Modeling Air Pollution-Related Health Benefits of Transportation Scenarios: A Collaboration Between Academic Researchers and Environmental Justice Organizations

Christopher Rick, Kim Gaddy, Sharon Lewis, Mark Mitchell, Sofia Owen, Queen Shabazz, Laura Chu Wiens, Jay Stange, Cheryl Little, Erica Ellis, Calvin Arter, Patrick Kinney, Jonathan I. Levy, Frederica Perera, Katy Coomes, Kathleen Lau, Laura Buckley, Matthew Raifman, Dinesch C, Sarav Arunachalam, Jonathan Buonocore
{"title":"Modeling Air Pollution-Related Health Benefits of Transportation Scenarios: A Collaboration Between Academic Researchers and Environmental Justice Organizations","authors":"Christopher Rick,&nbsp;Kim Gaddy,&nbsp;Sharon Lewis,&nbsp;Mark Mitchell,&nbsp;Sofia Owen,&nbsp;Queen Shabazz,&nbsp;Laura Chu Wiens,&nbsp;Jay Stange,&nbsp;Cheryl Little,&nbsp;Erica Ellis,&nbsp;Calvin Arter,&nbsp;Patrick Kinney,&nbsp;Jonathan I. Levy,&nbsp;Frederica Perera,&nbsp;Katy Coomes,&nbsp;Kathleen Lau,&nbsp;Laura Buckley,&nbsp;Matthew Raifman,&nbsp;Dinesch C,&nbsp;Sarav Arunachalam,&nbsp;Jonathan Buonocore","doi":"10.1029/2023CSJ000041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Transportation is a leading contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and has become a focus for climate policies. Traffic-related air pollution disproportionately affects environmental justice (EJ) communities—neighborhoods that have disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards, but health impact assessments rarely center EJ issues or prioritize the concerns of EJ communities. One explanation for the lack of focus on EJ communities is that both policymakers and academia have often failed to engage these communities. In this paper, academic researchers collaborate with seven EJ organizations in the northeastern US, working with collaboration advisors and facilitators, to design and evaluate potential transportation emissions reduction scenarios using air quality and health benefits modeling tools. We model and estimate the benefits of these scenarios, while working to build collaborative relationships between academic researchers and EJ organizations. The two primary outputs from this process are: quantification of health benefits attributable to emission reduction scenarios of interest to EJ organizations, and enhanced trust and community building between academic researchers and EJ organizations, with reflections on strengths, challenges, and opportunities for future work. We find the largest improvements to health result from scenarios that reduce car and truck traffic. Dialog between academic researchers and EJ organizations reinforce the disconnect between regional-scale models and local community concerns as well as the more general gaps between statistical models and lived experience. Despite these challenges, the collaboration led to more meaningful models and valued insight for community organizations, and we recommend comparable collaborations in other settings where pollution control is being planned and evaluated in EJ communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":93639,"journal":{"name":"Community science","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2023CSJ000041","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2023CSJ000041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transportation is a leading contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and has become a focus for climate policies. Traffic-related air pollution disproportionately affects environmental justice (EJ) communities—neighborhoods that have disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards, but health impact assessments rarely center EJ issues or prioritize the concerns of EJ communities. One explanation for the lack of focus on EJ communities is that both policymakers and academia have often failed to engage these communities. In this paper, academic researchers collaborate with seven EJ organizations in the northeastern US, working with collaboration advisors and facilitators, to design and evaluate potential transportation emissions reduction scenarios using air quality and health benefits modeling tools. We model and estimate the benefits of these scenarios, while working to build collaborative relationships between academic researchers and EJ organizations. The two primary outputs from this process are: quantification of health benefits attributable to emission reduction scenarios of interest to EJ organizations, and enhanced trust and community building between academic researchers and EJ organizations, with reflections on strengths, challenges, and opportunities for future work. We find the largest improvements to health result from scenarios that reduce car and truck traffic. Dialog between academic researchers and EJ organizations reinforce the disconnect between regional-scale models and local community concerns as well as the more general gaps between statistical models and lived experience. Despite these challenges, the collaboration led to more meaningful models and valued insight for community organizations, and we recommend comparable collaborations in other settings where pollution control is being planned and evaluated in EJ communities.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
模拟交通方案与空气污染相关的健康益处:学术研究人员与环境正义组织之间的合作
交通是温室气体排放的主要来源,已成为气候政策的重点。与交通相关的空气污染对环境正义(EJ)社区的影响尤为严重--这些社区暴露于环境危害的比例过高,但健康影响评估却很少将环境正义问题作为中心,或将环境正义社区的关切作为优先事项。对 EJ 社区缺乏关注的一种解释是,政策制定者和学术界往往未能让这些社区参与进来。在本文中,学术研究人员与美国东北部的七个 EJ 组织合作,与合作顾问和促进者一起,使用空气质量和健康效益建模工具设计和评估潜在的交通减排方案。我们对这些方案的效益进行建模和估算,同时努力在学术研究人员和环境正义组织之间建立合作关系。这一过程的两个主要成果是:量化了环境正义组织感兴趣的减排方案所带来的健康益处;增强了学术研究人员和环境正义组织之间的信任和社区建设,并对未来工作的优势、挑战和机遇进行了反思。我们发现,减少汽车和卡车交通的方案对健康的改善最大。学术研究人员与环境正义组织之间的对话加强了区域规模模型与当地社区关注点之间的脱节,以及统计模型与生活经验之间更普遍的差距。尽管存在这些挑战,但此次合作为社区组织带来了更有意义的模型和有价值的见解,我们建议在其他环境中开展类似的合作,以规划和评估 EJ 社区的污染控制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Issue Information “They Say the Water Is Perfectly Safe but…”: A Mixed-Methods Participatory Study of Factors Influencing Trust in Tap Water Safety in a Great Lakes City Validation of Traditional Pastoralist Practices Based on Ecological Observations of a Camel Herding Community and Coastal Mangrove Forests of Kutch, Gujarat, India A First Step in the Co-Production of a Climate Resilience Research Agenda for the Philadelphia Region A Co-Produced Workflow for Addressing Inequities in Cooling Center Access
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1