Constructing Credible Knowledge and Expertise in Air Pollution Regulation and Monitoring: The Problem of Quantification

寻求解决环境污染在历史上处于不利地位的社区--即所谓的环境正义(EJ)社区--产生的不同影响的政策举措，在地方、州和联邦各级日益突出。然而，此类举措往往建立在技术和量化指标的基础上，而没有受到环境差异影响的外行人的投入。EJ社区的许多居民声称，这些指标没有正确地获取他们的知识或经验，也没有解决他们的担忧。这项研究调查了普通人和技术专家如何以不同的方式衡量污染，并调查了社区关于污染的知识和经验如何以及为什么没有转化为政策行动。该项目的结果将被广泛传播给学术、公众和政策受众，以提供可操作的策略，以更好地将非专业知识纳入以社区为中心的公共政策的制定。本研究采用案例研究方法，包括半结构化访谈、文件分析和档案研究，以了解围绕空气污染监测和评估的关切、视角和实践。它调查了环境正义政策制定中提出的新问题：当技术认识方式与门外汉的生活经验不匹配时会发生什么，特别是在历史上处于不利地位的有色人种社区？当前政策基础设施在应对这些脱节方面的局限性是什么？为什么他们会坚持下去？这种方法创造了空间，以调查非专业知识、技术决策和实现环境正义的战略之间的联系、模式和边界。这项研究建立在公民和政策制定者如何合作制定监管标准的研究基础上，并检查了当这些集体产生的指标没有反映受影响居民的担忧时会发生什么。通过分析在此背景下有关可信知识的争论，该项目将为环境政策制定如何认真对待受影响社区的知识主张提供洞察力。除了这些贡献，这项研究还加强了关于社区-专家互动、环境治理以及科学和政策民主化的学术研究。这一奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力优势和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Policy initiatives that seek to address the disparate impacts of environmental pollution in historically disadvantaged communities—known as environmental justice (EJ) communities—are increasingly prominent at local, state, and federal levels. However, such initiatives are often grounded in technical and quantitative metrics produced without input from laypeople affected by environmental disparities. Many residents in EJ communities assert that these metrics do not properly capture their knowledge or experience nor address their concerns. This research examines how lay people and technical experts measure pollution differently and investigates how and why communities’ knowledge and experience with pollution are not translated into policy action. The results of this project will be widely disseminated to academic, public, and policy audiences to provide actionable strategies to better incorporate lay knowledge into the development of community-centered public policy.This research uses case study methods, including semi-structured interviews, document analysis, and archival research, to understand the concerns, perspectives, and practices around air pollution monitoring and evaluation. It investigates novel questions raised in environmental justice policymaking: What happens when technical ways of knowing do not match the lived experiences of laypersons, particularly in historically disadvantaged communities of color? What are the limitations of current policy infrastructure to grapple with these disconnects? Why do they persist? This approach creates space to investigate connections, patterns, and boundaries between lay knowledge, technical policymaking, and strategies to achieve environmental justice. This research builds on studies of how citizens and policymakers work together to develop regulatory standards and examines what happens when these collectively produced metrics don’t reflect affected residents’ concerns. By analyzing debates over credible knowledge in this context, this project will provide insights into how environmental policymaking can take seriously the knowledge claims of affected communities. Beyond these contributions, this study enhances scholarship on community-expert interactions, environmental governance, and the democratization of science and policy.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.