No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Our objective is to examine spatial relationships between modeled criteria air pollutants (i.e., nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide, and ozone) and sociodemographics in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona. Modeled air pollution offers environmental justice researchers a new and robust data source for representing chronic environmental hazards. Copyright (c) 2007 Southwestern Social Science Association.

While environmental justice (EJ) research in the United States has focused primarily on the social distribution of chronic pollution risks, previous empirical studies have not analyzed disparities in exposure to both chronic (long-term) and acute (short-term) pollution in the same study area. Our article addresses this limitation though a case study that compares social inequities in exposure to chronic and acute pollution risks in the Greater Houston Metropolitan Statistical Area, Texas. The study integrates estimates of chronic cancer risk associated with ambient exposure to hazardous air pollutants from the Environmental Protection Agency's National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment (2005), hazardous chemical accidents from the National Response Center's Emergency Response Notification System (2007-2011), and sociodemographic characteristics from the American Community Survey (2007-2011). Statistical analyses are based on descriptive comparisons, bivariate correlations, and locally derived spatial regression models that account for spatial dependence in the data. Results indicate that neighborhoods with a higher percentage of Hispanic residents, lower percentage of homeowners, and higher income inequality are facing significantly greater exposure to both chronic and acute pollution risks. The non-Hispanic black percentage is significantly higher in neighborhoods with greater chronic cancer risk, but lower in areas exposed to acute pollution events. Households isolated by language--those highly likely to face evacuation problems during an actual chemical disaster--tend to reside in areas facing significantly greater exposure to high-impact acute events. Our findings emphasize the growing need to examine social inequities in exposure to both chronic and acute pollution risks in future EJ research and policy.

Studies have demonstrated disparate exposures to carcinogenic hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) in neighborhoods with high densities of Black and Hispanic residents in the US. Asians are the fastest growing racial/ethnic group in the US, yet they have been underemphasized in previous studies of environmental health and injustice. This cross-sectional study investigated possible disparities in residential exposure to carcinogenic HAPs among Asian Americans, including Asian American subgroups in the US (including all 50 states and the District of Columbia, n = 71,208 US census tracts) using National Air Toxics Assessment and US Census data. In an unadjusted analysis, Chinese and Korean Americans experience the highest mean cancer risks from HAPs, followed by Blacks. The aggregated Asian category ranks just below Blacks and above Hispanics, in terms of carcinogenic HAP risk. Multivariate models adjusting for socioeconomic status, population density, urban location, and geographic clustering show that an increase in proportion of Asian residents in census tracts is associated with significantly greater cancer risk from HAPs. Neighborhoods with higher proportions (as opposed to lower proportions) of Chinese, Korean, and South Asian residents have significantly greater cancer risk burdens relative to Whites. Tracts with higher concentrations of Asians speaking a non-English language and Asians that are US-born have significantly greater cancer risk burdens. Asian Americans experience substantial residential exposure to carcinogenic HAPs in US census tracts and in the US more generally.

In 2006, El Paso County, a predominantly Hispanic urban area, was affected by a flood disaster; 1,500 homes were damaged. We assessed the health impacts of the disaster upon 475 individuals whose homes were flood-damaged using mail survey data and logistic regression. Substantial proportions of individuals had one or more physical (43 %) or mental (18 %) health problem in the four months following the floods; 28 % had one or more injury or acute effect related to post-flood cleanup. Adverse event experiences, older age, and lower socioeconomic status were significantly associated with negative post-flood health outcomes in all three logistic regression models. A lack of access to healthcare, non-US citizenship, and English proficiency were significant predictors of negative outcomes in both the physical and mental health models, while Hispanic ethnicity (physical), native-birth (mental), and more serious home damage (cleanup) were significant predictors in one model each. The disaster had disproportionate negative health impacts on those who were more exposed, poorer, older, and with constrained resource-access. While a lack of US citizenship and Hispanic ethnicity were associated with higher risks, being less acculturated (i.e., English-deficient, foreign-born) may have protected against health impacts.

No abstract