AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cutter, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Hill, A. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cutter, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Hill, A. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Other Environment
March 2002, Vol 92, No. 3 | American Journal of Public Health 420-422
© 2002 American Public Health Association


RESEARCH AND PRACTICE

Spatial Variability in Toxicity Indicators Used to Rank Chemical Risks

Susan L. Cutter, PhD, Michael S. Scott, PhD and Arleen A. Hill, MS

Susan L. Cutter is with the Department of Geography, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Michael S. Scott is with the Department of Geography, Salisbury University, Salisbury, Md. Arleen A. Hill is a PhD student in the Department of Geography, University of South Carolina, Columbia.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Susan L. Cutter, PhD, Department of Geography, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208 (e-mail: scutter{at}sc.edu).

Objectives. This study used 6 different measures of toxicity to explore spatial and statistical variations in relative risk indicators of Toxic Release Inventory emissions.

Methods. Statistical and spatial correlations between the 6 indices were computed for individual South Carolina facilities.

Results. Although the 6 toxicity indices are not highly correlated in theory, they have more commonality in practice. There was significant spatial variation in the indices by individual facility level.

Conclusions. Environmental justice researchers must be cognizant of differences in toxicity indices because the choice of the toxicity measure can alter (statistically and spatially) the results of equity analyses and lead to erroneous conclusions. (Am J Public Health. 2002;92:420-422)




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Economic Development QuarterlyHome page
H. Bacot and C. O'Dell
Establishing Indicators to Evaluate Brownfield Redevelopment
Economic Development Quarterly, May 1, 2006; 20(2): 142 - 161.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the American Public Health Association