Author
Listed:
- Heather E. Campbell
- Sekwen Kim
- Shawnika Johnson
- Claudia Cáceres
Abstract
Decades of research demonstrates that minoritized groups are disproportionately affected by swathes of harmful pollutants, including air pollution, even controlling for low income. Would significantly reducing individual car traffic help reduce the EJ gap? The systemic shock of the COVID‐19 economic shutdown, with accompanied reduction in car use, can be exploited to analyze this question. Kerr and colleagues ask this question for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), use satellite data and categorical differences, and find that majority‐minoritized tracts on average benefited more from the shutdown, but the least‐White tracts still were significantly worse off than the most‐White tracts. We further explore this question for PM2.5, one of the most harmful air pollutants, using Geographic Information System (GIS) methods to combine several different federal datasets to compare pre‐ and post‐COVID‐19 shutdown. Analyzing Census tracts, we find (1) little evidence of discrimination in the placement of PM2.5 sensors, (2) evidence of the standard EJ disproportionality for PM2.5 in both pre‐shutdown 2019 and post‐shutdown 2020, but (3) evidence of disproportionate improvement for Asians, Hispanics, and Native Americans, with concerning indications of possible harm to African Americans. This implies, as do the findings in Kerr and colleagues' study, that policies that limit gasoline‐powered car use can reduce air pollution but are unlikely to importantly alleviate US environmental racism affecting African Americans. 几十年的研究表明,即使在控制低收入因素的情况下,少数群体仍然受到包括空气污染在内的大量有害污染物的严重影响。大幅减少个人汽车交通一事能否有助于缩小环境正义差距?为分析该问题,可以将2019冠状病毒病(COVID‐19)经济停摆带来的系统性冲击以及相应的汽车使用量减少作为案例研究。Kerr等人针对二氧化氮(NO2)提出这个问题,使用卫星数据和分类差异,发现少数族裔占多数的地区平均而言从经济停摆中受益更多,不过,与白人最多的地区相比,白人最少的地区仍然在境况上明显更糟。我们针对PM2.5(最有害的空气污染物之一)进一步分析了该问题,使用地理信息系统(GIS)方法结合几个不同的联邦数据集,以比较COVID‐19经济停摆前后的情况。通过分析人口普查区,我们发现:(1)PM2.5传感器在各地区的分布几乎不存在歧视;(2)2019年经济停摆前和2020年经济停摆后,都存在关于PM2.5的标准环境不正义;(3)亚裔、西班牙裔和美洲原住民的境况改善程度不成比例,并且令人担忧的迹象表明,非裔美国人可能受到危害。正如Kerr等人的研究结果一样,这意味着“限制使用汽油动力汽车”的政策能减少空气污染,但不太可能减轻影响非裔美国人的美国环境种族主义。 Décadas de investigación demuestran que los grupos minoritarios se ven afectados de manera desproporcionada por una gran cantidad de contaminantes nocivos, incluida la contaminación del aire, incluso controlados para comunidades de bajo ingresos. ¿Es posible que la reducción significativa del tráfico de automóviles individuales ayudaría a disminuir la brecha de justicia ambiental (JA)? El impacto sistémico del cierre económico de COVID‐19, con la consiguiente reducción en el uso de automóviles, puede aprovecharse para analizar esta pregunta. Kerr y colega hacen esta pregunta sobre el dióxido de nitrógeno (NO2), usan datos satelitales y diferencias categóricas, y descubren que las áreas de minorías blancas en promedio se beneficiaron más del cierre, pero las áreas con minorías blancas todavía estaban significativamente peor que las áreas de mayoría blanca. Exploramos más a fondo esta pregunta para Material Particulado (PM2.5), uno de los contaminantes del aire más dañinos, utilizando Sistemas de Información Geográfica (SIG) para combinar varias capas de datos y poder comparar antes y después del cierre de COVID‐19. Al analizar los distritos censales, encontramos (1) poca evidencia de discriminación en la colocación de sensores de PM2.5, (2) evidencia de la desproporcionalidad estándar de JA para PM2.5 tanto antes del cierre de 2019 como después del cierre de 2020, pero hay (3) evidencia de mejora desproporcionada para los asiáticos, hispanos y nativos americanos, con indicaciones preocupantes de posibles daños a los afroamericanos. Esto implica, al igual que los hallazgos de Kerr et al., 2021, que las políticas que limitan el uso de automóviles a gasolina pueden reducir la contaminación del aire, pero es poco probable que alivie el racismo ambiental que afecta a los afroamericanos.
Suggested Citation
Heather E. Campbell & Sekwen Kim & Shawnika Johnson & Claudia Cáceres, 2025.
"Environmental racism and air pollution: Pre and post the COVID‐19 economic shutdown,"
Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 42(4), pages 949-981, July.
Handle:
RePEc:bla:revpol:v:42:y:2025:i:4:p:949-981
DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12570
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:42:y:2025:i:4:p:949-981. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.