Spatial disparity in the distribution of superfund sites in South Carolina: an ecological study.
Spatial disparity in the distribution of superfund sites in South Carolina: an ecological study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1476-069x-12-96
复制
发表时间：
2013-11-06
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Wilson S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Burwell-Naney K;Zhang H;Samantapudi A;Jiang C;Dalemarre L;Rice L;Williams E;Wilson S
根据美国环境保护署（EPA）的说法，超级基金是一项联邦政府计划，旨在清理不受控制的危险废物场地。南卡罗来纳州（SC）的26个地点已被列入国家优先事项清单（NPL），这对人类健康和环境具有严重影响。本研究的目的是评估在SC的超级基金网站的分布的空间差异。2000年美国人口普查区和块级数据被用来生成人口特征，其中包括种族/民族，社会经济地位（SES），教育，房屋所有权，并在1950年之前建成的家园。利用地理信息系统绘制了超级基金设施的地图，并根据上述社会人口变量绘制了地区图。空间方法，包括平均和中位数距离分析，缓冲区分析，和空间近似的特点负担的差距。进行回归分析，以评估超级基金设施的数量和人口特征之间的关系。空间一致性结果显示，29.5%的黑人生活在SC，55.9%生活在超级基金主机人口普查区。在在册种姓生活在贫困线以下的所有人口中（14.2%），57.2%位于超级基金所在的人口普查区。缓冲区分析结果（0.5英里，1.0英里，5.0英里，0.5公里，1.0公里和5.0公里）显示，白人的比例高于黑人托管超级基金设施。相反，黑人拥有超级基金的比例（30.2%）略高于那些没有拥有超级基金的人（28.8%），而他们的白色同行拥有更多的同等价值（分别为66.7%和67.8%）。简化模型中的回归分析（R2 = 0.038）仅解释了一小部分方差。此外，超级基金设施中第90百分位黑人的平均距离为0.48英里。在SC的超级基金设施在街区和人口普查区一级的分布中，存在着种族/族裔和社会经济地位人口构成水平不同的负担差异。
According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Superfund is a federal government program implemented to clean up uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Twenty-six sites in South Carolina (SC) have been included on the National Priorities List (NPL), which has serious human health and environmental implications. The purpose of this study was to assess spatial disparities in the distribution of Superfund sites in SC. The 2000 US census tract and block level data were used to generate population characteristics, which included race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), education, home ownership, and home built before 1950. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) were used to map Superfund facilities and develop choropleth maps based on the aforementioned sociodemographic variables. Spatial methods, including mean and median distance analysis, buffer analysis, and spatial approximation were employed to characterize burden disparities. Regression analysis was performed to assess the relationship between the number of Superfund facilities and population characteristics. Spatial coincidence results showed that of the 29.5% of Blacks living in SC, 55.9% live in Superfund host census tracts. Among all populations in SC living below poverty (14.2%), 57.2% were located in Superfund host census tracts. Buffer analyses results (0.5mi, 1.0mi, 5.0mi, 0.5km, 1.0km, and 5.0km) showed a higher percentage of Whites compared to Blacks hosting a Superfund facility. Conversely, a slightly higher percentage of Blacks hosted (30.2%) a Superfund facility than those not hosting (28.8%) while their White counterparts had more equivalent values (66.7% and 67.8%, respectively). Regression analyses in the reduced model (Adj. R2 = 0.038) only explained a small percentage of the variance. In addition, the mean distance for percent of Blacks in the 90th percentile for Superfund facilities was 0.48mi. Burden disparities exist in the distribution of Superfund facilities in SC at the block and census tract levels across varying levels of demographic composition for race/ethnicity and SES.