African American Exposure to Prescribed Fire Smoke in Georgia, USA

Estimated Impacts of Prescribed Fires on Air Quality and Premature Deaths in Georgia and Surrounding Areas in the US, 2015-2020

Smoke from wildfires poses a substantial threat to health in communities near and far. To mitigate the extent and potential damage of wildfires, prescribed burning techniques are commonly employed as land management tools; however, they introduce their own smoke-related risks. This study investigates the impact of prescribed fires on daily average PM2.5 and maximum daily 8-h averaged O3 (MDA8-O3) concentrations and estimates premature deaths associated with short-term exposure to prescribed fire PM2.5 and MDA8-O3 in Georgia and surrounding areas of the Southeastern US from 2015 to 2020. Our findings indicate that over the study domain, prescribed fire contributes to average daily PM2.5 by 0.94 ± 1.45 μg/m3 (mean ± standard deviation), accounting for 14.0% of year-round ambient PM2.5. Higher average daily contributions were predicted during the extensive burning season (January-April): 1.43 ± 1.97 μg/m3 (20.0% of ambient PM2.5). Additionally, prescribed burning is also responsible for an annual average increase of 0.36 ± 0.61 ppb in MDA8-O3 (approximately 0.8% of ambient MDA8-O3) and 1.3% (0.62 ± 0.88 ppb) during the extensive burning season. We estimate that short-term exposure to prescribed fire PM2.5 and MDA8-O3 could have caused 2665 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2249-3080) and 233 (95% CI: 148-317) excess deaths, respectively. These results suggest that smoke from prescribed burns increases the mortality. However, refraining from such burns may escalate the risk of wildfires; therefore, the trade-offs between the health impacts of wildfires and prescribed fires, including morbidity, need to be taken into consideration in future studies.

Methods in Public Health Environmental Justice Research: a Scoping Review from 2018 to 2021

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The volume of public health environmental justice (EJ) research produced by academic institutions increased through 2022. However, the methods used for evaluating EJ in exposure science and epidemiologic studies have not been catalogued. Here, we completed a scoping review of EJ studies published in 19 environmental science and epidemiologic journals from 2018 to 2021 to summarize research types, frameworks, and methods.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified 402 articles that included populations with health disparities as a part of EJ research question and met other inclusion criteria. Most studies (60%) evaluated EJ questions related to socioeconomic status (SES) or race/ethnicity. EJ studies took place in 69 countries, led by the US (n = 246 [61%]). Only 50% of studies explicitly described a theoretical EJ framework in the background, methods, or discussion and just 10% explicitly stated a framework in all three sections. Among exposure studies, the most common area-level exposure was air pollution (40%), whereas chemicals predominated personal exposure studies (35%). Overall, the most common method used for exposure-only EJ analyses was main effect regression modeling (50%); for epidemiologic studies the most common method was effect modification (58%), where an analysis evaluated a health disparity variable as an effect modifier. Based on the results of this scoping review, current methods in public health EJ studies could be bolstered by integrating expertise from other fields (e.g., sociology), conducting community-based participatory research and intervention studies, and using more rigorous, theory-based, and solution-oriented statistical research methods.

Structural and Social Determinants of Inequitable Environmental Exposures in the United States

American Indian (AI)/Alaskan Natives, African Americans, and Latino Americans have disproportionally high exposure to harmful environmental conditions as a consequence of unjust laws and policies, systemic racism, residential segregation, and discrimination. In this review, we draw connections between historical policies and social movements in the United States' history that have been rooted in racism and classism, leading to social isolation and marginalization of AIs, African Americans, and Latino Americans. We then discuss the structural factors that stem from the aforementioned inequities and that contribute to the inequitable distribution of environmental hazards.

The Relationship Between Air Quality, Health Outcomes, and Socioeconomic Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the US

COVID-19 lockdowns caused significant improvements in air quality in US states where traffic emissions are the main pollution source. In this study, we investigate the socioeconomic impacts of the COVID-19-related lockdowns in states which experienced the greatest changes in air quality, especially among different demographic populations and those with contraindications to health. We administered a 47-question survey and collected 1,000 valid responses in these cities. Our results show that 74% of respondents within our survey sample had some level of concern regarding air quality. In agreement with previous literature, perceptions of air quality were not significantly correlated with measured air quality criteria but rather seemed to be influenced by other factors. Respondents in Los Angeles were the most concerned about air quality followed by Miami, San Francisco, and New York City. However, those from Chicago and Tampa Bay expressed the least amount of concern about air quality. Age, education, and ethnicity were all factors affecting peoples' concerns about air quality. Respiratory conditions, living in proximity to industrial areas, and financial impacts from the COVID-19 lockdowns influenced concerns about air quality. About 40% of the survey sample reported greater concern for air quality during the pandemic, while approximately 50% stated that the lockdown didn't affect their perception. Furthermore, respondents seemed concerned about air quality in general, not a specific pollutant, and are willing to adopt additional measures and more stringent policies to improve air quality in all investigated cities.

Responses to Wildfire and Prescribed Fire Smoke: A Survey of a Medically Vulnerable Adult Population in the Wildland-Urban Interface, Mariposa County, California

California plans to substantially increase the use of prescribed fire to reduce risk of catastrophic wildfires. Although for a beneficial purpose, prescribed fire smoke may still pose a health concern, especially among sensitive populations. We sought to understand community health experience, adaptive capacity, and attitudes regarding wildland and prescribed fire smoke to inform public health guidance. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of medically vulnerable persons in a rural, high fire risk county (N = 106, 76% > 65 years) regarding wildfire and prescribed smoke health effects; health protective actions; information needs; and support for fire management policies. Qualitative comments were reviewed for context and emerging themes. More than half (58%) of participants reported health impacts from wildfire smoke; 26% experienced impacts from prescribed fire smoke. Participants expressed strong support for prescribed fire, although also concerns about safety and smoke. Respondents reported taking actions to reduce smoke exposure (average 5 actions taken per person), but many (47%) lacked confidence that they could successfully protect their health. Persons who were satisfied with the information received tended to be more confident in their ability to protect their health compared to those who were not satisfied (61% vs. 35%). More information was desired on many topics, including notifications about prescribed fire, health protection and exposure reduction. As California expands use of prescribed fire, the need for effective health protective communication regarding smoke is increasingly vital. We recommend seeking solutions that strengthen community resilience and address equity for vulnerable populations.

Socio-demographic and health vulnerability in prescribed-burn exposed versus unexposed counties near the National Forest System

Prescribed fire is an increasingly important tool in restoring ecological conditions and reducing uncontrolled wildfire. Prescribed burn techniques could reduce public health impacts associated with wildfire smoke exposure. However, there have been few assessments of the health impacts of prescribed burning, and potential vulnerabilities among populations exposed to smoke from prescribed fires. Our study area focused on counties in and near U.S. National Forests - a set of lands distributed across the U.S. In county-level analyses, we compared the sociodemographic and health characteristics of areas that were exposed with those that were not exposed to prescribe burns during the years 2010-2019 on a national level and within three regions. In addition, using spatial error regression models, we looked for associations between prescribed fire exposure and health behaviors and outcomes while controlling for spatial autocorrelation. On a national level, we found disproportionate prescribed fire exposure in rural counties with higher percentage mobile home and vacant housing units, and higher percentage African-American and white populations. Regionally, we found evidence of disproportionate exposure to prescribed burns among counties with lower percentage white population, higher percentage Hispanic population and mobile homes in the southern region, and to high poverty counties with high vacancy in the western region. These findings could indicate that vulnerable populations face potential health risks from prescribed burning smoke exposure, but also that they are not missing out on the benefits of prescribed burning, which could involve considerably lower smoke exposure compared to uncontrolled wildfire. In addition, in regression analyses, we found no evidence of disproportionate health burden in exposed compared to unexposed counties. Awareness of these patterns could influence both large-scale or institutional polices about prescribed burning practice, and could be used to build decision-making factors into modeling tools and smoke management plans, as well as community-engagement around wildfire risk reduction.

Satellite Monitoring for Air Quality and Health

Data from satellite instruments provide estimates of gas and particle levels relevant to human health, even pollutants invisible to the human eye. However, the successful interpretation of satellite data requires an understanding of how satellites relate to other data sources, as well as factors affecting their application to health challenges. Drawing from the expertise and experience of the 2016-2020 NASA HAQAST (Health and Air Quality Applied Sciences Team), we present a review of satellite data for air quality and health applications. We include a discussion of satellite data for epidemiological studies and health impact assessments, as well as the use of satellite data to evaluate air quality trends, support air quality regulation, characterize smoke from wildfires, and quantify emission sources. The primary advantage of satellite data compared to in situ measurements, e.g., from air quality monitoring stations, is their spatial coverage. Satellite data can reveal where pollution levels are highest around the world, how levels have changed over daily to decadal periods, and where pollutants are transported from urban to global scales. To date, air quality and health applications have primarily utilized satellite observations and satellite-derived products relevant to near-surface particulate matter <2.5 μm in diameter (PM_2.5) and nitrogen dioxide (NO₂). Health and air quality communities have grown increasingly engaged in the use of satellite data, and this trend is expected to continue. From health researchers to air quality managers, and from global applications to community impacts, satellite data are transforming the way air pollution exposure is evaluated.