Mixed Methods Approaches: Structures and Methodologies for Cumulative Impact Assessment Development

Abstract

Frontline communities and allies have long advocated for environmental protections that address cumulative impacts (CI) as a solution to the disproportionate and adverse pollution burden in low-income and communities of color. Cumulative impact assessments (CIAs) include the environmental health burden of a community from multiple sources, pollutants, and pathways as well as the existing conditions, including impacts from non-chemical stressors such as exposure to social adversity. Addressing the CI in communities requires a pivot away from the traditional risk assessment approach to include more qualitative information, particularly lived experience (LE) from impacted communities and populations. Mixed methods (MM) approaches have well-equipped structures and validity practices to inform how to integrate, process, and analyze both qualitative and quantitative data to answer research questions and provide examples for regulatory analyses that inform environmental decision making. This article describes an investigation of the existing MM studies in the environmental science and environmental health literature, MM parameters, data integration methodologies, and validity practices to ensure study rigor. The analysis of the included publications describes and highlights robust examples for community LE inclusion during data collection, analysis, and interpretation phases but found few examples of studies where impacted communities informed the initial research design. The authors consider how MM approaches can support the integration of quantitative and qualitative data, including LE, in applicable phases of CIAs.