Mapping environmental injustices: pitfalls and potential of geographic information systems in assessing environmental health and equity.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have been used increasingly to map instances of environmental injustice, the disproportionate exposure of certain populations to environmental hazards. Some of the technical and analytic difficulties of mapping environmental injustice are outlined in this article, along with suggestions for using GIS to better assess and predict environmental health and equity. I examine 13 GIS-based environmental equity studies conducted within the past decade and use a study of noxious land use locations in the Bronx, New York, to illustrate and evaluate the differences in two common methods of determining exposure extent and the characteristics of proximate populations. Unresolved issues in mapping environmental equity and health include lack of comprehensive hazards databases; the inadequacy of current exposure indices; the need to develop realistic methodologies for determining the geographic extent of exposure and the characteristics of the affected populations; and the paucity and insufficiency of health assessment data. GIS have great potential to help us understand the spatial relationship between pollution and health. Refinements in exposure indices; the use of dispersion modeling and advanced proximity analysis; the application of neighborhood-scale analysis; and the consideration of other factors such as zoning and planning policies will enable more conclusive findings. The environmental equity studies reviewed in this article found a disproportionate environmental burden based on race and/or income. It is critical now to demonstrate correspondence between environmental burdens and adverse health impacts--to show the disproportionate effects of pollution rather than just the disproportionate distribution of pollution sources

Racial, Gender, and Professional Diversification in the Forest Service from 1983 to 1992

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72604/1/j.1541-0072.1995.tb01744.x.pd

Is the Forest Service Keeping Up With the Times?

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/75358/1/j.1541-0072.1995.tb01747.x.pd

Neutral Bystander, Intrusive Micromanager, or Useful Catalyst?

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73380/1/j.1541-0072.1995.tb01746.x.pd

National Forest Timber Management Over the Past Decade

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/75177/1/j.1541-0072.1995.tb01742.x.pd

Environmental Justice and the Role of Criminology: An Analytical Review of 33 Years of Environmental Justice Research

An increasing number of scholars and activists have begun to tackle a variety of issues relevant to environmental justice studies. This study attempts to address the role of criminologists in this domain. The authors examine 425 environmental justice articles in 204 academic journals, representing 18 programs/departments between 1970 and 2003. First, they measure the environmental justice contributions in the literature by academic department or activist affiliation. Second, they identify the major themes in the literature as they have developed and reveal the current and future directions of environmental justice studies. Such themes include the spatial distribution of hazards, social movements, law and public policy, and environmental discrimination. Finally, the authors seek to call attention to the evident linkages between accepted areas of criminological scholarship and environmental justice. From this latter objective, the authors seek to demonstrate how criminology and criminal justice can advance this critical dialogue and social movement

Superfund, Hedonics, and the Scales of Environmental Justice

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 article 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