Income disparities and risk: Geographical manifestations of extreme inequities in the United States

We examined hazard and risk-related metrics of the highest- and lowest-income counties and municipalities in each U.S. state. Indicators of natural and anthropogenic hazards, health outcomes, location of locally unwanted land uses, food insecurity, and other metrics were used to measure social and environmental justice. As expected, the highest-income places have better health outcomes, access to assets that protect health, and high municipal ratings of place quality compared with their poorest counterparts. Yet, they also have higher natural hazard risks and are more likely to live near concentrations of anthropogenic hazards. That is, high-income places have a lot to lose. Although the poorest jurisdictions demonstrate cumulative disadvantages, those in rural areas are exposed to less dense motor vehicle traffic and other hazards and risks associated with urban life. Relationships between income and the geography of hazards and risks are not simple. Even the highest-income areas face challenges. We suggest improvements in databases and tools to increase the focus on and monitoring of the breadth of risks people face in all areas.