Article Preview
TopIntroduction
Environmental justice (EJ) research in the U.S. has focused on seeking the evidence to determine if racial/ethnic minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups are disproportionately exposed to various environmental hazards and risks. While numerous previous studies have examined social and spatial inequities in the distribution of technological hazards such as air pollution, hazardous waste, or industrial manufacturing facilities, relatively little research has been conducted on unequal exposure to natural hazards. However, Hurricane Katrina and the subsequent failures of government in responding to this disaster have prompted researchers to examine the social equity implications of disasters caused by geophysical phenomena. Specifically, the disproportionate exposure of the most socially vulnerable groups in New Orleans, Louisiana, to the most hazardous flooding in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina has initiated inquiry of the EJ implications of exposure to flood hazards. While flood hazards are usually considered to be natural hazards, urban planning and flood mitigation activities are purely anthropogenic. Consequently, recent EJ studies have emphasized the need to examine the geographic distribution of flood risks with respect to the racial/ethnic and socioeconomic characteristics of local residents (e.g., Fielding & Burningham, 2005; Johnson, Penning-Rowsell, & Parker, 2007; Maantay & Maroko, 2009). An EJ-oriented research approach is necessary to investigate whether certain groups of society are disproportionately exposed to natural hazards, as well as if their resiliency to natural hazards is enhanced with public resources.
As with Louisiana, Florida is a state that is highly susceptible to flood hazards. Florida received the highest rank for flood risk from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), followed by California, Texas, and Louisiana, based on a composite score computed from floodplain area and the number and value of households within floodplains (Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA], 1997). Florida’s low topography and densely populated coastal areas, combined with natural wetland alterations and floodplain development, have created elevated levels of flood risk in many counties of the state (Brody, Zahran, Maghelal, Grover, & Highfeld, 2007). Urban areas of lower elevation are often undesirable places to live because of increased risk of flooding hazards. Ueland and Warf (2006) examined the correlation between socially vulnerable groups and low topography using a large sample of U.S. southern cities. Their findings indicated that low-lying areas were characterized by residences of socially vulnerable people in most cities. Conversely, in Fort Meyers, Florida, areas of lower topography were found to be populated mostly by less socially vulnerable residents. These results can be explained, in part, by the fact that property values usually increase as elevation decreases in Florida, and coastal areas are characterized by lower topography. Coastal property values may be higher than their inland equivalents, but all flood insurance rates are lower than those that would be set by private insurance companies (Bagstad, Stapleton, & D'Agostino, 2007), since flood insurance in the U.S. is federally subsidized through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Although the NFIP is designed to mitigate costs from damages to property incurred by flooding by making flood insurance affordable to all who require it, this program has been criticized because it promotes development in floodplains (Bagstad et al., 2007; Brody et al., 2007). In the U.S. and especially in Florida, governmental structures such as NFIP and dense coastal development have created an environment that is susceptible to flooding and related disasters.