The Critical Race Framework Study is situated within Public Health Liberation (PHL) and Public Health Economy (PHE) Theory. 

Dr. Christopher Williams is the lead co-author of Public Health Liberation theory and the principal investigator for the Critical Race Framework Study.

Public Health Liberation - This is the name of a nonprofit and public health theory. Public Health Liberation theory draws attention to ongoing, salient public health threats and seeks to establish a universal rationality of the motivations and behaviors of agents - corporations, businesses, governments, and individuals - to gain insight into persistent health inequity. It posits that there exists another "economy" - the "public health economy" characterized by disorder, self-serving egoism, and competing "moralities" and agendas. The Public Health Economy contrasts with the traditional economy of growth and employment, meaning that that there exist two major economies. Until Public Health Liberation theory, there existed no general theory of public health to house the lead water crises in Flint, Michigan and Washington, DC or the undermining of vaccines and public health messaging. With PHL and PHE, there is a new frontier of public health theory, research, and practice that has now opened.

Public Health Economy - Public Health Liberation seeks to transcend the fragmented specialized nature across disparate disciplines by arguing that the Public Health Economy acts as a single phenomenon from the viewpoint of vulnerable populations. While sources of inequity can be defined and serve as a basis for intervention, accelerating health equity will require a deep understanding of the Public Health Economy.

Connection to the Critical Race Framework

The Critical Race Framework Study takes a firm stance that race is no longer a valuable tool for health disparities research, "Our study premise is that the centuries-old social construction of race has devolved as to be too attenuated and crude for public health research. It weakens research quality, encourages poor practices, and hinders scientific progress." The primary motivation is that public health economy needs to be unpacked, meaning those conditions and structural factors that drive health inequity. Public health economies differ by city and state, even neighborhood. By removing race as a "causal factor," it opens up a new realm of inquiry more closely aligned with people's lived experiences. As opposed to assuming the homogeneity of racial groups, the Critical Race Framework is "encouraging a major sea change" to align research with clearly identifiable groups and experiences that are supported by scientific reasoning and evidence. Another implication of the Critical Race Framework is that race has been conflated with racism without the use of validated instruments necessary in scientific practice, which makes public health research apt to considerable bias and error.

In his dedication to public health resident leaders, Dr. Williams criticizes the current paradigm shaped by ill-defined racialized groupings, "The current paradigm not only impedes scientific progress, but also obscures unique community experiences like yours that explain the persistence of vast health inequity and structural racism. Families in low-income housing warrant sustained focus in the discipline of public health." In order to put the nation on an accelerate path toward health equity, we need more sound approaches to problem conceptualization, analysis, and external validity.