Scales of justice: Is there a geographic bias in environmental equity analysis?

Brett Baden, Douglas Noonan and Rama Mohana Turaga

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 2007, vol. 50, issue 2, 163-185

Abstract: Many empirical environmental justice (EJ) studies lack a systematic framework in which to undertake research and interpret results. This paper characterizes the conventional EJ study and examines how results can be influenced by the choice of the spatial scale and scope of analysis. After thoroughly reviewing a sample of prominent EJ studies, a conventional EJ study was performed for (Superfund) National Priorities List sites at multiple scales and scopes. It was found that evidence of environmental injustice could be sensitive to scale and scope chosen, which partly explains the observed inconsistency in the empirical literature. Implications for interpreting existing EJ research and conducting future EJ research are discussed.

Date: 2007
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (30)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640560601156433 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:50:y:2007:i:2:p:163-185

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJEP20

DOI: 10.1080/09640560601156433

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management is currently edited by Dr Neil Powe, Dr Ken Willis and George Bill Page

More articles in Journal of Environmental Planning and Management from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().