Environmental inequality and pollution advantage among immigrants in the United States

Luna

Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space

2020

The United States’ National Environmental Policy Act is a knowledge production process required by federal government agencies to assist in their evaluation of the environmental (and social) impacts of proposed federal agency actions prior to their implementation. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which manages immigrant detention in the United States, is included among these federal agencies. Using Texas as a case study, we explore how the National Environmental Policy Act process, as it relates to immigrant detention, systematically produces ignorance while also producing knowledge. We identify four forms of absence: absence of process in Department of Homeland Security’s use of Categorical Exclusions and programmatic Environmental Assessments, absence of actors in the exclusion of people who are detained as an “affected” social group, absence of alternatives in how “meaningful alternatives” are identified in Environmental Assessments, and absence of discourse with the public in the Environmental Assessment process. In addition, we consider how these absences reflect and perpetuate existing social and environmental inequalities.

Section: Immigrant Detention and Environmental Impactssupporting

confidence: 58%

Environmental injustices in immigrant detention: How absences are embedded in the National Environmental Policy Act process

Luna

Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space

2020

Environ Health Perspect

“…We identified 10 studies that investigated immigrant environmental disparities other than endogenous factors or air pollution. 75 – 84 Seven of the 10 studies were conducted in the United States. They examined environmental disparities in proximity to green spaces/parks, chemical concentrations, and residence within flooding zones.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Intersection of Immigrant and Environmental Health: A Scoping Review of Observational Population Exposure and Epidemiologic Studies

Fong

Heo

Lim

et al. 2022

Background: Transnational immigration has increased since the 1950s. In countries such as the United States, immigrants now account for of the population. Although differences in health between immigrants and nonimmigrants are well documented, it is unclear how environmental exposures contribute to these disparities. Objectives: We summarized current knowledge comparing immigrants’ and nonimmigrants’ exposure to and health effects of environmental exposures. Methods: We conducted a title and abstract review on articles identified through PubMed and selected those that assessed environmental exposures or health effects separately for immigrants and nonimmigrants. After a full text review, we extracted the main findings from eligible studies and categorized each article as exposure-focused, health-focused, or both. We also noted each study’s exposure of interest, study location, exposure and statistical methods, immigrant and comparison groups, and the intersecting socioeconomic characteristics controlled for. Results: We conducted a title and abstract review on 3,705 articles, a full text review on 84, and extracted findings from 50 studies. There were 43 studies that investigated exposure (e.g., metals, organic compounds, fine particulate matter, hazardous air pollutants) disparities, but only 12 studies that assessed health disparities (e.g., mortality, select morbidities). Multiple studies reported higher exposures in immigrants compared with nonimmigrants. Among immigrants, studies sometimes observed exposure disparities by country of origin and time since immigration. Of the 50 studies, 43 were conducted in North America. Discussion: The environmental health of immigrants remains an understudied area, especially outside of North America. Although most identified studies explored potential exposure disparities, few investigated subsequent differences in health effects. Future research should investigate environmental health disparities of immigrants, especially outside North America. Additional research gaps include the role of immigrants’ country of origin and time since immigration, as well as the combined effects of immigrant status with intersecting socioeconomic characteristics, such as race/ethnicity, income, and education attainment. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9855

“…them confirm the inequalities (e.g.Hernández et al, 2015, for Hispanics in Houston, Texas).Despite only focusing on exposure to industrial facility emissions,Bakhtsiyarava & Nawrotzki (2017) paper on the USA showed that immigrants tend to be less exposed to toxins, while in Boletín de la Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles, (92)…”

mentioning

confidence: 80%

“…have been found to suffer from a lower environmental quality too (e.g. Bakhtsiyarava & Nawrotzki, 2017;Cooper et al, 2019;Havard et al, 2011;Mitchell & Dorling, 2003;Moreno Jiménez, 2007;Raddatz & Mennis, 2012;Hernández et al, 2015).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

How much inequality in exposure to high PM10 pollution is too much to be considered environmentally unfair? An assessment for vulnerable groups in two major Spanish cities

Jiménez

Torrecilla

Suárez³

et al. 2022

BAGE

¿Cuánta desigualdad en exposición a alta polución por PM10 es demasiada para considerarla ambientalmente injusta? Una evaluación para grupos vulnerables en dos grandes ciudades españolas Las desigualdades en la afección o carga ambiental (externalidades negativas, peligros, malestar, etc.) entre lugares y personas son un tema de creciente interés. Se han publicado abundantes estudios, utilizando métodos diversos, en los que se concluye que, a menudo, existe discriminación e inequidad. Ahora bien, desde el punto el punto de vista de la formación de decisiones públicas y de la gobernanza una pregunta sigue siendo necesario responder con claridad: cuánta desigualdad existe y si ésta es demasiada para ser calificada de injusta y justificar, por tanto, la acción pública. En este artículo se aborda esa cuestión a partir de un estudio de caso relativo al peligro por polución del aire en Madrid y Barcelona (España). A tal fin se examina la distribución espacial de varios grupos de población vulnerables y su exposición potencial a alta concentración de PM10 en la atmósfera, usando un método razonable que implica el uso de SIG y técnicas estadísticas. La adopción de un criterio operativo y explícito de imparcialidad posibilita medir la cantidad de desigualdad para cada grupo de población y determinar si ésta excede significativamente al criterio de referencia. Ello facilita una valoración más certera de la situación por los ciudadanos y los decisores públicos.