Skip to main content

Analyze

Disciplinary Background

mtebbe

This report is an interdisciplinary literature review, drawing from a variety of scholarly and professional data and research to present a complete view of the impacts of school facilities on students. The academic studies drawn on include medical, psychological, educational, and environmental research. The authors also drew on professional standards (for example, of the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers or ASHRAE) to delineate what levels of exposure to various hazards is safe.

The bibliography is not included in the report itself. According to the last page of the report, it is supposed to be accessible online but I was not able to find it.

Risk Assessment of Soil Heavy Metal Contamination Santa Ana CA (What does this text focus on?)

Taina Miranda Araujo

This study used a community-based participatory research approach to collect and analyze a large number of randomly sampled soil measurements to yield a high spatially resolved understanding of the distribution of heavy metals in the Santa Ana soil, in an effort to exposure misclassification. This study looks into average metal  concentrations at the Census tract level and by land use type, which helps map potential sources of heavy metals in the soil and better understand the association between socioeconomic status and soil contamination (Marsi et al. 2021). 

In 2018, soil samples of eight heavy metals including lead (Pb), arsenic (As), manganese (Mn), chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), cadmium (Cd), and zinc (Zn) were collected across Santa Ana. These were analyzed at a high resolution using XRF analysis. Then, metal concentrations were mapped out and American Community Survey data was used to assess the metals throughout Census tracts in terms of social and economic variables. Risk assessment was conducted to evaluate carcinogenic risk. The results of the concentrations of soil metals were categorized according to land-use type and socioeconomic factors. “Census tracts where the median household income was under $50 000 had 90%, 92.9%, 56.6%, and 54.3% higher Pb, Zn, Cd, and As concentrations compared to high-income counterparts” (Marsi et al. 2021). All Census tracts in Santa were above hazard inder >1, which implies non-carcinogenic effects, and almost all Census tracts showed a cancer risk above 104, which implies greater than acceptable risk. Risk was found to be driven by childhood exposure.

It was concluded that the issue of elevated soil contamination relates back to environmental justice due to overlap between contaminated areas and neighborhoods of lower socioeconomic status. Marsi et al. (2021) found there needs to be more community-driven recommendations for policies and other actions to address disproportionate solid contamination and prevent adverse health outcomes.      

 

Davies, Thom, and Alice Mah. 2020 (What does this text focus on and what methods does it build from?)

Taina Miranda Araujo

Text focuses on questions about the production and spread of knowledge, and the role science plays in society. Thom and Mah introduce the term “post-truths” that is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as “denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Which factors into how the intersection of science, politics, and values around the world determine a population’s attitude towards environmental justice. They argue for the importance of “science, knowledge, and data that are produced by and for ordinary people living in environmental risks and hazards” (Thom and Mah 2022). In doing so, they recognize data isn't sufficient to solve environmental injustice, especially since issues of environmental pollution are so deeply intertwined with structures that perpetuate social inequalities. Instead, they suggest an interdisciplinary approach that integrates “legacies of environmental justice movement, participatory citizen science,” and “experts” to come up with holistic questions on how to overcome environmental inequality and advance the environmental justice movement amid challenges on the salience of environmental expertise.

Thom and Mah use four case studies of community-based participatory environmental health and justice research to show the importance of including citizens in scientific research. Citizen science refers to public engagement with science, from data sensing and crowdsourcing to design, collection, analysis of research. Although citizen science is not the only answer - with Catree (2016) pointing out that citizen-led processes have become a “lucrative business,” which creates a conflict of interest - this book redefines the meaning of “justice” within the environmental justice movement and explores “role and interpretation of citizenship within citizen science research (Thom and Mah 2022). They recognize there’s tension in balancing a community’s subjective experience and contextual knowledge with rigorous, scientifically appropriate research. 

To tackle environmental injustice in a post-truth era, Thom and Mah (2022) argue there needs to be political change. An interdisciplinary approach is used to study local and global environmental justice challenges with a range of “qualitative and quantitative social science methods, including community-based participatory research (CBPR), epidemiology, ethnography, visual methods, and other innovative methods of participatory environmental justice and citizen science research” (Thom and Mah 2022). 

 

What does this text focus on and what methods does it build from? What scales of analysis are foregrounded? What data are drawn

Taina Miranda Araujo

The article focuses on creating definitions and clarifying concepts while analyzing the impact of a disproportionate distribution of resources in a way that clearly shows the link to systemic racism and the “inequitable distribution of environmental burdens and benefits” (Lee 2021). It develops a framework for integrating concepts of environmental injustice with environmental policy-making in an effort to overcome the inaction of environmental justice (EJ) practice to address the EJ Executive Order No. 12898 by President Clinton in 1994. A mandate that addressed “disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects” of its operation population of lower socio-economic status. The issue being these agencies did not know how to define the term “disproportionate effect” leading to the immense challenge of holding agencies to an environmental justice standard. 

The article also discusses future EJ practice that addresses systemic racism using empirical data in the context of programmatic decision-making to visualize public health impacts which recognizes that as the demand of governmental regulation of “disproportionate impacts” increases the need for greater resources, scale of analysis, and level of quantification increases.

Lee contextualizes his argument in the era of March 2021 when discussing how current conditions are optimal for making progress in reference to the Black Lives Matter movement, which has uplifted black voices and brought visibility to black discrimination and the environmenatal, social, economic, health outcome, and cultural effects of systemic racism.

Lee uses “second-generation EJ mapping tools that have cumulative impacts as their core organizing principle,” this tool goes beyond demographic indicators, it spatially array the factors EJ researchers identified and contributors to the cumulative impacts affecting communities of colors. It was created by EJ researchers Manuel Pastor, Rachel Morello-Frosch, and James Sadd officially developing an EJ Screening Method (EJSM) - which laid the foundation for CalEnviroScreen. These tools are used to study cumulative effects, a combination of environmental pollutants and socio-economic factors that leave communities of people-of-color vulnerable to adverse health outcomes. Other modern technological and statistical tools include modern geographic information system (GIS) technology.

 

srigyan annotation on behringer 1

prerna_srigyan
Annotation of

The podcast episode tells the story of the Park View Elementary School in Cudahy, LA County. Located on a former toxic dump, parents and educators have been involved in decades’ long fight to remediate and clean up the school land. That fight has not been easy. They have encountered an apathetic school district and a slowly-moving Dept. of Toxic Substances Control.  The coalition of parents, educators, and activists gained traction by collaborating with Spanish language media productions. The school closed down for a cleanup and reopened in 2001, but students and educators still reported feeling sick. They later found out that the cleanup had been planned to be short-term and a longer remediation plan was underway. Many parents shifted schools. The story continued with the proposal to build a charter school just a few miles away from the elementary school and from a former Exide battery recycling plant. The podcast offers a narrative-style discussion of cumulative impacts, mapping tools that make it possible to visualize different datasets to display disproportionate burdens, and structural and recognitional injustices that the parents and educators faced.

psrigyan EIJ-A annotation 5.1

prerna_srigyan

The text stages a conversation between the histories and current practices of engaged scholarship and environmental justice to make a case for why EJ practitioners should think about what to research, how to research, and what to do with their research. I like the connection between how strands of engaged scholarship can illuminate and reinforce specific approaches to environmental justice; for example, how CBPR approaches can work towards procedural and process justice. 

 

Srigyan on Lee 1

prerna_srigyan

The text focuses on the challenges of “second-generation environmental justice” such as identifying, characterizing, and integrating an analysis of disproportionate burdens, systemic racism, and cumulative impacts, into existing environmental governance regimes. The main challenge according to Lee is the unsatisfying non-uptake of “disproportionate impacts” in federal and state-level environmental governance legislation and programs. Often, public participation is limited to “hearing people out” but not actually implementing it into law and action. Lee advocates for environmental governance reform by paying attention to the use of mapping and visualization tools that have made it possible for environmental justice practitioners to link disproportionate health burdens to a history of redlining and segregation in the United States. In doing so, he reframes environmental justice as a “spatial distribution of environmental burdens and benefits”.  He sees hope in contemporary reckonings of racial and environmental injustice in the US and globally, to shape the next generation of environmental governance.

Lee builds on the work of researchers who study how government agencies incorporate (or not) EJ in how they function on a quotidian basis, focusing on both federal and state-level policies. He also builds on the work of scientists and activists working on community and participatory models of engagement (e.g. Groundwork USA, Jeremy Hoffman), foregrounding the importance of both qualitative and quantitative data for different ends. I liked his concluding discussion on New Jersey’s new environmental justice policy as well, which Lee interprets as embodying the next generation of environmental governance.