Skip to main content

Environmental Justice in Australia: Measuring the Relationship Between Industrial Odour Exposure and Community Disadvantage

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Community Quality-of-Life Indicators: Best Cases VII

Abstract

Community impact and environmental justice issues are examined across metropolitan Melbourne, Australia, using 2008–2011 self-reported odour complaint data as a direct measure of odour pollution exposure. Differences in pollution exposure and indicators of socio-economic disadvantage were compared across areas using spatial clustering and statistical analyses. Results found that odour affected areas have greater socio-economic disadvantage supporting the existence of environmental justice issues in metropolitan Melbourne. Commonly used buffers of 1 km surrounding polluting facilities under-represent odour affected areas. Findings have implications for urban planning and policy in establishing separation distances between residential and industrial zones in new and existing developments where guidelines are lacking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2011). Census of population and housing. Canberra: ABS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2013). Socio-economic indexes for areas, cat. no. 2033.0.55.001. Canberra: ABS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baden, B. M., Noonan, D. S., & Turaga, R. M. R. (2007). Scales of justice: Is there a geographic bias in environmental equity analysis? Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 50(2), 163–185. doi:10.1080/09640560601156433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolin, B., Pijawaka, K., Scott Smith, C., Sicotte, D., Sadalla, E., Matranga, E., et al. (2002). The ecology of technological risk in a Sunbelt city. Environment and Planning A, 34, 317–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, J., & MacCallum, D. (2013). Bordering on neglect: ‘Environmental justice’ in Australian planning. Australian Planner, 50(2), 164–173. doi:10.1080/07293682.2013.776984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, J., & Armstrong, M. P. (1997). Exploring the use of buffer analysis for the identification of impacted areas in environmental equity assessment. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems, 24(3), 145–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, J., & Green, D. (2014a). Australia’s first national level quantitative environmental justice assessment of industrial air pollution. Environmental Research Letters, 9(4), 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, J., & Green, D. (2014b). The relationship between industrial air pollution and social disadvantage in Australia: National and regional inequities. Air Quality and Climate Change, 48(4), 35–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, J., Maantay, J. A., & Brender, J. D. (2011). Disproportionate proximity to environmental health hazards: Methods, models, and measurement. American Journal of Public Health, 101(S1), S27–S36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chavis, B. F., & Lee, C. (1987). Toxic wastes and race in the United States: A national report on the racial and socioeconomic characteristics of communities with hazardous waste sites. New York: United Church of Christ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Environment Protection Authority Victoria. (2015a). EPAV (environment protection authority Victoria) your environment—Odour. http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/your-environment/odour. Accessed April 30, 2015.

  • Environment Protection Authority Victoria. (2015b). EPAV (environment protection authority Victoria) about us—Who we are. http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/about-us/who-we-are. Retrieved April 21, 2015.

  • Henshaw, P., Nicell, J., & Sikdar, A. (2006). Parameters for the assessment of odour impacts on communities. Atmospheric Environment, 40, 1016–1029. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.11.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaye, R., & Jiang, K. (2000). Development of odour impact criteria for sewage treatment plants using odour complaint history. Water Science and Technology, 41(6), 57–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, K. E., & White, S. R. (2015). Categorisation of built environment characteristics: The trouble with tertiles. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 12(1), 1–8. doi:10.1186/s12966-015-0181-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, N. (2010). Crimestat: A spatial statistics program for the analysis of crime incident locations (Version IV). Washington, DC: Ned Levine & Associates, Houston, TX, and the National Institute of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maantay, J. (2002). Mapping environmental injustices: Pitfalls and potential of geographic information systems in assessing environmental health and equity. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(Suppl 2), 161–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maantay, J. (2007). Asthma and air pollution in the Bronx: Methodological and data considerations in using GIS for environmental justice and health research. Health and Place, 13, 32–56. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2005.09.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackay, A. K., Taylor, M. P., Munksgaard, N. C., Hudson-Edwards, K. A., & Burn-Nunes, L. (2013). Identification of environmental lead sources and pathways in a mining and smelting town: Mount Isa, Australia. Environmental Pollution, 180, 304–311. doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2013.05.007 [Article].

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medina-Ramón, M., & Schwartz, J. (2008). Who is more vulnerable to die from ozone air pollution? Epidemiology, 19(5), 672–679. [research article].

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohai, P., Pellow, D., & Roberts, J. T. (2009). Environmental justice. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 29, 405–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohai, P., & Saha, R. (2006). Reassessing racial and socioeconomic disparities in environmental justice research. Demography, 43(2), 383–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicell, J. A. (2009). Assessment and regulation of odour impacts. Atmospheric Environment, 43, 196–206. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pastor, M., Jr., Morello-Frosch, R., & Sadd, J. L. (2005). The air is always cleaner on the other side: Race, space, and ambient air toxics exposures in California. Journal of Urban Affairs, 27(2), 127–148. doi:10.1111/j.0735-2166.2005.00228.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RDWI Air Inc. (2005). Final report odour management in British Columbia: Review and recommendations. British Columbia: Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schauberger, G., Piringer, M., & Petz, E. (2006). Odour episodes in the vicinity of livestock buildings: A qualitative comparison of odour complaint statistics with model calculations. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 114, 185–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlosberg, D., & Carruthers, D. (2010). Indigenous struggles, environmental justice, and community capabilities. Global Environmental Politics, 10(4), 12–35. http://www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/glep

  • Sheppard, E., Leitner, H., McMaster, R. B., & Tian, H. (1999). GIS-based measures of environmental equity: Exploring their sensitivity and significance. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology, 9(1), 18–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shusterman, D. (1999). The health significance of environmental odour pollution: Revisited. Journal of Environmental Medicine, 1(4), 249–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, E. J. (2013). ‘Tipped off’: Residential amenity and the changing distribution of household waste disposal in Melbourne. Paper presented at the State of Australian Cities Conference, November, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M. P., & Schniering, C. (2010). The public minimization of the risks associated with environmental lead exposure and elevated blood lead levels in children, Mount Isa, Queensland, Australia. Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health, 65(1), 45–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US Government Accountability Office. (1983). Siting of hazardous waste landfills and their correlation with racial and economic status of surrounding communities. Washington: U.S. Government Print Office.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project was supported by Community Indicators Victoria at The University of Melbourne. B. Greenham is supported by The University of Melbourne 2013 Vice-Chancellor’s Engagement Award. M. Bannister provided in-kind support via The University of Melbourne-Environment Protection Authority Victoria Partnership. Special thanks to Rebecca Roberts for GIS mapping assistance.

The authors declare they have no actual or potential competing financial interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucy Dubrelle Gunn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gunn, L.D., Greenham, B., Davern, M., Mavoa, S., Taylor, E.J., Bannister, M. (2017). Environmental Justice in Australia: Measuring the Relationship Between Industrial Odour Exposure and Community Disadvantage. In: Holden, M., Phillips, R., Stevens, C. (eds) Community Quality-of-Life Indicators: Best Cases VII. Community Quality-of-Life and Well-Being. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54618-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54618-6_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54617-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54618-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics