TY - JOUR

T1 - Measuring environmental (in)justices

T2 - Insights from a systematic literature review on methodological approaches

AU - Loos, Jacqueline

AU - Gohr, Charlotte

AU - Zafra-Calvo, Noelia

AU - Cortés-Capano, Gonzalo

AU - Tonninger, Anna Lena

AU - von Wehrden, Henrik

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)

PY - 2025/12/19

Y1 - 2025/12/19

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Earth sciences

KW - Environmental science

KW - Social sciences

KW - Biology

KW - Environmental Governance

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105022097974&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.isci.2025.113889

DO - 10.1016/j.isci.2025.113889

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 41341843

AN - SCOPUS:105022097974

VL - 28

JO - iScience

JF - iScience

SN - 2589-0042

IS - 12

M1 - 113889

ER -