绅士化、流动性和暴露于健康的情境社会决定因素。

IF 2.8 3区 经济学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Housing Policy Debate Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-18 DOI:10.1080/10511482.2022.2099937
Arthur Acolin, Kyle Crowder, Ari Decter-Frain, Anjum Hajat, Matt Hall
{"title":"绅士化、流动性和暴露于健康的情境社会决定因素。","authors":"Arthur Acolin, Kyle Crowder, Ari Decter-Frain, Anjum Hajat, Matt Hall","doi":"10.1080/10511482.2022.2099937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study uses individual level consumer trace data for 2006 residents of low- and moderate-income neighborhoods for the principal cities of the 100 largest metropolitan regions in the US using their location in 2006 and 2019 to examine exposure to the following four cSDOH: healthcare access (Medically Underserved Areas), socioeconomic condition (Area Deprivation Index), air pollution (NO2, PM 2.5 and PM10), and walkability (National Walkability Index). The results control for individual characteristics and initial neighborhood conditions. Residents of neighborhoods classified as gentrifying were exposed to more favorable cSDOH as of 2006 relative to residents of low- and moderate-income neighborhoods that were not gentrifying in terms of likelihood to be in a MUA, and level of local deprivation and walkability while experiencing similar level of air pollution. As a result of changes in neighborhood characteristics and differential mobility pattern, between 2006 and 2019, individuals who originally lived in gentrifying neighborhoods experienced worse changes in MUAs, ADI, and Walkability Index but a greater improvement in exposure to air pollutants. The negative changes are driven by movers, while stayers actually experience a relative improvement in MUAs and ADI and larger improvements in exposure to air pollutants. The findings indicate that gentrification may contribute to health disparities through changes in exposure to cSDOH through mobility to communities with worse cSDOH among residents of gentrifying neighborhoods although results in terms of exposure to health pollutants are mixed.</p>","PeriodicalId":47744,"journal":{"name":"Housing Policy Debate","volume":"33 1","pages":"194-223"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10187766/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gentrification, Mobility, and Exposure to Contextual Social Determinants of Health.\",\"authors\":\"Arthur Acolin, Kyle Crowder, Ari Decter-Frain, Anjum Hajat, Matt Hall\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10511482.2022.2099937\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study uses individual level consumer trace data for 2006 residents of low- and moderate-income neighborhoods for the principal cities of the 100 largest metropolitan regions in the US using their location in 2006 and 2019 to examine exposure to the following four cSDOH: healthcare access (Medically Underserved Areas), socioeconomic condition (Area Deprivation Index), air pollution (NO2, PM 2.5 and PM10), and walkability (National Walkability Index). The results control for individual characteristics and initial neighborhood conditions. Residents of neighborhoods classified as gentrifying were exposed to more favorable cSDOH as of 2006 relative to residents of low- and moderate-income neighborhoods that were not gentrifying in terms of likelihood to be in a MUA, and level of local deprivation and walkability while experiencing similar level of air pollution. As a result of changes in neighborhood characteristics and differential mobility pattern, between 2006 and 2019, individuals who originally lived in gentrifying neighborhoods experienced worse changes in MUAs, ADI, and Walkability Index but a greater improvement in exposure to air pollutants. The negative changes are driven by movers, while stayers actually experience a relative improvement in MUAs and ADI and larger improvements in exposure to air pollutants. The findings indicate that gentrification may contribute to health disparities through changes in exposure to cSDOH through mobility to communities with worse cSDOH among residents of gentrifying neighborhoods although results in terms of exposure to health pollutants are mixed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Housing Policy Debate\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"194-223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10187766/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Housing Policy Debate\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2022.2099937\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/8/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Housing Policy Debate","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2022.2099937","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究使用2006年和2019年美国100个最大大都市地区的主要城市的2006年中低收入社区居民的个人层面消费者追踪数据,调查他们对以下四种cSDOH的暴露情况:医疗服务(医疗服务不足地区)、社会经济状况(地区剥夺指数),空气污染(NO2、PM2.5和PM10)和可步行性(国家可步行性指数)。结果控制了个体特征和初始邻域条件。截至2006年,与低收入和中等收入社区的居民相比,被归类为绅士化的社区的居民在经历类似空气污染水平的同时,在MUA的可能性、当地贫困程度和可步行性方面,接触到了更有利的cSDOH。由于社区特征和差异流动模式的变化,2006年至2019年间,最初居住在绅士化社区的个人的MUA、ADI和步行能力指数变化更大,但暴露在空气污染物中的情况有所改善。负面变化是由搬家者推动的,而滞留者实际上在MUA和ADI方面有了相对的改善,在暴露于空气污染物方面有了更大的改善。研究结果表明,中产阶级化可能会导致健康差异,因为中产阶级化社区的居民通过迁移到cSDOH较差的社区而改变对cSDOH的暴露,尽管暴露于健康污染物的结果参差不齐。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Gentrification, Mobility, and Exposure to Contextual Social Determinants of Health.

This study uses individual level consumer trace data for 2006 residents of low- and moderate-income neighborhoods for the principal cities of the 100 largest metropolitan regions in the US using their location in 2006 and 2019 to examine exposure to the following four cSDOH: healthcare access (Medically Underserved Areas), socioeconomic condition (Area Deprivation Index), air pollution (NO2, PM 2.5 and PM10), and walkability (National Walkability Index). The results control for individual characteristics and initial neighborhood conditions. Residents of neighborhoods classified as gentrifying were exposed to more favorable cSDOH as of 2006 relative to residents of low- and moderate-income neighborhoods that were not gentrifying in terms of likelihood to be in a MUA, and level of local deprivation and walkability while experiencing similar level of air pollution. As a result of changes in neighborhood characteristics and differential mobility pattern, between 2006 and 2019, individuals who originally lived in gentrifying neighborhoods experienced worse changes in MUAs, ADI, and Walkability Index but a greater improvement in exposure to air pollutants. The negative changes are driven by movers, while stayers actually experience a relative improvement in MUAs and ADI and larger improvements in exposure to air pollutants. The findings indicate that gentrification may contribute to health disparities through changes in exposure to cSDOH through mobility to communities with worse cSDOH among residents of gentrifying neighborhoods although results in terms of exposure to health pollutants are mixed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
17.20%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Housing Policy Debate provides a venue for original research on U.S. housing policy. Subjects include affordable housing policy, fair housing policy, land use regulations influencing housing affordability, metropolitan development trends, and linkages among housing policy and energy, environmental, and transportation policy. Housing Policy Debate is published quarterly. Most issues feature a Forum section and an Articles section. The Forum, which highlights a current debate, features a central article and responding comments that represent a range of perspectives. All articles in the Forum and Articles sections undergo a double-blind peer review process.
期刊最新文献
Retraction: The Effect of Rent Control Status on Eviction Filing Rates: Causal Evidence from San Francisco The Effect of Rent Control Status on Eviction Filing Rates: Causal Evidence From San Francisco Game of Homes: Carrots, Sticks, and the Puzzle of Housing Vacancies “This Voicemail Box Is Full”: Landlord Perceptions of Communication Issues as a Key Challenge to Participating in the Housing Choice Voucher Program “Especially Being Homeless, They Just Think You’re Infected with COVID or Something”: A Qualitative Exploration of the COVID-19 Pandemic’s Impact on People Experiencing Homelessness With a History of Injection Drug Use in Baltimore, Maryland
×
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