Abstract
Globally, the influx of refugee, migrant, and immigrant populations into small centers of industrialized agriculture has called attention to a looming public health crisis. As small towns shift from remote villages into rural, agri-industrial centers, they offer limited access to amenities needed to support human well-being. Our study focused on three Iowa towns that continue to experience an increase in under-represented minority populations and decline of majority populations as a proxy for studying shifting populations in an era of industrialized agriculture and global capital. We aimed to understand the socioecological impact of built environments-outdoor locations where people live and work-and likelihood of environmental exposures to impact vulnerable populations. Urban socioecological measures tend to present contradictory results in small towns due to their reliance on density and proximity. To compensate, we used post-occupancy evaluations (POE) to examine built environments for evidence of access to environmental design criteria to support healthy behaviors. The study systematically identified 44 locations on transects across three small towns to employ a 62 item POE and assess multiple environmental criteria to crosscut design with environmental health disparities. Principal-components factor analysis identified two distinct significant components for environmental risk and population vulnerability, supporting similar studies on parallel communities. Multilevel modeling found a divergence between supportive environmental design coupled with an increase environmental risk due to location. The combined effect likely contributes to environmental health disparities. The study provides a strategy for auditing small town built environments as well as insight into achieving equity.
Highlights
IntroductionSmall U.S towns & rural built environments
Small U.S towns & rural built environmentsCountries around the world are facing an increase in industrialized agriculture, growing urbanization, shifting populations, and a mounting public health dichotomy between urban/rural built environments [1, 2]
In response to the question whether people in small towns were at higher risk of exposure when compared to their urban counterparts, environmental risk from pollutants was not found to be Crosscutting environmental risk with design for vulnerable populations in small, Ag-based towns equal across the three small towns in our study and, in some cases, these towns evidence significantly higher risks of exposure than state averages (Table 3)
Summary
Small U.S towns & rural built environments. Countries around the world are facing an increase in industrialized agriculture, growing urbanization, shifting populations, and a mounting public health dichotomy between urban/rural built environments [1, 2]. The current state of research on local life in small agrarian towns reveals a critical knowledge-gap linking built environments with health-promoting behaviors. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) modified health disparity populations to include people from underserved rural areas. Crosscutting environmental risk with design for vulnerable populations in small, Ag-based towns
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.