In Jason Corburn’s book, Street Science: Community Knowledge and Environmental Health Justice, one of the examples used to explain his term street science is the West Harlem Environmental Action (WEACT). According to research compiled, the case of WEACT and its use of street science to address growing health concerns is one of the more famous examples demonstrating how street science can become empowering to the community. Furthermore, this case study exhibits broader implications that can arise from street science regarding policy changes. The area of West Harlem is adversely affected by environmental health justice concerns. The creation of WEACT was to establish an organization that would directly address community concerns, rather …show more content…
than strictly adhering to researchers. WEACT is an important example to show how street science can have a viable impact on communities facing environmental health justice issues. In addition, it establishes itself as a case where community members and professionals can collaborate to create “good” science and dialogue concerning the production of knowledge. WEACT became the successful case study that it is today through the creation of its own community organization and the co-production of knowledge that exists in a bottom up fashion, contrasting most research methodologies that only come from professionals. WEACT’s history begins in 1988 when members sued the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) over its plans to construct a 6th diesel bus depot in Northern Manhatta (weact.org). This battle was derived from the growing concern amongst citizens who had noticed the damaging health effects resulting from the MTA. Additionally, the group also sued the city over the poor operation of the North River Sewage Treatment Plant. “The lawsuit calls for more stringent odor control as well as improvements in the plant’s design and capacity, and compensation for injuries and property losses” (“West Harlem's Battle for Clean Air" 3 ). Resulting from the lawsuit was a settlement of $1.1 million the city agreed to pay WEACT. Vernice Miller stated his joy at the outcome of the settlement: “now we will have the health data to back up what we know to be true. People are not making up that they are sick. This community has been besieged by something that is not natural” (Bernstein 6). The settlement money came about from WEACT’s ability to conduct street science that could formally address their growing health concerns largely ignored by government. The primary way that WEACT conducted street science was with the formation of a community “risk map” that could displayed areas of the neighborhood where health concerns were the most prominent.
An extensive part of WEACT’s mission is to “promote actions that people can take in their own homes as well as addressing the larger policy issues of where industry is located and its effects on the health of neighborhood residents” (Carlson & Stroebel). In order to take these actions and help guarantee that policy makers were listening, the creation of the risk maps were vital. The risk map was able to present areas where “young people experienced foul odors, irritated throats, watery eyes, shortness of breath, and other self reported symptoms” (Corburn 55). The mission of this street science project was to safeguard the community’s health concerns, in addition to allowing further action to be implemented. However, the risk maps were not the only way that WEACT sought to address these …show more content…
issues. Moreover, along with the creation of the “risk maps” WEACT partnered with professionals at Columbia University to co-produce research that would become crucial in the lawsuit . “The Columbia University researchers collaborated with youth from WEACT on two studies that examined how air pollution from buses and trucks in West Harlem might be adversely affecting their health” (Corburn 55). This partnership aided WEACT’s ability to further create awareness about environmental health justice issues not only amongst their community members, but also with government agencies. “This research was presented to the EPA, resulting in policy changes to tighten air quality standards, as well as a 1.1 million dollar settlement with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection” (Kuznetsov 14). Through all of WEACT’s triumphs, it is clear that the use of street science had a large impact on its ability to get the attention of policymakers and professionals who did not live in the community. However, an analysis about how and why street science worked for WEACT should further be provided. There is no doubt that the creation of “risk maps”, the community’s engagement with the environmental health justice issues, and the lawsuit settlement demonstrates that something about this case study works.
So, one of the main question that can be asked is; what is is about WEACT and its engagement with street science that proved successful? As Corburn states, “street science fuses local and professional knowledge with the aim of achieving environmental health justice” (Corburn 4). The goal is not to just claim professional science as inherently bad, but to instead actively work towards “good” science that engages the community and components of social justice. This radically changes the dominant theory behind the production of knowledge that systematically prefers a top-down approach. WEACT and its collaboration with Columbia University demonstrates clearly Corburns argument advocating for co-produced research. Corburn states that “street science offers a way for environmental-health decisions to draw from the best science has to offer while upholding the democratic ideals of participation and justice” (Corburn 11). WEACT and the researchers at Columbia’s ability to effectively collaborate together was one of the most successful aspects of the community’s engagement with street science and Corburn’s
principles. In a study done in the Journal of Urban Health, the authors attempted to understand this partnership further by interviewing 17 Earth Crew (the youth who created the “risk maps”) and researchers at Columbia who worked on the project as well. It was noted in the study that “the genuine co-learning in WEACT’s partnership research was frequently pointed out in our interviews” (Minkler et al 105). This demonstrates exactly the vision that Corburn has in his book regarding the co-production framework. Further in the study, one interview with a researcher at Columbia provided insight into how academics view the experience with WEACT. One researcher noted that “input from community members caused him to rethink the placement of ambient monitors (a method used to collect data)” (Minkler et al 105). This address exactly what Corburn envisioned when discussing how community members and professionals can use joint fact-finding to create “good” science, rather than ill informed science. As Corburn states, “professionals must learn how to view their practice in a more open-ended way...that requires a special kind of interaction with community members” (Corburn 11). This statement is embodied by one of the researchers at Columbia when they said, “I think community people, because they are looking at it from a fresh perspective, will question the assumptions in a way that actually improves the science” (Minkler et al 105). By not shutting out WEACT, but instead willingly collaborating with the organization, Columbia was able to immensely aide WEACT mission to bring environmental health justice to their community through the use of street science. Street Science offers a distinctive perspective on the production of knowledge that engages community members who are disproportionately affected by environmental-health justice issues. Without doubt, it becomes essential that professionals exchange in a dialogue with community members to maintain their own research as something that could further benefit the community. The idea of street science is not to perpetuate dichotomous thinking by saying lay people are better off without engaging professionals. Rather, it is to demonstrate the co-productions model of developing knowledge and research as one that can benefit all, in addition to doing better science. The case of WEACT clearly demonstrates the importance of the co-production model Corburn presents in his book. This is one of the reasons WEACT was such a successful case. The democratization of knowledge production has the ability to create “good” science, along with addressing critical environmental-health justice issues that plague our nation.
Nydia Velazquez is a representative for New York’s Twelfth Congressional District, which includes parts of Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens. In her essay “In Search of Justice,” Velazquez describes several unjust situations that happened in her district. She points out that the residents of Greenpoint, which is the heart of her district, are among the poorest in the country. She argues that large corporations carelessly dump their waste next to poor minorities’ living areas and emphasizes the terrible air conditions in her district. Velazquez believes that minority communities are treated unfairly under the environmental law, which targets large corporations.
Concepts from various disciplines within health studies can be used to view a variety of environmental problems that impact health. Combined models of health can allow one to gain insight into the different aspects of these problems. This is beneficial as using solely one model will only give perspective to one view of a situation. However, using multiple models can allow one to establish a greater understanding of the problem which would be beneficial. The film, Fenceline: A Company Town Divided, is an example of this. In the town Norco, Louisiana, citizens were faced with air pollution that caused detrimental health effects. This film portrays the different perspectives of the environmental problems that are occurring within
This essay focuses upon evidence gathered from people who provide good examples of ‘making and remaking’ on City Road in relation to connections and disconnections. Evaluations are drawn from the relevant Open University reading and visual resources and the essay is revised following ‘TMA 01 feedback’ (TMA FORM PT3e: TMA No 01, 2016).
Being susceptible to health issues, can result from an interaction between the resources available to individuals and the built environment. Also, these negative health issues can be due to disadvantaged social status, leading to a plethora of ill effects, such as degraded neighborhoods, food deserts, and lack of community mobilization. The complex interactions of these factors over the course of time can create vulnerabilities in the
In his article entitled The "environmental racism" Hoax, white male, David Friedman explains his disbelief in the existence of environmental racism. He argues that the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to prevent environmental injustice make it too difficult to push business projects through in urban areas. Therefore business efforts, “shift operations to white, politically conservative, less-developed locations,” to avoid complications with EPA requirements (Friedman). Moving industrial facilities to predominantly white areas creates jobs and economic growth in these areas rather than in areas with larger colored populations. Therefore, it could be seen that the EPA’s efforts ironically counteract their purpose of protecting colored communities. This view attributes for lack of industrial plants in urban areas, but fails to consider the relationship between environmental horrors such as Hurricanes Katrina, Irma, and Jose, DAPL, and the Flint Water Crisis. Effort is not actively put into protecting communities of color in our country. Citizens fail to recognize the weight of this issue because our leaders themselves don’t prioritize
Shriver, Thomas, and Gary Webb. “Rethinking the Scope of Environmental Injustice: Perceptions of Health Hazards in Rural Native American Community Exposed to Carbon Black.” Rural Sociology 74.2 (2009): 270-292. EBSCO Host. Web. 12 December, 2009.
The environment and the health of the surrounding population go hand in hand. The Environmental Protection Agency takes on this ever so important mission of protecting them both. The mission statement of the EPA states, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Small Business Programs is to support the protection of human health and the environment by advocating and advancing the business, regulatory, and environmental compliance concerns of small and socio-economically disadvantaged businesses, and minority academic institutions (US Enviromental Protection Agency, 2010).” The impact of its mission can be defined clearly as it examines the impact of contamination in the air, the water, and the land on human health.
Conclusions and Recommendations The results for this initiative illustrate the power to change societal practices through the collaboration of individuals and organizations that hold the same advocacies.
Racism is commonly thought of as an act that is synonymous with violence; however, one common form of racism, environmental racism, often takes place without people being aware the events are happening before detrimental activities have been put into action. In Melissa Checker’s book Polluted Promises, she relates that Reverend Dr. Benjamin F. Chavis Jr. coined the term environmental racism while stating that there is “deliberate targeting of communities of color for toxic waste disposal and the siting of polluting industries” (Checker 14). This problem is important to discuss, as many groups of people around the United States continue to be impacted by these events every day. Such people include
For our group community assessment, we assessed the neighbourhood of Moss Park. Throughout our assessment at Moss Park, we noted many of the community’s characteristics including physical environment, resources available, strengths and weaknesses etc… Moss Park is a neighbourhood located in downtown Toronto, the area is mainly comprised of worn-out buildings and houses with a satisfactory number of resources including a public library, school, health care centers, pharmacies etc… During the assessment of this neighbourhood we noticed that the physical environment was contaminated with the presence of garbage on the streets and in residential areas. As we were walking through this area during our assessment, we noticed a strong smell of cigarette smoke in many areas on the streets and in some residential areas. We also observed many people smoking in the area which creates a harmful environment of second-hand smoke. Lastly, we noted th...
It wasn’t until a study called Toxic Waste and Race done by the Church of Christ in 1987 showed that the most significant factor is deciding a location of a hazardous waste facility was racial did the movement gain momentum. While there are many debate on what environmental justice is, most would say the first significant documentation of it was when the Principles of Environmental Justice was written, signed, and sent to DC to be reviewed in the 1990’s. Various community leaders from churches to council members to school teachers came together at the National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit and made a point in showing that the citizens are not happy with how their environment has been handled and the ideals that legislation has come to fruition under. Ideals such as fairness when making policy, responsible use of renewable resources, balanced relations with native americans, use of military force on peoples, and mitigation for victims domestically and abroad are only a few controversial topics they
This means freedom from pollution, and dumping sites, access to clean water, and air quality, and freedom from environmental hazards, such as chemical toxins, industrial pollution, solid waste disposal and noise. Studies have shown that the social distribution of pollution suggest that poor households with low income, minorities, and poor African Americans in the United States are most affected by the environmental quality issues, (1) and “concerns about the environmental inequality led to the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency for Environmental Justice in 1992.” (1) The EPA is responsible for distributing and regulating the risks. (2) Since environmental Justice concerns where people work, live and play, it is also important for these people to be included in the decision making process.
O’Faircheallaigh, C., 2010. Public participation and environmental impact assessment: purposes, implications, and lessons for public policy making. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30 (1),
I remember when I first thought about the power one person could have to create change. I was a teenager growing up in the South when I read Rachel Carson’s book “Silent Spring”. This beautifully written book is a powerful indictment of the widespread use of pesticides. Rachel Carson criticized the chemical companies for claiming that pesticides were safe despite mounting evidence to the contrary. And she criticized public officials who accepted the chemical industry’s claims.
...ffects on human health. These have high negative effects on low income areas, as a result of pollution, visual, oral and air, as well as high levels of overcrowding. The World Health Organisation predicts that in the next 30years most of the world’s population growth will occur in cities and towns of poor countries. This rapid, unplanned and unsustainable pattern of urbanisation, is creating cities into focal points for environmental and health hazards (World Medical Association, 2010).