distinct methodological patterns: health, pollution, governance, climate change, collaboration, access, and green space. The lack of broadly adopted methodological approaches for evaluating environmental (in)justices largely stems from the context-specific, multi-scalar nature of cases and the philosophical and normative diversity embedded in the EJ concept itself.

OriginalspracheEnglisch
Aufsatznummer113889
ZeitschriftiScience
Jahrgang28
Ausgabenummer12
Seitenumfang18
ISSN2589-0042
DOIs
PublikationsstatusErschienen - 19.12.2025

Bibliographische Notiz

Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 The Author(s)

Fachgebiete und Schlagwörter

  • Biologie
  • Umwelt Governance

ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete

  • Allgemein

Fingerprint

Untersuchen Sie die Forschungsthemen von „Measuring environmental (in)justices: Insights from a systematic literature review on methodological approaches“. Zusammen bilden sie einen einzigartigen Fingerprint.

Dieses zitieren