Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
81 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
environmental racism
|
unequal apportionment of environmental hazards based upon race OR access to control natural resources
|
|
|
How did immigration lay the foundation for environmental racism
|
When immigrants came in, white individuals were in power. Immigrants threatened their current power. By creating "whiteness" it was a way to exclude other groups from having priviledges.
White was typically defined by who was not white |
|
|
New deal and racism
|
Gave financing for homes to whites but not to nonwhite. Blacks would supposedly drive down housing communities prices.
|
|
|
Today's segregation is a funciton of
|
geography
furthered by housing markets and realators only selling to certain groups |
|
|
Yamato's 4 forms of racism
|
aware/blatant
aware/covert unaware/unintentional unaware/self-righteous |
|
|
oppression defined by yamato
|
the systematic institutionalized mistreatment of one group
|
|
|
optional ethnicities and being white
|
white americans have a choice in who they include into their heritage
choose an ethnicity when they want like on saint patrick's day |
|
|
issues in water management
|
quality
quantity habitat power generation flood control transportation |
|
|
beneficial uses
|
used to define what the water should be used for. Basis for how water is regulated.
|
|
|
how beneficial uses are set
|
done by states or tribes and standards are made to keep those beneficial uses intact (ex: NPDES permits, water quality standards, etc)
|
|
|
TMDL
|
total maximum daily load of a certain water quality parameter
|
|
|
problem with tribes and water apportionment
|
tribes will have standards higher than area downstream. area downstream will sue.courts generaly rule in favor
|
|
|
Steps to risk assessment
|
hazard ID
dose/response assessment Exposure assessment Risk characterization |
|
|
role of EPA in water quality regulations
|
They issue guidelines for setting criteria about a certain water quality parameter and gives standards (how much is ok)
|
|
|
What colloquial saying has made its way into shaping risk assessment
|
one in a million
|
|
|
difference between acute and chronic toxicity
|
acute is reversible
chronic is longer term exposure that can cause irreversible damage |
|
|
potential consequences of toxicity
|
affects brain
disrupts endocrine system cause autoimmune disorders |
|
|
emergent toxicity
|
brain "amplifier" for detecting toxins turned up or down
|
|
|
two ways of defining sensitivity to a toxin
|
sensitization by an extreme event or
immune system markers are confused |
|
|
mutagenesis and carcinogenesis
|
damaged DNA from toxicity mutates and leads to cancer
|
|
|
Steps in toxicity testing
|
do carcogenetic assay
short term in mice oR do chronic test in multiple animals (minimum 600) 2 species x 100 animals x 3 doses |
|
|
Are we capable of doing enough tests to detect one in a million risk?
|
No because it would require a lot of animals
24,000 animcals is greater than 1% risk |
|
|
promoter vs initiator
|
promoter encourages bad DNA to replicate
initiator starts bad DNA growing |
|
|
what is the healthy worker effect
|
when the reference population for study is similar to the unexposed population. This is because those exposed could not be working.
|
|
|
chronic daily intake
|
avg daily dose / body weight
|
|
|
lifetime cancer risk
|
cdi x potency factor
|
|
|
role of biomarkers and toxicity
|
used to find damaged dna, cancer, white blood cell, baisclaly finding ways to for signals for toxic risk
|
|
|
top 5 ways to be exposed to chemicals
|
working environment
indoor radon pesticides on food indoor air pollutants consumer exposure |
|
|
problems with risk assessment
|
establishing baselins
determining what is significant vs detectable Extrapolation model |
|
|
treaty with native americans
|
grants right to the US
supposed to be supreme law of the land but it has been often ignored |
|
|
what is the sovereignty of NA
|
Worcester v. Georgia (1832): they are distinct political entities with their own rights
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831): US was given trust to ensure and continue well being dependent nations |
|
|
plenary power
|
Congress can enact legislation and rules that will affect native lands and people on it
|
|
|
how are NA disproportinately impacted
|
enticed to siting high risk endeavors
exploit poor economic conditions place for high waste |
|
|
state powers and NA
|
subordinate to tribe and federal unless interests are sufficient
|
|
|
tribal authority
|
enforce tribal law
limited on non members |
|
|
EPA and tribes
|
EPA has to treat tribes as states, but allocation has not be equal and tribes are behind in standards
|
|
|
environmental legislation and tribes
|
many laws have been amended to include provisions for tribes, except Resource conservation recovery act (regarding haz waste). Courst decided they have jurisdiction to oversee
|
|
|
Treaty implications
|
tribes use them to put more stringent env quality standards on non tribal affected areas
|
|
|
Albuquerque v. Browner
|
Tribe adopts high water quality
EPA granted and changed Albequerke permits, they sued, and tribes won Montana and EPA same |
|
|
eurocentrism
|
white priviledge
historical advantage to power and resources "permanent superiority" seeks to erase differences to gain power diffusion of european ideology |
|
|
Native Americans and PCBs
|
high levels of mercury and PCBs because waterways have been contaminated and cultural use of i fish
|
|
|
Spanish and water rights with NA
|
crown gave land and water rights in return for slave labor
ignored NA being there first |
|
|
Winters Doctrine
|
From US v Winters
reserved NA rights for reservations to funciton Fed can ovverride state beneficial usues priority based on treaty date |
|
|
common good and native americans
|
not included, water projects have overrided rights
|
|
|
Locally Unwanted Land Uses
|
any dirty or hazardous activity
|
|
|
players in LuLus
|
powerful landowners
weak residents |
|
|
systematic racism is both
|
societal and institutional
|
|
|
institutional oversight and environmental racism
|
government has oversight in institutinos which are subjec to public pressure. Whoever has the most clout wins, leaving the least powerful unprotected
|
|
|
two dimensions of racism
|
scale
intention |
|
|
white priviledge
|
structures and practices which reinforce white priviledge
|
|
|
white flight
|
when whites leaves industrial or toxic areas because they have the economic means to do so
|
|
|
What does Bowen's paper advocate
|
that there is not enough quantitative rigor in EJ research
ave 3 ratings to prior reserach (high being worthy of management decisions) |
|
|
Typical problems in EJ research
|
not enough stats
spatial analysis not done right incomplete documentation unreliable data |
|
|
what have high quality studies indicated about EJ
|
seen in SE US
no evidence at national level |
|
|
what do process studies documenting environmental justice involve
|
Looking @ LULU siting as biased vs market force
sociospatial analysis (class, race, etc? involved) |
|
|
what do outcome studies documenting environmental justice involve?
|
presence, extent of the disparity in exposure
ex: pollution --> exposure --> harm |
|
|
how is water quality exposure often determined
|
by proportion of fish eaten
|
|
|
Buzzelli and Jarret
|
air pollution was correlated with ratial status, particularly latin canadians
|
|
|
jarret et al 2005
|
correlated mortality from air pollution with minority exposure
|
|
|
west et al
|
found a connection between fish consumption and minority status
|
|
|
Bullard's 3 types of equities
|
procedural- fairness in governance, rules, regulations, enforcement
geographic- location and spatial configuration of communities with respect to environmental hazards social-sociological factors in environmental decision making |
|
|
Bullard's 5 principles to environmental justice
|
right to protection from environmental degradation
prevention of harm shift burden of proof obviate proof of intent redress inequities |
|
|
Bryner's 5 frameworks for environmental justice
|
Civil Rights-looks at sociological factors
Distributive Justice and Ethics- distribution of benefits and just compensation Public Participation-all groups have social capital Social Justice - looks at root causes on injustice and ensure cultural diversity Ecological sustainability-reducing pollution for all, sustainability and precautionary principle |
|
|
bryner advocates for expanding environmental justice to including
|
the disporportionate access and power to natural resources
|
|
|
wenz doctrine of double effect
|
a blameworth action becomes blameless when it has an effect that is morally justified
ex: having an abortion because the mother is at risk of something severe |
|
|
Main arguements in wenz
|
Current practices say that economics that are blameless drive the disproportionate impacts. Wenz argues that it is not purely economic factors and that the DDE cannot apply because disporportionate effects for any reason is not good. Says that those deriving the benefits should be the one's bearing the burden. Therefore wealthy should be placed next to the most waste.
|
|
|
Wenz LULU point system
|
different types of LULU sites are worth different points and based upon wealth, communities are given more LULU sites to have more sites in proportion with their consumption
|
|
|
Wenz 4 rejected theories
|
Libertarianism: everyone has a veto
utilitarianism: where's the beef? free market: Vital interests require bettering of market-based inequalities Cost-Benefit Analysis: Justifies disproportionate burdens |
|
|
Alar Scare
|
a chemical that was placed on apples to moderate their growth. A CBS show looking @ the risks from the NRDC started a public scare about it as a carcinogen.
|
|
|
What are the limits of science and policy in regards to public health
|
reliant upon risk assessment
controversial hard to match up goals both are becoming increasingly reliant upon each other limits to neutrality policy go w/ or w/o scientific consensus |
|
|
acceptable risk
|
no definition
|
|
|
summarize the Rosenbaum paper
|
policies do not set clear guidelines for acceptable risk
environmental policy based on a lot of assumptions rather than expert policies EJ hard to put into policy because it incorporates more than risk |
|
|
What are the 3 systems for determining appropriate risk according ot Rosenbaum
|
health-based
technology-based cost-benefit |
|
|
Bezdek on EJ
|
spending on environmental protection promotes an environmentally protective industry
|
|
|
What happened in the case study of fish consumption and the clean water act
|
fish consumptions, risk, and minority status correlated
a court head that lower yet adequate status wa sok EPA created new standards as a result |
|
|
what is the EPA's 4 tier system for data
|
local
data from similar socio-economic groups national survey default intake rates |
|
|
what kind of authority does the federal government have on protection
|
typically general protection and not specific protection
|
|
|
what ways does the EPA have to address EJ
|
setting standards
permitting facilities awarding grants reviewing actions of other govt entities |
|
|
Grand Gulch Plateau Case Study
|
BLM wanted to build a new visitor center to increase visitor. It could threaten cultural resources as well as natural, but the BLM ignored. Got in trouble with interior board of land appeals
|
|
|
Summary of Hill and Targ
|
Executive Order on Environmental Justice does not ensure EJ victims can sue government agencies
lower yet adequate has been health up by courts |
|
|
purpose of envrionmental appeals board
|
Address what community needs to thrive
Ensure early public involvement Address any plausible EJ claim |
