Analyze

"What does the lack in prominence of environmental coverage in German TV tell us about the general state of environmental journalism in Germany? It is almost impossible to draw con- clusions based on hard facts and numbers.There is no national organization of professionals in the media dealing with this topic like the Society of Environmental Journalists in the USA, for instance.That means there are also no statistics about how many editors, reporters, or producers would count themselves as environmental journalists; nobody is keeping track. Communications scholars, when asked about the number of environmental journalists in Germany, reply with: “That’s something I would also like to know; tell me if you find out.”There is no formal educa- tion, and only a few training opportunities are offered for established writers and editors who want to specialize in the field. In recent years, some well-qualified and experienced reporters on newspapers with influential voices have departed (or been made to depart) the publishing houses or even journalism per se, leaving a noticeable gap." (Schrader 2020)

"Summarizing, environmental journalism in Germany appears to be in a transition phase. Many traditional media and press outlets are struggling to keep their business model or find a new one. And reporting on air quality, biodiversity, or the climate beyond their often-superficial implications for national politics is not high on the list of priorities. Much of the work might be shifting to online publishing in new contexts and organizations, but those are still forming and far from settled."

How are Data Gaps Worked Around:

Sarnia, and the surrounding area around chemical valley, have 9 air monitoring stations in which air pollutants are monitored from the nearby petrochemical complex. Until 2017, only data from one of these stations (the one on Christina Street in downtown Sarnia) was publicly available. This created a gap in accessiblility of important data for sarnia and the nearby AFN residents. In September 2015, the Clean Air Sarnia and Area group launched as a "community advisory panel made up of representatives from the public, government, First Nations, and industry, who are dedicated to providing the community with a clear understanding of ambient air quality in the Sarnia area." This group works to improve air quality in Sarnia by making information about air quality publicly available and by making recommendations to relevant authorities. In 2018, this group launched the website: https://reporting.cleanairsarniaandarea.com/ (also uploaded as an artifact) which allows public to access data from the air quality monitoring stations and understand how air quality compares to Ontario's standards. This site works to fill the gap of publicly available air quality data in Sarnia.

This report from Ecojustice shows a decline in air pollution compared to Ecojustice's first report released in 2007 for the area around Chemical Valley, yet Sarnia industries continue "to release far more pollution, and in particular far more SO2 , than comparable U.S. refineries." One contributor to the continued excessive emissions is Ontario's lagging air quality standards. The report notes that "Ontario’s AAQC and air quality standards are lagging behind current science on the health impacts of air pollutants, which may put the health of residents at risk." The report highlights pollutants where Ontario's standard is above the national standard or where Ontario has no standard at all. Additionally, Sarnia's benzene emissions are exempt from Ontario's health-based standard for this chemical and are instead regulated by  "an industry technical-based standard" allowing benzene levels to be far higher than the health-based standard. The lagging, lack of, or exemption from regulation undercut efforts in monitoring and reducing emissions to a "safe" level as what is considered "safe" by standards is out of line with what is considered "safe" by health and other standards.

Quoted from the front page of the website

"Our Mission ... to raise the physical, mental, social, and spiritual health of American Indians and Alaska Natives to the highest level.

Our Goal ... to assure that comprehensive, culturally acceptable personal and public health services are available and accessible to American Indian and Alaska Native people."

The membership consists of American natives who would like to receive the benefits of this organization. To be eligible to be a member you must be "an Indian and/or Alaskan Native" evidenced by several factors including being a part of a tribe, living on reservation land, or living in the household of a native. The employees consist of federal healthcare professionals commissioned by the United States Public Health Service and Civil Service federal employees.

Representatives of the Indian Health Service have made numerous congressional testimonies and numerous pieces of legislation have been passes to support the IHS, however, it does not appear that any relate to emergency response or disaster.

The IHS mainly focuses on disaster prevention and preparedness with initiatives such as teaching children about illness prevention, teaching about safe drinking water and food safety, preventing the spread of disease, and preventing injuries. They also have a number of resources available to their members to connect with healthcare professionals. This seems to be a community awareness type approach that prevents the spread of disease by teaching the community. It resembles that of many healthcare systems and does not seem to suggest problems with other approaches.

Legislation including the Indian Healthcare Improvement Act and the Snyder Act are the bases on which the IHS was founded. The passing of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act by President Obama is the cornerstone of the IHS, however no single event seems to shape the agency's way of approaching health.

The IHS is funded by Congress after being reviewed by The House, Senate, and Congressional committees annually. A budget is formulated by a division within the IHS for approval each year. This means that their way of thinking about disaster and health must be approved by Congress, since they are a Federal agency.

I could not find any data or reports on their website that have been collected to support their approach to healthcare other than the legislation previously mentioned.