No abstract

Using a meta-narrative review approach, we characterize the evolution of environmental justice research in Canada from 2006 to 2017, and draw comparisons to an earlier review.• We find increased attention to multi-sited investigations, access to environmental benefits, climate change, drinking water systems, and an intersectional approach to social vulnerability, particularly for Indigenous communities. • Persistent gaps in the literature include understudied geographic regions, recognitional dimensions (e.g., racialization as a form of social stratification), and a focus on prevention and promoting justice.Environmental injustices-in the form of inequitable distribution of environmental risks and benefits, uneven access to decision-making processes, and misrecognition of communities-have been documented globally. However, in Canada, many have argued that the story of environmental injustice is less widely known, with more fragmented research that has produced little in terms of public policies intended to alleviate injustice. This paper uses a meta-narrative review approach to map the evolution of environmental justice research in Canada between 2006-2017, and characterize how central themes, emerging trends, and gaps in the literature have changed since the last review of this kind was completed. We conducted a systematic search of publications addressing environmental justice in Canada, yielding 820 publications. We coded abstracts to assess patterns of coverage across space, time, topics, and populations of focus. We find that Canadian environmental justice literature has continued to grow in quantity and scope, addressing more dimensions of environmental harms and benefits, and from an increasingly integrated perspective. However, there remain important and persistent gaps in its coverage. Future research that more fully addresses these geographic (e.g., Atlantic and Prairie regions), topical (e.g., focus on prevention), and recognitional (e.g., racialization) gaps is needed to inform policy-making and promote justice.

Several scholars have proposed that values embedded in science are a central reason why more research does not necessarily resolve scientific controversies around complex environmental issues. In the Capital Regional District, British Columbia, Canada, scientists have positioned themselves for and against the construction of a wastewater treatment plant in a debate framed as purely technical. This study explores the link between the scientists' positions in the debate and the way they, in their scientific publications, portray nature and environmental risks. We performed a qualitative content analysis of peer-reviewed publications by scientists who have publicly taken opposing positions in the controversy. We found that scientists against treatment predominantly frame nature as tolerant, up to a limit, to disturbances and potential risks, and they seem to embrace a view of science as capable of reducing uncertainties. In contrast, scientists in favor of treatment predominantly portray nature as fragile, particularly toward human-mobilized environmental risks and they commonly present scientific uncertainty as worrisome based on potentially harmful consequences. Our study suggests that value-laden perspectives impact scientists' positions even in a seemingly technical controversy.

No abstract

No abstract