Analyze

The case study findings in the text have been discussed with senior staff at the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and members of the California Latino Legislative Caucus. It has also been presented at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and the Yale Center for the Study of Race, Indigeneity, and Transnational Migration during a Scoping Analysis workshop with California policymakers and advocates.

“Despite these disadvantages, the state of California has failed to map wildfire vulnerability based on socioeconomic status. Without an accurate identification and mapping process, the state is unable to provide local governments and community-based groups with a reliable rendering of the populations most vulnerable to the impacts of wildfire. Most importantly, by failing to identify socially vulnerable communities across California, government entities are unable to understand in advance where to target limited resources and programs (Sadd et al., 2011).” (Mendez 57)

“To further ensure participation and strengthen capacity, federal, state and local governments should provide appropriate funding to community-based organizations working directly with vulnerable populations.Community-based organizations have stronger cultural competency in engaging with communities of color and immigrants,

greater levels of trust, and more flexibility to explicitly assist these populations. In community-based planning processes, vulnerable communities are actively engaged in the identification, analysis and interventions, monitoring, and evaluation of disaster risks. This approach helps reduce their vulnerabilities and enhance their capacities.” (Mendez 59)

This text highlights the importance of a mixed methods approach to disaster planning. Specifically, the importance of incorporating qualitative research methods as a way to anchor the voices of marginalized communities within disaster planning and provide context to emerging trends observed in climate related risks.  Regarding disaster planning and undocumented immigrant communities for example, Mendez (2020) stresses that practitioners must go beyond addressing the contextual vulnerability of these communities and consider how to address systemic problems perpetuated by the agricultural industry. The lack of accountability and disregard for human life within the industry, coupled with the lack political power within undocumented immigrant communities, particularly those belonging to the Mixteco/ Indigena indigenous groups, are systems of oppression which must be addressed if climate disaster risks are to be truly addressed.

Mendez (2020) stresses that the intersectionality of race, class, gender, indigeneity, and many other dimensions of identities coalesce to shape the lived experiences of people in their local environments. Traditional quantitative methods, though useful in providing snapshots of disaster vulnerability, can do little in capturing the social environmental conditions which determine responses to extreme weather and climatic events. At best, it can serve to provide an obscured understanding of disaster risks, at worst, this one-dimensional methodology approach may exacerbate existing inequalities perpetuated by systems of racism, classicism, and sexism by rendering whole communities invisible simply by virtue of sampling biases (Mendez, 2020). The case study by which Mendez frames his central argument focuses on how Indigenous immigrants were systematically ignored in emergency response and alleviation efforts following the Thomas Fire in California’s Ventura and Santa Barbara counties. 

The study aimed to do large scale studies on disasters relating to the exposure of a portion of the population to a toxic agent, in order to learn how to better study the long-term medical effects.

The article was published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, a well regarded journal dedicated to publishing reliable studies concerning ecological damage and effects, as well as the medical effects due to ecological factors of both natural and human creation.

The study aimed to discover new or more effective methods of studying long term effects of exposure to toxic agents. It describes the new insights including the effectiveness of simple studies, ensuring control groups, and methods to do research by using ecological aspects or involving the community in places where medical researchers are not entirely trusted.

As the disasters studied occurred many years ago and have been thoroughly studied previously this study did not present sufficiently new information to be disseminated through news reports. The study did however provide information of interest for future studies, and has been cited in other articles indicating it was used as reference in determining the effectiveness of research techniques.

The data presented could be used for medical professionals to better understand the cause of similar symptoms, or to treat patients involved in a similar incidents. The methods of research presented could be used by academics and researchers in further study.

The study does not directly address vulnerable populations, but rather focuses on including all relevant populations involved in a disaster including those reluctant to take surveys or be interviewed, or communities that are not often studies or may have had little to no exposure in order to maintain the proper control group.