Measuring Environmental Justice
to Create Sustainable Regions
10.21.14
Madeline Wander, MURP
WHAT IS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE?
Environmental justice (EJ) is rooted in
the belief that all people—regardless of
race, ethnicity, gender, or income—
have the right to a clean and healthy
environment in which to live, work, go
to school, play, and pray.
EJ ensures:
1. Equitable distribution of
environmental burdens and
benefits
2. Fair and meaningful participation in
decision-making processes
WHY ADDRESS EJ?
Two key findings:
1. There are disparities in exposures to environmental hazards
between racial and socioeconomic groups, which are linked to
adverse health risks
2. Patterns of inequality are not just attributable to income or land
use – race matters, too
Manuel Pastor, Rachel Morello-Frosch and James Sadd, Still Toxic After All These Years: Air Quality and
Environmental Justice in the San Francisco Bay Area (Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Justice, Tolerance and
Community, University of California, Santa Cruz, 2007).
WHY ADDRESS EJ TO ACHIEVE SUSTAINABILITY?
Q: Why should those who are worried about sustainable regions put
the imperative of EJ at the forefront?
A: EJ is good for everybody.
Average exposure by
race/ethnicity in Metros with
low, medium and high minority
discrepancy scores
Source: Michael Ash et al., Is Environmental Justice Good for
White Folks? (Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts,
Amherst, Department of Economics, Working Paper 2010-05, July
2010).
WHY REGIONS?
The regional scale is key:
• Each region has its own set
of industries and pollution
problems
• Transportation and land use
issues are regional in scale
• Disparities often ‘wash-out’
at the national or even
state levels – but are
apparent at the regional
level
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE SCREENING METHOD
 Maps where people are
exposed
 Measures the
“cumulative impact” of
a variety of factors
 All mapping done at
the Census tract level
 Scoring system: each
tract receives “points”
related to indicators
 Statewide coverage,
REGIONAL scoring
Principle Investigators: Rachel Morello-Frosch
(UC Berkeley), Manuel Pastor (USC), and Jim
Sadd (Occidental College)
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE SCREENING METHOD
 Co-created with community
 Helped identified indicators and
priorities
 Iterative process, checking in with
community along the way
 Trained community members in
“ground truthing”
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE SCREENING METHOD
4 Categories of Indicators
The Cumulative
Impact
Proximity to Hazards
and Land Uses Associated
with Air Pollution, and
Sensitive Land Uses
Social and
Health
Vulnerability
Indicators
Health Risk
and Exposure
Indicators
Climate Change
Vulnerability Indicators
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE SCREENING METHOD
Cumulative Impact Score =
Hazard Proximity and Sensitive Land Use Score (1-5) +
Health Risk and Exposure Score (1-5) +
Social and Health Vulnerability Score (1-5) +
Climate Change Vulnerability Score (1-5)
LAYER 1 – HAZARD PROXIMITY INDICATORS
Industry-wide
layers
Land uses
Sensitive land
uses
•
Facilities reporting Greenhouse Gas emissions
and toxic air pollution (about 3,000 facilities)
•
•
•
•
Autobody shops
Dry cleaners
Gas stations
Printing/publishing shops
•
•
•
•
•
•
Rail
Ports
Airports
Refineries
Intermodal distribution facilities
Traffic volume
•
•
•
•
•
•
Childcare facilities
Hospitals
Senior housing
Schools
Playgrounds and parks
Residential land uses
LAYER 2 – EXPOSURE & HEALTH RISKS INDICATORS
• RSEI (Risk Screening Environmental Indicators)
average toxic concentration hazard scores
• Particulate matter estimated concentration
• Ozone concentration
• Pesticide concentration
• NATA (National Air Toxic Assessment ) respiratory
hazards from mobile and stationary sources
• NATA inhalation cancer risk
LAYER 3 – SOCIAL VULNERAILITY INDICATORS
Socioeconomic
vulnerability
•
•
•
•
•
% residents of color
% residents below twice national poverty level
% renter
Median housing value
% population >24 with less than a high school
education
Biological
vulnerability
• % <5 years old and % >60 years old
• % pre-term of SGA infants, 2001 – 2006
• % >4 in HH where no one >15 speaks English well
Political
vulnerability
• % votes case among all registered voters averaged
for 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010 general elections
LAYER 4 – CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY INDICATORS
Heat Island
Risk
• % tree canopy
• % impervious surface
• NLCD, 2001
Temperature
• Projected max monthly temperature
• Change in projected max monthly temperature
• Change in degree-days of warm nights
Mobility /
social
isolation
• % elderly living alone
• % car ownership
CUMULATIVE IMPACT SCORE
Cumulative Impact Score =
Hazard Proximity and Sensitive Land Use Score (1-5) +
Health Risk and Exposure Score (1-5) +
Social and Health Vulnerability Score (1-5) +
Climate Change Vulnerability Score (1-5)
COMMUNITIES USING DATA
Example: “Clean Up, Green UP”
campaign in Los Angeles
• Campaign aims to provide
special assistance to prevent
new siting while also helping
businesses convert to safer,
cleaner processes
• EJSM helped identify
environmentally overburdened
and socially vulnerable
communities
• Researchers have also trained
and collaborated with community
on data gathering, analysis, and
presentation
Source: Elva Yañez
AGENCIES USING DATA
FOR MORE, CHECK OUT OUR EQUITY ISSUE BRIEF…
http://dornsife.usc.edu/pere/ej-brief/