Public participation, trust and data sharing: gardens as hubs for citizen science and environmental health literacy efforts

Sandhaus, Shana; Kaufmann, Dorsey; Ramírez‐Andreotta, Mónica D.

doi:10.1080/21548455.2018.1542752

Cited by 28 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparing environmental monitoring data against regulatory standards has been used to effectively communicate risk and advocate for change ( Ottinger 2010 ; Sandhaus et al. 2018 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Comparing environmental monitoring data against regulatory standards has been used to effectively communicate risk and advocate for change (Ottinger 2010;Sandhaus et al 2018). However, established standards may not exist for many environmental contaminants, increasing the challenge of effectively translating data for action (e.g., Brody et al 2007Brody et al , 2014Emmett and Desai 2010;Ponder-Brookins et al 2014;Quandt et al 2004).…”

Section: Opening the Policy Windowmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Participatory Research for Environmental Justice: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis

Davis

Ramírez‐Andreotta

2021

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Environmental health risks are disproportionately colocated with communities in poverty and communities of color. In some cases, participatory research projects have effectively addressed structural causes of health risk in environmental justice (EJ) communities. However, many such projects fail to catalyze change at a structural level. OBJECTIVES: This review employs Critical Interpretive Synthesis (CIS) to theorize specific elements of participatory research for environmental health that effectively prompt structural change in EJ communities. METHODS: Academic database search was used to identify peer-reviewed literature describing participatory research with EJ communities to address environmental health. Synthetic constructs were developed iteratively related to study characteristics, design elements, and outcomes; and data were extracted for included records. Statistical analyses were performed to assess correlations between study design elements and structural change outcomes. Through critical, comparative, and contextual analyses of the "structural change" case study group and "nonstructural change" group, informed by relevant theoretical literature, a synthesizing argument was generated. RESULTS: From 505 total records identified, eligibility screening produced 232 case study articles, representing 154 case studies, and 55 theoretical articles for synthesis. Twenty-six case studies resulted in a structural change outcome. The synthesizing argument states that participatory research with EJ communities may be more likely to result in structural change when a) community members hold formal leadership roles; b) project design includes decision-makers and policy goals; and c) long term partnerships are sustained through multiple funding mechanisms. The assumption of EJ community benefit through research participation is critically examined. DISCUSSION: Recommended future directions include establishing structural change as a goal of participatory research, employing participatory assessment of community benefit, and increased hiring of faculty of color at research institutions. The power, privilege, and political influence that academic institutions are able to leverage in partnership with EJ communities may be as valuable as the research itself.

show abstract

“…Comparing environmental monitoring data against regulatory standards has been used to effectively communicate risk and advocate for change ( Ottinger 2010 ; Sandhaus et al. 2018 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Opening the Policy Windowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory Research for Environmental Justice: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis

Davis

Ramírez‐Andreotta

2021

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The University of Kentucky SRP Center’s CEC created handouts, based on their center’s research on reducing hazardous substance exposure through diet, that they share when providing nutritional education in Kentucky’s Appalachia region [6]. The University of Arizona SRP Center creates infographics for community gardeners that increase environmental health literacy through data sharing and visualization of environmental quality reports via community events and mail [7]. The Duke University SRP Center CEC also provides various sources of information and resources (website, educational materials, newsletters) for community gardeners in North Carolina on the sources and health impacts of soil contaminants, ways to reduce exposure, and how to get their soil tested [8].…”

Section: Importance Of Community Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Importance of Community Engagement and Research Translation within the NIEHS Superfund Research Program

Trottier

Carlin

Heacock

et al. 2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Superfund Research Program (SRP) funds university-based, solution-oriented research to understand how hazardous substances contribute to disease and how to prevent exposures to these hazardous substances. A unique aspect of the SRP is that, beyond the biomedical, environmental sciences, and engineering research projects, SRP-funded centers are required to include community engagement to build partnerships with affected communities and research translation to communicate and facilitate the use of research findings. The SRP views both as effective ways to inform and advance science for protection of public health. The purpose of community engagement within the centers is to ensure bidirectional communication between the researchers and the community, identify best practices and activities in community engagement for prevention and intervention activities, enhance knowledge, and support the needs of the communities impacted by hazardous waste sites. The SRP views research translation as communicating and facilitating the use of research findings emanating from the center in a manner most appropriate for their application and for the advancement of a center’s research objectives. The SRP has a strong history of seeking opportunities to work with communities and stakeholders, by translating and sharing research findings in an impactful and informative manner with long-lasting benefits to improve public health.

show abstract

“…Some projects directly helped community members to document contamination from oil sands development (Baker 2016;Baker and Fort Mackay Berry Group 2019) and from an oil spill (Simon-Friedt et al 2016;Wickliffe et al 2018;Wilson et al 2015). CS also provided data that enabled citizens to avoid environmental and health harms, such as reducing exposure to heavy metals found in garden soil and collected rainwater (Ramirez-Andreotta et al 2013, 2014, 2015Sandhaus et al 2018;Soleri et al 2016). CS enhanced the scientific and health literacy of participants (Sandhaus et al 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CS also provided data that enabled citizens to avoid environmental and health harms, such as reducing exposure to heavy metals found in garden soil and collected rainwater (Ramirez-Andreotta et al 2013, 2014, 2015Sandhaus et al 2018;Soleri et al 2016). CS enhanced the scientific and health literacy of participants (Sandhaus et al 2018). For many participants, CS fostered better relationships among researchers from universities and community members.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizen Science in North American Agri-Food Systems: Lessons Learned

Kimura

Kinchy

2020

Citizen Science: Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In April 2018, a three-day workshop entitled "Citizen Science and the Food System" took place in Honolulu, Hawai'i (USA). The ten professional scientists and six community-based investigators who participated have diverse practical experiences with citizen science (CS) covering a range of food and farming issues. This report summarizes the discussions that took place and provides suggestions to researchers, university administrators, and funding bodies on how to support agri-food research that engages a wide range of collaborators. Workshop participants shared their experiences and articulated the lessons they have learned about fostering research partnerships in the food system and the challenges that can undermine participatory research. Attention to social and historical contexts is crucial. Many aspects of the agri-food system have been built on the dispossession of indigenous peoples, and food production and distribution is highly stratified by race, ethnicity, class, and citizenship. Large corporations have significant power over the norms and practices of food production, distribution, and consumption. The pursuit of "food justice" through CS requires diligent attention to these power asymmetries and concerted efforts to redistribute power. Workshop participants also drew attention to the need for various forms of support for CS projects relating to food and agriculture. Funding is, of course, a key challenge, but academic/university expectations also hinder participatory research.

show abstract

Public participation, trust and data sharing: gardens as hubs for citizen science and environmental health literacy efforts

Cited by 28 publications

References 30 publications

Participatory Research for Environmental Justice: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis

Participatory Research for Environmental Justice: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis

The Importance of Community Engagement and Research Translation within the NIEHS Superfund Research Program

Citizen Science in North American Agri-Food Systems: Lessons Learned

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About