Search

Main argument

Anonymous (not verified)
In response to
Lee argues that EJ practice has long stagnated over an inability to properly define the concept of disproportionate (environmental and public health) impacts, but that national conversations on system racism and the development of EJ mapping tools have improved his outlook on the potential for better application of the concept of disproportionate impact. Lee identifies mapping tools (e.g. CalEnviroScreen) as a pathway for empirically based and analytically rigorous articulation and analysis of disproportionate impacts that are linked to systemic racism. In describing the scope and nature of application of mapping tools, Baker highlights the concept of cumulative impacts (the concentration of multiple environmental, public health, and social stressors), the importance of public participation (e.g. Hoffman’s community science model), the role of redlining in creating disproportionate vulnerabilities, and the importance of integrating research into decision making processes. Baker ultimately argues that mapping tools offer a promising opportunity for integrating research into policy decision making as part of a second generation of EJ practice. Key areas that Lee identifies as important to the continued development of more effective EJ practice include: identifying good models for quantitative studies and analysis, assembling a spectrum of different integrative approaches (to fit different contexts), connecting EJ research to policy implications, and being attentive to historical contexts and processes that produce/reproduce structural inequities.

pece_annotation_1474232858

michael.lee
Annotation of
In response to

"These initiatives build on a growing perception among diverse actors — life scientists and public health officials, policymakers and security analysts — that new biological threats challenge existing ways of understanding and managing collective health and security. From the vantage point of such actors, the global scale of these threats crosses and confounds the boundaries of existing regulatory jurisdictions. Moreover, their pathogenicity and mutability pushes the limits of current technical capacities to detect and treat disease."

"However, the ideal of dual use faces many difficulties, in part because public health professionals often do not agree with security experts about which problems deserve attention, and how interventions should be implemented. Such disagreements point to broader tensions provoked by the current intersection of public health and national security. Public health officials and national security experts promoting preparedness strategies have very different ways of evaluating threats and responses. As a result, programs that depend on coordination between these groups may often founder."

"The report defines emerging disease as one among a number of new threats to security that 'do not stem from the actions of clearly defined individual states but from diffuse issues that transcend sovereign borders and bear directly on the effects of increasing globalization that challenge extant frameworks for thinking about national and international security.' Proposed responses to this new 'global threat' have come from various kinds of organizations, with diverse agendas."

pece_annotation_1474858921

michael.lee
Annotation of
In response to

OSHA is a part of the United States Department of Labor and is overseen by the Secretary of Labor. The chief administrator of OSHA is the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, who is supported by a Chief of Staff and several Senior Advisors. The Assistant Secretary oversees two Deputy Assistant Secretaries who supervises various directors and administrators. The full organization chart can be found on the OSHA website.