• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of envhperEnvironmental Health PerspectivesBrowse ArticlesAbout EHPGeneral InformationAuthorsMediaProgramsPartnerships
Environ Health Perspect. Mar 2000; 108(3): 225–231.
PMCID: PMC1637958
Research Article

Environmental injustice in North Carolina's hog industry.

Abstract

Rapid growth and the concentration of hog production in North Carolina have raised concerns of a disproportionate impact of pollution and offensive odors on poor and nonwhite communities. We analyzed the location and characteristics of 2,514 intensive hog operations in relation to racial, economic, and water source characteristics of census block groups, neighborhoods with an average of approximately 500 households each. We used Poisson regression to evaluate the extent to which relationships between environmental justice variables and the number of hog operations persisted after consideration of population density. There are 18.9 times as many hog operations in the highest quintile of poverty as compared to the lowest; however, adjustment for population density reduces the excess to 7.2. Hog operations are approximately 5 times as common in the highest three quintiles of the percentage nonwhite population as compared to the lowest, adjusted for population density. The excess of hog operations is greatest in areas with both high poverty and high percentage nonwhites. Operations run by corporate integrators are more concentrated in poor and nonwhite areas than are operations run by independent growers. Most hog operations, which use waste pits that can contaminate groundwater, are located in areas with high dependence on well water for drinking. Disproportionate impacts of intensive hog production on people of color and on the poor may impede improvements in economic and environmental conditions that are needed to address public health in areas which have high disease rates and low access to medical care as compared to other areas of the state.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (2.5M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Bullard RD, Wright BH. Environmental justice for all: community perspectives on health and research needs. Toxicol Ind Health. 1993 Sep-Oct;9(5):821–841. [PubMed]
  • Taylor D. Fresh from the farm. Environ Health Perspect. 1999 Mar;107(3):A154–A157. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Donham K, Haglind P, Peterson Y, Rylander R, Belin L. Environmental and health studies of farm workers in Swedish swine confinement buildings. Br J Ind Med. 1989 Jan;46(1):31–37. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Donham KJ, Rubino M, Thedell TD, Kammermeyer J. Potential health hazards to agricultural workers in swine confinement buildings. J Occup Med. 1977 Jun;19(6):383–387. [PubMed]
  • Cormier Y, Duchaine C, Israël-Assayag E, Bédard G, Laviolette M, Dosman J. Effects of repeated swine building exposures on normal naive subjects. Eur Respir J. 1997 Jul;10(7):1516–1522. [PubMed]
  • Donham KJ, Reynolds SJ, Whitten P, Merchant JA, Burmeister L, Popendorf WJ. Respiratory dysfunction in swine production facility workers: dose-response relationships of environmental exposures and pulmonary function. Am J Ind Med. 1995 Mar;27(3):405–418. [PubMed]
  • Haglind P, Rylander R. Occupational exposure and lung function measurements among workers in swine confinement buildings. J Occup Med. 1987 Nov;29(11):904–907. [PubMed]
  • Heederik D, Brouwer R, Biersteker K, Boleij JS. Relationship of airborne endotoxin and bacteria levels in pig farms with the lung function and respiratory symptoms of farmers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1991;62(8):595–601. [PubMed]
  • Holness DL, O'Blenis EL, Sass-Kortsak A, Pilger C, Nethercott JR. Respiratory effects and dust exposures in hog confinement farming. Am J Ind Med. 1987;11(5):571–580. [PubMed]
  • Iversen M. Predictors of long-term decline of lung function in farmers. Monaldi Arch Chest Dis. 1997 Oct;52(5):474–478. [PubMed]
  • Larsson KA, Eklund AG, Hansson LO, Isaksson BM, Malmberg PO. Swine dust causes intense airways inflammation in healthy subjects. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1994 Oct;150(4):973–977. [PubMed]
  • Olson DK, Bark SM. Health hazards affecting the animal confinement farm worker. AAOHN J. 1996 Apr;44(4):198–206. [PubMed]
  • Pickrell J. Hazards in confinement housing--gases and dusts in confined animal houses for swine, poultry, horses and humans. Vet Hum Toxicol. 1991 Feb;33(1):32–39. [PubMed]
  • Schwartz DA, Landas SK, Lassise DL, Burmeister LF, Hunninghake GW, Merchant JA. Airway injury in swine confinement workers. Ann Intern Med. 1992 Apr 15;116(8):630–635. [PubMed]
  • Vogelzang PF, van der Gulden JW, Preller L, Heederik D, Tielen MJ, van Schayck CP. Respiratory morbidity in relationship to farm characteristics in swine confinement work: possible preventive measures. Am J Ind Med. 1996 Aug;30(2):212–218. [PubMed]
  • Von Essen SG, Scheppers LA, Robbins RA, Donham KJ. Respiratory tract inflammation in swine confinement workers studied using induced sputum and exhaled nitric oxide. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 1998;36(6):557–565. [PubMed]
  • Zejda JE, Barber E, Dosman JA, Olenchock SA, McDuffie HH, Rhodes C, Hurst T. Respiratory health status in swine producers relates to endotoxin exposure in the presence of low dust levels. J Occup Med. 1994 Jan;36(1):49–56. [PubMed]
  • Wing S, Wolf S. Intensive livestock operations, health, and quality of life among eastern North Carolina residents. Environ Health Perspect. 2000 Mar;108(3):233–238. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Swinker M. Human health effects of hog waste. N C Med J. 1998 Jan-Feb;59(1):16–18. [PubMed]
  • Schiffman SS, Miller EA, Suggs MS, Graham BG. The effect of environmental odors emanating from commercial swine operations on the mood of nearby residents. Brain Res Bull. 1995;37(4):369–375. [PubMed]
  • Schiffman SS. Livestock odors: implications for human health and well-being. J Anim Sci. 1998 May;76(5):1343–1355. [PubMed]
  • Glasgow HB, Jr, Burkholder JM, Schmechel DE, Tester PA, Rublee PA. Insidious effects of a toxic estuarine dinoflagellate on fish survival and human health. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1995 Dec;46(4):501–522. [PubMed]
  • Wing S. Whose epidemiology, whose health? Int J Health Serv. 1998;28(2):241–252. [PubMed]
  • Wing S, Casper M, Davis WB, Pellom A, Riggan W, Tyroler HA. Stroke mortality maps. United States whites aged 35-74 years, 1962-1982. Stroke. 1988 Dec;19(12):1507–1513. [PubMed]
  • Sclar ED. Community economic structure and individual well-being: a look behind the statistics. Int J Health Serv. 1980;10(4):563–579. [PubMed]

Articles from Environmental Health Perspectives are provided here courtesy of National Institute of Environmental Health Science

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

  • Cited in Books
    Cited in Books
    PubMed Central articles cited in books
  • PubMed
    PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...