Toxic Cities Essay Research Paper Executive Summary

Toxic Cities Essay, Research Paper

Executive Summary:

I am evaluating solutions to reduce the proliferation of chemical and radioactive industrial carcinogens that threaten human health nationally and globally. I am specifically concerned with the toxic health effects on minority and low-income communities. After critiquing several alternatives, I can recommend methods to find reparations for suffering resulting from severe medical problems.

More than half of the nation s 26 million African Americans and more than a third of its Latinos live in neighborhoods with at least one uncontrolled toxic waste site. People of color, immigrants, and low-income workers disproportionately suffer from toxic emissions because polluting industrial facilities are intentionally placed in minority neighborhoods and residential areas for minorities are built adjacent to industrial facilities. This causes residents to be unnecessarily exposed to industrial chemicals, nuclear radiation, and dioxins that cause cancer, reproductive and developmental disorders, and immune system problems.

Three solutions: increased community awareness and activism, increased government regulation of toxic sites, and housing redevelopment, are evaluated in respect to criterions (equality, efficiency, political feasibility, legality, robustness) in the decision making process.

After negotiating the tradeoffs of money, time, better health status, justice, and equality, I feel that empowering community members to work with public health officials will help to ensure a long lasting relationship built on trust and cooperation. Once these ties are formed, more permanent plans, such as relocation and redevelopment can be discussed and possibly implemented. Other plans, such as monetary reparations can be discussed as well. These solutions may be difficult to implement, but if successful, they will benefit the health and economic states of millions of residents by preventing numerous diseases and unnecessary suffering.

I. INTRODUCTION

I am evaluating solutions to reduce the proliferation of chemical and radioactive industrial carcinogens that threaten human health nationally and globally. I am specifically concerned with the toxic health effects on minority and low-income communities. After critiquing several alternatives, I can recommend methods to find reparations for suffering resulting from severe medical problems.

II. BACKGROUND

More than half of the nation s 26 million African Americans and more than a third of its Latinos live in neighborhoods with at least one uncontrolled toxic waste site. People of color, immigrants, and low-income workers disproportionately suffer from toxic emissions because polluting industrial facilities are intentionally placed in minority neighborhoods and residential areas for minorities are built adjacent to industrial facilities. This causes residents to be unnecessarily exposed to industrial chemicals, nuclear radiation, and dioxins that cause cancer, reproductive and developmental disorders, and immune system problems.

III. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES

Three solutions: increased community awareness and activism, increased government regulation of toxic sites, and housing redevelopment, are evaluated in respect to evaluative and practical criterions as well as to tradeoffs in the decision making process.

A. Baseline

Choosing no action may lead to a continuation or perhaps even to an increase in the current trend of political apathy and unnecessary illnesses. This may be affordable and easy, but it would not create equality or justice or reduce medical problems, which are guiding criterions. Thus, it is important to consider the following alternatives.

B. Community awareness and activism

This will be accomplished by linking community activist groups with governmental agencies and residents through committees on which all parties would reside. The community members will choose leaders/representatives to help organize monthly community forums, weekly meetings, and publications in which all sides can voice their concerns and improvements could be made. Ideally, community members who are not in a formal leadership role will participate. Being knowledgeable about health risks and injustice will build trust between all interested parties and will empower residents to make informed decisions.

Equality

This will be measured by looking at the decision making process of the community members and of the committees as well as the outcomes of their decisions. For example, the makeup of the committees will need to have an equal distribution of residents and officials. Each community member will have one vote and will need sufficient access to polls (convenient times and locations.) It will be imperative that the committees decisions were well thought out and accounted for long-term results, so that they will produce equitable decisions.

Efficiency

This can be measured by measuring community satisfaction and learned knowledge using pre and post surveys. In addition, analyzing voter turnout and active participation in the voting process will help demonstrate the degree to which the community is involved in the formal democratic decision making process.

Political feasibility

With support from politically like-minded individuals, recruiting active community members and forming a cohesive unit will definitely be politically feasible. Difficulties may arise as community members work in a larger, more political arena and are likely to encounter opposition and may struggle in implementing changes to attain their goals.

Legality

Unifying individuals and prompting them to act for change is legal. However, the legality of their behavior is determined by laws and by their actions. For example, if they choose to engage in nonviolent political activity, then their actions will be considered to be legal. If they engage in more aggressive behavior, then their actions may be considered to be illegal.

Robustness