Many empirical environmental justice (EJ) studies lack a systematic framework in which to undertake research and interpret results. This paper characterizes the conventional EJ study and examines how results can be influenced by the choice of the spatial scale and scope of analysis.After thoroughly examining a sample of prominent EJ studies, a conventional EJ study is performed for (Superfund) National Priorities List sites. The sensitivity of these results to changes in scale and scope choices demonstrates the observed inconsistency in the empirical literature. Implications for interpreting existing EJ research and conducting future EJ research are discussed.

No abstract

Numerous hedonic price analyses estimate price effects associated with hazardous waste site remediation or other environmental variation. This paper estimates a neighborhood transition model to capture the direct price effect from Superfund site cleanup and the indirect price effects arising from residential sorting and changes in investment in the housing stock following cleanup. First-difference models of neighborhood change and a national sample are used. This approach fails to find consistent positive direct price effects. Positive indirect effects, however, may arise through residential sorting and neighborhood investment spurred by remediation. The findings can be sensitive to policy endogeneity and model specification.

Abstract:Environmental justice (EJ) is prominent in environmental policy, yet EJ research is plagued by debates over methodological procedures. A well-established economic approach, the hedonic price method, can offer guidance on one contentious aspect of EJ research: the choice of the spatial unit of analysis. Environmental managers charged with preventing or remedying inequities grapple with these framing problems. This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature on unit choice in EJ, as well as research employing hedonic pricing to assess the spatial extent of hazardous waste site impacts. The insights from hedonics are demonstrated in a series of EJ analyses for a national inventory of Superfund sites. First, as evidence of injustice exhibits substantial sensitivity to the choice of spatial unit, hedonics suggests some units conform better to Superfund impacts than others. Second, hedonic estimates for a particular site can inform the design of appropriate tests of environmental inequity for that site. Implications for policymakers and practitioners of EJ analyses are discussed.2