ASU Research E-Magazine: Price of Pollution

Can you put a price on the air you breathe?

Sure can. In fact, it’s already been done in Phoenix and many other large cities, according to ASU sociologists Bob Bolin, Ed Hackett, and Sharon Harlan. One way or another, residents are paying the price.

“Simply put, low-income families and people of color are much more likely to live in proximity to environmental hazards and industrial pollution sources than other people in the Phoenix metropolitan area,” Bolin says.

Bolin and Hackett worked with David Pijawka of ASU’s School of Planning and Landscape Architecture as part of an environmental risk group. They formed the group in association with the Central Arizona-Phoenix Long Term Ecological Research project to study interactions between people and the environment in Phoenix.

The researchers began by pinpointing the location of various types of environmental hazards in Phoenix, such as hazardous waste treatment and storage sites, and areas identified by the Environmental Protection Agency as being contaminated. They then mapped the location of these sites using Maricopa County census data. They wanted to determine whether there was a correlation between the location of these hazardous sites and the living areas that are home to members of specific races or social classes.

They found a distinct pattern. If residents can afford to live in wealthier neighborhoods, they essentially pay for access to less-polluted surroundings. Residents who can’t afford to live in more upscale areas pay the price of increased risk of exposure to environmentally hazardous fumes or liquid spills.

The ASU scientists took the first step in combining sociological and ecological research as part of the CAP-LTER project. The project is a long-term study of the interactions between metro Phoenix and its desert surroundings on many levels and in many disciplines.

Hackett and Bolin built on the success of their early findings. They joined sociologist Sharon Harlan and other ASU social scientists to learn more about how Phoenix residents relate to their desert environment. Together, they developed the Phoenix Area Social Survey (PASS).

They studied residents of eight Phoenix neighborhoods. Survey questions were designed to gain an understanding of residents’ conceptions of their environment, as well as their concerns regarding pollution, natural resources, and climate.

The neighborhoods were chosen to coincide with locations where CAP-LTER ecologists are already recording environmental data such as air quality and rainfall. As a result, the sociologists can compare residents’ views on their environment with field observations from the same neighborhoods.

Survey results revealed that Phoenix residents have very clear ideas about what they value in both their natural and human-built environment. However, their beliefs and behaviors don’t always match.

For example, the researchers found that the greatest environmental concern for Phoenix residents is the future water supply. But few respondents are concerned about the amount of water consumed in their own neighborhoods.

“People may perceive that the real problem of a water shortage will be caused by future population and economic growth in the metro area,” says Harlan. “We need to learn more about why people do not associate a possible future water shortage with residential water consumption in their own neighborhoods.”

Harlan continued her research with support from the National Science Foundation. The new project included scientists from ASU’s geology and geography departments. The team decided to focus on the Phoenix “heat island,” a common urban phenomenon, and a topic that required the expertise of each member.

“We live in a desert. It’s hot. Heat affects people’s health and well-being. We thought this would be a good thing to explore,” Harlan explains.

Harlan’s team included graduate students as well as climatologist Tony Brazel and geologist William Stefanov. They monitored air temperature, vegetation, elevation, and humidity in the same eight neighborhoods where the original survey was conducted. This allowed them to couple the sociological, demographic, and ecological data from the survey results with new geographic and climate data.

The results were interesting. The study revealed that surface temperature and vegetation levels correlated with ethnicity and income levels in the neighborhoods.

“Basically, we found that poorer people live in hotter places. To a large degree, that is because their neighborhoods have less vegetation,” says Harlan.

Harlan’s biocomplexity project continued the successful integration of social and ecological research that was started with the environmental risk group and PASS. The initial work had uncovered the social inequity of environmental risk. The survey work had collected and linked social and ecological data. Harlan’s work took a look at the interrelationships of social and environmental factors.

“The biocomplexity project is actually an integration of social class, ethnicity, elevation, land cover, human cover, temperature, and its consequences for human comfort,” Hackett explains.

The scientists combined sociological research with the CAP-LTER goals of understanding human/environment interactions in Phoenix. As a result, they uncovered patterns and trends that would not be found by using sociological or ecological research methods alone.

“I think it’s an incredibly useful kind of tool to bring together groups where you check your disciplinary differences at the door,” says Bolin. “The approach is: here is the problem. Now, what can we learn about it?”

All three of the sociologists agree on the importance of a sociological perspective to research of an environment heavily dominated by human influence, such as Phoenix. “So much of what happens to the environment depends on what people do,” Harlan adds. “You really need to understand basic sociological concepts to understand fully how the environment is changing and why.” —Tracy Johns