Search

Decades of research indicate that most Census‐measured U.S. racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately impacted by environmental disamenities, all else equal; the study of this is referred to as Environmental Justice (EJ) research. Yet both U.S. and world history show that another minoritized group is religious minorities. If so, this has health consequences and policy implications. Houses of worship (HOWs) are visible and physical symbols of religion. We use tax records to locate Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist or Hindu HOWs within census tracts for the entire contiguous United States. We combine these data with EJSCREEN data to analyze whether air pollution risks are greater in their presence. We find that, even holding constant race, ethnicity, and poverty, two non‐census‐measured religious minorities' HOWs are disproportionately impacted by air pollution in the United States: Jews and Muslims. This new knowledge has consequences for EJ policy and social justice‐motivated environmental research. Related Articles: Ash, John. 2010. "New Nuclear Energy, Risk, and Justice: Regulatory Strategies for an Era of Limited Trust." Politics & Policy 38(2): 255–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2010.00237.x. Fowler, Luke. 2022. "Searching for Green Elephants and Other Mythical Creatures during the Trump Years: Partisanship and Congressional Voting on Environmental Legislation." Politics & Policy 50(5): 913–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12499. Tubadji, Annie. 2023. "You'll Never Walk Alone: Loneliness, Religion, and Politico‐economic Transformation." Politics & Policy 51(4): 661–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12538. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Single‐use plastics (SUPs) are increasingly polluting terrestrial, coastal, and marine habits, contributing to the creeping "plastic crisis." The COVID‐19 pandemic provided a window of opportunity for decision makers to change the degree of urgency and responsiveness to this crisis and for policy entrepreneurs and industry who are against reducing plastic consumption to influence decision makers to change their position on various plastic‐related issues. Hygiene/health concerns have been used as a justification by governments and industry to increase the use of SUPs resulting in a reversal in, or a reprioritization of, policy decisions. Through the Multiple Streams Framework (MSF), I examine how creeping crises become secondary to urgent crises through agenda setting that is influenced and leveraged by policy entrepreneurs. I explore examples of such plastic policy decisions finding that they have been politically driven and influenced by entrepreneurs and industry rather than being primarily based on health concerns. Related Articles: Diaz‐Kope, Luisa, and John C. Morris. 2022. "Why Collaborate? Exploring the Role of Organizational Motivations in Cross‐sector Watershed Collaboration." Politics & Policy 50(3): 516–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12470. Gerlach, John David, Laron K. Williams, and Colleen E. Forcina. 2013. "The Science‐Natural Resource Policy Relationship: How Aspects of Diffusion Theory Explain Data Selection for Making Biodiversity Management Decisions." Politics & Policy 41(3): 326–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12017. Neill, Katharine A., and John C. Morris. 2012. "A Tangled Web of Principals and Agents: Examining the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill through a Principal–Agent Lens." Politics & Policy 40(4): 629–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2012.00371.x. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]