Background: In environmental epidemiology, we use an array of tools from various, related disciplines to answer key questions about environmental exposures in relation to health outcomes. Typically, we ask questions related to what, who, where, when, and how. We value these questions because they contribute to novel scientific discovery and our understanding of disease etiology linked to environmental exposures. In addition, these questions help us better understand who might be at highest risk of exposure and subsequent risk of disease. Although necessary for the goals of environmental epidemiology, these questions are insufficient for addressing environmental health disparities. Specifically, these questions may be able to help us describe exposure-health outcome associations but are limited in their ability to move beyond identification to intervening on observed disparities to achieve environmental health equity.
Objectives: We sought to emphasize the need to value and routinely add the key question of "Why?" in environmental epidemiological studies. In asking this additional critical question, we can identify and incorporate the structural determinants and drivers of environmental exposure disparities and determine whether these factors are linked to existing and historically recalcitrant health disparities. Further, we can design effective studies that build on existing frameworks to address the fundamental causes of environmental health disparities.
Discussion: This commentary underscores the need to routinely incorporate "why" questions in the practice of environmental epidemiology. By asking and addressing "Why?" we can employ better, more solution-oriented study designs, improve data collection, and enhance our ability to collaborate with diverse study populations through trust-building and community-engaged research. Incorporating these approaches will move environmental epidemiology forward from mostly documenting to actively addressing environmental health disparities. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP14513.