ArticleEnvironmental justice (Print)2025
Procedural Justice in Environmental Decision Making: An Analysis of Public Participation Language in State Level Cumulative Impact Legislation.
Article in Environmental justice (Print), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research ethics committees and regulation of climate change and health research.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2026Article
- Defining "Overburdened Communities" in State Level Legislation Using Cumulative Impacts Frameworks to Inform Environmental Decision-Making: Implications for Environmental and Health Justice.Environmental justice (Print) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: The active engagement of those impacted by environmental decisions is foundational to environmental justice (EJ) movements. EJ advocates and state level policy makers are crafting legislation using cumulative impact (CI) frameworks. We examine language in state-level CI legislation related to public participation, with a particular focus on the degree of public influence in environmental decision-making. Methods: We used legislative tracking sites to identify state level CI legislation introduced or passed, 2017 -2024. We extracted language describing mechanisms for public participation and agency accountability, and coded each document using classifications based on the International Organization for Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum of Public Participation. Results: We identified 44 legislative documents using CI frameworks introduced or passed, 2017-2024. Four (9%) included no public participation language and two (5%) were coded at IAP2's lowest level of public participation, "inform" (e.g. providing information). Twenty-four (54%) were coded in IAP2's "consult" category (e.g. inviting comments), with six (14%) coded as "involve" (e.g., assuring public concerns and aspirations are understood and addressed). Seven (16%) were coded as "collaborate" (e.g., active engagement of the public as partners in decision-making) and one (2%) was coded in the "empower" category (e.g. community members making the decisions). Conclusions: Effective and just environmental governance requires collaborative and empowered decision making. Language in most state policies using CI frameworks falls short of collaborative or empowered public participation. Those with collaborative and empowered approaches to public participation offer important models for expanding public influence in environmental decision-making.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.