Changing the geographic unit of analysis can make racial siting disparities statistically vanish

Evidence

Researchers at the Social and Demographic Research Institute (SADRI) of the University of Massachusetts challenged the findings of the 1987 CRJ study. The SADRI study found that there was not a statistically significant pattern of racial or ethnic disparity in the distribution of commercial hazardous waste sites. Though the SADRI study analyzed data similar to those used in the recent CRJ study, its methodology was significantly different. For example, the SADRI study used census tracts from 1980 and 1990, instead of zip codes, as the geographic unit of analysis. The SADRI researchers also used data from only metropolitan or rural counties, not from the entire United States, as their comparison group (nonhost tracts), possibly understating the relationship among race, ethnicity, and siting choices. Moreover, the study looked only at African American and Latino populations and did not measure the proximity of other racial groups, such as Asians and Native Americans, to existing toxic waste sites. Hence, the researchers’ conclusions leave out a not-insignificant percentage of the people of color population in the United States and possibly understate racial and ethnic disparities. — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up, 300 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Facility siting laws evaluate each permit in isolation, enabling toxic clustering.; Failing to control for population density produces spurious no-disparity findings in waste-siting studies.; One nationwide study found no demographic shifts after waste facilities were sited. (+4 more)

Related

• Contradictory siting studies differed mainly over geographic unit and comparison scope (similarity 0.93)
• National studies already show enough racial disparity in toxic siting to demand causal investigation (similarity 0.84)
• Failing to control for population density produces spurious no-disparity findings in waste-siting studies. (similarity 0.83)
• Facility siting laws evaluate each permit in isolation, enabling toxic clustering. (similarity 0.81)
• Demographic change over time does not exonerate facility siting from racism (similarity 0.81)
• Toxic waste siting disparities trace to different eras for Black versus Latino neighborhoods (similarity 0.81)
• Market-dynamics explanations for siting disparities lack conclusive empirical support (similarity 0.80)
• Correlational studies cannot by themselves establish that environmental racism siting is causal (similarity 0.78)
• Distributional studies alone cannot explain the processes producing environmental racism. (similarity 0.78)
• Race is the strongest predictor of hazardous waste facility siting in the US (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Contradictory siting studies differed mainly over geographic unit and comparison scope #exemplifies (0.85) — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up, 300