Air quality and equity

AIR QUALITY AND EQUITY

Dr. Gordon Mitchell

The School of Geography and Institute for Transport Studies, The University of Leeds

[email protected]

The Presentation

Ø

An Introduction to Environmental Equity

Ø

Environmental (air quality) equity examples:

§ UK

§ Leeds

Ø

Emerging Policy responses

AN INTRODUCTION

Sustainable Development Trade-Offs

JUSTICE _{EQUITY vs. ENVIRONMENT} ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION

Growth vs. Environment Equity vs.

Environmental equity : a global issue….

Environmental Equity in the USA

Ø Environmental equity

concerns grew from civil rights movement

Ø Concern over siting of

hazardous facilities

Ø Very strong protests

over race/poverty bias

Ø Inadequate empirical

ENVIRONMENTAL

EQUITY EXAMPLE #1:

Air Quality and Equity

Ø Prior UK studies:

§ Stevenson 1998 (NO2, wards, London, income)

§ McLeod 2000 (3 pollutants, LA districts, social class;

ethnicity)

§ NETCEN 2000 (2 pollutants, 5 UK cities, IMD) § NETCEN 2001 (2 pollutants, 4 UK cities, IMD)

§ Pennycook 2001 (2 pollutants, Bradford wards, IMD) § Lyons 2002 (NO2, W.Glamorgan, social class)

§ Brainard 2002 (2 pollutants, Birmingham EDs, IMD)

Ø Small body of research with conflicting

conclusions due to heterogeneity (pollutants,

Study Objectives

Ø

To address conflicting results of past UK

studies through small area - national analyses

Ø

To test two common assumptions:

§ Disadvantaged groups are resident in areas with

highest pollutant concentrations

§ The poor largely bear the pollution costs of the

Data and Methods

Ø

Study Area - All 10,444 wards in Britain

Air quality - Mean annual NO

per ward

centroid from NETCEN 1999 1 km grid

map

Ø

Disadvantaged groups:

§ The Poor

§ Non-car owners

Poverty Analysis

% Households in poverty (BB Index)

1027 wards per poverty decil bars denote 5- 95 percentile

‘Affluent’ wards ‘Poor’ wards

Most deprived AND least deprived

Car Ownership Analysis

% Households with no car

1027 wards per no car decile Bars denote 95% CI

‘Many cars’ wards ‘Few cars’ wards

Wards with few cars are most polluted, hence: “Traffic pollution is caused by the better off, but the

poor feel its effects” (Higman, 1999). True?

The affluent pollute the poor?

Ø

Annual NOx emission from vehicles

estimated (crudely) for all GB wards:

§ DVLA postcoded vehicle data

§ 35 vehicle groups (age / cc / fuel type)

§ MEET NO_x emission factors at 55 kph

(older cars emit more)

§ MEET UK age-distance correction

Emission Analysis

Ø Less cars and car

use in ‘poor’ wards is balanced by use of older more

polluting vehicles

Ø Deprived wards

make significant contributions to vehicle emissions Vehicle NOx emission (tonnes / yr / ward)

But inequality does occur....

Wards of worst air quality emit least AND are the most deprived

‘Exceedence’ wards (NO2, Eng.)

Mitchell and Walker forthcoming (Env Agency)

Of 2.5 million people in ward with mean annual NO2 > 40ug/m3, >50% are

Temporal Change (NO

exceedence)

Pollution-Poverty ‘Hot spots’

Ø

Application

§ Can guide remediation strategies or further analysis § Requires agreement on variables & thresholds applied Ø

Selection criteria (example)

§ AQ Index > 1.5 (c. 800 wards, 7.5 M people) AND most

deprived wards (decile 1, with 10% of pop.)

Ø

Hot-spots identified

§ MAJOR: (> 5 wards) London, Liverpool, Manchester,

Nottingham, Sheffield.

§ MINOR (1- 5 wards) : Bristol, Derby, Thurrock, Leeds,

Conclusions from UK analysis

Ø The most and least deprived experience above average

NO2, but the poor experience the worst AQ of all, bearing a highly disproportionate burden of peak concentrations, including exceedences (X 10)

Ø The poor experience the worst air quality, but also

contribute significantly to emissions (i.e. EJ requires careful interpretation)

Ø Air quality policy to tackle injustice could focus on

‘hotspots’ - but how should they be defined - e.g.

§ High deprivation and high concentration, or

AIR QUALITY

EQUITY EXAMPLE #2:

The Leeds Study

Ø

EPSRC-DETR project with Leeds CC

Ø

Air quality impact of transport strategies:

§ Cordon charging (Single and Double)

§ Distance charging (Charges at 2-20 p/km)

§ Network development (Do-All, Do-Min)

§ Clean fuel promotion

§ Do-nothing, “business as usual” 1993-2015

Ø

Modelling method

§ Traffic modelling using SATURN inc. SATTAX

The Env. Equity Analysis

Ø Data on a 200m grid:

- modelled annual NO2

- deprivation index

Ø Analysis to assess:

- environmental equity - env equity responses

Env. Equity under ‘Do-nothing’

Annua

lm

ea

n

NO

2

ug/

m

3

Deprivation Index

‘Affluent’ _‘Poor’

Disease burden from NO2, 1993

Total NO2 DB in Leeds = 96 RHA / yr

Leeds Case Study Conclusions

Ø The ‘poor’ in Leeds suffer significantly greater NO₂

concentrations than people of average or above average means

Ø Change in inequality is (predicted to be) strongly

proportional to change in city-wide air quality

Ø All transport options that improve city-wide air quality

Recommendations (Air Quality)

Ø Support efforts to understand the nature & significance of

env. inequalities, & measures to reduce unacceptable inequalities

Ø Support LAs seeking to meet NAQS objectives

Ø Identify 'poverty-pollution hotspots’ and focus efforts to

improve air quality in these areas

Ø Investigate the equity implications of AQMAs and LTPs

Ø Develop technical guidance on equity appraisal (new devt.) Ø Work to ensure that equity appraisal is adopted in the

RESPONSES TO

USA

Ø

Clinton’s 1994 Executive Order :

“Federal actions to address environmenta

justice in minority and low incom

populations”.

Ø

Must address:

“disproportionately high and adverse

human health or environmental effects o

policies, programs and activities on

US guidance emerging via:

Ø

Federal working groups and enforcement

actions (e.g. EPA TWG on EJ assessment

of actions proposed re Clean Air Act

compliance

Ø

Public participation (e.g. in NEPA process

Europe

Ø

UN ECE Aarhus Convention on the

Environment

(adopted 1998, ratified Oct 2001)

§ Public access to environmental information

(Directive proposed June 2001)

§ Public participation in environmental plans and

programmes (Directive proposed Jan 2001)

§ Access to justice in environmental matters

UK

Ø

Major Political commitment:

§ E+W - Prime Minister and M Beckett (DEFRA)

§ Scotland : McConnell, First Minister

Ø

Government response

§ ODPM - NRU ‘policy mapping’; Env in IMD

§ DEFRA - co-ordinating cross dept. EE agenda

§ Scottish Executive (Programme; EJ in SEA)

§ SD commission (Key theme)

UK evidence base

Ø

Some empirical analyses :

§ Air quality (mostly cities by ward) § Landfill sites and health impacts § Hazardous industrial facilities

Ø

Extending the evidence base

§ Environment Agency study (Walker & Mitchell)

§ SNIFFER (2004 - 2005)

ISSUES IN

Measuring Inequality

Ø

Technical Issues:

§ Which env. issues? (positive and negative)

§ Environmental justice for who?

§ What is the appropriate spatial unit of analysis?

§ How large should the study area be?

§ Env. metrics: exposure or adverse effect? § Multiple, cumulative and indirect impacts

§ Assessing not just facilities, but plans & policies

Identifying Injustice

Ø

Understanding causation:

§ Inequalities as a product of neighbourhood

transition processes (e.g. chicken and egg), or discrimination?

Ø

Is inequality unjust?

§ How unequal is unfair?

§ Which justice theory (Rawlsian, Utilitarian etc.)

Addressing Injustice

Ø

Building environmental equity / justice

assessments into policy and plan

evaluation (i.e. all SD trade-offs)

Ø

Ensure public involvement in equity issues:

§ Scoping (e.g. identifying target groups / issues)

§ Reviewing appraisals

Publications

Mitchell, G. and Dorling, D. (2003). An Environmental Justice Analysis of British Air Quality, Environment and Planning A, 35, 909-929

Mitchell, G. (forthcoming). The Response of Urban Air Quality to Strategic Road Transport Initiatives: An Environmental Justice Analysis of Leeds, UK.

Transportation Research Part D

Mitchell, G., Namdeo, A., May, A.D. and Milne, D. (forthcoming). Road User Charging and Urban Air Quality: An Empirical Analysis of Leeds, UK.

Transportation Research Part D

Publications

Mitchell, G and Walker, G. (In press) Environmental Quality and Social

Deprivation. R&D Technical Report E2-067/1/TR, The Environment Agency, Bristol, 61pp, ISBN 1 8443 221 9

Walker, G., Mitchell, G., Fairburn, J. and Smith, G. (In press) Environmental Quality and Social Deprivation. Phase II: National Analysis of Flood Hazard, IPC Industries and Air Quality. R&D Project Record E2-067/1/PR1, The

Environment Agency, Bristol, 133pp, ISBN 1 8443 222X

Mitchell, G. and Walker, G. (In press) Environmental Quality and Social

Deprivation. Phase I: A Review of Research and Analytical Methods. R&D

Project Record E2-067/1/PR2, The Environment Agency, Bristol, 107pp, ISBN 1 8443 22 246

Mitchell, G. and Walker, G. (Forthcoming) Methodological Issues in the

Thank you for listening…..for

more information contact:

Dr Gordon Mitchel

School of Geograph

The University of Leeds,

UK, LS2 9J

[email protected]

Age Analysis

1999

annual

mean

NO

2

ug/

m

3

Age decile

Few of age

Age Analysis #2

Above average NO2

Below average NO2

Children have higher

NO2 exposure…. …..due to parental_{location choices}

Inequality but probably not