Gå til innholdScholarGate
BibliotekMitt bibliotekPultenReview StudioAssistent
Logg inn
Environmental Justice Spatial Analysis/Bevis
Metodebevisregister

Environmental Justice Spatial Analysis

Environmental justice spatial analysis tests whether environmentally hazardous facilities are located disproportionately near poor and minority communities by comparing the demographics of populations close to hazards with those farther away. The field grew out of Robert Bullard's foundational documentation in Dumping in Dixie that African American communities in the U.S. South systematically bore the burden of noxious land uses. A central methodological turning point came with Paul Mohai and Robin Saha's 2006 Demography article, which showed that the long-dominant 'unit-hazard coincidence' method, comparing only the host tract or zip code, badly understated disparities, and that distance-based methods reveal larger and more consistent inequities. The modern analysis therefore treats proximity explicitly, drawing buffers or distance bands around hazard sites and apportioning population within them. It then asks whether race and income predict who lives in the burdened zone, controlling for plausible confounders. The result is a spatially explicit test of the disparate-burden hypothesis at the heart of the environmental justice movement.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegister

Siteringer kopiert ordrett fra metodens kilderegister. Ingen påstandsnivåverifisering er underforstått fra dem.

Environmental Justice Spatial Analysis (Distance-Based Disparate Burden Assessment)
Taksonomisk metoderegister · process-pipeline / environmental-sociology
  • Mohai, P., & Saha, R. (2006). Reassessing Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Environmental Justice Research. Demography, 43(2), 383-399. · DOI 10.1353/dem.2006.0017
  • Bullard, R. D. (2000). Dumping in Dixie: Race, Class, and Environmental Quality (3rd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. · ISBN 9780813367927
Åpne full metode

Kuraterte påstander

Påstander lagret i bevishovedboken, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterte påstander ennå

Denne visningen finner ikke opp en påstandsvurdering når hovedboken ikke har noen.

Relaterte metoder

Generert fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinforslåtte relasjoner – ingen bevispåstand er underforstått.

Used in the same domainEJ Screening Index (EJScreen-Style)machine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyLand-Change Driver Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyParticipatory GISmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyToxic Release Inventory Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

2 registrerte siteringer, kopiert fra metodens kilderegister.

Handlinger

Åpne metodeside
ScholarGate

Et innholdsfokusert oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder — hva hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åpne data (CC-BY)

Oppdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søk i metoder…
  • Bla etter fagfelt
  • Fagfelt
  • Reise
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Referanse

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodikk
  • Filosofi

Arbeidsområde

  • Mitt bibliotek
  • Pulten
  • Chat

Selskap

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Oppføringene er sammenstilt fra publiserte kilder til referansebruk. Å kontrollere at informasjonen er korrekt og egnet for ditt eget bruk, er fremdeles ditt eget ansvar.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder
  • Personvern
  • Informasjonskapsler
  • Vilkår
  • Slett konto