Open government data (OGD) are critical for environmental justice (EJ) policymaking, characterized by power differentials and information asymmetries between government agencies, affected populations, and advocacy and interest groups. We contend that not only should state governments provide OGD, but they should remove burdens associated with its access and use to address the data divide and facilitate participation of vulnerable populations in policymaking. Applying a user-oriented approach, this article evaluates the degree of completeness, usability, and accessibility of EJ-OGD initiatives across the 50 US states. Results show that only one out of five states achieves at least half points on our EJ-OGD Implementation Score, suggesting that most states do not provide OGD to answer two core EJ questions: “To what extent is my community exposed to environmental harms and health hazards? Is the exposure disproportionately high given the community’s socioeconomic characteristics?” We discuss implications for equity and next steps for government.

Provide the government's open data action plan for the Ministry of Environment.

China Government Expenditure: Environment Protection data was reported at 50.700 RMB bn in Mar 2025. This records a decrease from the previous number of 106.300 RMB bn for Dec 2024. China Government Expenditure: Environment Protection data is updated monthly, averaging 30.200 RMB bn from Jan 2007 (Median) to Mar 2025, with 201 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 186.800 RMB bn in Dec 2019 and a record low of 1.180 RMB bn in Jan 2007. China Government Expenditure: Environment Protection data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Ministry of Finance. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Government and Public Finance – Table CN.FA: Government Revenue and Expenditure: Monthly.

China Government Expenditure: Year to Date: Environment Protection data was reported at 130.200 RMB bn in Mar 2025. This records an increase from the previous number of 79.500 RMB bn for Feb 2025. China Government Expenditure: Year to Date: Environment Protection data is updated monthly, averaging 143.721 RMB bn from Jan 2007 (Median) to Mar 2025, with 211 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 739.020 RMB bn in Dec 2019 and a record low of 1.178 RMB bn in Jan 2007. China Government Expenditure: Year to Date: Environment Protection data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Ministry of Finance. The data is categorized under China Premium Database’s Government and Public Finance – Table CN.FA: Government Revenue and Expenditure: Monthly.

Environmental and social precautionary measures policy

Thailand CG: Budgetary: EP: Environmental Protection data was reported at 86.000 THB mn in 2016. Thailand CG: Budgetary: EP: Environmental Protection data is updated yearly, averaging 86.000 THB mn from Sep 2016 (Median) to 2016, with 1 observations. Thailand CG: Budgetary: EP: Environmental Protection data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Fiscal Policy Office. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Thailand – Table TH.F023: Government Finance: Outlays by Functions of Government.

Station name, NO, Date, Temperature (C), Water temperature (C), Salt (psu), pH, Conductivity (mho/cm), Suspended solids (mg/L), COD (mg/L), BOD5 (mg/L), Dissolved oxygen (mg/L), Cl (mg/L), Nitrate nitrogen (mg/L), Ammonia nitrogen (mg/L), TP (mg/L), E-coli (CFU/100mL), Pb (mg/L), Cd (mg/L), Cu (mg/L), Fe (mg/L), Zn (mg/L), Cr (mg/L), Ni (mg/L), Hg (mg/L)

As environmental problems continue to intensify, public environmental awareness and participation have become key forces in a modernized environmental governance system. Recognizing the importance of public participation in environmental governance, this study explores the influence of public pressure on environmental pollution and its implications for China’s long-term environmental management efforts. Using statistical and internet search data from 284 prefecture-level cities between 2011 and 2020, the study finds that a 1% increase in public environmental concern leads to a 0.009% reduction in pollution. The study also highlights the strengthening effect of government environmental regulation on the impact of public environmental concern. Moreover, regional heterogeneity analysis reveals a stronger effect of public environmental concern in cities facing low economic pressure. The findings of the study provide a reference for the construction of a coordinated and sustainable environmental governance model in China as well as in developing countries.

National Laboratory for Environmental Testing (NLET) Water Quality (WQ) data (DP, TP, TDN, TN, TSS; approx. weekly) at 8 stations in the La Salle, Boyne, Little Sask., and Little Morris watersheds.

The Water Quality Portal (WQP) is a cooperative service sponsored by the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC). It serves data collected by over 400 state, federal, tribal, and local agencies. Water quality data can be downloaded in Excel, CSV, TSV, and KML formats. Fourteen site types are found in the WQP: aggregate groundwater use, aggregate surface water use, atmosphere, estuary, facility, glacier, lake, land, ocean, spring, stream, subsurface, well, and wetland. Water quality characteristic groups include physical conditions, chemical and bacteriological water analyses, chemical analyses of fish tissue, taxon abundance data, toxicity data, habitat assessment scores, and biological index scores, among others. Within these groups, thousands of water quality variables registered in the EPA Substance Registry Service (https://iaspub.epa.gov/sor_internet/registry/substreg/home/overview/home.do) and the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (https://www.itis.gov/) are represented. Across all site types, physical characteristics (e.g., temperature and water level) are the most common water quality result type in the system. The Water Quality Exchange data model (WQX; http://www.exchangenetwork.net/data-exchange/wqx/), initially developed by the Environmental Information Exchange Network, was adapted by EPA to support submission of water quality records to the EPA STORET Data Warehouse [USEPA, 2016], and has subsequently become the standard data model for the WQP. Contributing organizations: ACWI The Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI) represents the interests of water information users and professionals in advising the federal government on federal water information programs and their effectiveness in meeting the nation's water information needs. ARS The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is the U.S. Department of Agriculture's chief in-house scientific research agency, whose job is finding solutions to agricultural problems that affect Americans every day, from field to table. ARS conducts research to develop and transfer solutions to agricultural problems of high national priority and provide information access and dissemination to, among other topics, enhance the natural resource base and the environment. Water quality data from STEWARDS, the primary database for the USDA/ARS Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) are ingested into WQP via a web service. EPA The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gathers and distributes water quality monitoring data collected by states, tribes, watershed groups, other federal agencies, volunteer groups, and universities through the Water Quality Exchange framework in the STORET Warehouse. NWQMC The National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC) provides a national forum for coordination of comparable and scientifically defensible methods and strategies to improve water quality monitoring, assessment, and reporting. It also promotes partnerships to foster collaboration, advance the science, and improve management within all elements of the water quality monitoring community. USGS The United States Geological Survey (USGS) investigates the occurrence, quantity, quality, distribution, and movement of surface waters and ground waters and disseminates the data to the public, state, and local governments, public and private utilities, and other federal agencies involved with managing the United States' water resources. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Website Pointer for Water Quality Portal. File Name: Web Page, url: https://www.waterqualitydata.us/ The Water Quality Portal (WQP) is a cooperative service sponsored by the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC). It serves data collected by over 400 state, federal, tribal, and local agencies. Links to Download Data, User Guide, Contributing Organizations, National coverage by state.

Government Budget Allocations for R&D (GBARD). GBARD data are measuring government support to research and development (R&D) activities, and thereby provide information about the priority Governments give to different public R&D funding activities.

GBARD data are compiled using the guidelines laid out in the OECD Guidelines for collecting and reporting data on research and experimental development - Frascati Manual, OECD, 2015 (See related identifiers).

GBARD data are broken down by:

• Socio-economic objectives (SEOs) in accordance to the Nomenclature for the analysis and comparison of scientific programmes and budget. This dataset uses the Environment objective.

The missing data are approximated, forecasted and backcasted by country. In our version of the dataset, 40% more countries, and a 23% larger dataset can be used for supervised and unsupervised learning models, such as machine learning, that require complete datasets compared to the source dataset released by Eurostat: GBARD by socioeconomic objectives (NABS 2007)[gba_nabsfin07]

Attributes of establishments that are currently inspected by and/or regulated by Louisville Metro Government. Personal/identifying data has been removed. EstablishmentID column can be joined to the EstablishmentID column in the Inspections table to show attributes of any inspections of the establishment.Data Dictionary:EstablishmentID-Permit numberCountyID-System ID for Jefferson County = 255Rcode-facility type codeRCodeDesc-facility type text desciptionEstType-sub facility typePremiseName-Facility NamePermiseStreetNo-Facility street numberPremiseStreet-facility streetPremiseExtraAddrLinePremiseCity-facility cityPremiseState-facility statePremiseZip-facility zip codeInspectionIntervalDays-how often does facility have a routine inspection?IsPayFee-Does the facility pay a permit fee? Some government establishments like pools do not.IsStateOwned-is the facility state owned?Status-does the facility have an acive permit?WaterProvider-water provider typeSewageProvider-sewage provider typeIsBonded- is the facility bonded?RenewalStatus-system indicatorPermitPrinted-system indicatorLanguage-What language is spoken in facility?RiskType-usually used to designate whether a facility is high risk like a day care center or one that serves seniors.MenuType-Menu type if availableIsCaterer-is the facility a catering business?IsDriveThru-Does the facility have a drive through?IsTrucksOnly-is the business trucks only, no storefront.Area-geographic area of inspectorsMailAppIDDesc-system indicatorMailPermitIDDesc-system indicatorHoursOfOperation-used by inspectors to denote special hoursDaysOfOperation-used by inspector to denote special days of operationMonthsOfOperation-used by inspector to denote special months of operationopening_date-date facility was permitted to current ownerrenewal_sent_date-renewal system indicatorrenewal_received_date-system indicatorpermit_print_date-system indicatorpermit_expiration_date-permit expiration datenext_inspection_date-next scheduled inspection datebond_expiration_date-iff bonded bond expiration date.Quantity1-number of units in unit field # 1Quantity1Unit-units countedQuantity2-number of units in unit field # 2Quantity2Units-units countedlatitude-geo latitude of facility-this may be innacuratelongitude-geo longitute of facility-this may be innacuratecommentsTotalFeeAmt-total fee paid be facilityPermitFeeAmt-permit portion of fee amountInspectionFeeAmt-inspection fee portion of fee amountVarianceGranted-not usedFollowUpDate-next followup inspection dateContact:Gerald Kaforskigerald.kaforski@louisvilleky.gov

The Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) creates a financial incentive for Australian businesses to adopt smarter practices to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

Participants can earn carbon credits by undertaking a project using an approved ERF method, which sets out the rules for the activity. These methods ensure that emissions reductions are genuine - that they are both real and additional to business as usual operations.

ERF environmental data layers are provided to assist proponents’ participation in the ERF. This page provides access to data layers that can be used under a number of agricultural and vegetation methods to assist proponents’ implementation of these land sector methods.

Specified regions for subsection 20AB(5)
This links to spatial data defining regions applicable to potential plantation forestry and farm forestry projects under the Emissions Reduction Fund.

Additional Emissions Reduction Fund data can be found at https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/emissions-reduction-fund-environmental-data

How do political authorities in China respond to mounting environmental problems? Moreover, on what basis do they succeed in securing public approval in the realm of environmental governance? In this study, I argue that local authorities perform "symbolic responsiveness" as a strategy to manage public opinion over environmental issues. Furthermore, symbolic responsiveness is effective in generating public approval, despite the lack of, and sometimes at the expense of appreciable improvement in environmental quality. Data collected in 2014-2015.

United States Federal Govt Outlays: Natural Resources & Environment data was reported at 3.389 USD bn in Oct 2018. This records an increase from the previous number of 3.296 USD bn for Sep 2018. United States Federal Govt Outlays: Natural Resources & Environment data is updated monthly, averaging 2.420 USD bn from Apr 1992 (Median) to Oct 2018, with 319 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 9.424 USD bn in Sep 2010 and a record low of 1.071 USD bn in May 1993. United States Federal Govt Outlays: Natural Resources & Environment data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of the Fiscal Service. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.F001: Federal Government Receipts & Outlays.

We considered agencies within Cabinet departments (e.g. the Bureau of Land Management within the Department of the Interior) to be non-Cabinet agencies, whereas the departments themselves are Cabinet-level. We also considered the White House to be Cabinet-level.

The Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) publishes an annual report on environmental penalties issued in the previous calendar year. Environmental penalties apply to plants in 9 industrial sectors and specific open and closed landfilling sites.

The 9 industrial sectors are as follows:

• organic chemical manufacturing
  • inorganic chemical manufacturing
  • industrial minerals
  • metal mining
  • metal casting
  • iron and steel manufacturing
  • petroleum
  • pulp and paper
  • electric power generation

The report identifies the company and its location, penalty amount and a description of the violation.

The environmental penalty report is issued by March 31 each year.

Station Name, Station Number, Date, Temperature (C), Water Temperature (C), Salt (psu), pH, Conductivity (mho/cm), Suspended Solids (mg/L), COD (mg/L), BOD5 (mg/L), Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L), Cl (mg/L), Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/L), Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/L), TP (mg/L), E.coli (CFU/100mL), Pb (mg/L), Cd (mg/L), Cu (mg/L), Fe (mg/L), Zn (mg/L), Cr (mg/L), Ni (mg/L), Hg (mg/L)