The White House published a beta version in February of its new environmental justice screening tool. This was a crucial step towards achieving the administration’s climate and equity goals. The Interactive mapAnalyses every census tract in the U.S. based on socioeconomic and environmental data. Some tracts are designated as disadvantaged using a complex formula.
This map and formula will be used once finalized by government agencies to ensure at least 40% of the overall federal climate, clean power, affordable and sustainable housing, clean water, and other programs go to disadvantaged communities. This initiative, known as Justice40, is now complete.
This new screening tool is essential for environmental justice goals. It is also a pioneering example of open governance. Open source software for the tool’s development has been available since last May. It was freely available even though it was still in its infancy. Anyone could contribute. Find it on GitHubYou can then download it to see how it worked.
The government also created a Google Group for anyone interested in the project. This group allowed people to share ideas, troubleshoot problems, and discuss data that should be included in it. Monthly Zoom community chats allowed participants to have deeper conversations. Regular Zoom office hours were also offered for informal discussions. There was even a Slack channel that anyone can join.
All of this was done by the U.S. Digital Service or USDS, which is the government’s in-house data scientists and web engineers. The office was responsible to gather the data, build the map and interface, and advise the Council on Environmental Quality (or CEQ), another White House agency, on the formula that will determine which communities are deemed to be disadvantaged.
These were unprecedented efforts by a federal agency in order to work transparently and collaboratively. They are a model of democratic, participatory government and an attempt to incorporate environmental justice principles in federal government.
Shelby Switzer, the USDS open-community engineer and technical advisor for Justice40, stated that environmental justice has a long history in participatory practices. Jemez Principles for Democratic OrganizingA kind of Bible for inclusion in environmental justice work, titled. As part of living environmental values, it was important that the team ran this project from the beginning in an open and participatory manner.
The experiment led to a vibrant community, and some participants were highly appreciative of the agency’s efforts. Others were skeptical about how open and participatory the experiment was. It was made public but not widely advertised, and it ultimately failed to reach the top experts.
Open source does not mean that everyone can access the code or technology. It’s a chance to play with it, add to and modify it to suit your needs. A web browser that includes extensions like an ad blocking or password manager will benefit from the fact that it is open source. This allows skilled developers to build all kinds of add-ons that will improve your browsing experience.
The Justice40 map can be used in a similar way. Environmental groups or community groups can build on the existing code and add more data points. This might help them visualize injustice patterns and inform local solutions. The code isn’t only accessible. The public can also report bugs or request features. They can also leave comments and questions that will be answered by the USDS.
The USDS sought to get input from experts in coding, mapping technology, user experience, and environmental justice. Similar screening tools have been developed at the state level in states like California, New York and Washington.
We know we can learn from many communities, including those who will be impacted or using the tool. The agency also wrote in a mission statement that was pinned to the agency’s website. Justice40 data repository.
Garry Harris was one of these participants. He is the founder and CEO of the Center for Sustainable Communities. Harris uses science and technology in order to implement community-based sustainability solutions. He learned about the Google Group through a colleague while working on an assignment. Map pollution in Virginia. He said that being a grassroots organization makes me feel very special. I know that without people like us who view it both through a technology and environmental justice lens, the results are not going be as beneficial.
The agency sought feedback through the Google Group, monthly community chats, and other data sources to measure community exposure to extreme heat and pollution from animal feedlots.
Rohit Musti (director of software and data Engineering at American Forests) said that this level of transparency is uncommon. Musti was a participant in the open-source project after learning about it through his federal forest policy work. He said that he felt the USDS did an excellent job of outreach to people working in this area and made people feel like they could help.
Musti submitted American Forests Tree Equity ScoreTo the Justice40 data repository, you can add, which is a measure of how evenly trees are distributed in urban areas, The Tree Equity Score data was not included in the Justice40 screening tool beta, but it is available in a separate comparison tool created by the USDS.
There is currently no way to access this comparison tool. However, if you are proficient in Python programming, you can create reports that compare the government’s environmental justice map with other established environmental justice screening methods such as the Tree Equity Score. You can also view all the experiments that the USDS conducted to identify disadvantaged communities.
Jessie Mahr (director of technology at the non-profit Environmental Policy Innovation Center) believes that the Python fluency prerequisite is indicative of an underlying problem.
She said that you can call it open-source, but to what community? If the community that’s going to be using it cannot access that tool, does it matter that it’s open source?
Mahr stated she understood the USDS team’s intentions, but was not satisfied with the outcome. She stated that the tool seemed to have incorporated very little of the information sharing and discussion that took place in the Google Group and monthly chats. Although the USDS staffers who managed the effort seemed to be interested in gathering outside expertise were not the ones making the final decisions about CEQ, Open-source platforms provided no insight into the information being passed to decision-makers. Mahr was disappointed to learn that the beta tool released to the general public in February didn’t reflect the research done by outside participants on data related to extreme heat and the proximity of animal feedlots.
Switzer, the technical advisor to USDS, said that CEQ was part and parcel of the effort since the beginning. They explained that CEQ’s senior advisor regularly participated in the Google Group, and that CEQ received the relevant learnings in various formats.
CEQ has not provided any explanations of the logic behind the choices made in the tool. It is however planning to release additional details about the methodology soon. CEQ is also Holding listening and training sessionsFind out where the public can find more information.
Mahr found it also odd that the open-source efforts were not promoted despite the high profile of Justice40, the White House’s initiative to protect the environment. Mahr stated that I have not heard of it through any other channels involved in Justice40. In an email, she said that she enjoyed being part of the USDSs teams efforts. She also added that they didn’t try to hide them. I just think that they didn’t have the license or capacity to really promote it. Mahr, just like the other participants Grist talked to, heard about this project through word-of-mouth from a colleague who knew the USDS staff.
Switzer confirmed that USDS relied heavily upon word of mouth to spread word. However, Switzer noted that they did reach out at times to experts in environmental justice screening tools.
It is clear that the word of mouth system did not reach the key players in the field. Grist was contacted by Esther Min, a researcher from the University of Washington who helped to build Washington’s state-level environmental justice screening system. Min said that she had met with CEQ folks about a year ago to discuss that project. However, she hadn’t heard anything about Google Group until February, when the beta version of the federal tool had been released. Alvaro Sanchez, vice president of policy at nonprofit Greenlining Institute, was a participant in the development California’s environmental justice screening tool. He said that he didn’t know anything about the group until Grist reached him in March.
Sanchez was frustrated because the government had not provided any information for months about the status of this tool. He understood that the USDS team may have not had the ability to reach out far enough to invite every grassroots organization in the nation. But the bar that I’m setting is actually fairly low, he said. The people who have been working on this stuff for such a long time, we didn’t know what was happening with the tool? This indicates to me that there was very little engagement.
Sacoby Wilson is a pioneer in environmental justice screening tools, and was invited to the group by the Office of Management and Budget, another White House agency. He admitted that he did not get the impression that the group was secretive, but said that the USDS had failed to do a good job of getting the word out either to the data specialists who make these environmental mapping tools at state level or to the community groups that actually work on the issues the tool is trying visualize.
Wilson pointed out, however, that the federal government used another method to collect input from communities: The White House Environmental Justice Advisory CouncilThe group is made up leaders from grassroots organizations across the country. Submitted extensive recommendationsCEQ can be contacted for advice on the considerations that should be reflected within the screening tool. Wilson said that a major problem was that the Advisory Council did not have enough environmental mapping specialists.
Switzer answered a question about how much outreach USDS does. We hope to continue expanding this kind of community engagement, making the open-source group as inclusive and as equitable as possible.
It was a learning experience, as it was for pioneers in this form of government practice. They also said.
CEQ is still in beta and plans to update the tool based on feedback from the public and research. The public can attend. Sessions of CEQ listeningSubmit comments Through the Federal RegisterOr through the Website screening tool. The discussion in the open source Google Group is ongoing. The USDS team will continue hosting monthly community chats and weekly office hours.
In a recent email announcing upcoming office hours, Switzer encouraged people to attend if you don’t know how to use this Github thing and would like an intro 🙂
This story has been updated in order to clarify the types federal programs included within the Justice40 initiative..