Inequality's Impact: Pollution Exposure And Its Unfair Burden

Income inequality and environmental pollution are two pressing issues that have significant impacts on society. Research has shown that there is a complex relationship between income inequality and exposure to pollution, with inequality affecting not only the level of pollution but also the distribution of its impacts.

Income inequality can influence environmental regulation, with varying effects depending on the level of corruption. When corruption is low, widening income inequality may lead to stricter environmental regulations as intermediate voters demand higher standards to reduce the negative effects of pollution. However, when corruption is high, income inequality can lead to a decline in environmental standards as interest groups bribe officials to weaken regulations. This dynamic has been observed in developing countries like China, where high levels of corruption and income inequality have resulted in weakened environmental regulations.

Additionally, income inequality and pollution exposure are linked to social vulnerability. Vulnerable communities, including racial and ethnic minorities, people with low socioeconomic status, and those in specific geographical areas often face higher exposure to pollutants and increased health risks.

Poorer people and racial and ethnic minorities are exposed to more pollution

Research from the US has consistently shown that low-income communities and racial and ethnic minorities are exposed to higher levels of air pollution. A study by the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health found that Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Latinos, and low-income populations are exposed to higher levels of dangerous fine particulate air pollution (PM2.5) than other groups. The study also found that areas with higher densities of Black, Asian, and Hispanic or Latino populations have consistently been exposed to higher average PM2.5 levels than areas with higher densities of White and Native American populations.

Other studies have found similar results, with people of color and low-income communities experiencing higher exposure to air pollution and facing a greater risk of health problems as a result. For example, a study in California found that Latinos, African Americans, Asians, and low-income people breathe in significantly more tailpipe pollution than other demographic groups, increasing their risk of heart and lung problems, exacerbated asthma, lung cancer, and premature death.

The impact of air pollution on premature death has also been studied, with findings indicating that racial and ethnic minorities and low-income groups are at higher risk. A study of the Medicaid population found that those living in predominantly Black or African American communities suffered a greater risk of premature death from particle pollution than those in predominantly White communities. Another study of New Jersey residents found that the risk of dying early from long-term exposure to particle pollution was higher in communities with larger African American populations, lower home values, and lower median incomes.

Socioeconomic position also appears to be tied to greater harm from air pollution. Multiple large studies have found that low socioeconomic status increases the risk of premature death from fine particle pollution. Additionally, areas with higher unemployment or higher use of public transportation have been found to have greater risk for premature death from air pollution.

The disparities in exposure to air pollution have been persistent, even as overall PM2.5 levels have decreased over the years. Addressing these disparities requires targeted measures to reduce the pollution intensity of economic growth and direct measures to address the disproportionate exposure of poor people and racial and ethnic minorities to pollution.

Pollution sources are often located near disadvantaged communities

For example, in the United States, racial and ethnic minorities make up 40% of the overall population, yet they account for half of those living within a mile of federal Superfund sites. Similarly, a study in California found that communities with a higher proportion of minority populations were exposed to elevated concentrations of harmful pollutants like nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter.

The placement of pollution sources near disadvantaged communities has significant health implications. Studies have shown that people of colour and low-income individuals are at greater risk of adverse health outcomes and premature death from air pollution. This is due to increased exposure to pollutants, as well as social and economic factors that limit access to healthcare, healthy food options, and quality education.

Furthermore, the impact of pollution on disadvantaged communities is compounded by a lack of political power and influence to stop the construction of locally undesirable land uses (LULUs) such as factories and roads. As a result, these communities experience a disproportionate burden of air pollution, leading to environmental injustice and inequality.

Low social position may make some groups more susceptible to health threats

Socioeconomic status is a multidimensional construct comprising multiple factors, such as income, education, and employment status. Low socioeconomic status is associated with higher risk of developing and dying from cardiovascular disease. For example, lower levels of education are associated with a greater risk of cardiovascular disease than higher levels of education. This may be due to the combined effects of increased stress, trauma, and allopathic load, and limited access to appropriate and timely healthcare.

In addition to educational attainment, employment status is also an indicator of socioeconomic status that is strongly associated with health outcomes. Employment status affects health through both physical and psychosocial pathways. For instance, employees may be exposed to hazardous physical, chemical, or biological agents in the occupational setting. Unstable employment can lead to a loss of employee benefits, such as health insurance, creating psychosocial stress.

Income is another factor that affects one's health. Households with incomes below the federal poverty level have high levels of illness and premature mortality. Individuals with lower incomes lack economic resources, resulting in social disadvantage, poor education, poor working conditions, housing insecurity, and residence in unsafe neighborhoods. These negative environmental and psychosocial factors affect behavioral and physiological pathways that have proximal effects on health, including increased morbidity and mortality.

People of colour are among the groups most at risk from air pollutants

People of colour are among the groups most vulnerable to the harmful effects of air pollution. This is true across income levels and regions of the US, with people of colour exposed to higher levels of dangerous fine particulate air pollution (PM2.5) than other groups. This disparity is also evident in the UK, where non-white wards have higher levels of NO2 and PM2.5.

In the US, the disparity in exposure to air pollution is driven by race/ethnicity, independently of income. This is due to a legacy of housing policy and other factors, which have resulted in people of colour and pollution sources being pushed together. As a result, people of colour are exposed to greater than average levels of harmful pollutants, increasing their risk of health issues such as respiratory irritation, cardiovascular disease, and premature death.

The disparity in exposure to air pollution is not limited to the US, with similar patterns observed in the UK. A study of air pollution in Great Britain found that non-white wards had higher levels of NO2 and PM2.5 compared to white wards. This disparity was particularly pronounced in London, with non-white wards having NO2 levels that were 5.7 μg/m3 higher than white wards.

The impact of air pollution on people of colour is further exacerbated by social and economic disadvantages. People of colour are more likely to live in areas with higher unemployment, lack of access to healthcare and healthy food options, and poorer job opportunities. These factors contribute to increased susceptibility to the negative health effects of air pollution, resulting in health disparities between racial and ethnic groups.

Addressing environmental injustice and reducing air pollution exposure disparities will require strong and targeted air pollution reduction strategies. It is essential to recognise the role of systemic racism in creating and perpetuating these disparities and to implement regulations that effectively address the unique challenges faced by communities of colour.

Income inequality may lead to a decline in environmental standards

Income inequality can have a significant impact on environmental standards, and this relationship is often influenced by other factors such as official corruption. In the context of corruption, the effect of income inequality on environmental regulation may exhibit a threshold effect. This means that the impact of income inequality on environmental standards changes at certain levels of corruption.

When there is little to no official corruption, widening income inequality among residents can lead to stricter environmental regulations. In this scenario, intermediate voters with lower incomes are likely to push for stronger environmental standards to mitigate the negative effects of pollution on their health and well-being.

However, when the level of official corruption is high, the expansion of income inequality can lead to a decline in environmental standards. In this case, wealthy individuals and polluting business owners may have more influence over government officials, leading to weaker environmental regulations and policies.

The relationship between income inequality and environmental standards is complex and can vary across different regions and countries. Additionally, the impact of income inequality on environmental regulation may be influenced by other factors, such as economic development, industrial structure, population density, unemployment rate, and foreign direct investment.

In the case of China, studies have found that income inequality among urban residents and the income gap between urban and rural residents are significant factors contributing to the corruption threshold effect on environmental regulation. This suggests that the government's focus on urban development and the imbalance between urban and rural areas play a role in shaping environmental policies.

Addressing income inequality and reducing corruption can be powerful measures for improving environmental pollution governance and promoting social fairness and justice.

Frequently asked questions