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.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 113889 |
| Journal | iScience |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue number | 12 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| ISSN | 2589-0042 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 19.12.2025 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2025 The Author(s)
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 13 Climate Action
Research areas and keywords
- Earth sciences
- Environmental science
- Social sciences
- Biology
- Environmental Governance
ASJC Scopus Subject Areas
- General
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Measuring environmental (in)justices: Insights from a systematic literature review on methodological approaches'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver