| Literature DB >> 35742800 |
Hongbo Zhao1, Li Yue1, Zeting Jia1, Lingling Su1.
Abstract
Research on environmental pollution and public health has aroused increasing concern from international scholars; particularly, environmental hazards are among the important issues in China, focusing public attention on significant health risks. However, there are few studies concentrated on how perceived environmental hazards are characterized by spatial variation and on the impact of these risks on residents' health. Based on a large-scale survey of Zhengzhou City in 2020, we investigated how the self-rated health of residents and the environmental hazards perceived by them were spatially inequal at a fine (subdistrict) scale in Zhengzhou City, China, and examined the relationship among self-rated health, environmental hazards, and geographical context. The Getis-Ord Gi* method was applied to explore the spatially dependent contextual (neighborhood) effect on environmental health inequality, and the ordered multivariate logistic regression method was used to examine the correlative factors with environmental hazards, geographical context, and health inequality. The results reveal that self-rated health and environmental hazards were disproportionately distributed across the whole city and that these distributions showed certain spatial cluster characteristics. The hot spot clusters of self-rated health had favorable environmental quality where the hot spot clusters of environmental hazards were located and vice versa. In addition, health inequality was evident and was related to gender, income level, educational attainment, and housing area of residents, and the inequalities of environmental hazards existed with respect to income and housing area. Meanwhile, environmental risk inequalities associated with the social vulnerability of residents (the poor and those with low educational attainment) were obvious, with those residents experiencing a disproportionately high exposure to environmental hazards and reporting bad health conditions. The role of the geographical context (subdistrict location feature) also helps to explain the spatial distribution of health and environmental inequalities. Residents with better exposure to green coverage generally reported higher levels of self-rated health condition. In addition, the geographical location of the subdistrict also had a significant impact on the difference in residents' self-rated health status. The purpose of this study is to provide reference for policy makers to optimize the spatial pattern of urban public services and improve public health and environmental quality at a fine scale.Entities:
Keywords: Zhengzhou City; geographical context; perceived environmental hazard; self-rated health; spatial inequality
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35742800 PMCID: PMC9224377 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19127551
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1The location of Zhengzhou City.
The statistics of key sociodemographic variables.
| Variables | Variable Description and Proportion (%) |
|---|---|
| Age | 18–29 (26.52%); 30–39 (31.39%); 40–49 (23.82%); 50–59 (7.63%); ≥60 (10.65%) |
| Gender | Male (56.65%); Female (49.35%) |
| Marital status | Married (77.12%); Unmarried (21.94%); Others (0.94%) |
| Education | Primary (4.76%); Secondary (14.21%); Tertiary (78.58%); Postgraduate (2.45%) |
| Monthly income (RMB) | <1400 (0.05%); 1401–2000 (5.05%); 2001–3000 (24.6%); 3001–6000 (36.62%); ≥6000 (33.68%) |
| Residence status (hukou) | Local resident (80.17%); Migrant (19.83%) |
| Housing type | Commodity housing (64.29%); Rented housing (32.69%); Danwei housing (3.02%) |
Figure 2The method framework in this study.
Figure 3Proportion (%) of residents in self-rated health (a) and four perceived environmental hazard types (b).
Figure 4Proportion of residents reporting self-rated good health by four perceived environmental hazard types ((a) noise pollution, (b) air pollution, (c) landfill pollution, (d) water pollution).
Figure 5Spatial pattern of self-rated health (a) and four perceived environmental hazards (b–e) at the subdistrict (jiedao) level of Zhengzhou City.
Figure 6The cold–hot spot patterns of self-rated health (a) and four perceived environmental hazards (b–e) at the subdistrict (jiedao) level of Zhengzhou City.
Multivariate linear regression results of residents’ subjective health perception.
| Variable | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | t-Value | Estimate | t-Value | Estimate | t-Value | |
|
| ||||||
| Female | −0.12077 | −1.9774 ** | −0.13947 | −2.27109 ** | −0.15128 | −2.40575 *** |
|
| ||||||
| 30−39 | −0.0441 | −0.4179 | −0.08685 | −0.81673 | −0.12214 | −1.11503 |
| 40−49 | −0.08983 | −0.7652 | −0.06144 | −0.51945 | −0.06615 | −0.54683 |
| 50−59 | 0.02916 | 0.1954 | 0.00164 | 0.01087 | −0.04484 | −0.29049 |
| ≥60 | −0.0191 | −0.1319 | −0.03996 | −0.27367 | −0.06954 | −0.46445 |
|
| ||||||
| Secondary | −0.29171 | −1.7941 ** | −0.39079 | −2.38616 *** | −0.42781 | −2.56082 *** |
| Tertiary | −0.53459 | −3.4963 *** | −0.58486 | −3.7998 *** | −0.60226 | −3.81043 *** |
| Postgraduate | −0.91998 | −3.7491 *** | −0.93109 | −3.76829 *** | −0.87297 | −3.45236 *** |
|
| ||||||
| Unmarried | −0.12725 | −1.1775 | −0.18276 | −1.67121 ** | −0.20967 | −1.86258 ** |
| Others | 0.80207 | 2.4182 *** | 0.7871 | 2.3532 ** | 0.654995 | 1.93277 ** |
|
| ||||||
| Migrant | −0.11696 | −1.1261 | −0.09181 | −0.87303 | −0.14167 | −1.31027 * |
| 1401−2000 | −2.58694 | −2.2399 ** | −2.75676 | −2.34506 | −2.79142 | −2.34479 ** |
| 2001−3000 | −2.98865 | −2.5973 *** | −3.15074 | −2.6879 *** | −3.20708 | −2.69903 *** |
| 3001−6000 | −2.90663 | −2.5283 *** | −3.05599 | −2.60787 | −3.1501 | −2.65216 *** |
| >6000 | −2.78342 | −2.4211 *** | −2.90936 | −2.4825 *** | −3.01443 | −2.53742 *** |
| 1−3 km | −0.0443 | −0.6757 | −0.05878 | −0.89005 | −0.09188 | −1.34569 * |
| ≥3 km | −0.31986 | −2.2543 ** | −0.36723 | −2.55879 *** | −0.37193 | −2.4985 *** |
|
| ||||||
| Good | 0.64887 | 6.7276 *** | 0.33796 | 3.25761 *** | 0.357945 | 3.38118 *** |
| Fair | 1.22326 | 11.5627 *** | 0.78936 | 6.83316 *** | 0.790332 | 6.70318 *** |
| Bad | 1.41848 | 9.9129 *** | 0.93469 | 6.08199 *** | 0.903472 | 5.76069 *** |
| Very bad | 0.54758 | 1.3017 * | 0.29634 | 0.68471 | 0.378306 | 0.85676 |
|
| ||||||
| Rented housing | −0.09131 | −0.9317 | −0.11341 | −1.14072 | −0.11477 | −1.13111 |
| −0.0773 | −0.4006 | −0.1645 | −0.84956 | −0.22403 | −1.13063 | |
| Housing area ≥ 100 m2 | −0.51824 | −6.7257 *** | −0.51184 | −6.60108 *** | −0.50503 | −6.27832 *** |
|
| ||||||
| good | −0.09806 | −1.0205 | −0.16669 | −1.62373 * | −0.17909 | −1.69718 ** |
| Fair | 0.15536 | 1.5962 * | 0.03447 | 0.33777 | 0.006172 | 0.05892 |
| bad | 0.54859 | 4.8724 *** | 0.25674 | 2.0679 ** | 0.237911 | 1.8784 ** |
| Very bad | 0.61814 | 3.2046 *** | 0.35968 | 1.71195 ** | 0.324823 | 1.51901 * |
|
| ||||||
| Low | 0.34993 | 3.16219 *** | 0.36494 | 3.23853 *** | ||
| Fair | 0.56717 | 5.00739 *** | 0.571593 | 4.9426 *** | ||
| High | 0.29573 | 2.02868 ** | 0.321115 | 2.16455 ** | ||
| Very high | 0.45921 | 2.07983 ** | 0.564549 | 2.48986 *** | ||
|
| ||||||
| Low | 0.18769 | 1.65067 ** | 0.183207 | 1.57489 * | ||
| Fair | 0.31574 | 2.83984 *** | 0.306699 | 2.69744 *** | ||
| High | 0.49848 | 3.77843 *** | 0.444475 | 3.29695 *** | ||
| Very high | 0.52889 | 2.55582 *** | 0.515924 | 2.44589 *** | ||
|
| ||||||
| Low | 0.37653 | 3.27875 *** | 0.399906 | 3.40899 *** | ||
| Fair | 0.34572 | 3.02955 *** | 0.394031 | 3.37957 *** | ||
| High | 0.24951 | 1.94122 ** | 0.286432 | 2.18339 ** | ||
| Very high | 0.03808 | 0.19984 | 0.111245 | 0.57333 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Low | 0.24434 | 2.217 ** | 0.252614 | 2.24819 ** | ||
| Fair | 0.4766 | 4.21765 *** | 0.490912 | 4.27303 *** | ||
| High | 0.5428 | 4.06375 *** | 0.554227 | 4.07914 *** | ||
| Very high | 0.36328 | 1.70501 ** | 0.422682 | 1.94788 ** | ||
|
| ||||||
| Chengdonglu Subdistrict | 1.00996 | 2.75323 *** | ||||
| Huayuankou town | −0.9158 | −1.76298 ** | ||||
| Dongdajie Subdistrict | 0.828687 | 2.34175 ** | ||||
| Lvdongcun Subdistrict | 1.033971 | 2.47699 *** | ||||
| Longyuanlu Subdistrict | 1.183477 | 1.72045 * | ||||
| Erligang Subdistrict | 0.828864 | 2.15024 ** | ||||
Note: significance level: *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1.