Methodological Variations in Environmental Justice Screening Tools and Their Impact on Disadvantaged Community Designations

Government agencies in the United States have developed environmental justice screening tools (EJSTs) and designations to promote equitable distribution of benefits from environmental policies to disadvantaged communities (DACs). However, the methodological choices embedded in these tools, including the selection, weighting, and aggregation of environmental justice indicators, vary across EJSTs, and their implications for DAC designation outcomes are poorly understood. Here we systematically compare four EJSTs at the federal and state levels and show that these tools produce substantial variation in the DAC census tracts, with some tools emphasizing socioeconomic burdens while others prioritize environmental risks. Using quantitative regression models, we further show that indicator weighting and other design choices shape final DAC designations in ways that are not always made explicit. These findings highlight the need for greater transparency in EJST methodological choices to support informed policymaking and public understanding of DAC eligibility. Environmental justice screening tools use different methods to designate disadvantaged communities. This study finds substantial variation in designations across tools and shows that method choices can shape outcomes in ways rarely made transparent.