Abstract

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 “non- structural 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. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP6274

中文翻译：

---

环境正义的参与性研究：批判性的解释性综合

 抽象的

 背景：

环境健康风险不成比例地集中在贫困社区和有色人种社区。在某些情况下，参与性研究项目有效地解决了环境正义（EJ）社区健康风险的结构性原因。然而，许多此类项目未能促进结构层面的变革。

 目标：

本综述采用批判性解释综合 (CIS) 对环境健康参与性研究的具体要素进行理论化，有效促进 EJ 社区的结构变化。

 方法：

使用学术数据库搜索来识别同行评审的文献，这些文献描述了 EJ 社区参与性研究，以解决环境健康问题。与研究特征、设计元素和结果相关的综合结构被迭代开发；并提取数据以包含记录。进行统计分析以评估研究设计要素与结构变化结果之间的相关性。通过对“结构性变革”案例研究组和“非结构性变革”案例研究组的批判性、比较性和情境分析，并参考相关理论文献，产生了综合论证。

 结果：

从总共确定的 505 条记录中，资格筛选产生了 232 篇案例研究文章（代表 154 个案例研究）和 55 篇综合理论文章。二十六个案例研究产生了结构性变革的结果。综合论点指出，当社区成员担任正式领导角色时，EJ 社区的参与式研究更有可能导致结构性变革； b ) 项目设计包括决策者和政策目标； c ) 通过多种融资机制维持长期合作伙伴关系。 EJ 社区通过研究参与而受益的假设受到严格审查。

 讨论：

建议的未来方向包括将结构变革作为参与式研究的目标，采用参与式社区效益评估，以及增加研究机构聘用有色人种教师。学术机构与 EJ 社区合作所能够利用的权力、特权和政治影响力可能与研究本身一样有价值。 https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP6274