Environmental justice and enforcement of the safe drinking water act

The Arizona arsenic experience

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Environmental justice is concerned with the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. A wide variety of empirical studies have concluded that disparate-impact discrimination does in fact exist since minority and low-income communities are at disproportionate risk for environmental harm. In this paper we examine these issues in the context of enforcing the safe drinking water act (SDWA). Specifically, we focus on the association between race, income, and hazardous levels of arsenic concentration and analyze the broad equity implications of implementing the new arsenic regulation by examining the relationship between community-level exposure to arsenic and socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of the population in Arizona. The results provide no support for the contention that continued selective implementation and enforcement of the revised SDWA arsenic standard is likely to disadvantage minority or low-income groups disproportionately in Arizona.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1825-1837
Number of pages13
JournalEcological Economics
Volume68
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 15 2009

Fingerprint

environmental justice
arsenic
drinking water
income
equity
enforcement
Drinking water
Enforcement
Environmental justice
Arsenic
minority
regulation
Low income
Income
Minorities

Keywords

  • Arsenic standard
  • Environmental justice
  • Safe drinking water act

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Environmental Science(all)

Cite this

Environmental justice and enforcement of the safe drinking water act : The Arizona arsenic experience. / Cory, Dennis C; Rahman, Tauhidur.

In: Ecological Economics, Vol. 68, No. 6, 15.04.2009, p. 1825-1837.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{95ff88c2b1c44050818d018d516ee669,
title = "Environmental justice and enforcement of the safe drinking water act: The Arizona arsenic experience",
abstract = "Environmental justice is concerned with the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. A wide variety of empirical studies have concluded that disparate-impact discrimination does in fact exist since minority and low-income communities are at disproportionate risk for environmental harm. In this paper we examine these issues in the context of enforcing the safe drinking water act (SDWA). Specifically, we focus on the association between race, income, and hazardous levels of arsenic concentration and analyze the broad equity implications of implementing the new arsenic regulation by examining the relationship between community-level exposure to arsenic and socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of the population in Arizona. The results provide no support for the contention that continued selective implementation and enforcement of the revised SDWA arsenic standard is likely to disadvantage minority or low-income groups disproportionately in Arizona.",
keywords = "Arsenic standard, Environmental justice, Safe drinking water act",
author = "Cory, {Dennis C} and Tauhidur Rahman",
year = "2009",
month = "4",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.12.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "68",
pages = "1825--1837",
journal = "Ecological Economics",
issn = "0921-8009",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Environmental justice and enforcement of the safe drinking water act

T2 - The Arizona arsenic experience

AU - Cory, Dennis C

AU - Rahman, Tauhidur

PY - 2009/4/15

Y1 - 2009/4/15

N2 - Environmental justice is concerned with the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. A wide variety of empirical studies have concluded that disparate-impact discrimination does in fact exist since minority and low-income communities are at disproportionate risk for environmental harm. In this paper we examine these issues in the context of enforcing the safe drinking water act (SDWA). Specifically, we focus on the association between race, income, and hazardous levels of arsenic concentration and analyze the broad equity implications of implementing the new arsenic regulation by examining the relationship between community-level exposure to arsenic and socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of the population in Arizona. The results provide no support for the contention that continued selective implementation and enforcement of the revised SDWA arsenic standard is likely to disadvantage minority or low-income groups disproportionately in Arizona.

AB - Environmental justice is concerned with the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. A wide variety of empirical studies have concluded that disparate-impact discrimination does in fact exist since minority and low-income communities are at disproportionate risk for environmental harm. In this paper we examine these issues in the context of enforcing the safe drinking water act (SDWA). Specifically, we focus on the association between race, income, and hazardous levels of arsenic concentration and analyze the broad equity implications of implementing the new arsenic regulation by examining the relationship between community-level exposure to arsenic and socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of the population in Arizona. The results provide no support for the contention that continued selective implementation and enforcement of the revised SDWA arsenic standard is likely to disadvantage minority or low-income groups disproportionately in Arizona.

KW - Arsenic standard

KW - Environmental justice

KW - Safe drinking water act

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=62349130995&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=62349130995&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.12.010

DO - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.12.010

M3 - Article

VL - 68

SP - 1825

EP - 1837

JO - Ecological Economics

JF - Ecological Economics

SN - 0921-8009

IS - 6

ER -