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_1481658802

michael.lee
Annotation of
In response to

In 2013, Figure 1 launched with $2 million (CDN) in seed money invested by Rho Canada Ventures and Version One Ventures. In 2015, the company added $5 million (USD) to its Series A financing round, which was invested by Union Square Ventures, bringing the total investment round to $9 million (USD).

pece_annotation_1473993631

tamar.rogoszinski
Annotation of
In response to

The narrative in this film is an emotional one, rather than a scientific one. For the most part, scientific knowledge is common, as the outbreak occurred recently. The only scientific information given was at the end where the statistics of how many deaths occurred in Liberia are given as well as the amount of people who contracted the disease. The primary appeal of this film is that it plays into people's emotions. The narrator is a student at the University of Wisconsin, who discusses his struggle with getting his family to the United States and out of the infected areas. Through graphic footage, as well as this story and narratives from people within the community, we are given an emotional framework with which to empathize. 

pece_annotation_1480606010

tamar.rogoszinski
Annotation of
In response to

While this article does not really address emergency response, the discussion of violent attacks on humanitarian workers does involve emergency responders and can affect how humanitarians provide care. So while not direct, this article does have implications for emergency responders in those regions. 

pece_annotation_1474482414

tamar.rogoszinski
Annotation of
In response to
  1. "Yet, the demands placed on an investigation have as much, or more, to do with defining the dominant investigator and quickly addressing the fears and anger of the press, government, and an outraged public than they do with discovering the definitive technical truths of a catastrophic event."
  2. "Blame, memorial, and reconstruction tend to outpace technical consensus."
  3. "Notions of public responsibility for private safety were highly evolved by this time, hence the fact that a coroner's inquest indicted Mayor Harrison and a full slate of city officials for complicity in the deaths of the Iroquois victims."
  4. "Apparently, despite the technical acumen of the nation's investigators, a lack of funding and authority had rendered the investigators unbelievably 'unable to provide a comprehensive analysis of how well the buildings and their structural elements performed, and as a result, they cannot say if the buildings had specific weaknesses'"

pece_annotation_1474856578

michael.lee
Annotation of
In response to

The Burning of the US Capitol Building, 1814. From the very beginnings of its contruction, the US Capitol Building was plagued by conflict between the chief engineer Benjamin Henry Latrobe, who desired a durable and fireproof design, and Congress, which pushed for rapid completion of the building with limited expense. The result was a mixed contruction, with parts of the building constructed to withstand a major fire and others constructed with lumber. Following the fire, Latrobe conducted a relatively thorough investigation, revealing the various points of failure and recontructing the timeline of the disaster. However, as far as the public was concerned, the disaster was the result of diplomatic and military failures, rather than any engineering failures. 

The Hague Street Explosion, 1850. Steam power was widely used in the United States, but safety protocols and standards were not widespread nor maintained by any particular agency. The exact nature and cause of the boiler explosion at Hague Street was widely debated by various experts, engineers, and laypersons. The federal government scrambled to enact new laws regarding boiler inspection and safety with little effect in reducing boiler-related disasters, while city officials instead chose to remember the disaster through a fund-raising campaign for the victims' families. 

The Iroquois Theater Fire in Chicago, 1903. The disaster called into question the integrity of the building code system in the city of Chicago and caused widespread debate regarding who should be responsible for enforcing building codes. The disaster resulted in a rapid expansion of fire code and fire safety standards and the creation of a network of investigators, comprised of engineers, insurance agencies, testing labs, and fire officials. However, the pressure for such action and progress soon declined as the government, press, and public moved on from the disaster. 

pece_annotation_1475437348

tamar.rogoszinski
Annotation of
In response to

The author supports his argument by first giving the reader a history about immigrant healthcare in France. By using stories of immigrants and showcasing the ways in which physicians dealt with the medical and humanitarian issues, the author provides a social framework for us to see how immigrants were treated. By also providing philosophical insight and statistics, the author is further able to support his argument.