The Shadow of the Politics of Deservedness? The Implications of Group-Centric Policy Context for Environmental Policy Implementation Inequalities in the United States

Who Deserves Solidarity? Unequal Treatment of Immigrants in Swiss Welfare Policy Delivery

“…Both experimental and field research suggest that persisting stereotypes, in terms of simplified cognitive representations of how members of a distinct group are similar or different from members of other groups, provoke discrimination of immigrants during service delivery, especially in interaction with gender (Brodkin, 1993;Einstein & Glick, 2017;Fineman, 1998;Gooden, 2006;Grohs, Adam, & Knill, 2016;Johnson, 2012;Liang, 2016;Lipsky, 1980;Monnat, 2010;Moynihan & Herd, 2010;Nicholson-Crotty & Nicholson-Crotty, 2004;Piatak, 2015;Schram et al, 2010;Watkins-Hayes, 2009). Normative individual assessments of deservingness become particularly salient when welfare agents need to cope with austerity pressures that force them to prioritize some clients over others (Maynard-Moody & Musheno, 2012;Tummers, Bekkers, Vink, & Musheno, 2015).…”

“…Stereotypes about the power and deservingness of target groups explain inequalities in both the distribution and allocation of benefits (Ingram, Schneider, & DeLeon, 2007;Nicholson-Crotty & Nicholson-Crotty, 2004;Pierce et al, 2014;Schneider & Ingram, 1997;Schneider & Sidney, 2009). Particularly in the context of the United States, racial bias in policy delivery is amply documented (DiAlto, 2005;Einstein & Glick, 2017;Epp, Maynard-Moody, & Haider-Markel, 2017;Frederickson, 1990;Gooden, 2006;Johnson, 2012;Liang, 2016;Maynard-Moody & Musheno, 2012;Monnat, 2010;Moynihan & Herd, 2010;Piatak, 2015;Schram, Soss, & Fording, 2010;Yoo, 2008). In contrast, much less is known about the role of nationality and race in welfare delivery in the European context.…”

Latinos and Environmental Justice: Examining the Link between Degenerative Policy, Political Representation, and Environmental Policy Implementation

“…It is no exception in environmental policy (Rinfret & Pautz, ; Waterman, Rouse, & Wright, ). As such, in a setting characterized by administrative discretion, contested issue framing, and multiple policy goals, it is reasonable to anticipate that environmental policy implementation is susceptible to the feed‐forward effect of “a broader group‐centric, degenerative policy context that has an inherent redistributive dimension and reinforces the messages regarding different citizens' social worth and deservedness of government's attention and assistance” (Liang, , p. 555).…”

“…Environmental justice describes "the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies" (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2011, p. 1). Alongside the uneven environmental hazards observed in socially marginalized and economically disadvantaged communities (Lester et al, 2001;Mohai, Pellow, & Roberts, 2009;Mohai & Saha, 2015;Ringquist, 2005), government's inequitable implementation practices encountered by people of color (e.g., African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians) have drawn increased attention of scholars and practitioners (Konisky, 2009;Konisky & Schario, 2010;Liang, 2016;Lynch et al, 2004;Malley, Scroggins, & Bohon, 2012;Mennis, 2005;Opp, 2012;Spina, 2015;Teodoro, Haider, & Switzer, 2016).…”

“…698-99, 711). Although states' environmental policy implementation structures are primarily premised at the county level (Baden et al, 2007;Lester et al, 2001;Liang, 2016;Lynch, Stretesky, & Burns, 2004;Williams, 1999) and county-level findings on regulatory enforcement inequity largely comport with prior work employing smaller spatial scales (Konisky, 2009;Konisky & Schario, 2010;Liang, 2016), it is imperative to examine the research questions based on an analytical unit that is more robust to aggregation bias.…”