Search

Copyright of Journal of Planning Education & Research is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

A world in flux confronts the present generation, raising fears of systems gone awry. Whether it is the prospect of runaway climate change or the dangers of unbridled artificial intelligence, these dilemmas suggest that scientific and technological remedies have not been matched by progress in harnessing social and political capacities for collective action. Part of this impasse stems from a gap between the multidimensional nature of contemporary global crises and unidimensional modes of understanding and managing them. In this article, we describe an integrative approach rooted in the paradigm of social ecology that might enable us to tackle these challenges more comprehensively. We discuss, for example, how a social ecological perspective focuses attention not only on the carbon footprint of society but also on the social footprint of carbon. We review the tenets of social ecology and reflect on its promise for spurring new modes of collaborative research and collective action, including more effective strategies for planetary governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spatial injustices, especially the disproportionate exposure of disadvantaged communities to environmental risks, stem from an inability to appreciate the lived experience of risk and, instead, a reliance on technical frameworks for regulating it. We review Noddings' ideas about the caring attitude, in particular, that of caring for and, to some degree, caring about, and apply this to the issue of knowing about the experience of vulnerability and crafting effective and affective responses to it. We apply this lens to the case study of Southeast Los Angeles, where a profusion of small sources of air toxics creates zones of inordinate risk, and ask: How should the state and community have responded in a more caring way? How could the teachers and schoolchildren, themselves, have been empowered to speak for themselves? We draw lessons from it that speak to how we can begin reforming the regulatory state.

Regulatory agencies often face a dilemma when regulating chemicals in consumer products-namely, that of making decisions in the face of multiple, and sometimes conflicting, lines of evidence. We present an integrative approach for dealing with uncertainty and multiple pieces of evidence in toxics regulation. The integrative risk analytic framework is grounded in the Dempster-Shafer (D-S) theory that allows the analyst to combine multiple pieces of evidence and judgments from independent sources of information. We apply the integrative approach to the comparative risk assessment of bisphenol-A (BPA)-based polycarbonate and the functionally equivalent alternative, Eastman Tritan copolyester (ETC). Our results show that according to cumulative empirical evidence, the estimated probability of toxicity of BPA is 0.034, whereas the toxicity probability for ETC is 0.097. However, when we combine extant evidence with strength of confidence in the source (or expert judgment), we are guided by a richer interval measure, (Bel(t), Pl(t)). With the D-S derived measure, we arrive at various intervals for BPA, with the low-range estimate at (0.034, 0.250), and (0.097,0.688) for ETC. These new measures allow a reasonable basis for comparison and a justifiable procedure for decision making that takes advantage of multiple sources of evidence. Through the application of D-S theory to toxicity risk assessment, we show how a multiplicity of scientific evidence can be converted into a unified risk estimate, and how this information can be effectively used for comparative assessments to select potentially less toxic alternative chemicals.

Project included three major parts: 1) field measurements of particulate matter in five urban areas, 2) laboratory modeling of flow and dispersion within model urban areas, and 3) numerical modeling. Project website and database are located at http://emissions.engr.ucr.edu/.