Saturday, March 23, 2024

Environmental Risk Transition: Communities with Different Socio-Economic Capabilities Face Different Environmental Risks and Those Risks Show Characteristic Changes with Development and Economic Growth in Societies


     Wikipedia via the WHO and other researchers like Kirk R. Smith, defines environmental risk transition as “the process by which traditional communities with associated environmental health issues become more economically developed and experience new health issues. In traditional or economically undeveloped regions, humans often suffer and die from infectious diseases or of malnutrition due to poor food, water, and air quality. As economic development occurs, these environmental issues are reduced or solved, and others begin to arise. There is a shift in the character of these environmental changes, and as a result, a shift in causes of death and disease.”

 

Risk Transition Frameworks

     There are several risk transition frameworks. The earliest to be used is the demographic transition which was used in the 1940’s. The epidemiological transition framework was utilized beginning in 1970. According to Wikipedia: “In 1990, environmental health researcher Kirk R. Smith at the University of California, Berkeley proposed the "risk transition" framework in relation to the established demographic and epidemiological transition frameworks. This theory was based on the concept that there must be a shift in risk factors leading up to a shift in causes of death and disease. In efforts to prevent, rather than respond to diseases, the risk transition was further studied and quantified. Figure 1 shows the relationship between risk, epidemiological, and demographic transition, in which risk factors change to affect patterns of disease and health, which in turn affects the demographic. However, a shift in population also impacts the risk factors, and so these three frameworks all show significant impact on one another.”




Source of above graphs: Wikipedia



     I first came across the idea of environmental protection as a higher-order public good when I read Nordhaus and Shellenberger’s 2007 book Breakthrough in the early 2010s. There, they presented environmental protection as a higher-level need on Maslow’s pyramid or hierarchy of needs. Survival-level needs lower on the pyramid are prioritized by people with very little discretionary cash. As we have seen, clean energy choices are more available to those with discretionary cash. Things like tax credits for things like rooftop solar and EVs that can be redeemed at tax time are taken advantage of by those with the financial means to do so. Thus, those with wealth have been able to take advantage of most of the clean energy incentives for citizens. That means it was and is a benefit that favors the wealthy much more than the poor. However, some of the newer incentives such as those for new and used EVs can be applied immediately to downpayments which makes those incentives more available to those of lesser economic means.  

     Wealth is an enabler of environmental protection. When our lower needs are met, we can approach higher orders of utilitarian goods such as environmental protection. Environmental protection is also viewed by many as a duty. One might fulfill that duty by being optimally educated, and understanding the issues and the science behind them.

 

     Another way environmental risk transition has been described is as follows:

•       This term characterizes changes in environmental risks that happen as a consequence of economic development in the less developed regions of the world.

•       Before transition occurs: poor food, air, and water quality 

 

     The environmental risk transition precedes the epidemiologic and demographic transitions. This means that environmental risk precedes epidemiologic and demographic risks since it is much higher in the form of the more dangerous traditional risks vs. modern risks. Traditional risks are more oriented to survival than modern risks. The graphs show a trend of traditional risks transitioning downward while modern risks begin to rise. The areas of the graphs where the two risk types converge are known as risk overlap. This is where risks transition into new forms: risk genesis. This is also where risks can be transferred when attempts to control one type of risk can increase risks of other types. This is known as risk transfer.  Here, risk synergism can also occur where one type of risk changes sensitivity to other risks. The graphs below are form a power point presentation I found at a Health Dept. I work for. I am not sure of the origin. 








     

     Wealth helps people to better mitigate natural environmental hazards such as contagious infections and parasites, dust, dampness, woodsmoke, pollen, and other airborne hazards, injuries from falls, fires, and animals, and heat, cold, rain, snow, wind, natural disasters, and other adverse conditions. Once these natural hazards are reduced those societies can focus more on higher-order public goods such as environmental protection from anthropogenic hazards like pollution from power plants and factories, greenhouse gas emissions, sanitation, remediation of contamination, and better prevention and reduction of air, water, and soil pollution.

 

Environmental Risk Transition Theory and Urban Health Inequities

 

     A study published in Social Science and Medicine in May 2021 titled Adapting the environmental risk transition theory for urban health inequities: An observational study examining complex environmental riskscapes in seven neighborhoods in Global North cities sought to “understand how environmental injustice, urban renewal and green gentrification could inform the understanding of epidemiologic risk transitions.” The graph below summarizes changing environmental health exposures among affected urban populations.




 

     Much of the study’s data was provided through interviews with affected residents, which is valid but such methods can be strongly biased due to the interviewees feeling cheated by their exposures:

 

Respondents reported renewed, complexified and overlapping exposures leading to poor mental and physical health and to new patterns of health inequity. Our findings point to the need for theories of environmental and epidemiologic risk transitions to incorporate analysis of trends 1) on a city-scale, acknowledging that segregation and patterns of environmental injustice have created unequal conditions within cities and 2) over a shorter and more recent time period, taking into account worsening patterns of social inequity in cities.”

 

     The paper makes a recommendation to zoom in with such studies to smaller and more specific populations over shorter time periods. The authors suggest that environmental risk theory and epidemiological risk theory miss some of the important aspects of environmental health, in particular the higher environmental exposures of some populations. I do object to the term environmental racism. While there was no doubt such activity in the past, especially in regard to environmental justice communities being over exposed to certain risks and pollutants, I think there is very little evidence of that happening in modern times. I still think nearly all of these environmental justice communities are legacy communities, exposed due to past actions that have been largely corrected. There may be a few cases here and there, but it is mostly not an issue these days.   

 

Our results have important implications for epidemiologic theory and methods. We find that studying epidemiologic risk transitions on a finer geographical scale and over shorter timeframes than traditional theories linking risk transitions to larger-scale development illuminates important nuances to identifying risks that contribute to socio-spatial health inequity in cities. Theories of epidemiologic transition have described the evolution of causes of morbidity and mortality as populations move through phases of development, often emphasizing the contribution of riskscapes in urban settings as exposures are modified via urbanization. However, the epidemiologic and environmental risk transition frameworks fail to identify more finite patterns resulting from exposure to persistent, transitional, new, and emerging environmental risks which are inequitably distributed within cities inequalities due to the ongoing impact of environmental racism (Friel et al., 2011). Failing to account for the resulting overlapping and synergistic risk factors, as often happens using a traditional epidemiologic approach, may lead to an underestimation of a population's true burden of exposure and to the inability of cities to address historic and new health injustices.”

 

 

Environmental Kusnets Curves

     In the 1950s and 1960s economist Simon Kusnets developed a hypothesis that stated that “as an economy develops, market forces first increase and then decrease economic inequality.”  The original Kusnets Curve shown below, developed around 1960, was concerned with inequity and increasing wealth. It has been strongly criticized and many say invalidated due to the fact that inequality has increased in many societies since 1960 even though it had dropped through the first half of the 20th century. However, Kusnets curves such as the environmental Kusnets curves that show pollution or environmental impact vs. wealth are still considered by many to be valid models.

 

 













     According to Majeti Narasimha Vara Prasad in the 2024 book, Bioremediation and Bioeconomy:

 

     “The Environmental Kuznets curve suggests that economic development initially causes deterioration in the environment. Later due to economic growth, society begins to improve the relationship with the environment, and environmental degradation reduces. Thus, the economic growth is good for the environment. Nevertheless, critics are of the view that there is no guarantee that the economic growth will lead to an improved environment—in fact, the opposite is often the case. At the least, it requires a very targeted policy and attitudes to make sure that economic growth is compatible with an improving environment.”

 

 

     Environmental Kusnets curves seem to be generally valid models for some pollutants, some ecological impacts, carbon footprints, and waste products such as sewage. Decoupling of these things from economic growth is confirmed, which is part of the curve trajectory pattern. We are close to peak emissions, peak pollution, and peak other waste products. Wealth is a huge factor in these successes. So too is technological improvement, which also tracks well with wealth.






     A January 2024 paper in Nature: Humanities and Social Sciences Communications by Qiang Wang, Xiaowei Wang, Rongrong Li and Xueting Jiang, titled Reinvestigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) of carbon emissions and ecological footprint in 147 countries: a matter of trade protectionism, aimed to validate the EKC hypothesis, with success when the variables of economic growth, environmental degradation/improvement, and trade protectionism are compared statistically and graphically.

     From the study’s conclusion:

 

This study conducted a comprehensive investigation into the intricate relationship between economic growth, trade protectionism, and environmental indicators across 147 countries, segmented into four income groups. The utilization of the Pedroni cointegration test further validated the existence of stable long-term correlations between carbon emissions, ecological footprint, and other variables, establishing the groundwork for nuanced regression analyses. Notably, the study pioneered the exploration of threshold effects, unveiling non-linear relationships between trade, economic growth, and environmental outcomes across income groups. The elucidation of threshold models revealed intriguing insights, showcasing varying impacts of trade on economic growth, carbon emissions, and ecological footprints. Particularly noteworthy were the distinct thresholds identified across income groups, delineating changes in the relationships between trade, economic growth, and environmental impacts. These findings underscored the nuanced nature of economic development’s impact on environmental degradation, supporting theories such as the EKC within specific income brackets while uncovering divergences in others.”

 

 



 

Environmental Risk Assessment, Risk Management, Risk Perception, Risk Education and Risk Awareness

 

     The nexus of humans and risk is multifaceted and sometimes counterintuitive. There is often a mismatch between real risk and perceived risk. Both human psychology and neurobiology are at play in our interfacing with risk. Danger invites fight-flight-freeze reactions at the amygdala level in our pre-logic emotional circuit. The mismatch is known as the risk gap (between real and perceived risk). Risk assessment is important as a necessary early step that precedes and supports risk management. There are many factors that influence human risk perception including media, media trends, news events, past events, and the different types of risks. Some risks are misperceived due simply to lack of knowledge about them. In these cases, the risk gap is simply a knowledge gap. A recent study about PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), also known as forever chemicals, found that 76% of people surveyed by Texas Water Resources Institute knew nothing about PFAS chemicals. 41.5% of respondents had not heard of them and 31.6% of respondents had heard of them but were unaware of the risks. 11.5% of respondents were aware of PFAS contamination. 97.4% of respondents did not believe their own drinking water had been affected. For several years now I have been hearing about PFAS chemicals as emerging contaminants in environmental circles. The results of the survey are an example of risk awareness, in this case lack of awareness about the risks, which possibly include cancer and reproductive problems. Research has confirmed that many people have been exposed to PFAS chemicals. Risk education can help to increase risk awareness. Risk misperceptions can lead to focusing resources on the wrong variables, ones that don’t best help to solve problems.

 

References:


Environmental Risk Transition. Wikipedia. Environmental risk transition - Wikipedia

Adapting the environmental risk transition theory for urban health inequities: An observational study examining complex environmental riskscapes in seven neighborhoods in Global North cities. Helen V.S. Cole, Isabelle Anguelovski, James J.T. Connolly, Melissa García-Lamarca, Carmen Perez-del-Pulgar, Galia Shokry, and Triguero-Mas. Social Science & Medicine. Volume 277, May 2021, 113907. Adapting the environmental risk transition theory for urban health inequities: An observational study examining complex environmental riskscapes in seven neighborhoods in Global North cities - ScienceDirect

Bioremediation and Bioeconomy: A Circular Economy Approach. Book • Second Edition • 2023. Bioremediation and Bioeconomy | ScienceDirect

Reinvestigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) of carbon emissions and ecological footprint in 147 countries: a matter of trade protectionism. Qiang Wang, Xiaowei Wang, Rongrong Li & Xueting Jiang. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume 11, Article number: 160 (2024) January 24, 2024. Reinvestigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) of carbon emissions and ecological footprint in 147 countries: a matter of trade protectionism | Humanities and Social Sciences Communications (nature.com)

The Environmental Risk Transition. Power Point Presentation. (unknown origin)

Kusnets curve. Wikipedia. Kuznets curve - Wikipedia

Researchers raise concerns after surveying Americans about common risks: ‘A significant knowledge gap’. Laurelle Stelle. The Cool Down. March 17, 2024. Researchers raise concerns after surveying Americans about common risks: ‘A significant knowledge gap’ (msn.com)



No comments:

Post a Comment

     The SCORE Consortium is a group of U.S. businesses involved in the domestic extraction of critical minerals and the development of su...

Index of Posts (Linked)