Skip to Main Content
  

LIBRARY

HON 499 Professor Moon's Library Instruction: A

ProQuest - FEMA and Flint and lead and water

BASICS INEQUALITY

PDF CiteCiteEmailPrintAll Options
Hide highlighting

Abstract

In light of 2014-2016 media coverage about the inadequate water and sanitation services for households in places like Flint and Detroit, Michigan and the Central Valley of California, this paper asks whether places with majority non-White residents in the United States disproportionately lack access to these most basic of services. Investigating this issue through the combined lenses of structural racism, environmental justice, and the human right to water and sanitation, we analyze U.S. Census American Community Survey household data at the county level. Our findings indicate strong White versus non-White racial effects at the national and county levels (R2 = 0.0462, P < 0.05). When the non-White population is broken down into racial categories, places with higher percentages of American Indians and Alaska Native households are significantly associated with lack of access to complete plumbing facilities. Lacking access to complete plumbing does correlate with lower educational attainment and higher percentages of unemployment, and less robustly, it also correlates positively with median household income. The implication is the existence of a pattern of structural environmental racism in terms of the practical accessibility of water and sanitation infrastructure. We suspect, however, that the U.S. Census, while considered the most comprehensive national data source on this issue right now, significantly undercounts those lacking access to water and sanitation services. We argue that better data will be essential in order to carry out a more in-depth analysis of water access conditions and to develop strategies that address this issue of growing importance.

Flint Water AND Criminal Justice

Politics and Public Health: The Flint Drinking Water Crisis.

Authors:
Gostin, Lawrence O.
Source:
Hastings Center Report. Jul2016, Vol. 46 Issue 4, p5-6. 1p.
Document Type:
Article
Subject Terms:
*DAMAGES (Law)
*LEAD
*PRACTICAL politics
*PUBLIC health
*RESPONSIBILITY
*WATER supply
*ENVIRONMENTAL exposure
Geographic Terms:
MICHIGAN
NAICS/Industry Codes:
327990 All other non-metallic mineral product manufacturing
416210 Metal service centres
327992 Ground or Treated Mineral and Earth Manufacturing
525120 Health and Welfare Funds
221310 Water Supply and Irrigation Systems
Abstract:
The Flint, Michigan, lead drinking water crisis is perhaps the most vivid current illustration of health inequalities in the United States. Since 2014, Flint citizens-among the poorest in America, mostly African American-had complained that their tap water was foul and discolored. But city, state, and federal officials took no heed. In March 2016, an independent task force found fault at every level of government and also highlighted what may amount to criminal negligence for workers who seemingly falsified water-quality results, allowing the people of Flint to continue to be exposed to water well above the federally allowed lead levels. It would have been possible to prevent lead seeping into the drinking water by treating the pipes with federally approved anticorrosives for around $100 per day. But today the cost of repairing the Flint water system is estimated at $1.5 billion, and fixing the ageing and lead-laden system across the United States would cost at least $1.3 trillion. How will Flint residents get justice and fair compensation for the wrongs caused by individual and systemic failures? And how will governments rebuild a water infrastructure that is causing and will continue to cause toxic conditions, particularly in economically marginalized cities and towns across America? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Flint Michigan Water Crisis AND federal

 

Citizen Science During the Flint, Michigan Federal Water Emergency: Ethical Dilemmas and Lessons Learned

Citizen Science: Theory and Practice. 2019;4(1) DOI 10.5334/cstp.154

 

Journal Homepage

Journal Title: Citizen Science: Theory and Practice

ISSN: 2057-4991 (Online)

Publisher: Ubiquity Press

Society/Institution: Citizen Science Association

LCC Subject Category: Science

Country of publisher: United Kingdom

Language of fulltext: English

Full-text formats available: PDF, XML

 

AUTHORS

Siddhartha Roy (Virginia Tech)
Marc Edwards (Virginia Tech)

EDITORIAL INFORMATION

Double blind peer review

Editorial Board

Instructions for authors

Time From Submission to Publication: 45 weeks

 

Abstract | Full Text

A citizen science collaboration between Flint residents, the Virginia Tech “Flint Water Study” team, and others helped to uncover the Flint Lead-in-Drinking Water Crisis and a community-wide outbreak of 'Legionella'. The resulting Federal Emergency declaration in January 2016 resulted in more than $600 million in relief funding, an acknowledged case of environmental injustice, and resignations/indictments of some public officials. But after responsible government entities apologized and attempted to make amends and help with the recovery, some “citizen scientists” began making public statements that were in direct conflict with public health messaging of scientific authorities. A general state of science anarchy resulted, which created further distrust and confusion. Some practices employed were consistent with a concept of “citizen engineering,” which aims to “undermine engineering [and science] expertise” in the name of “democratizing” science. “Citizen Engineers” view concepts of scientific rigor and objectivity as justification for abuse of power by authorities and scientists, and they embrace biases and conflicts of interest that scientists aspire to guard against. While there are ethical guidelines for professional scientists on research misconduct, no such framework exists for policing instances of unethical behavior by citizen scientists. Possible abuses of citizen science documented in Flint explored in this case study include: 1) collection of non-representative data that created unjustified fear among residents about the safety of water used for bathing and showering, 2) perceived financial conflicts of interest, and 3) falsification of data to obtain relief resources, support lawsuits, gain media attention, or support erroneous scientific conclusions. We also report the journey of an aspiring citizen scientist who openly acknowledged mistakes, made the “right” decision in relation to handling an ethical dilemma, and who was then publicly attacked for doing so. This experience highlights challenges to the practice of citizen science, especially during high profile emergency interventions and disasters involving environmental injustice.

Articles - EBSCO Computers & Applied Sciences Complete

ebook - Strategic Plan Model? What does the GAO say about FEMA?