Commentary A Section 508–conformant HTML version of this article

is available at https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP11384.

Antiracist Research and Practice for Environmental Health: Implications for

Community Engagement
Donele Wilkins1 and Amy J. Schulz2
1
Green Door Initiative, Detroit, Michigan, USA
2
Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

BACKGROUND: Communities who experience disproportionate environmental exposures and associated adverse health outcomes have long been aware
of, and worked to draw attention to, the role of racism in shaping those risks. A growing number of researchers are focusing on racism as a fundamen-
tal driver of racial inequities in environmental health. Importantly, several research and funding institutions have publicly committed to addressing
structural racism within their organizations. These commitments highlight structural racism as a social determinant of health. They also invite reflec-
tion on antiracist approaches to community engagement in environmental health research.
OBJECTIVES: We discuss strategies for taking more explicitly antiracist approaches to community engagement in environmental health research.
DISCUSSION: Antiracist (as opposed to nonracist, color-blind, or race-neutral) frameworks entail thinking or acting in ways that explicitly question, an-
alyze, and challenge policies and practices that produce or sustain inequities between racial groups. Community engagement is not inherently antira-
cist. There are, however, opportunities for extending antiracist approaches when engaging communities who are disproportionately harmed by
environmental exposures. Those opportunities include a) promoting leadership and decision-making power by representatives from harmed commun-
ities, b) centering community priorities in identifying new research areas, and c) translating research into action by applying knowledge from multiple
sources to disrupt policies and practices that create and sustain environmental injustices. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP11384

“Environmental racism is racial discrimination in environmental and practices that reproduce racial inequities in, for example,
policymaking. It is racial discrimination in the enforcement of funding decisions and priorities.
regulations and law. It is racial discrimination in the deliberate These declarations range from primarily symbolic statements—
targeting of communities of color for toxic waste disposal and what some have termed “performative”—to those pledging specific
the siting of polluting industries. It is racial discrimination in the actions to address structural racism, meaning it is perpetuated
official sanctioning of life-threatening presence of poisons and through mutually reinforcing social systems.6 As a whole, these
pollutants in communities of color. And it is racial discrimination statements point to structural racism as a fundamental social de-
in the history of excluding people of color from the mainstream terminant of health. They also highlight both the need and the op-
environmental groups, decision making boards, commissions and portunity to address racist policies and practices within research
regulatory bodies.” institutions that may inadvertently reproduce the inequalities that
Reverend Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr.1 underlie health inequities.
In this commentary, we discuss the implications of these
statements and commitments for community engagement in
Introduction environmental health research. Building on the definition of
Communities that experience disproportionate environmental environmental racism offered by environmental justice move-
exposures and associated health outcomes have long drawn ment founder Reverend Benjamin Chavis, Jr.—with which this
attention to the role of racism in shaping those risks. More commentary begins—and the work of scholars of environmen-
recently, public health scholars have begun studying racism as a tal racism (e.g., Payne-Sturgis et al.,4 Pellow,9 and Pulido10)
fundamental driver of racial inequities in health.2–4 By late we consider what an antiracist approach to community engage-
2022, 257 declarations naming racism as a public health crisis ment might entail. In that context, we discuss how to involve com-
had been passed at the state, county, and municipal level across munity representatives in planning and conducting environmental
39 states.5,6 Importantly, federal research and funding entities, health research to inform action from an antiracist perspective.
including the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Finally, we suggest several promising strategies for partnerships
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), between communities and researchers, as well as for funding and
have joined in making public commitments to address structural research institutions committed to promoting environmental jus-
racism within their organizations.7,8 In March 2021, for exam- tice and health equity. These strategies are meant to be exemplary
ple, NIEHS and National Toxicology Program Director Rick rather than exhaustive. They are grounded in the environmental
Woychik announced a new working group on antiracism, diver- racism literature, the principles of environmental justice crafted
sity, inclusion, and equity.7 These commitments stand to benefit and adopted by delegates to the First National People of Color
communities by identifying and addressing institutional policies Environmental Leadership Summit in 1991,11 and principles of
community-based participatory research (CBPR), an approach to
community–research partnerships that emphasizes shared power
Address correspondence to Amy J. Schulz, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann and control.12,13
Arbor, MI 48109 USA. Email: [email protected]
The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Received 7 April 2022; Revised 5 January 2023; Accepted 14 April 2023; Discussion
Published 24 May 2023.
Note to readers with disabilities: EHP strives to ensure that all journal What is Antiracism in Environmental Health Research?
content is accessible to all readers. However, some figures and Supplemental Historian Ibram X. Kendi wrote in his path-breaking book How to
Material published in EHP articles may not conform to 508 standards due to be an Antiracist that antiracism does not mean simply being “not
the complexity of the information being presented. If you need assistance
accessing journal content, please contact [email protected]. Our racist.”14 Like color-blind or race-neutral approaches, being “not
staff will work with you to assess and meet your accessibility needs within 3 racist” is grounded in the idea that ignoring race can address the
working days. problem of racial inequities. These approaches have in common a

Environmental Health Perspectives 055002-1 131(5) May 2023

failure to recognize racism as a system that structures opportunity, science], and . . . ensuring that community members and research-
unfairly disadvantaging racialized groups and unfairly advantag- ers work together on science that is important to both.”19
ing those defined as “White.”3,14 In contrast, antiracism means As illustrated in Table 2, community engagement is a broad
thinking and acting in ways that actively question, analyze, and term that can encompass a wide range of goals, objectives, and
challenge racist policies and practices.14 In other words, antiracist activities.19,24,25 Writing nearly half a century ago, Arnstein26
practices work to address written and unwritten laws, rules, proce- spelled out a “ladder of citizen participation” that detailed varying
dures, and guidelines that are grounded in the idea that racial levels and goals of including representatives from economically and
groups are fundamentally different and that create or maintain racially marginalized communities in decision-making processes.
inequities between those groups14 (e.g., the belief that not all racial More contemporary analyses of the range of community engage-
groups are worthy of the same environmental health protections). ment objectives and strategies—including those by Daramola
We present examples of such antiracist practices in Table 1. et al.,27 Gibson-Wood,28 Woolford et al.,29 and Muhammad
Building on the above, we argue that an antiracist approach to et al.30—demonstrate that community engagement takes many
community engagement is one that is explicit about analyzing forms, with varying degrees of community power and wide varia-
and challenging policies and practices that reinforce racial inequi- tions in the extent to which antiracist research and practice are
ties. Achieving environmental health equity requires conducting explicit goals.
science that rigorously documents inequities resulting from dis-
criminatory policies and practices. These include, for example,
the disproportionate siting of polluting industries, waste sites, or Strategies for Supporting Antiracist Community
freeways and the less rigorous enforcement of emissions near Engagement
racialized communities—those that have been ascribed a racial or
ethnic identity that is deemed inferior.15 It also requires using A review of the above critical analyses makes clear that commu-
that science to name (see, e.g., Hoffman et al.16) and disrupt (see, nity engagement is not inherently antiracist. Rather, there are
e.g., Jones3 and Payne-Sturgis et al.4) racist policies and prac- opportunities for antiracist approaches to engaging with com-
tices. Finally, it requires providing opportunities for racialized munities who have historically been marginalized from the pro-
groups—who have been excluded from boards, commissions, cess of producing academic knowledge. Below we describe three
and regulatory bodies—to actively participate in and influence types of opportunities for community–academic partnerships and
environmental decision-making and enforcement.11 for research and funding institutions committed to strengthening
These tenets of antiracist research and practice resonate with antiracist community engagement practices. These approaches
principles of environmental justice,11 two of which are particu- emphasize shared power and control, joint responsibility and
larly relevant for this discussion. One demands that public policy accountability, and equitable participation and influence,31 and
be based on mutual respect and justice for all people. The other they offer tools for researchers and funding institutions alike.
demands the right to participate as equal partners at every level Promoting leadership and influence from racialized groups
of decision-making and the restructuring of opportunities to in decision-making, and ensuring accountability. We argue that
ensure racial equity in that process. Both of these principles the first broad component of antiracist community engagement
inform the strategic actions for antiracist community engagement involves explicit promotion of leadership and decision-making
in research and practice described below. power by community representatives. Central to this process is
understanding how racialization becomes codified in social, eco-
nomic, and environmental policies.32,33 One example is challeng-
ing policies and practices that a) systematically exclude racialized
What Are the Implications of Antiracist Approaches for groups from institutions of higher education and then b) privilege
Community Engagement? the voices and perspectives of individuals (disproportionately
Partnerships between disproportionately affected communities and White) who have been educated in such institutions.34 Further dis-
researchers from academic, governmental, or independent research cussion of policies and practices that institutionalize racial
institutions hold substantial promise for informing action toward inequities can be found in writings by, for example, Rothstein,35
environmental justice.15,17,18 Indeed, community engagement in Alvarez,36 Chen et al.,37 and Logue.38
environmental health science has become a cornerstone of NIH Partnerships can apply principles and procedures that are
translational research efforts broadly. It is firmly embedded designed to support equitable participation, shared power, and
within, for example, NIEHS’s 2018–2023 Strategic Plan, which community leadership. They can also commit to mutual account-
emphasizes community engagement as a means for “ensuring ability, which means community and academic partners are ready
the institute’s awareness and understanding of stakeholder pri- to interrogate the practices and policies that sustain inequality in
orities, concerns, and needs related to [environmental health power and privilege associated with race, class, or gender and their

Table 1. Environmental racism and characteristics of antiracist approaches to environmental health research and practice.
Forms of racial discrimination identified by Chavis1 that define environmental
racism Antiracist approaches
Environmental policymaking Identify, document, and work to address policies and practices that create
and maintain inequities between racial groups.
Enforcement of regulations and laws Identify, document, and work to address differential enforcement of regu-
lations and laws across racialized communities.
Targeting of communities of color for toxic waste disposal and the siting of Identify, document, and work to address the targeting of communities of
polluting industries color for siting toxic waste disposal facilities and polluting industries.
Official sanctioning of life-threatening presence of toxicants and pollutants in Identify, document, and work to address the presence of toxicants and pol-
communities of color lutants in communities of color.
Exclusion of people of color from mainstream environmental groups, deci- Actively work to promote the inclusion of people of color in decision-
sion-making boards, commissions, and regulatory bodies making and regulatory bodies, including involvement in funding and
research priority setting at the institutional level.

Environmental Health Perspectives 055002-2 131(5) May 2023

Table 2. Examples of community engagement goals, objectives, and activities drawn from selected NIEHS initiatives.
NIEHS initiative Community Engagement Goals or Objectives Activities
NIEHS Strategic Plan, 2018–202317 Share new findings with affected groups; gain Communicate environmental health information and
unique knowledge and perspectives from affected promote of environmental health science literacy.
groups through collaborations that benefit both
the institute and the groups.
Superfund research centers, community Enhance knowledge exchange and support the needs Assist communities in accessing pertinent informa-
engagement and research of communities affected by hazardous waste tion or translating materials into the languages
translation18 sites. spoken within the community.
Partner with tribes in determining exposure path-
ways relevant to their traditional and cultural
practices.
Provide scientific expertise in response to a com-
munity’s questions.
Specialized Centers of Excellence on Facilitate equitable and collaborative relationships Coordinate dissemination activities with community
Environmental Health Disparities with community and other stakeholders to de- members, partner organizations, and relevant
Research: Community Engagement velop, implement, and advance a) strategies to service organizations or policymakers, as well as
and Dissemination Cores20 strengthen environmental health literacy of the the scientific community.
public, policymakers, and clinical professionals; Present findings from research projects and pilot
b) approaches to foster and sustain bi-directional projects.
dialog with identified stakeholders for appropriate Strategic planning to translate findings into sustain-
translation and application of scientific findings; able community and system-level changes at the
c) research training for community residents to local level and beyond.
enable their participation in the full research spec- Contribute to scientific advancements, for example,
trum from study design to conduct to communica- improved interventions based on local knowl-
tion of community-engaged health disparity edge, improved cultural competency of investiga-
interventions; and d) strategies to assess the effec- tors, strengthened community-engaged research
tiveness of core activities and their contributions approaches.
to the overall mission of the center. Contribute to improvements within the community
(broadly defined), for example, increased envi-
ronmental health literacy, greater knowledge of
environmental contributions to health disparities
and ways to recognize, prevent, reduce or elimi-
nate them.
NIEHS Environmental Health Science Foster community–university partnerships. Each Conduct outreach and research translation in an
Core Centers21,22 Community Engagement Core (CEC) builds and innovative and culturally appropriate way.
sustains a dialog between the center and its Communicate environmental health research find-
defined audience. ings and concepts to community partners.
Increase awareness of environmental health in com- Convey the voice of communities to researchers
munities. within the center.
Help researchers understand which environmental
health issues are important to their identified
audiences.
Research to Action (R2A) funding Assure that communities play a role in identifying Characterize distributions and sources of environ-
mechanism19,23 and defining problems and risks related to envi- mental and occupational exposures, as well as
ronmental or occupational exposures and stres- distributions of exposure-related diseases.
sors that are of greatest importance to them. Develop effective strategies for education, outreach,
Communities receive scientific and financial support and remediation in response to environmental or
to conduct high-quality research in partnership occupational threats.
with scientists and/or public health professionals. Develop ways to prevent such exposures and health
outcomes in the future.
Note: NIEHS, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.

intersections.39,40 Specific examples of such principles and proce- priorities and strengths, building new skills in collaborative
dures include the following: research (e.g., how to develop consensus), and working together to
Promote, support, and follow the leadership of community address shared priorities (e.g., how to share data, recognizing and
representatives in all aspects of decision-making. This recom- applying the strengths that each team member brings to the table in
mendation is grounded in principles of environmental justice,11 addressing priorities). Tools include the curricula developed by the
democratic decision-making,41 and CPBR (see, e.g., Israel et al.12 Building Equitable Partnerships for Environmental Justice44 and
and Wallerstein and Duran13). In this process, it is critical that all by Training for Change.45
partners—particularly those who occupy positions of racial, Identify and challenge policies and practices that under-
gender, and class privilege—reflect on social positions and mine leadership from marginalized communities in research.
power. Critical reflections on social position and power in CBPR Principles of environmental justice,11 democratic organizing,41
partnerships have been published by Muhammad et al.,40 Chavez and CBPR13,31 all call for supporting leadership from those who
et al.,39 and Fleming et al.42 Principles of environmental justice11 are most acutely experiencing environmental or health threats, cen-
and democratic organizing41 are important resources in guiding tral to antiracist community engagement. Examples of policies and
these reflections. practices that undermine leadership from marginalized groups
Invest in strengthening capacity and sustaining long-term include both written and unwritten rules that privilege individuals
relationships between partners. Building on the CBPR litera- with advanced degrees from elite educational institutions for lead-
ture,13,31,42,43 such investments can take multiple forms. For exam- ership roles and funding opportunities. Partners should also scruti-
ple, setting aside time during meetings to learn about each other’s nize the policies and practices of the educational institutions

Environmental Health Perspectives 055002-3 131(5) May 2023

themselves, which can exclude individuals from marginalized to influence funding decisions. Such actions have the potential to
communities from matriculation or graduation.42 Finally, policies not only influence funding decisions for specific grant-making
and practices of funding institutions that create challenges for cycles but also modify institutional priorities toward more antira-
scholars from underrepresented groups who choose to enter cist practices. For example, if community priorities favor research
research-focused institutions should be identified and addressed. that informs action, institution funding priorities may shift toward
These include, for example, broadening priorities for health fund- a rebalancing of basic/bench vs. more translational research
ing to include proposals that focus on structural racism as a driver funding.
of health inequities.46 Centering community priorities in identifying new research
Support current and emerging community leaders in questions. In keeping with the tenets of antiracism introduced ear-
decision-making venues. Actively working to support the pres- lier, a second broad component of antiracist community engagement
ence and visibility of emerging community leaders in decision- involves strategies that ensure that research questions are locally rel-
making venues, a recommendation that emerges from environ- evant and informed by the experiences, insights, and priorities of the
mental justice,11 democratic organizing,41 and the CBPR litera- communities themselves. This broad recommendation builds from
ture13,31 is central to antiracist community engagement: In and of the premise that public health inequities are grounded in local histor-
itself, it challenges policies and practices that have marginalized ies, policy decisions, and events.49,51 Thus, it is critical for commu-
the voices of racialized communities in decision-making proc- nity residents to bring their lived experience to bear on research that
esses. This includes actively engaging community leaders in directly investigates discriminatory policies and regulatory deci-
decision-making roles within partnerships and with policy mak- sions that have created or sustain contemporary environmental
ers.11,15 This can take the form of, for example, placing youth inequities. Examples include research52 conducted by Steve Wing
and adults from marginalized communities in leadership roles in and colleagues at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
meetings with decision-makers to convey their environmental working in conjunction with Naeema Muhammed and Gary Grant
health concerns, as well as supporting opportunities for represen- of Concerned Citizens of Tillery, that addressed the siting of con-
tatives from racialized groups to take on formal or informal centrated swine operations in predominantly Black communities in
decision-making roles. rural North Carolina.
Commit to equitable and fair distribution of resources by, Community involvement in defining research questions rec-
for example, examining the distribution of grant resources ognizes community priorities and insights and produces research
across community and academic partners. This can help that explicitly focuses on the local conditions that influence
ensure that both action and research components of joint projects health. It thus increases the relevance of that research for address-
are fairly and adequately funded. It also provides community ing local-level public health challenges, and it can help to avoid
partners with opportunities to build fiduciary capacity for future challenges that can arise linked to outside researchers’ unfami-
joint environmental justice endeavors.47 liarity with local histories and contexts.53 Additional examples of
Use self-reflexive, formative evaluations to strengthen environmental health research driven by community priorities
partnership processes and to ensure mutual accountability have been reported by Narayan and Scandrett,54 Sampson et al.,23
and adherence to equity commitments. This recommendation is and Minkler et al.55
supported by the CBPR literature, where there is a strong emphasis We offer several recommendations for creating opportunities
on co-learning and mutual accountability, supported by self- for new research to be informed by the insights, priorities and
reflexive, formative evaluation practices.13,31,40 Self-reflexive experiences of community residents below. Examples of such
evaluation actively engages all partners in evaluating partnership efforts, derived from the literature, are also provided.
processes and outcomes, and encourages collective identification Create and support opportunities for meaningful dialog
of aspects of the partnership that are working well, as well as those and co-development of new research endeavors between com-
that need improvement.12,31,48 Formative evaluation is used to munity and academic partners. One example of such an effort
identify opportunities for growth and development within the is the CBPR Partnership Academy, a year-long mentored opportu-
partnership.48 The use of self-reflexive formative evaluation is a nity for community and academic partners to work together to de-
critical approach for examining and strengthening partnership velop new research ideas. The Academy, which is led by the
processes.49 Muhammad et al.40 and Chavez et al.39 present spe- Detroit Community Academic Urban Research Center, has
cific discussions of self-reflection to evaluate race and privilege received funding from multiple sources, including NIEHS and the
in the context of CBPR partnerships, whereas Coombe et al.48 National Institute of General Medical Sciences. It offers training
provide an example of self-reflexive, formative evaluation proc- on understanding structural and interpersonal racism, antiracist
esses from the CBPR literature. Partnerships committed to shared approaches to community engagement, and mini-grant funding to
leadership, racial equity, and/or the equitable distribution of part- support partnership development and co-development of initial
nership resources can evaluate their progress toward realizing research ideas.48 Another example is the CBPR Program of the
these objectives by including those domains within routine, sys- National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
tematic evaluations of partnership practices and processes. (NIMHD), which provides resources to enable community and
Results can then be used to engage all partners in considering pro- academic partners to co-develop research questions, conduct stud-
gress toward these goals and to consider strategies for strengthen- ies, and translate the findings to action. Examples of initiatives
ing the partnership.48 funded through this mechanism can be found at the NIMHD
Identify and challenge institutional policies and practices CBPR website (https://www.nimhd.nih.gov/programs/extramural/
that create barriers for community representatives in assum- community-based-participatory.html).
ing or maintaining leadership and decision-making roles in Commit to understanding the policies and practices that
funding priorities and decisions. Accountability to principles of shaped the social and physical environmental histories of the
equity and antiracism must extend to the research and funding community and also contemporary community dynamics.
institutions themselves.3,12 A bold example of such an effort to Researchers working collaboratively with racialized communities
shift power in decision-making is NIEHS’s Environmental Justice: should take responsibility for learning about the social, economic,
Partnerships for Communication initiative,50 which engaged envi- and political histories of that community, as well as their implica-
ronmental advocates as members of study sections with the power tions for current environmental justice challenges the community

Environmental Health Perspectives 055002-4 131(5) May 2023

faces.13,31,42 These include policies and practices shaped by racist informed by listening to and learning from community leaders.22
ideologies that have contributed to legacy contamination as well Providing support for community and academic collaborations in
as contemporary excess exposures. Although it is imperative that shaping research priorities and executing the research itself helps
researchers listen to and learn from residents, community mem- community members become familiar with research tools and sup-
bers must not bear the burden of educating researchers about ports their use of the resulting data to inform local decisions.54,55 It
those histories. Furthermore, both researchers and research insti- also establishes a foundation for ensuring that research in which
tutions should commit to deepening understanding of environ- community members have been meaningfully engaged is used to
mental racism, environmental justice, structural and interpersonal advance environmental health equity and justice.
racism, and antiracist approaches to community engagement Translation of research to action. We argue that a third broad
(e.g., by offering training to researchers). Excellent resources for component of antiracist community engagement involves ensur-
developing such understanding include the United Church of ing tangible benefits to communities who invest their time and
Christ’s Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States21 and Toxic energy in the research project. A commitment to such translation
Wastes and Race at Twenty 1987–2007,56 as well as an emerging is encompassed within NIEHS’s current strategic plan.19 Examples
body of scholarship on antiracist research and practice in environ- of strategic actions toward translation of research to action are
mental and public health.3,4,42 described below.
Offer funding opportunities that center community prior- Increase funding opportunities with the explicit objective
ities in research and action. One example is the Native of producing data that can inform antiracist decision-making
American Research Centers for Health (https://nigms.nih.gov/ processes. Such research and its application can take place at
capacity-building/division-for-research-capacity-building/native- the local level by, for example, applying science to ensure that
american-research-centers-for-health-(narch)), whose funding municipal zoning decisions in residential neighborhoods are
mechanisms require Tribal leadership in CBPR endeavors.57 This based on relevant environmental health science. Data can also
is an important model for research that challenges institutional- be applied at larger scales to inform environmental decision-
ized inequities and expand the decision-making power of making. Additional examples have been reported by Cacari-
communities who have historically been marginalized in those Stone et al.17 and Minkler.15
processes. Generate research products that explicitly challenge racist
Additional examples include the Research to Action (R2A) practices and policies, including those intended for transla-
funding mechanism, part of the Partnerships for Environmental tion into action and dissemination. Examples include research
Public Health research portfolio at NIEHS (https://www.niehs.nih. that a) tests hypotheses related to inequitable distributions of
gov/research/supported/translational/rta/index.cfm), which brings risks and health outcomes or assesses the relative reductions in
together researchers and community members to build an evidence health inequities realized by various strategies20; b) links historic
base around a priority issue for the community and to translate that racist policies and practices, such as redlining, to contemporary
evidence into action to address environmental health inequities. environmental exposures60; and c) quantifies health impacts of
Examples of currently funded R2A projects can be found at the policies and practices that produce racial inequities in environ-
NIEHS Research to Action: current grantees website (https://www. mental health.61 Other examples include dissemination and trans-
niehs.nih.gov/research/supported/translational/rta/cfg/index.cfm). lation of research results to inform individual or collective
Ensure accountability of research institutions to commun- decision-making.53 Guidelines for such dissemination practices
ities disproportionately affected by environmental racism have emerged from CBPR partnerships.62
when developing new research priorities. Research institutions Ensure institutional accountability for the application of
that are committed to antiracist community engagement should research findings to challenging racist policies and practices.
critically analyze policies and practices within their own institu- Accountability to such ends can be fostered by incorporating an anal-
tions that may undermine such efforts. Such analysis can provide ysis of equity when designing and evaluating research questions,
a foundation for creating new policies and practices that support findings, and products (e.g., policy recommendations grounded in the
antiracist community engagement, and create mechanisms for findings).47 Co-learning, dialog, and self-reflection within partner-
accountability. Institutional accountability can take the form of sus- ships are central to this process, and they can be informed by the rich
tained relationships that transcend individual research grants, such literature from CBPR on this topic.12,13,39,40,42,43 Such efforts require
as those developed through longstanding stakeholder advisory that research and funding institutions ensure mutual accountability
boards associated with NIEHS Environmental Health Sciences Core and long-term commitments to address policies and practices that
Centers (https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/supported/centers/core/ reinforce and sustain racial inequities.
index.cfm). Institutions can also critically examine tenure and pro-
motion criteria that may disadvantage researchers committed to anti- Conclusions
racist approaches to community engagement in their research and We argue that antiracist community engagement requires specific
practice.58 attention to interrogating and challenging racist policies and prac-
Examine and challenge practices and policies within fund- tices. Specifically, antiracist community engagement in environ-
ing institutions that maintain racial inequities in decision- mental health research can be supported by a) developing
making processes, distribution of resources, and research mutually agreed-upon processes and principles to ensure equita-
priorities. Such practices might include funding streams that ble resource distribution, decision-making power, and representa-
emphasize basic research over the translation of research findings tion; b) supporting and amplifying new and existing leadership
to inform decision-making and review criteria that disadvantage from within disproportionately impacted communities; c) crit-
research proposals led by community researchers relative to those ically examining and addressing practices and policies that repro-
led by investigators at large research institutions. Other policies duce inequities both within community–academic partnerships
and procedures may contribute to inequitable funding for and in environmental decision-making processes; and d) ensuring
researchers of color and for historically Black and historically accountability of research and funding institutions to commun-
Hispanic colleges and universities.59 ities who invest their time and energy to support research, by
Guidance for funding institutions committed to antiracist prac- ensuring dissemination and applications of findings to support
tice includes self-reflection on institutional practices and policies, social change and environmental justice.

Environmental Health Perspectives 055002-5 131(5) May 2023

 Antiracist community engagement requires ensuring there are 11. Environmental Justice Network. 1996. Principles of Environmental Justice.
tangible benefits to communities who engage in the research pro- https://www.ejnet.org/ej/principles.html [accessed 1 August 2022].
12. Israel BA, Krieger J, Vlahov D, Ciske S, Foley M, Fortin P, et al. 2006. Challenges
cess, with a focus on applying research findings to promote more
and facilitating factors in sustaining community-based participatory research
equitable protections and health outcomes. We argue this process partnerships: lessons learned from the Detroit, New York City and Seattle Urban
must engage funding institutions, whose calls for proposals set Research Centers. J Urban Health 83(6):1022–1040, PMID: 17139552, https://doi.org/
the stage for research priorities, as well as research institutions 10.1007/s11524-006-9110-1.
whose policies and practices shape the types of research con- 13. Wallerstein N, Duran B. 2017. Chapter 2: Theoretical, historical, and practice
ducted and the types of community engagement that are sup- roots of CBPR. In: Community-Based Participatory Research for Health:
ported and sustained. It is up to institutions to shift their practices Advancing Social and Health Equity. Wallerstein N, Duran B, Oetzel JG,
Minkler M, eds. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 17–30.
and policies to promote and sustain antiracist approaches to com- 14. Kendi IX. 2019. How to Be an Antiracist. New York, NY: One World.
munity engagement in environmental health research. 15. Minkler M. 2010. Linking science and policy through community-based participa-
tory research to study and address health disparities. Am J Public Health
Acknowledgments 100(suppl 1):S81–S87, PMID: 20147694, https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.165720.
16. Hoffman JS, Shandas V, Pendleton N. 2020. The effects of historical housing
This commentary is based upon an invited address titled policies on resident exposure to intra-urban heat: a study of 108 US urban
“Addressing Racism as a Public Health Issue Through the Lens areas. Climate 8(1):12, https://doi.org/10.3390/cli8010012.
of Environmental Health Disparities and Environmental Justice,” 17. Cacari-Stone L, Wallerstein N, Garcia AP, Minkler M. 2014. The promise of
presented at the National Institute of Environmental Health community-based participatory research for health equity: a conceptual model
Sciences (NIEHS) on 10 December 2021. for bridging evidence with policy. Am J Public Health 104(9):1615–1623, PMID:
25033119, https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2014.301961.
We thank the many colleagues who have contributed to our 18. Davis LF, Ramírez-Andreotta MD. 2021. Participatory research for environmental
thinking and the ideas presented here over many years, including justice: a critical interpretive synthesis. Environ Health Perspect 129(2):26001,
B. Bryant, L. Cacari-Stone, M. Creary, P. Fleming, E. Green PMID: 33591210, https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP6274.
Moton, B. Israel, C. Jones, M. Minkler, P. Mohai, A.G. Reyes, 19. NIEHS. 2018. 2018–2023 Strategic Plan: Advancing Environmental Health
N. Sampson, K. Savoie, P. Shepard, N. Wallerstein, O. Wilson, the Sciences Improving Health. NIH Publication No. 18-ES-7935. https://www.
reviewers and editorial staff of Environmental Health Perspectives niehs.nih.gov/about/strategicplan/strategicplan20182023_508.pdf [accessed 20
July 2022].
who commented on an earlier draft of this commentary, and many, 20. Martenies SE, Milando CW, Williams GO, Batterman SA. 2017. Disease and
many others. Special thanks to S. Alhagri for assistance with health inequalities attributable to air pollutant exposure in Detroit, Michigan.
preparation of the manuscript. Int J Environ Res Public Health 14(10):1243, PMID: 29048385, https://doi.org/10.
We also thank funders whose support has contributed to our ability 3390/ijerph14101243.
to collaborate on efforts to promote environmental justice, including 21. Commission for Racial Justice. 1987. Toxic Wastes and Race in the United
NIEHS (R01ES022616, R01ES032389, and P30ES017885, all States: A National Report on the Racial and Socio-Economic Characteristics of
Communities with Hazardous Waste Sites. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1310/
to A.J.S.) and the Fred A. and Barbara M. Erb Family Foundation.
ML13109A339.pdf [accessed 5 March 2022].
The content of this commentary is solely the responsibility of the 22. Hayling C. 2021. Transformative philanthropy for racial justice. Stanf Soc Innov
authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Rev 19(4):61–62, https://doi.org/10.48558/mcz7-x668.
National Institutes of Health, the Fred A. and Barbara M. Erb 23. Sampson N, Sagovac S, Schulz A, Fink L, Mentz G, Reyes A, et al. 2020.
Family Foundation, or any of the individuals named above. Mobilizing for community benefits to assess health and promote environmental
justice near the Gordie Howe International Bridge. Int J Environ Res Public
Health 17(13):4680, PMID: 32610649, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17134680.
References 24. NIEHS. 2011. Community Engagement and Research Translation—Superfund
1. Chavis Rev BF Jr. 1994. Preface. In: Unequal Protection: Environmental Justice Research Program. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/supported/centers/srp/
and Communities of Color. Bullard RD, ed. San Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Books. outreach/index.cfm [accessed 27 July 2022].
2. Williams DR, Collins C. 2001. Racial residential segregation: a fundamental 25. Department of Health and Human Services. 2022. PAR-22-210: Research to
cause of racial disparities in health. Public Health Rep 116(5):404–416, PMID: Action: Assessing and Addressing Community Exposures to Environmental
12042604, https://doi.org/10.1093/phr/116.5.404. Contaminants (R01 Clinical Trial Optional). https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/
3. Jones CP. 2018. Toward the science and practice of anti-racism: launching a pa-files/PAR-22-210.html [accessed 27 July 2022].
national campaign against racism. Ethn Dis 28(suppl 1):231–234, PMID: 30116091, 26. Arnstein SR. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Plann 35(4):216–
https://doi.org/10.18865/ed.28.S1.231. 224, https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225.
4. Payne-Sturges DC, Gee GC, Cory-Slechta DA. 2021. Confronting racism in envi- 27. Daramola EJ, Marsh JA, Allbright TN. 2022. Advancing or inhibiting equity: the
ronmental health sciences: moving the science forward for eliminating racial role of racism in the implementation of a community engagement policy.
inequities. Environ Health Perspect 129(5):55002, PMID: 33945300, https://doi.org/ Leadersh Policy Sch, https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2022.2066546.
10.1289/EHP8186. 28. Gibson-Wood H. 2010. Exploring Environmental Justice and Interrogating
5. American Public Health Association. 2021. Racism is a public health crisis. ‘Community Engagement’: A Case Study in the Latin American Community of
https://www.apha.org/topics-and-issues/health-equity/racism-and-health/ Toronto [master’s thesis]. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto.
racism-declarations [accessed 20 December 2022]. https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/24571/1/Gibson-Wood_Hilary_
6. Paine L, de la Rocha P, Eyssallenne AP, Andrews CA, Loo L, Jones CP, et al. F_201006_MA_thesis.pdf [accessed 10 May 2023].
2021. Declaring racism a public health crisis in the United States: cure, poison, 29. Woolford SJ, Buyuktur AG, Piechowski P, Doshi A, Marsh EE. 2019. 3573 critical
or both? Front Public Health 9:676784, PMID: 34249843, https://doi.org/10.3389/ barriers to effective community-academic research partnerships and potential
fpubh.2021.676784. solutions. J Clin Trans Sci 3(suppl 1):86–87, https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.199.
7. Hood E. 2021. Advisory council launches working group on anti-racism. 30. Muhammad M, Garzón C, Reyes A, West Oakland Environmental Indicators
https://factor.niehs.nih.gov/2021/3/science-highlights/council/index.htm [accessed Project. 2018. Chapter 4: Understanding contemporary racism, power, and priv-
10 May 2023]. ilege and their impacts on CBPR. In: Community-Based Participatory Research
8. NIEHS (National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences). 2022. Environmental for Health: Advancing Social and Health Equity. Wallerstein N, Duran B, Oetzel
Health Disparities & Environmental Justice (EHD-EJ) Faculty. https://www.niehs. JG, Minkler M, eds. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 47–60.
nih.gov/research/programs/ehd-ej/index.cfm [accessed 5 July 2022]. 31. Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, Becker AB, Allen AJ, Guzman R, et al. 2017.
9. Pellow DN. 2016. Toward a critical environmental justice studies: black lives Chapter 3: Critical issues in developing and following CBPR principles. In:
matter as an environmental justice challenge. Du Bois Rev 13(2):221–236, Community-Based Participatory Research for Health: Advancing Social and
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X1600014X. Health Equity. Wallerstein N, Duran B, Oetzel J, Minkler M, eds. 3rd ed. San
10. Pulido L. 2017. Environmental racism. In: International Encyclopedia of Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 31–46.
Geography: People, the Earth, Environment and Technology. Richardson D, 32. Jones CP. 2014. Systems of power, axes of inequity: parallels, intersections,
Castree N, Goodchild MF, Kobayashi A, Liu W, Marston RA, eds. Wiley Online braiding the strands. Med Care 52(10 suppl 3):S71–S75, PMID: 25215922,
Library. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg0453. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000216.

Environmental Health Perspectives 055002-6 131(5) May 2023

33. Mullings L, Schulz AJ. 2006. Intersectionality and health: an introduction. In: achieve health equity: results from the CBPR partnership academy. Health
Gender, Race, Class, & Health: Intersectional Approaches. Schulz AJ, Mullings Promot Pract 21(4):552–563, PMID: 30596283, https://doi.org/10.1177/15248
L, eds. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley, 3–17. 39918818830.
34. Frazier KN. 2011. Academic bullying: a barrier to tenure and promotion for 49. Devia C, Baker EA, Sanchez-Youngman S, Barnidge E, Golub M, Motton F, et al.
African-American faculty. Fla J Educ Adm Policy 5(1). https://files.eric.ed.gov/ 2017. Advancing system and policy changes for social and racial justice: com-
fulltext/EJ961222.pdf [accessed 29 July 2022]. paring a rural and urban community-based participatory research partnership
35. Rothstein R. 2017. The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our in the U.S. Int J Equity Health 16(1):17, PMID: 28219386, https://doi.org/10.1186/
Government Segregated America. New York, NY: Liveright Publishing. s12939-016-0509-3.
36. Alvarez CH. 2023. Structural racism as an environmental justice issue: a multilevel 50. Environmental Health Perspectives. 1995. Environmental justice: partnerships
analysis of the state racism index and environmental health risk from air toxics. J for communication. Environ Health Perspect 103(1):22–23, PMID: 7628420,
Racial Ethn Health Disparities 10(1):244–258, PMID: 34993918, https://doi.org/10. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.103-1519046.
1007/s40615-021-01215-0. 51. Israel BA, Eng E, Schulz AJ, Parker EA. 2012. Introduction to methods for CBPR
37. Chen CY, Kahanamoku SS, Tripati A, Alegado RA, Morris VR, Andrade K, et al. for Health. In: Methods for Community-Based Participatory Research for
2022. Systemic racial disparities in funding rates at the National Science Health. Israel BA, Eng E, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, eds. 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA:
Foundation. Elife 11:e83071, PMID: 36444975, https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.83071. Jossey-Bass, 3–38.
38. Logue AW. 2021. Decreasing structural racism in higher education. Inside 52. Wing S, Horton RA, Muhammad N, Grant GR, Tajik M, Thu K. 2008. Integrating
Higher Ed. 4 August 2021. https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/08/05/ epidemiology, education, and organizing for environmental justice: community
how-remediation-and-transfer-policies-increase-structural-racism-higher-ed- health effects of industrial hog operations. Am J Public Health 98(8):1390–1397,
opinion [accessed 10 May 2023]. PMID: 18556620, https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2007.110486.
39. Chávez V, Duran B, Baker QE, Avila MM, Wallerstein N. 2008. Chapter 5: The 53. Arquette M, Cole M, Cook K, LaFrance B, Peters M, Ransom J, et al. 2002.
dance of race and privilege in CBPR. In: Community-Based Participatory Holistic risk-based environmental decision making: a Native perspective.
Research for Health: From Process to Outcomes. Minkler M, Wallerstein N, Environ Health Perspect 110(suppl 2):259–264, PMID: 11929736, https://doi.org/
eds. 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 91–106. 10.1289/ehp.02110s2259.
40. Muhammad M, Wallerstein N, Sussman AL, Avila M, Belone L, Duran B. 2015. 54. Narayan S, Scandrett E. 2014. Science in community environmental struggles:
Reflections on researcher identity and power: the impact of positionality on lessons from community environmental monitors, Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu.
community based participatory research (CBPR) processes and outcomes. Crit Community Dev J 49(4):557–572, https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bst084.
Sociol (Eugene) 41(7–8):1045–1063, PMID: 27429512, https://doi.org/10.1177/ 55. Minkler M, Vásquez VB, Shepard P. 2006. Promoting environmental health policy
0896920513516025. through community based participatory research: a case study from Harlem,
41. SNEEJ (Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice). 1996. New York. J Urban Health 83(1):101–110, PMID: 16736358, https://doi.org/10.1007/
Jemez Principles for Democratic Organizing. https://www.ejnet.org/ej/jemez. s11524-005-9010-9.
pdf [accessed 4 August 2022]. 56. Bullard R, Mohai P, Saha R, Wright B. 2007. Toxic Wastes and Race at
42. Fleming PJ, Carcari-Stone L, Creary MS, Greene-Moton E, Israel BS, Key KD, Twenty: 1987–2007—A Report Prepared for the United Church of Christ
et al. 2023. Antiracism and community-based participatory research: synergies, Justice & Witness Ministries. https://www.ucc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/
challenges, and opportunities. Am J Public Health 113(1):70–78, PMID: 03/toxic-wastes-and-race-at-twenty-1987-2007.pdf [accessed 27 July 2022].
36516389, https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307114. 57. National Institute of General Medical Sciences. 2022. Native American
43. Brush BL, Mentz G, Jensen M, Jacobs B, Saylor KM, Rowe Z, et al. 2020. Research Centers for Health (NARCH). https://www.nigms.nih.gov/Research/
Success in long-standing community-based participatory research (CBPR) DRCB/NARCH/Pages/default.aspx [accessed 11 June 2022].
partnerships: a scoping literature review. Health Educ Behav 47(4):556–568, 58. Sdvizhkov H, Van Zanen K, Aravamudan N, Aurbach EL. 2022. A framework to
PMID: 31619072, https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198119882989. understand and address barriers to community- engaged scholarship and public
44. University of California, Davis Environmental Health Sciences Center; University of engagement in appointment, promotion, and tenure across higher education.
Michigan School of Public Health Lifestage Environmental Exposures and Disease Reflective essay. J High Educ Engagem 26(3). https://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/
Center. 2018. Building Equitable Partnerships for Environmental Justice: Curriculum. jheoe/article/view/2796 [accessed 10 May 2023].
http://mleead.umich.edu/files/Building%20Equitable%20Partnerships%20for% 59. Hayden EC. 2015. Racial bias continues to haunt NIH grants. Nature 527(7578):286–
20Environmental%20Justice%20Curriculum.pdf [accessed 5 August 2022]. 287, PMID: 26581270, https://doi.org/10.1038/527286a.
45. Training for Change. 2023. Tools. [Website.] http://devo.trainingforchange.org/ 60. Wilson B. 2020. Urban heat management and the legacy of redlining. J
tools/ [accessed 10 May 2023]. Am Plann Assoc 86(4):443–457, https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2020.
46. Chen E, Wallace D, Leos C, Merino Y. 2023. Examining the White suprema- 1759127.
cist practices of funding organizations for public health research and prac- 61. Loftus C, Yost M, Sampson P, Arias G, Torres E, Vasquez VB, et al. 2015.
tice: a composite narrative from female, BIPOC junior researchers in public Regional PM2.5 and asthma morbidity in an agricultural community: a panel
health. Health Promot Pract 24(1):45–58, PMID: 36310429, https://doi.org/10. study. Environ Res 136:505–512, PMID: 25460673, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.
1177/15248399221129864. 2014.10.030.
47. Ward M, Schulz AJ, Israel BA, Rice K, Martenies SE, Markarian E. 2018. A con- 62. Parker EA, Robins TG, Israel BA, Brakefield-Caldwell W, Edgren KK, O’Toole A,
ceptual framework for evaluating health equity promotion within community- et al. 2012. Chapter 14: Developing and implementing guidelines for dissemina-
based participatory research partnerships. Eval Program Plann 70:25–34, tion: the experience of the Community Action Against Asthma Partnership. In:
PMID: 29894902, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.04.014. Methods for Community-Based Participatory Research for Health. Israel BA,
48. Coombe CM, Schulz AJ, Guluma L, Allen AJ III, Gray C, Brakefield-Caldwell Eng E, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, eds. 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass,
W, et al. 2020. Enhancing capacity of community–academic partnerships to 405–434.

Environmental Health Perspectives 055002-7 131(5) May 2023