| Literature DB >> 32024171 |
Yoo Min Park1, Mei-Po Kwan2,3,4.
Abstract
This study investigates the effect of spatiotemporal distributions of racial groups on disparities in exposure to traffic-related air pollution by considering people's daily movement patterns. Due to human mobility, a residential neighborhood does not fully represent the true geographic context in which people experience racial segregation and unequal exposure to air pollution. Using travel-activity survey data containing individuals' activity locations and time spent at each location, this study measures segregation levels that an individual might experience during the daytime and nighttime, estimates personal exposure by integrating hourly pollution maps and the survey data, and examines the association between daytime/nighttime segregation and exposure levels. The proximity of each activity location to major roads is also evaluated to further examine the unequal exposure. The results reveal that people are more integrated for work in high-traffic areas, which contributes to similarly high levels of exposure for all racial groups during the daytime. However, white people benefit from living in suburbs/exurbs away from busy roads. The finding suggests that policies for building an extensive and equitable public transit system should be implemented together with the policies for residential mixes among racial groups to reduce everyone's exposure to traffic-related air pollution and achieve environmental justice.Entities:
Keywords: environmental health disparities; environmental justice; exposure to PM2.5; human mobility; multi-contextual segregation; neighborhood effect averaging problem; spatiotemporal methods; traffic-related air pollution; uncertain geographic context problem
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32024171 PMCID: PMC7037907 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17030908
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The study area (the Atlanta metropolitan area).
Figure 23D geovisualization of traffic-related particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations (R-LINE model output).
Racial differences in exposure to traffic-related PM2.5.
| Racial Groups | Difference of Means | |
|---|---|---|
| African-Americans–Whites | 0.1504 *** | <0.001 |
| Hispanics–Whites | 0.0563 | 0.2758 |
| Others–Whites | 0.1636 *** | <0.001 |
| Hispanics–African-Americans | −0.0941* | 0.0306 |
| Others–African-Americans | 0.0132 | 0.9907 |
| Others–Hispanics | 0.1073 | 0.1543 |
*** p ≤ 0.001; * p ≤ 0.05.
Descriptive statistics for dependent and independent variables.
| Whites | African-Americans | Hispanics | Others | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Mean | 1.18 | 1.33 | 1.24 | 1.35 |
| Median | 0.97 | 1.05 | 0.98 | 1.13 | |
| Max | 26.93 | 30.19 | 15.36 | 35.30 | |
| Min | 0.14 | 0.17 | 0.21 | 0.22 | |
| S.D. | 1.05 | 1.43 | 1.18 | 1.71 | |
|
| Mean | 0.53 | 0.57 | 0.56 | 0.54 |
| Median | 0.53 | 0.53 | 0.56 | 0.53 | |
| Max | 1.30 | 1.13 | 1.42 | 1.10 | |
| Min | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.17 | 0.19 | |
| S.D. | 0.14 | 0.20 | 0.16 | 0.15 | |
|
| Mean | 0.70 | 0.79 | 0.78 | 0.73 |
| Median | 0.67 | 0.77 | 0.72 | 0.69 | |
| Max | 1.77 | 1.41 | 1.49 | 1.39 | |
| Min | 0.24 | 0.18 | 0.31 | 0.32 | |
| S.D. | 0.17 | 0.22 | 0.20 | 0.18 | |
|
| Mean | 40.10 | 38.60 | 33.55 | 37.44 |
| Median | 44.00 | 41.00 | 36.00 | 41.00 | |
| Max | 93.00 | 87.00 | 87.00 | 87.00 | |
| Min | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| S.D. | 21.29 | 20.40 | 19.87 | 20.12 | |
|
| Mean | 0.53 | 0.60 | 0.49 | 0.50 |
|
| Mean | 0.10 | 0.28 | 0.23 | 0.15 |
|
| Mean | 0.18 | 0.30 | 0.21 | 0.18 |
|
| Mean | 0.27 | 0.27 | 0.40 | 0.28 |
|
| Mean | 0.30 | 0.40 | 0.27 | 0.22 |
Figure 3Diagnostic plots of multiple linear regression models.
Race-specific regression analysis results.
| Variables | Whites | African-Americans | Hispanics | Others |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main independent variables | ||||
| log(daytime segregation) | −1.836 *** | −0.823 *** | −1.484 *** | −1.273 *** |
| log(nighttime segregation) | −0.338 *** | 0.040 | 0.113 | −0.272 |
| Control variables | ||||
| Age | −0.000 | 0.000 *** | −0.000 | −0.000 |
| Gender (male:0; female:1) | −0.030 *** | 0.018 | −0.065 * | −0.006 |
| Income dummy 1 | −0.168 *** | 0.063 ** | 0.215 *** | 0.194 ** |
| Income dummy 2 | −0.082 *** | 0.053 * | −0.058 | −0.077 |
| Education dummy 1 | −0.212 *** | −0.281 *** | −0.151 *** | −0.106 * |
| Education dummy 2 | −0.180 *** | −0.017 | 0.094 * | −0.223 *** |
*** p ≤ 0.001; ** p ≤ 0.01; * p ≤ 0.05.
Figure 4Diagnostic plots of multiple linear regression models with log-transformed variables.
Figure 5Two hundred-meter buffers around major roads (Note: Individual activity locations are not visualized together on this map to ensure data confidentiality).
The percentage (%) of the near-road population at different times of day (by race).
| Race | The Percentage (%) of the Near-Road Population (Within 200 Meters from Major Roads) at Different Times of Day | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3–6 a.m. | 6–9 a.m. | 9 a.m.–12 p.m. | 12–3 p.m. | 3–6 p.m. | 6–9 p.m. | 9 p.m.–3 a.m. | |
| Whites | 4.6 | 10.5 | 16.2 | 17.1 | 13.7 | 10.2 | 6.4 |
| African-Americans | 9.7 | 17.6 | 23.1 | 23.7 | 22.1 | 16.1 | 12.2 |
| Hispanics | 6.6 | 10.3 | 15.9 | 17.0 | 14.2 | 11.5 | 7.6 |
| Otherss | 7.6 | 15.0 | 18.8 | 18.2 | 19.8 | 15.4 | 9.9 |