IntroductionUrban areas are typically characterized by a patchwork of both desirable and undesirable land uses (Boone and Modarres, 2006). This urban mosaic results in an uneven geography of environmental amenities (eg parks) or disamenities (eg hazardous waste disposal sites), leading to an unequal distribution of social benefits or burdens across people and places. Perceived and reported inequities in the distribution of various undesirable land uses and facilities (eg United Church of Christ, 1987; US General Accounting Office, 1983) fueled the growth of the US environmental justice movement during the 1980s, on the basis of the contention that racial and ethnic minorities and economically disadvantaged groups are disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards and risks. Concerns regarding environmental injustice have catalyzed federal regulatory actions in the US (eg Clinton, 1994) and a considerable amount of scientific research in the last two decades (see reviews by Liu, 2001;Zilney et al, 2006). In order to determine if principles of environmental justice have been violated, quantitative case studies have typically focused on testing the environmental equity hypothesisöwhether all demographic or socioeconomic groups in a particular study area are equally affected by the existing spatial distribution of environmental benefits and burdens (Cutter, 1995).The proliferating research literature on environmental equity assessment has relied on various statistical and spatial analytic methods to determine whether racial and ethnic minority and economically disadvantaged communities are disproportionately impacted by locally unwanted land uses (

No abstract

We sought to provide a historical overview of methods, models, and data used in the environmental justice (EJ) research literature to measure proximity to environmental hazards and potential exposure to their adverse health effects. We explored how the assessment of disproportionate proximity and exposure has evolved from comparing the prevalence of minority or low-income residents in geographic entities hosting pollution sources and discrete buffer zones to more refined techniques that use continuous distances, pollutant fate-and-transport models, and estimates of health risk from toxic exposure. We also reviewed analytical techniques used to determine the characteristics of people residing in areas potentially exposed to environmental hazards and emerging geostatistical techniques that are more appropriate for EJ analysis than conventional statistical methods. We concluded by providing several recommendations regarding future research and data needs for EJ assessment that would lead to more reliable results and policy solutions.

No abstract

No abstract

How living near environmental hazards contributes to poorer health and disproportionate health outcomes is an ongoing concern. We conducted a substantive review and critique of the literature regarding residential proximity to environmental hazards and adverse pregnancy outcomes, childhood cancer, cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses, end-stage renal disease, and diabetes. Several studies have found that living near hazardous wastes sites, industrial sites, cropland with pesticide applications, highly trafficked roads, nuclear power plants, and gas stations or repair shops is related to an increased risk of adverse health outcomes. Government agencies should consider these findings in establishing rules and permitting and enforcement procedures to reduce pollution from environmentally burdensome facilities and land uses.

No abstract

Few environmental justice studies of air pollution have examined the adverse health implications of exposure to transportation-related emissions or used statistical techniques that are appropriate for spatial data. This article addresses these gaps by examining the distribution of cancer and respiratory risks from inhalation exposure to vehicular emissions of hazardous air pollutants in the Tampa Bay Metropolitan Statistical Area, Florida. This study advances quantitative environmental justice research by (a) focusing on mobile source air pollution instead of major point sources; (b) examining the health risks of disproportionate exposure; (c) including transportation disadvantaged individuals, in addition to minority and low-income residents; and (d) using multiple regression models that account for spatial dependence. Data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 1999 National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment are utilized to estimate lifetime cancer and respiratory health risks from on-road vehicles for census tracts in the study area. Inequities associated with these risk estimates are investigated using relevant demographic and socioeconomic variables from Census 2000. Statistical analyses are based on simple comparisons, conventional multiple regression, and a set of spatial regression models that address spatial autocorrelation. Results indicate that race or ethnicity plays a persistent explanatory role in the distribution of health risks from vehicular emissions, after controlling for well-documented contextual factors. Additionally, tracts characterized by higher population density and lower rates of home ownership and vehicle ownership are facing significantly greater cancer and respiratory risks from traffic-related pollutants. These findings have several implications for transportation and land use policy in and beyond Tampa Bay.Muy pocos son los estudios de justicia ambiental relacionados con la contaminación del aire que hayan examinado las adversas implicaciones sanitarias que tiene la exposición a emisiones ocasionadas por el transporte, o que hayan utilizado técnicas estadísticas apropiadas para datos espaciales. El presente artículo aboca estos vacíos mediante el examen de la distribución de riesgos respiratorios y de cáncer, como resultado de la exposición a inhalaciones de polutantes aéreos peligrosos generados por emisiones vehiculares en elÁrea Estadística Metropolitana de Tampa Bay, Florida. Este estudio avanza la investigación cuantitativa de justicia ambiental, (a) enfocándose más en la fuente móvil de la contaminación aérea que en las fuentes puntuales principales; (b) examinando los riesgos a la salud por exposición desproporcionada; (c) incluyendo también el transporte de individuos con desventajas, además de residentes de minorías y de bajos ingresos; y (d) utilizando modelos de regresión múltiple que toman en cuenta la dependencia espacial. Se utilizaron datos de la Evaluación de Tóxicos del Aire a Escala Nacional en 1999 de la Agencia de Protección Ambiental de los EE.UU., para cal...