Those are standard measures of populations that are stressed, said Tina Echeverria with the state Department of Health, who manages a team in the department that tracks environmental health.
“Those are well established risky populations that are more vulnerable,” she said.
The prevalence of cardiovascular disease, for instance, is important to assessing environmental health because individuals with heart disease are at a higher risk of death when exposed to environmental stressors.
Likewise, burdensome transportation or housing costs are stressors that can lead to poor health outcomes, and can keep healthier food or health care out of reach.
The idea, Echeverria said, is activists, public officials and policy makers can use the information to get a better understanding of the problems their communities face and guide their efforts accordingly.
Clusters of census tracts with a score of 9 or 10 — meaning they’re in the 20th percentile for impact — include Longview, Centralia, and much of the area around Puget Sound, including Bremerton, Tacoma, Kent and south Seattle. In eastern Washington, the pattern continues for Yakima, the Tri-Cities and Spokane.
The high scores for urban areas speak to their density and level of industrialization, Echeverria said, but also to some of the map’s limitations.
For instance, better information on water quality, she said, would likely alter the relative scoring for agricultural areas or places where wells are more common.
“It’s definitely something that’s on our radar — the rural-urban divide,” she said.
The project is ongoing. Researchers hope to add data on noise pollution, proximity to state cleanup sites and food access, and others, as possible.
The research and mapping was done through a partnership of environmental and racial justice advocacy coalition Front and Centered, the University of Washington Department of Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences, the state health and ecology departments and the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency.
