Environmental Injustice and Industrial Chicken Farming in Maryland
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data Sources
2.2. Statistical Analyses
3. Results
4. Discussion
4.1. Limitations
4.2. Implications and Recommendations
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Finanzierung
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Dimitri, C.; Effland, A.; Conklin, N. The 20th Century Transformation of U.S. Agriculture and Farm Policy; Economic Information Bulletin No. 3; Economic Research Service, USDA: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. Available online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/EIB3/EIB3.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2020).
- USDA—National Agricultural Statistics Service—Census of Agriculture. Available online: https://www.nass.usda.gov/AgCensus/ (accessed on 17 July 2020).
- Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. 2019. Available online: https://www.ncsl.org/research/agriculture-and-rural-development/concentrated-animal-feeding-operations.aspx (accessed on 17 July 2020).
- Animal Feeding Operations|NRCS. Available online: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/plantsanimals/livestock/afo/ (accessed on 19 July 2020).
- Yuan, B.; Coggon, M.M.; Koss, A.R.; Warneke, C.; Eilerman, S.; Peischl, J.; Aikin, K.C.; Ryerson, T.B.; de Gouw, J.A. Emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs): Chemical compositions and separation of sources. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. 2017, 17, 4945–4956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Edwards, D.; Daniel, T. Environmental impacts of on-farm poultry waste disposal—A review. Bioresour. Technol. 1992, 41, 9–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osterberg, D.; Wallinga, D. Addressing Externalities From Swine Production to Reduce Public Health and Environmental Impacts. Am. J. Public Health 2004, 94, 1703–1708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Copeland, C. Animal Waste and Water Quality: EPA’s Response to the Waterkeeper Alliance Court Decision on Regulation of CAFOs; Congressional Research Service: Washington, WA, USA, 2011.
- US EPA. Protecting Water Quality from Agricultural Runoff; US EPA: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents/ag_runoff_fact_sheet.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2020).
- US EPA. Risk Assessment Evaluation for Concentrated Feeding Operations; US EPA: Washington, DC, USA, 2004. Available online: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/901V0100.PDF?Dockey=901V0100.PDF (accessed on 23 July 2020).
- Graham, J.P.; Nachman, K.E. Managing waste from confined animal feeding operations in the United States: The need for sanitary reform. J. Water Health 2010, 8, 646–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, S.M.; Serre, M.L. Examination of atmospheric ammonia levels near hog CAFOs, homes, and schools in Eastern North Carolina. Atmos. Environ. 2007, 41, 4977–4987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, S.M.; Serre, M.L. Use of passive samplers to measure atmospheric ammonia levels in a high-density industrial hog farm area of eastern North Carolina. Atmos. Environ. 2007, 41, 6074–6086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Camillo, N.G.D. Methane Digesters and Biogas Recovery—Masking the Environmental Consequences of Industrial Concentrated Livestock Production. J. Environ. Law 2011, 29, 31. [Google Scholar]
- US EPA. Chemical Contaminant Rules [Other Policies and Guidance]; US EPA: Washington, DC, USA, 2015. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/chemical-contaminant-rules (accessed on 25 July 2020).
- Sahoo, P.K.; Kim, K.; Powell, M.A. Managing Groundwater Nitrate Contamination from Livestock Farms: Implication for Nitrate Management Guidelines. Curr. Pollut. Rep. 2016, 2, 178–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Donham, K.J.; Wing, S.; Osterberg, D.; Flora, J.L.; Hodne, C.; Thu, K.M.; Thorne, P.S. Community Health and Socioeconomic Issues Surrounding Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. Environ. Health Perspect. 2007, 115, 317–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wing, S.; Cole, D.; Grant, G. Environmental Injustice in North Carolina’s Hog Industry. Environ. Health Perspect. 2000, 108, 225–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greger, M.; Koneswaran, G. The Public Health Impacts of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations on Local Communities. Fam. Community Health 2010, 33, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wing, S.; Wolf, S. Intensive livestock operations, health, and quality of life among eastern North Carolina residents. Environ. Health Perspect. 2000, 108, 233–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Radon, K. The two sides of the “endotoxin coin”. Occup. Environ. Med. 2006, 63, 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hatcher, S.M.; Rhodes, S.M.; Stewart, J.R.; Silbergeld, E.; Pisanic, N.; Larsen, J.; Jiang, S.; Krosche, A.; Hall, D.; Carroll, K.C.; et al. The prevalence of antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nasal carriage among industrial hog operation workers, community residents, and children living in their households: North Carolina, USA. Environ. Health Perspect. 2017, 125, 560–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Rinsky, J.L.; Nadimpalli, M.; Wing, S.; Hall, D.; Baron, D.; Price, L.B.; Larsen, J.; Stegger, M.; Stewart, J.; Heaney, C.D. Livestock-Associated Methicillin and Multidrug Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Is Present among Industrial, Not Antibiotic-Free Livestock Operation Workers in North Carolina. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e67641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Abara, W.; Wilson, S.M.; Burwell, K. Environmental Justice and Infectious Disease: Gaps, Issues, and Research Needs. Environ. Justice 2012, 5, 8–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guidry, V.T.; Rhodes, S.M.; Woods, C.G.; Hall, D.J.; Rinsky, J.L. Connecting Environmental Justice and Community Health: Effects of Hog Production in North Carolina. N. C. Med. J. 2018, 79, 324–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nicole, W. CAFOs and Environmental Justice: The Case of North Carolina. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013, 121, a182–a189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wilson, S.M.; Howell, F.; Wing, S.; Sobsey, M. Environmental injustice and the Mississippi hog industry. Environ. Health Perspect. 2002, 110, 195–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Son, J.-Y.; Muenich, R.L.; Schaffer-Smith, D.; Miranda, M.L.; Bell, M.L. Distribution of environmental justice metrics for exposure to CAFOs in North Carolina, USA. Environ. Res. 2021, 195, 110862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lenhardt, J.; Ogneva-Himmelberger, Y. Environmental Injustice in the Spatial Distribution of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations in Ohio. Environ. Justice 2013, 6, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogneva-Himmelberger, Y.; Huang, L.; Xin, H. CALPUFF and CAFOs: Air Pollution Modeling and Environmental Justice Analysis in the North Carolina Hog Industry. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2015, 4, 150–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Walljasper, C. Large Animal Feeding Operations on the Rise. Investigate Midwest. 7 June 2018. Available online: https://investigatemidwest.org/2018/06/07/large-animal-feeding-operations-on-the-rise/ (accessed on 10 June 2020).
- [Dataset] Maisenholder, Karen, Census Tracts 2010, Maryland GIS Data Catalog: Demographics, 2010. Available online: https://data.imap.maryland.gov/datasets/maryland-census-data-census-tracts (accessed on 18 June 2020).
- [Dataset] American Community Survey Tables: 2014–2018 (5-Year Estimates), U.S. Census Bureau Prepared by Social Explorer. 2019, DP05 Table. Available online: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=acs%202018&tid=ACSDP5Y2018.DP05&y=2018&vintage=2018&hidePreview=false (accessed on 20 June 2020).
- Nicolaides, B.; Wiese, A. Suburbanization in the United States after 1945. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American History; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The American Community Survey. 1 July 2018. Available online: https://www.esri.com/content/dam/esrisites/en-us/media/whitepaper/WF2012-j10020-american-community-survey-2018-rev.pdf (accessed on 4 October 2021).
- [Dataset] Meat, Poultry and Egg Product Inspection Directory. Available online: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/inspection/mpi-directory (accessed on 17 July 2020).
- Zboreak, V. “Yes, in Your Backyard!” Model Legislative Efforts to Prevent Communities from Excluding CAFOs; National Agricultural Law Center: Fayetteville, AR, USA, 2015; Available online: https://nationalaglawcenter.org/publication/zboreak-yes-in-your-backyard-model-legislative-efforts-to-prevent-communities-from-excluding-cafos-5-wake-forest-j-l-policy-147-185-2015/ (accessed on 17 July 2020).
- Bernhardt, C.; Burkhart, K.; Schaeffer, E. More Phosphorus, Less Monitoring, Environmental Integrity Project. 2015. Available online: http://environmentalintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/Poultry-report_2013_FINAL1.pdf (accessed on 17 July 2020).
- United States Census Bureau. American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2009–2018). The United States Census Bureau. 2018. Available online: https://www.census.gov/data/developers/data-sets/acs-5year.html (accessed on 17 July 2020).
- Jacques, M.L.; Gibbs, C.; Rivers, L.; Dobson, T. Expanding Environmental Justice: A Case Study of Community Risk and Benefit Perceptions of Industrial Animal Farming Operations. Race Gend. Cl. 2012, 19, 218–243. [Google Scholar]
- Pendall, R.; Goodman, L.; Zhu, J.; Gold, A. The Future of Rural Housing; Urban Institute: Washington, WA, USA, 2016; 91p. [Google Scholar]
- Schultz, A.A.; Peppard, P.; Gangnon, R.E.; Malecki, K.M. Residential proximity to concentrated animal feeding operations and allergic and respiratory disease. Environ. Int. 2019, 130, 104911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cox, J. For Communities of Color, Air Pollution May Heighten Coronavirus Threat. Bay J. 2020. Available online: https://www.bayjournal.com/news/pollution/for-communities-of-color-air-pollution-may-heighten-coronavirus-threat/article_d557b12e-8978-11ea-90aa-c7b3d7dc8353.html (accessed on 17 July 2020).
- Artz, G.M.; Orazem, P.F.; Otto, D.M. Measuring the Impact of Meat Packing and Processing Facilities in Nonmetropolitan Counties: A Difference-in-Differences Approach. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2007, 89, 557–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Artz, G.M. Immigration and Meatpacking in the Midwest. Choices 2012, 27. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/choices.27.2.10 (accessed on 14 May 2021).
- Broadway, M. Meatpacking and the Transformation of Rural Communities: A Comparison of Brooks, Alberta and Garden City, Kansas. Rural. Sociol. 2007, 72, 560–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalla, R.L.; Christensen, A. Latino Immigrants Describe Residence in Rural Midwestern Meatpacking Communities: A Longitudinal Assessment of Social and Economic Change. Hisp. J. Behav. Sci. 2005, 27, 23–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taitan, P.A.; McTarnaghan, S.; Arena, O.; Su, Y. State of Immigrants in the District of Columbia, Urban Institute. 2018. Available online: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/99031/state_of_immigrants_in_dc_brief_2.pdf (accessed on 17 July 2020).
- Frey, W.H. Melting Pot Cities and Suburbs: Racial and Ethnic Change in Metro America in the 2000s, Metropolitan Policy Programs. 2011. Available online: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/0504_census_ethnicity_frey.pdf (accessed on 17 July 2020).
- Iceland, J.; Steinmetz, E. “The Effects of Using Census Block Groups Instead of Census Tracts When Examining Residential Housing Patterns”. U.S. Census Bureau Working Paper. 2003. Available online: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/resseg/pdf/unit_of_analysis.pdf (accessed on 31 July 2020).
- Animal Feeding Operations (AFOS). Available online: https://mde.maryland.gov/programs/LAND/RecyclingandOperationsprogram/Pages/AFOInfo.aspx (accessed on 31 July 2020).
- Bullard, R.D.; Johnson, G.S. Environmentalism and Public Policy: Environmental Justice: Grassroots Activism and Its Impact on Public Policy Decision Making. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 555–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lockhart, K.; King, A.; Harter, T. Identifying sources of groundwater nitrate contamination in a large alluvial groundwater basin with highly diversified intensive agricultural production. J. Contam. Hydrol. 2013, 151, 140–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mirabelli, M.C.; Zock, J.-P.; Plana, E.; Antó, J.M.; Benke, G.; Blanc, P.D.; Dahlman-Höglund, A.; Jarvis, D.; Kromhout, H.; Lillienberg, L.; et al. Occupational risk factors for asthma among nurses and related healthcare professionals in an international study. Occup. Environ. Med. 2007, 64, 474–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nadimpalli, M.; Rinsky, J.L.; Wing, S.; Hall, D.; Stewart, J.; Larsen, J.; Nachman, K.E.; Love, D.C.; Pierce, E.; Pisanic, N.; et al. Persistence of livestock-associated antibiotic-resistantStaphylococcus aureusamong industrial hog operation workers in North Carolina over 14 days. Occup. Environ. Med. 2015, 72, 90–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Community Healthy Air Act; HB 1642. Maryland General Assembly, Reg. Session 2020; Maryland General Assembly: Annapolis, MD, USA, 2020.
- USDA/NASS. State Agriculture Overview for Maryland. 2019. Available online: https://www.nass.usda.gov/Quick_Stats/Ag_Overview/stateOverview.php?state=MARYLAND (accessed on 17 July 2020).
CAFO Host | Non-Host | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Urban | Rural | Urban | Rural | |
# of Census Tracts | 12 | 35 | 1163 | 99 |
# of CAFOs | 83 | 446 | 0 | 0 |
# of Meat Processing Facilities | 2 | 4 | 70 | 9 |
% Population: People of Color | 27.5% | 15.3% | 49.3% | 16.2% |
% Population Under 18 | 21.3% | 20.4% | 22.3% | 20.7% |
Median Household Income | 64,059.83 | 66,626.29 | 86,313.37 | 101,345.24 |
% Homeownership | 56.6% | 67.7% | 59.2% | 76.8% |
Maryland | CAFO Hotspot | CAFO Coldspot | CAFO Insignificant | Meat Processing Hotspot | Meat Processing Coldspot | Meat Processing Insignificant | Maryland |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
# of Census Tracts | 70 | 941 | 298 | 194 | K.A. | 1115 | 1309 |
# of CAFOs | 518 | 0 | 11 | 66 | K.A. | 463 | 529 |
# of Meat Processing Facilities | 8 | 56 | 14 | 31 | K.A. | 47 | 78 |
% Population: People of Color | 25.7% | 54.7% | 21.99% | 59.8% | K.A. | 43.2% | 45.7% |
% Population Under 18 | 21.0% | 22.2% | 22.0% | 21.7% | K.A. | 22.2% | 22.1% |
Median Household Income | 61,060.87 | 88,492.63 | 87,149.13 | 55,797.43 | K.A. | 92,100.06 | 86,719.84 |
% Homeownership | 56.0% | 58.9% | 67.8% | 43.9% | K.A. | 63.7% | 60.7% |
Count Model | Estimate | Std. Error | z Value | Probability (>|z|) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Intercept | −6.86 | 0.46 | −14.94 | <2 × 10−16 *** |
% Population: People of Color | 8.75 × 10−3 | 5.03 × 10−3 | 1.739 | 0.082 |
% Population Under 18 | −0.01 | 0.01 | −0.88 | 0.379 |
Median Household Income (USD) (Scaled by 1000) | −0.04 | 4.07 × 10−3 | −9.91 | <2 × 10−16 *** |
% Homeownership | 0.05 | 6.09 × 10−3 | 8.87 | <2 × 10−16 *** |
Count Model-Meat Processing | Estimate | Std. Error | z Value | Pr (>|z|) |
---|---|---|---|---|
(Intercept) | −12.19 | 1.36 | −9.00 | <2 × 10−16 *** |
% Population: People of Color | 0.02 | 7.92 × 10−3 | 3.02 | 2.55 × 10−3 ** |
% Population Under 18 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 1.10 | 0.27 |
% Homeownership | 0.02 | 0.02 | 1.35 | 0.18 |
Median Household Income (USD) | −8.23 × 10−3 | 0.01 | −0.72 | 0.47 |
Count Model-Eastern Shore | Estimate | Std. Error | z Value | Pr (>|z|) |
---|---|---|---|---|
(Intercept) | −6.55 | 0.44 | −14.90 | <2 × 10−16 *** |
% Population: People of Color | 3.82 × 10−3 | 5.02 × 10−3 | 0.72 | 0.45 |
% Population Under 18 | −0.01 | 0.01 | −1.20 | 0.23 |
% Homeownership | 0.05 | 5.96 × 10−3 | 8.52 | <2 × 10−16 *** |
Median Household Income (USD) | −0.04 | 3.90 × 10−3 | −9.85 | <2 × 10−16 *** |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hall, J.; Galarraga, J.; Berman, I.; Edwards, C.; Khanjar, N.; Kavi, L.; Murray, R.; Burwell-Naney, K.; Jiang, C.; Wilson, S. Environmental Injustice and Industrial Chicken Farming in Maryland. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 11039. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111039
Hall J, Galarraga J, Berman I, Edwards C, Khanjar N, Kavi L, Murray R, Burwell-Naney K, Jiang C, Wilson S. Environmental Injustice and Industrial Chicken Farming in Maryland. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(21):11039. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111039
Chicago/Turabian StyleHall, Jonathan, Joseph Galarraga, Isabelle Berman, Camryn Edwards, Niya Khanjar, Lucy Kavi, Rianna Murray, Kristen Burwell-Naney, Chengsheng Jiang, and Sacoby Wilson. 2021. "Environmental Injustice and Industrial Chicken Farming in Maryland" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 21: 11039. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111039