@article{WeigandWurmDechetal.2019,
  author    = {Weigand, Matthias and Wurm, Michael and Dech, Stefan and Taubenb{\"o}ck, Hannes},
  title     = {Remote sensing in environmental justice research—a review},
  series = {ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information},
  number    = {1},
  issn      = {2220-9964},
  doi       = {10.3390/ijgi8010020},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-196950},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Human health is known to be affected by the physical environment. Various environmental influences have been identified to benefit or challenge people's physical condition. Their heterogeneous distribution in space results in unequal burdens depending on the place of living. In addition, since societal groups tend to also show patterns of segregation, this leads to unequal exposures depending on social status. In this context, environmental justice research examines how certain social groups are more affected by such exposures. Yet, analyses of this per se spatial phenomenon are oftentimes criticized for using "essentially aspatial" data or methods which neglect local spatial patterns by aggregating environmental conditions over large areas. Recent technological and methodological developments in satellite remote sensing have proven to provide highly detailed information on environmental conditions. This narrative review therefore discusses known influences of the urban environment on human health and presents spatial data and applications for analyzing these influences. Furthermore, it is discussed how geographic data are used in general and in the interdisciplinary research field of environmental justice in particular. These considerations include the modifiable areal unit problem and ecological fallacy. In this review we argue that modern earth observation data can represent an important data source for research on environmental justice and health. Especially due to their high level of spatial detail and the provided large-area coverage, they allow for spatially continuous description of environmental characteristics. As a future perspective, ongoing earth observation missions, as well as processing architectures, ensure data availability and applicability of 'big earth data' for future environmental justice analyses.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SponslerBratman2021,
  author    = {Sponsler, Douglas B. and Bratman, Eve Z.},
  title     = {Beekeeping in, of or for the city? A socioecological perspective on urban apiculture},
  series = {People and Nature},
  volume    = {3},
  journal   = {People and Nature},
  number    = {3},
  doi       = {10.1002/pan3.10206},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-239949},
  pages     = {550 -- 559},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {The term 'urban beekeeping' connotes a host of meanings—sociopolitical, commercial, ecological and personal—beyond the mere description of where bees and beekeepers happen to coincide. Yet, these meanings are seldom articulated explicitly or brought into critical engagement with the relevant fields of urban ecology and political ecology. Beginning with a brief account of the history of urban beekeeping in the United States, we draw upon urban ecological theory to construct a conceptual model of urban beekeeping that distinguishes beekeeping in, of and for the city. In our model, beekeeping in the city describes the mere importation of the traditionally rural practice of beekeeping into urban spaces for the private reasons of the individual beekeeper, whereas beekeeping of the city describes beekeeping that is consciously tailored to the urban context, often accompanied by (semi)professionalization of beekeepers and the formation of local expert communities (i.e. beekeeping associations). Beekeeping for the city describes a shift in mindset in which beekeeping is directed to civic ends beyond the boundaries of the beekeeping community per se. Using this framework, we identify and discuss specific socioecological assets and liabilities of urban beekeeping, and how these relate to beekeeping in, of and for the city. We then formulate actionable guidelines for maturing the practice of urban beekeeping into a beneficent and self-critical form of urban ecological citizenship; these include fostering self-regulation within the beekeeping community, harnessing beekeeping as a 'gateway' experience for a broader rapprochement between urban residents and nature, and recognizing the political-ecological context of beekeeping with respect to matters of socioecological justice.},
  language  = {en}
}