Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
People of color and with lower socioeconomic status are more likely to live near pollution sources. We present a framework for assessing whether disparities in residential proximity to multiple environmental hazards are improving and illustrate the approach using CalEnviroScreen, a geographic screening tool used by the State of California to designate disproportionately burdened (‘disadvantaged’) communities. In this proof-of-concept, we derived a benchmarked composite index from a subset of four CalEnviroScreen indicators (traffic, cleanup sites, pesticide use, and toxic releases) and assess inequality with respect to disadvantaged community designation and race and ethnicity over time (2014–2021). The average absolute and relative gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged communities shrank over this period—signaling improvement—but grew among the most impacted communities (95th percentile). Disadvantaged communities were 51% more likely to experience better-than-average improvement in cumulative environmental burdens than non-disadvantaged communities. Gaps also shrank among tracts with high proportions of people of color relative to Whites, with the exception of Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders. Expanding our approach to encompass additional indicators could help policymakers prioritize investments in communities falling further behind and make greater progress towards health equity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cushing et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: