Income disparities and risk: Geographical manifestations of extreme inequities in the United States.

We examined hazard and risk-related metrics of the highest- and lowest-income counties and municipalities in each U.S. state. Indicators of natural and anthropogenic hazards, health outcomes, location of locally unwanted land uses, food insecurity, and other metrics were used to measure social and environmental justice. As expected, the highest-income places have better health outcomes, access to assets that protect health, and high municipal ratings of place quality compared with their poorest counterparts. Yet, they also have higher natural hazard risks and are more likely to live near concentrations of anthropogenic hazards. That is, high-income places have a lot to lose. Although the poorest jurisdictions demonstrate cumulative disadvantages, those in rural areas are exposed to less dense motor vehicle traffic and other hazards and risks associated with urban life. Relationships between income and the geography of hazards and risks are not simple. Even the highest-income areas face challenges. We suggest improvements in databases and tools to increase the focus on and monitoring of the breadth of risks people face in all areas.

Stigma as a multispatial-scale process: Revisiting the worst US Superfund sites.

Areas immediately adjacent to 16 of the first US national priority (NPL) hazardous waste sites that also had pre-superfund emergency actions were examined to measure local stigma. Four decades after their NPL designation, I found marked variation in these areas' social, public health and environmental attributes. About one-third of these small areas fit the stereotype of stressed areas with environmental injustice challenges. Yet, another one-third of these sites have better measurable outcomes than a combination of their host states and counties. For example, they have elevated levels of broadband access and their local jurisdictions are classified as safe and attractive to families. I conclude that long-term stigma around a Superfund site was limited by US EPA actions, as well as by progressive state and local governments, and community groups, in other words, contributions from parties at multiple geographical scales.

Ports and Environmental Justice in the United States: An Exploratory Statistical Analysis.

A screening environmental justice analysis was conducted of 50 United States ports that manage more than 10 million tons of products. Using the U.S. EPA's EJSCREEN tool, the author examined seven demographic and 11 environmental metrics at distances of 2, 5, and 10 miles from the port centroids. The 2-mile zones were found to have higher values for 13 of the 18 environmental inequity indicators, including all three measures of air toxics, fine particles, proximity to hazardous waste sites, and facilities with risk management plans, as well as indicators of low socioeconomic status and minority populations. With ports expanding, the author discusses the need for maintaining and upgrading EPA's screening tool and considers that alternative futures for port neighborhoods depend upon the strength of their civic groups and elected officials, the role of their government port authorities, and civic values of their commercial users.

Advancing Risk-Informed Decision Making in Managing Defense Nuclear Waste in the United States: Opportunities and Challenges for Risk Analysis.

An omnibus spending bill in 2014 directed the Department of Energy to analyze how effectively Department of Energy (DOE) identifies, programs, and executes its plans to address public health and safety risks that remain as part of DOE's remaining environmental cleanup liabilities. A committee identified two dozen issues and associated recommendations for the DOE, other federal agencies, and the U.S. Congress to consider, as well as other stakeholders such as states and tribal nations. In regard to risk assessment, the committee described a risk review process that uses available data, expert experience, identifies major data gaps, permits input from key stakeholders, and creates an ordered set of risks based on what is known. Probabilistic risk assessments could be a follow-up from these risk reviews. In regard to risk management, the states, in particular, have become major drivers of how resources are driven. States use different laws, different priorities, and challenge DOE's policies in different ways. Land use decisions vary, technology choices are different, and other notable variations are apparent. The cost differences associated with these differences are marked. The net result is that resources do not necessarily go to the most prominent human health and safety risks, as seen from the national level.

Keeping surveys valid, reliable, and useful: a tutorial.

This tutorial focuses on how to produce reliable and generalizable data from random-digit-dialing (RDD) landline and cell phone surveys. The article notes that RDD response rates have declined and explores the impact of this pronounced decline. The tutorial addresses order, response mode, and many other biases, sample size, cooperation and response rates, weighting, and hybrid designs-all using examples from risk analysis to illustrate the key points. The article ends with a brief review of the advantages and disadvantages of major Internet and paper surveys tools, and how these can be molded and sometimes combined in repeated, longitudinal, and other designs to answer questions about risk preferences and perceptions.

Public support for policies to reduce risk after Hurricane Sandy.

A phone survey was conducted in New Jersey in 2013 four months after the second of two major devastating tropical storms (Sandy in 2012 and Irene in 2011). The objective was to estimate public support for restricting land uses in flood zones, requiring housing to be built to resist storm waters, and otherwise increasing mitigation and resilience. Respondents who supported these mitigation and resilience policies disproportionately were concerned about global climate change, trusted climate scientists and the federal government, and were willing to contribute to a redevelopment program through taxes, bonds, and fees. They also tended to have collectivist and egalitarian worldviews. Half of the respondents supported at least four of the seven risk-reducing policies. How their support translates into public policy remains to be seen. Lack of willingness to personally fund these policies is an obstacle.

The public's preparedness: self-reliance, flashbulb memories, and conservative values.

OBJECTIVES: We surveyed how many US residents engaged in 6 preparedness activities and measured the relationship between engagement and personal experience in hazard events, flashbulb memories of major events, self-reliance, and other indicators of a conservative philosophy. METHODS: We used random digit dialing for national landline (75%) and cell phone (25%) surveys of 1930 US residents from July 6, 2011, to September 9, 2011; 1080 of the sample lived near 6 US Department of Energy nuclear waste management facilities and 850 were a national random sample. RESULTS: The median respondent engaged in 3 of the 6 activities; those who disproportionately engaged in 4 or more had experienced a hazard event, had distressing and strong flashbulb memories of major hazard events, and had strong feelings about the need for greater self-reliance. The results for the national and US Department of Energy site-specific surveys were almost identical. CONCLUSIONS: A cadre of US residents are disproportionately engaged in disaster preparedness, and they typically have stronger negative memories of past disasters and tend to be self-reliant. How their efforts can or should be integrated into local preparedness efforts is unclear.