Williams, Miriam F., and Daisy D. James. "Embracing New Policies, Technologies, and Community Partnerships: A Case Study of the City of Houston's Bureau of Air Quality Control." Technical Communication Quarterly 18, no. 1 (December 2008): 82-98. Communication & Mass Media Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed November 2, 2015).
ABSTRACT
"As the City of Houston's Bureau of Air Quality Control embraced new policies, technologies, and rhetorical strategies, they simultaneously moved through Lukensmeyer and Torres's “four levels of public involvement,” which include the information, consultation, engagement, and collaboration levels (Lukensmeyer & Torres, 2006). Because of the technical and scientific nature of air quality inspections, increasing public involvement, especially the involvement of those in a predominantly African American and a predominantly Hispanic neighborhood, has been a challenge. This article describes the Bureau's journey through the information level, where the Bureau opens public access and participation in the investigation and reporting process; the consultation level, where Bureau staff go door-to-door in poor and minority neighborhoods collecting citizen feedback regarding perceived environmental hazards; the engagement level, where the Bureau conducts monthly environmental meetings with neighborhood residents; and the collaboration level, where citizens are taught to collect evidence of environmental violations."
Where do the authors work, and what are their areas of expertise? Note any other publications by the authors with relevance to the 6Cities project.
Daisy D James works with the Bureau of Air Quality Control in Houston, and Miriam F Williams is a Texas State University Researcher who is interested in government agencies and technology.
What are the main findings or arguments presented in the article or report?
This article discusses the challenges of raising community involvement in a way that reaches effected peoples fairly and encourages participation. It goes over some new methods that Houston is using to engage the community on 4 levels:information, consultation, engagement, and collaboration. They also used some checks to make sure all parts of the community were being equally heard.
Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
There is no hard evidence or statistics to support the argument that the new policies have engaged the community, but testimony from bureau officials corroborates with the message of the article.
In the section on "coalition building", the authors talk about how people from the agency are frequently met with hostility until a rapport is formed. The success in forming relationships within the community is a form of evidence for success of that aspect of the program.
The system they have developed calls for less time wasted on redundant data entry and report filing. The article claims this gives them more time to work on environmental issues in the community.
What three (or more) quotes capture the message of the article or report?
"Although intercultural conflicts due to language barriers are the most prevalent barriers to communication, education of stakeholders by the Bureau and education of the Bureau by stakeholders is also crucial. From the citizen's perspective, one call to the 311 system about paint on their vehicle, a foul odor, or something in the air making their throats hurt or skin erupt is sufficient. But Bureau staff have learned that citizens are empowered when they are given the tools to contribute to the environmental regulation process."
"This case study demonstrates the possibilities for civic engagement in environmental regulation, not only among constituents supported by advocacy groups but also in poor and minority neighborhoods that are also affected by environmental hazards."
"this study suggests that the four levels of public participation, coupled with tenets of effective technical communication, are useful tools for environmental agencies seeking to engage poor and minority constituents. The Bureau's conscious efforts to include citizens in environmental regulation through investigation reports, audience feedback, oral presentations, and intercultural technical communication highlights strategies that agencies can use to increase civic participation."
"Bureau staff learned that they must overcome barriers to intercultural communication when engaging Spanish-speaking audiences unfamiliar with environmental science and when soliciting information from African American audiences distrustful of the intentions of their agency. Environmental agencies need culturally competent staff who can translate environmental science not only from English to Spanish but also from English to plain-language Spanish."
What were the methods, tools and/or data used to produce the claims or arguments made in the article or report?
In design of this program, they reference Lukensmeyer and Torres's "four levels of public involvement,"; this seems to be the major influence on the design of this project. The "4 levels of engagement" is a theory about social & political interaction. Ideas from this theory were used to try to increase engagement across various neighborhoods.
How (if at all) are health disparities or other equity issues addressed in the article or report?
In their efforts to engage community members, special attention was given to black and Hispanic communities, as minority communities are dis-proportionally affected and are frequently under-represented in technical communication projects such as this
Where has this article or report been referenced or discussed? (In some journals, you can see this in a sidebar.)
Can you learn anything from the article or report’s bibliography that tells us something about how the article or report was produced?
Because of one of the authors affiliations with the bureau, I thought that this article was very positive, and biased to be in favor of the changes. I don't think that that means we have to throw out the ideas or changes in policy that they made, seeing as they still might be positive.
What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your understanding of how air pollution science has been produced and used in governance and education in different settings?
Does the article provide information or perspective on any of the thematics already identified as important for the 6Cities project?
Open data initiatives are enabling air pollution research and action. -- the article talks a lot about making data available to the public in easy-to-understand forms
Increasingly, researchers themselves are calling for specific policies and interventions. -- the authors are advocating for increased public role in data collection/air pollution advocacy
A notable group of environmental health researchers and advocates now argue for making air pollution knowledge more actionable by tightening its resolution, leveraging diverse data types (potentially including citizen science) and new capacity in data analytics.
Across sites, there is growing recognition of a need to improve understanding of air pollution, health impacts, and mitigation opportunities at the neighborhood level. -- in this study, the importance of including minority neighborhoods is emphasized
- Full citation and abstract?
LINKWilliams, Miriam F., and Daisy D. James. "Embracing New Policies, Technologies, and Community Partnerships: A Case Study of the City of Houston's Bureau of Air Quality Control." Technical Communication Quarterly 18, no. 1 (December 2008): 82-98. Communication & Mass Media Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed November 2, 2015).
ABSTRACT
"As the City of Houston's Bureau of Air Quality Control embraced new policies, technologies, and rhetorical strategies, they simultaneously moved through Lukensmeyer and Torres's “four levels of public involvement,” which include the information, consultation, engagement, and collaboration levels (Lukensmeyer & Torres, 2006). Because of the technical and scientific nature of air quality inspections, increasing public involvement, especially the involvement of those in a predominantly African American and a predominantly Hispanic neighborhood, has been a challenge. This article describes the Bureau's journey through the information level, where the Bureau opens public access and participation in the investigation and reporting process; the consultation level, where Bureau staff go door-to-door in poor and minority neighborhoods collecting citizen feedback regarding perceived environmental hazards; the engagement level, where the Bureau conducts monthly environmental meetings with neighborhood residents; and the collaboration level, where citizens are taught to collect evidence of environmental violations."