Health Risks and Environmental Inequity: A Geographical Analysis of Accidental Releases of Hazardous Materials

Revisiting critical GIS

“…On the one hand, critics have questioned the complicity of geospatial technologies, and mapping more generally, in supporting the interests of corporate and governmental power, not to mention the military applications of GIS and its role as part of the broader apparatus of geosurveillance (Crampton, 2008;Pickles, 1995Pickles, , 2004Smith, 1992). On the other, a growing body of literature draws on GIS techniques to document systematic patterns of spatial inequity, such as the disproportionate risks that socially marginalized groups face in exposure to air pollution and toxic waste (Buzzelli et al, 2003;Higgs and Langford 2009;Margai, 2001;Raddatz and Mennis 2013). In some cases, GIS use has been instrumental in legal decisions resulting in millions of dollars in damages being paid to affected residents (e.g.…”

Mapping human vulnerability to chemical accidents in the vicinity of chemical industry parks

“…And GIS technology provides a practicable tool for demonstrating vulnerability in spatial terms. Compared with the above-mentioned studies [4,8,9], the proposed procedure delineates explicitly the footprint of hazardous accidents, instead of relying on proximity-based measures with some proposed distances. Thus it focuses on vulnerability of sensitive targets to specific hazardous accidents, which provides a significant reference for emergency responders.…”

“…Most researchers dealing with vulnerability of risk targets to chemical accidents emphasized exposure to risk or socially adaptation, instead of assessing vulnerability in synthetic approaches. Though there are a few studies revealing integrative vulnerability to chemical accidents in spatial terms, most of them defined hazardous zones using proposed safety distances [4] or other recommended protective action distances [9].…”

“…The residential density of each census block was calculated by dividing [1,4] A bit vulnerable [5,18] Quite vulnerable [19,48] Seriously vulnerable the population by the residential area as follows:…”

“…[1]. Fortunately, some researchers started digging into environmental justice in terms of potential acute health risks by examining the distribution of serious chemical accidents across diverse sub-populations since the 21st century [2][3][4]. Another group of researchers tried to reveal the vulnerability of people and the environment to acute health risks posed by chemical materials [5][6][7][8][9], providing guidance for land-use planning and emergency response, with the objective to limit the potential consequences.…”