Environmental justice and drinking water: A critical review of primary data studies

IF 6.8 1区 地球科学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water Pub Date : 2023-05-09 DOI:10.1002/wat2.1653
Seigi Karasaki, J. Goddard, Alasdair Cohen, I. Ray
{"title":"Environmental justice and drinking water: A critical review of primary data studies","authors":"Seigi Karasaki, J. Goddard, Alasdair Cohen, I. Ray","doi":"10.1002/wat2.1653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Though safe drinking water for all is a global public health goal, disparities in access persist worldwide. We present a critical review of primary‐data based environmental justice (EJ) studies on drinking water. We examine their findings in relation to the broader EJ and drinking water literatures. Using pre‐specified protocols to screen 2423 records, we identified 33 studies for inclusion. We organized our results using the following questions: (1) what sampling and data collection methods are used; (2) how is (un)just access to water defined and measured; (3) what forms of environmental injustice are discussed; (4) how are affected communities resisting or coping; and (5) what, if any, mechanisms of redress are advocated? We find that while many studies analyze the causes and persistence of environmental injustices, most primary‐data studies on drinking water are cross‐sectional in design. Many such studies are motivated by health impacts but few measure drinking water exposures or associated health outcomes. We find that, while distinct types of injustice exist, multiple types are either co‐produced or exacerbate one another. Recognitional injustice is emerging as an undergirding injustice upon which others (distributional or procedural) can take hold. Tensions remain regarding the role of the state; redress for inequitable water access is often presumed to be the state's responsibility, but many EJ scholars argue that the state itself perpetuates inequitable conditions. The accountability for redress under different forms of water governance remains an important area for future research.","PeriodicalId":23774,"journal":{"name":"Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1653","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Though safe drinking water for all is a global public health goal, disparities in access persist worldwide. We present a critical review of primary‐data based environmental justice (EJ) studies on drinking water. We examine their findings in relation to the broader EJ and drinking water literatures. Using pre‐specified protocols to screen 2423 records, we identified 33 studies for inclusion. We organized our results using the following questions: (1) what sampling and data collection methods are used; (2) how is (un)just access to water defined and measured; (3) what forms of environmental injustice are discussed; (4) how are affected communities resisting or coping; and (5) what, if any, mechanisms of redress are advocated? We find that while many studies analyze the causes and persistence of environmental injustices, most primary‐data studies on drinking water are cross‐sectional in design. Many such studies are motivated by health impacts but few measure drinking water exposures or associated health outcomes. We find that, while distinct types of injustice exist, multiple types are either co‐produced or exacerbate one another. Recognitional injustice is emerging as an undergirding injustice upon which others (distributional or procedural) can take hold. Tensions remain regarding the role of the state; redress for inequitable water access is often presumed to be the state's responsibility, but many EJ scholars argue that the state itself perpetuates inequitable conditions. The accountability for redress under different forms of water governance remains an important area for future research.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
环境正义与饮用水:对原始数据研究的批判性回顾
虽然人人享有安全饮用水是一项全球公共卫生目标,但世界各地在获得安全饮用水方面仍然存在差距。我们提出了基于原始数据的饮用水环境正义(EJ)研究的批判性回顾。我们将研究结果与更广泛的EJ和饮用水文献联系起来。使用预先指定的方案筛选2423份记录,我们确定了33项研究纳入。我们使用以下问题来组织我们的结果:(1)使用什么抽样和数据收集方法;(2)如何定义和衡量(非)公平获取水资源;(3)讨论了哪些形式的环境不公正;(4)受影响社区如何抵抗或应对;(5)如果有的话,主张什么补救机制?我们发现,虽然许多研究分析了环境不公正的原因和持续存在,但大多数关于饮用水的原始数据研究在设计上都是横截面的。许多这类研究的动机是对健康的影响,但很少测量饮用水暴露或相关的健康结果。我们发现,虽然存在不同类型的不公正,但多种类型要么是共同产生的,要么是相互加剧的。认识上的不公正正在成为其他(分配上的或程序上的)不公正的基础。关于国家角色的紧张关系仍然存在;纠正不公平的用水通常被认为是国家的责任,但许多经济学家认为,国家本身使不公平的状况永久化。不同形式的水治理下的补救问责制仍然是未来研究的一个重要领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water Environmental Science-Ecology
CiteScore
16.60
自引率
3.70%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: The WIREs series is truly unique, blending the best aspects of encyclopedic reference works and review journals into a dynamic online format. These remarkable resources foster a research culture that transcends disciplinary boundaries, all while upholding the utmost scientific and presentation excellence. However, they go beyond traditional publications and are, in essence, ever-evolving databases of the latest cutting-edge reviews.
期刊最新文献
Holocene sedimentary history of the Silala River (Antofagasta Region, Chile) MAD Water: Integrating Modular, Adaptive, and Decentralized Approaches for Water Security in the Climate Change Era. Advances and gaps in the science and practice of impact‐based forecasting of droughts The geological evolution of the Silala River basin, Central Andes Hydrogeological characterization of the Silala River catchment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1