Environmental justice in the age of big data : challenging toxic blind spots of voice, speed, and expertise

Article English OPEN
Mah, Alice (2016)

In recent years, grassroots environmental justice activists have increasingly used big data techniques for monitoring, recording, and reporting toxic environmental exposures. Despite the promise of big data for environmental justice, there is a need to address structural barriers to making toxic environmental exposures visible, and to avoid over-relying on new digital methods and techniques as a panacea for problems of voice. The emphasis of real-time analysis in crowdsourced and participatory big data is good at tracking the immediate aftermath of environmental disasters, but it misses slower-burning environmental problems that emerge over time. While big data more generally may have implications for understanding toxic exposure landscapes across different temporal and spatial scales, it is complex, difficult to analyze, and faces significant problems of reliability. There are three key blind spots of the ethos and practice of big data in relation to environmental justice: voice, speed, and expertise. In the context of increasing pressure to embrace new tools and technologies, it is also important to slow down and to reflect on the wider implications of the age of big data.
  • References (70)
    70 references, page 1 of 7

    Allen, B. 2003. Uneasy Alchemy: Citizens and Experts in Louisiana's Chemical Corridor Disputes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Anema, A., S. Kluberg, K. Wilson, R. S. Hogg, K. Khan, S. I. Hay, A. J. Tatem, and J. S. Brownstein. 2014. “Digital Surveillance for Enhanced Detection and Response to Outbreaks.” The Lancet Infectious Diseases 14 (11): 1035- 1037. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(14)70953-3.

    Auyero, J., and D. A. Swistun. 2009. Flammable: Environmental Suffering in an Argentine Shantytown. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Back, L. 2007. The Art of Listening. Oxford: Berg.

    Bollier, D. 2010. The Promise and Peril of Big Data. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.

    Bonney, R., C. B. Cooper, J. Dickinson, S. Kelling, T. Phillips, K. V. Rosenberg, and J. Shirk. 2009. “Citizen Science: A Developing Tool for Expanding Science Knowledge and Scientific Literacy.” BioScience 59 (11): 977-984. doi:10.1525/bio. 2009.59.11.9.

    Boudia, S., and N. Jas. 2014. “Introduction.” In Powerless Science?: Science and Politics in a Toxic World, edited by S. Boudia and N. Jas, 1-26. Vol. 2. New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books.

    boyd, D., and K. Crawford. 2012. “Critical Questions for Big Data.” Information, Communication & Society 15 (5): 662- 679. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878.

    Breen, J., S. Dosemagen, J. Warren, and M. Lippincot. 2015. “Mapping Grassroots: Geodata and the Structure of Community-Led Open Environmental Science.” ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies 14 (3): 849-873.

    Brown, P. 1997. “Popular Epidemiology Revisited.” Current Sociology 45 (3): 137-156. doi:10.1177/001139297045003008.

  • Metrics
    views in OpenAIRE
    views in local repository
    downloads in local repository

    The information is available from the following content providers:

    From Number Of Views Number Of Downloads
    Warwick Research Archives Portal Repository - IRUS-UK 0 111
Share - Bookmark