The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Mapping environmental injustices: pitfalls and potential of geographic information systems in assessing environmental health and equity.
Open accessAbstract
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have been used increasingly to map instances of environmental injustice, the disproportionate exposure of certain populations to environmental hazards. Some of the technical and analytic difficulties of mapping environmental injustice are outlined in this article, along with suggestions for using GIS to better assess and predict environmental health and equity. I examine 13 GIS-based environmental equity studies conducted within the past decade and use a study of noxious land use locations in the Bronx, New York, to illustrate and evaluate the differences in two common methods of determining exposure extent and the characteristics of proximate populations. Unresolved issues in mapping environmental equity and health include lack of comprehensive hazards databases; the inadequacy of current exposure indices; the need to develop realistic methodologies for determining the geographic extent of exposure and the characteristics of the affected populations; and the paucity and insufficiency of health assessment data. GIS have great potential to help us understand the spatial relationship between pollution and health. Refinements in exposure indices; the use of dispersion modeling and advanced proximity analysis; the application of neighborhood-scale analysis; and the consideration of other factors such as zoning and planning policies will enable more conclusive findings. The environmental equity studies reviewed in this article found a disproportionate environmental burden based on race and/or income. It is critical now to demonstrate correspondence between environmental burdens and adverse health impacts--to show the disproportionate effects of pollution rather than just the disproportionate distribution of pollution sources.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Socioeconomic Disparities and Air Pollution Exposure: a Global Review
Hajat, A., Hsia, C., & O’Neill, M. S. (2015) · Current Environmental Health Reports · doi:10.1007/s40572-015-0069-5 · Cited by 1,097
Environmental Health Disparities: A Framework Integrating Psychosocial and Environmental Concepts
Gee, G. C., & Payne-Sturges, D. C. (2004) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.7074 · Cited by 821
COVID-19 and Inequity: a Comparative Spatial Analysis of New York City and Chicago Hot Spots
Maroko, A. R., Nash, D., & Pavilonis, B. T. (2020) · Journal of Urban Health · doi:10.1007/s11524-020-00468-0 · Cited by 242
Shokry, G., Connolly, J. J., & Anguelovski, I. (2020) · Urban Climate · doi:10.1016/j.uclim.2019.100539 · Cited by 227
Environmental Equity and Health: Understanding Complexity and Moving Forward
Northridge, M. E., Stover, G. N., Rosenthal, J. E., & Sherard, D. (2003) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.93.2.209 · Cited by 107
Metadata
- Authors
- Maantay, J.
- Venue
- Environmental Health Perspectives
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2002-04
- Volume
- 110
- Issue
- suppl 2
- Pages
- 161-171
- ISSN
- 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-9924
- OpenAlex
- W2024289340
- Cited by
- 311
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 42.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mapping environmental injustices: pitfalls and potential of geographic information systems in assessing environmental health and equity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1289/ehp.02110s2161
- The paper
- Maantay, J. (2002). Mapping environmental injustices: pitfalls and potential of geographic information systems in assessing environmental health and equity. Environmental Health Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.02110s2161
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.