Accounting for Health Risk Inequality in Regulatory Impact Analysis: Barriers and Opportunities.
Accounting for Health Risk Inequality in Regulatory Impact Analysis: Barriers and Opportunities.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/risa.13714
复制
发表时间：
2021-04
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Levy JI
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Levy JI
人们越来越有兴趣在监管影响分析中考虑健康风险和福利方面的不平等，因为人们对福利的分配更感兴趣，也越来越关注不平等（定义为那些被认为不公正或不公平的不平等）和环境不公正（在这种情况下，指那些与种族/族裔和某些其他社会人口因素相关的健康风险不平等）。尽管关于这一主题的文献越来越多，但在实践中进展有限，而且缺乏量化限制了政策过程中对不平等的考虑。关于正式纳入不平等的最佳方法，何时应该使用这些方法，甚至在这种情况下量化不平等是否有意义，争议仍然存在。本文的目的是回顾关于将不平等的估计和关注纳入监管影响分析的方法的文献，特别是那些与环境正义考虑相关的方法，并考虑对这些方法的解释及其对决策的影响。以东北和中大西洋各州为减少运输部门的碳排放而开展的合作“运输和气候倡议”为例，描述了多种战略，可用于揭示健康风险不平等和不公平现象，在未决的政策决定中考虑这些战略，并评估它们对政策或工具选择的影响。在适当的背景下并承认公平的多维性，量化不平等指标可以对健康风险中的不平等和不平等提供有意义的见解。健康风险不平等可以在监管影响分析中进行有意义的量化，为环境司法评估和健康惠益公平分配的其他评价提供信息。
There has been increasing interest in accounting for inequality in health risks and benefits within regulatory impact analyses, both given more general interest in the distributions of benefits and growing concerns about inequity (defined as those inequalities deemed unjust or unfair) and environmental injustice (in this context, those health risk inequalities that are correlated with race/ethnicity and certain other sociodemographic factors). Although there has been growing literature on this topic, there has been limited progress in practice, and the lack of quantification limits consideration of inequality in the policy process. Controversy remains regarding the best approaches to formally incorporate inequality, when these approaches should be used, and even whether it makes sense to quantify inequality in this context. The objective of this article is to review the literature on approaches for incorporating estimates of, and concerns for, inequality into regulatory impact analyses, especially those where environmental justice considerations are relevant, and consider the interpretation of these approaches and the implications for decision-making. Using the case example of the Transportation and Climate Initiative, a collaboration among Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states to reduce carbon emissions from the transportation sector, multiple strategies are described that could be used to shed light on health risk inequality and inequity, consider them in pending policy decisions, and evaluate their implications for the policy or instrument choice. Given appropriate contextualization and acknowledgment of the multidimensionality of equity, quantitative inequality indicators can provide meaningful insight about both inequality and inequity in health risks. Health risk inequality can be meaningfully quantified in regulatory impact analyses, informing environmental justice assessments and other evaluations of the equitable distribution of health benefits.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5.4
作者：
Robinson, Lisa A.;Hammitt, James K.;Zeckhauser, Richard J.
通讯作者：
Zeckhauser, Richard J.
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Levy, Jonathan I.;Greco, Susan L.;Mukhi, Neha
通讯作者：
Mukhi, Neha
DOI：
10.3390/ijerph10094039
发表时间：
2013-08-30
影响因子：
--
作者：
Harper S;Ruder E;Roman HA;Geggel A;Nweke O;Payne-Sturges D;Levy JI
通讯作者：
Levy JI
影响因子：
2
作者：
Scammell, Madeleine Kangsen;Montague, Peter;Raffensperger, Carolyn
通讯作者：
Raffensperger, Carolyn
影响因子：
3
作者：
Cranor, Carl F.;Finkel, Adam M.
通讯作者：
Finkel, Adam M.