Balancing Act: Trade-Offs in Developing Cumulative Impacts Mapping Tools

Abstract

Recent years have seen a proliferation of mapping and data tools characterizing the cumulative impacts (CI) of environmental and social stressors. The development of these tools by governmental and nongovernmental organizations has been motivated by the need to address multiple, persistent environmental disparities and identify overburdened communities. These mapping and data tools empower policymakers to make informed decisions on where to focus their attention and resources in addressing environmental health inequities. This article examines some of the concerns and debates surrounding CI mapping tools from the perspectives of two established tools, the California Environmental Protection Agency’s CalEnviroScreen and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry’s Environmental Justice Index. We discuss the importance of balancing statistical rigor with community engagement, transparency, and ease of use, and we discuss the processes behind indicator selection and evaluation. Furthermore, we explore persistent data gaps and trade-offs between specificity and generalizability, as well as precision and accuracy in CI tools. Our discussion is framed by a commitment to achieving equity through prioritizing meaningful community engagement and collaboration. To mitigate common limitations of CI mapping, we propose strategies such as statistical validation, the use of plain language communication, and community collaboration for increased adoption and use. We conclude with recommendations for future tool enhancements and underscore the importance of transparent methodologies and community-driven approaches in CI screening, all while continuing the development of principles that guide equitable environmental decision making to address environmental and health disparities.