美国多个州对集中动物饲养操作(cafo)和其他动物饲养操作的暴露差异。

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Ji-Young Son, Brandon M Lewis, Michelle L Bell
{"title":"美国多个州对集中动物饲养操作(cafo)和其他动物饲养操作的暴露差异。","authors":"Ji-Young Son, Brandon M Lewis, Michelle L Bell","doi":"10.1038/s41370-025-00783-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Animal feeding operations (AFOs), including concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), pose significant environmental degradation and health risks. These facilities are often disproportionately located in disadvantaged communities, however, findings are inconsistent.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We investigated disparities in AFO/CAFO exposure across seven US states, focusing on variables related to environmental justice (EJ) and at-risk populations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We linked AFO/CAFO data from seven states (Iowa, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin) to ZIP code-level census variables. We assessed exposure by calculating area-weighted number of AFO/CAFO within 15 km buffers and categorized ZIP codes into no, low, medium, and high exposure groups. Our analysis compared the spatial distributions of AFO/CAFO exposure and variables related to EJ and at-risk populations by exposure intensity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found differences in the distributions of AFO/CAFO exposure and variables related to EJ and at-risk populations among states. In some states (e.g., North Carolina, Pennsylvania), AFOs/CAFOs were densely clustered in specific areas, while in others (e.g., Iowa, Wisconsin), they were more evenly distributed. We found disproportionate exposure to AFO/CAFO in disadvantaged communities such as communities with high percentages of racial/ethnic minority persons and low socioeconomic status in some states, whereas other states showed different patterns. Trends varied by state, with some showing increasing Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic populations with higher exposure (e.g., North Carolina), while others showed opposite trends (e.g., Pennsylvania). Education, poverty, and income levels also varied, with some states (e.g., North Carolina, South Carolina) showing higher poverty rates, lower education level, and lower incomes in higher exposure groups and other states showing reverse trends (e.g., Wisconsin).</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>This study investigated disparities in AFO/CAFO exposure across seven US states. We applied an advanced exposure metric and considered multiple variables to capture diverse aspects of environmental injustice and disadvantaged communities. Our findings across multiple states provide valuable insights that can inform policy development and help mitigate exposure disparities across various populations and locations.</p>","PeriodicalId":15684,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12413751/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disparities in exposure to concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and other animal feeding operations across multiple states in USA.\",\"authors\":\"Ji-Young Son, Brandon M Lewis, Michelle L Bell\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41370-025-00783-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Animal feeding operations (AFOs), including concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), pose significant environmental degradation and health risks. These facilities are often disproportionately located in disadvantaged communities, however, findings are inconsistent.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We investigated disparities in AFO/CAFO exposure across seven US states, focusing on variables related to environmental justice (EJ) and at-risk populations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We linked AFO/CAFO data from seven states (Iowa, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin) to ZIP code-level census variables. We assessed exposure by calculating area-weighted number of AFO/CAFO within 15 km buffers and categorized ZIP codes into no, low, medium, and high exposure groups. Our analysis compared the spatial distributions of AFO/CAFO exposure and variables related to EJ and at-risk populations by exposure intensity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found differences in the distributions of AFO/CAFO exposure and variables related to EJ and at-risk populations among states. In some states (e.g., North Carolina, Pennsylvania), AFOs/CAFOs were densely clustered in specific areas, while in others (e.g., Iowa, Wisconsin), they were more evenly distributed. We found disproportionate exposure to AFO/CAFO in disadvantaged communities such as communities with high percentages of racial/ethnic minority persons and low socioeconomic status in some states, whereas other states showed different patterns. Trends varied by state, with some showing increasing Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic populations with higher exposure (e.g., North Carolina), while others showed opposite trends (e.g., Pennsylvania). Education, poverty, and income levels also varied, with some states (e.g., North Carolina, South Carolina) showing higher poverty rates, lower education level, and lower incomes in higher exposure groups and other states showing reverse trends (e.g., Wisconsin).</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>This study investigated disparities in AFO/CAFO exposure across seven US states. We applied an advanced exposure metric and considered multiple variables to capture diverse aspects of environmental injustice and disadvantaged communities. Our findings across multiple states provide valuable insights that can inform policy development and help mitigate exposure disparities across various populations and locations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12413751/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-025-00783-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-025-00783-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:动物饲养操作(afo),包括集中动物饲养操作(cafo),造成严重的环境退化和健康风险。然而,这些设施往往不成比例地位于弱势社区,调查结果并不一致。目的:我们调查了美国七个州AFO/CAFO暴露的差异,重点关注与环境正义(EJ)和高危人群相关的变量。方法:我们将七个州(爱荷华州、北卡罗来纳州、宾夕法尼亚州、南卡罗来纳州、德克萨斯州、弗吉尼亚州和威斯康星州)的AFO/CAFO数据与邮政编码级人口普查变量联系起来。我们通过计算15公里缓冲区内AFO/CAFO的面积加权数量来评估暴露程度,并将邮政编码分为无、低、中、高暴露组。我们的分析比较了AFO/CAFO暴露的空间分布以及暴露强度与EJ和高危人群相关的变量。结果:我们发现AFO/CAFO暴露的分布以及与EJ和高危人群相关的变量在各州之间存在差异。在一些州(如北卡罗来纳州、宾夕法尼亚州),afo / cafo密集地聚集在特定区域,而在其他州(如爱荷华州、威斯康星州),它们的分布更为均匀。我们发现,在一些州,弱势社区(如种族/少数民族比例高、社会经济地位低的社区)的AFO/CAFO暴露率不成比例,而其他州则表现出不同的模式。趋势因州而异,有些州显示非西班牙裔黑人和西班牙裔人口增加,暴露率较高(如北卡罗来纳州),而其他州则显示相反的趋势(如宾夕法尼亚州)。教育、贫困和收入水平也各不相同,一些州(如北卡罗来纳、南卡罗莱纳)显示出较高的贫困率、较低的教育水平和较高暴露人群的较低收入,而其他州则呈现相反的趋势(如威斯康星州)。影响:本研究调查了美国七个州AFO/CAFO暴露的差异。我们采用了一种先进的暴露度量,并考虑了多个变量来捕捉环境不公正和弱势社区的不同方面。我们在多个州的研究结果提供了有价值的见解,可以为政策制定提供信息,并有助于减轻不同人群和地点之间的暴露差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Disparities in exposure to concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and other animal feeding operations across multiple states in USA.

Background: Animal feeding operations (AFOs), including concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), pose significant environmental degradation and health risks. These facilities are often disproportionately located in disadvantaged communities, however, findings are inconsistent.

Objective: We investigated disparities in AFO/CAFO exposure across seven US states, focusing on variables related to environmental justice (EJ) and at-risk populations.

Methods: We linked AFO/CAFO data from seven states (Iowa, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin) to ZIP code-level census variables. We assessed exposure by calculating area-weighted number of AFO/CAFO within 15 km buffers and categorized ZIP codes into no, low, medium, and high exposure groups. Our analysis compared the spatial distributions of AFO/CAFO exposure and variables related to EJ and at-risk populations by exposure intensity.

Results: We found differences in the distributions of AFO/CAFO exposure and variables related to EJ and at-risk populations among states. In some states (e.g., North Carolina, Pennsylvania), AFOs/CAFOs were densely clustered in specific areas, while in others (e.g., Iowa, Wisconsin), they were more evenly distributed. We found disproportionate exposure to AFO/CAFO in disadvantaged communities such as communities with high percentages of racial/ethnic minority persons and low socioeconomic status in some states, whereas other states showed different patterns. Trends varied by state, with some showing increasing Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic populations with higher exposure (e.g., North Carolina), while others showed opposite trends (e.g., Pennsylvania). Education, poverty, and income levels also varied, with some states (e.g., North Carolina, South Carolina) showing higher poverty rates, lower education level, and lower incomes in higher exposure groups and other states showing reverse trends (e.g., Wisconsin).

Impact: This study investigated disparities in AFO/CAFO exposure across seven US states. We applied an advanced exposure metric and considered multiple variables to capture diverse aspects of environmental injustice and disadvantaged communities. Our findings across multiple states provide valuable insights that can inform policy development and help mitigate exposure disparities across various populations and locations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
93
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (JESEE) aims to be the premier and authoritative source of information on advances in exposure science for professionals in a wide range of environmental and public health disciplines. JESEE publishes original peer-reviewed research presenting significant advances in exposure science and exposure analysis, including development and application of the latest technologies for measuring exposures, and innovative computational approaches for translating novel data streams to characterize and predict exposures. The types of papers published in the research section of JESEE are original research articles, translation studies, and correspondence. Reported results should further understanding of the relationship between environmental exposure and human health, describe evaluated novel exposure science tools, or demonstrate potential of exposure science to enable decisions and actions that promote and protect human health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信