Skip to main content
Login
  1. Home
  2. The Field Guide to Mixing Social and Biophysical Methods in Environmental Research
  3. 16. Using mixed methods to confront disparities in public health interventions in urban community gardens
Open Book Publishers

Using mixed methods to confront disparities in public health interventions in urban community gardens

  • Melanie Malone(author)
Chapter of: The Field Guide to Mixing Social and Biophysical Methods in Environmental Research(pp. 309–326)
  • Export Metadata
  • Metadata
  • Locations
  • Contributors
  • References

Export Metadata

Metadata
Title Using mixed methods to confront disparities in public health interventions in urban community gardens
ContributorMelanie Malone(author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0418.16
Landing pagehttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0418/chapters/10.11647/obp.0418.16
Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
CopyrightMelanie Malone;
PublisherOpen Book Publishers
Published on2025-02-25
Long abstract

This chapter details a mixed methods approach to investigate how contaminant concentrations of heavy metals, petroleum products, and the herbicide glyphosate impact urban community gardeners and farmers in and near Seattle, Washington. Using a mixture of soil and plant sampling, interviews, surveys, informal conversations, and advocacy, the study revealed that many pathways of exposure to contaminants are often overlooked. The study also examined how traditional risk assessment has not served communities being impacted by contamination in urban community gardens, particularly those from marginalized communities. Using an environmental justice framework, the chapter further elaborates on how politics, subjectivity, and environmental racism all shape risk assessment. Finally, the chapter offers suggestions for better ways to analyse risk, harm, and exposure in urban community gardens, and for reciprocal research that benefits community partners.

Page rangepp. 309–326
Print length18 pages
LanguageEnglish (Original)
Locations
Landing PageFull text URLPlatform
PDFhttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0418/chapters/10.11647/obp.0418.16Landing pagehttps://books.openbookpublishers.com/10.11647/obp.0418.16.pdfFull text URL
HTMLhttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0418/chapters/10.11647/obp.0418.16Landing pagehttps://books.openbookpublishers.com/10.11647/obp.0418/ch16.xhtmlFull text URLPublisher Website
Contributors

Melanie Malone

(author)
Associate Professor in the School of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences at University of Washington
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7054-0924
References
  1. Ali, H.N., S.L. Sheffield, J.E. Bauer, R.P. Caballero-Gill, N.M. Gasparini, J. Libarkin, K.K. Gonzales, J. Willenbring, E. Amir-Lin, J. Cisneros, D. Desai, M. Erwin, E. Gallant, K.J. Gomez, B.A. Keisling, R. Mahon, E. Marín-Spiotta, L. Welcome, and B. Schneider. 2021. ‘An actionable anti-racism plan for geoscience organizations’, Nat. Commun., 12.
  2. Balotin, L., S. Distler, A. Williams, S.J.W. Peters, C.M. Hunter, C. Theal, G. Frank, T. Alvarado, R. Hernandez, A. Hines, and E. Saikawa. 2020. ‘Atlanta residents’ knowledge regarding heavy metal exposures and remediation in urban agriculture’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17.
  3. CATO Institute. 1998. ‘Science is badly used in risk assessment’, Cato Institute, https://www.cato.org/speeches/science-badly-used-risk-assessment
  4. CDC. 2022. ‘Lead FAQs’, Lead CDC, https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/faqs/lead-faqs.htm
  5. CDC. 2021. ‘Blood lead reference value’, Lead CDC, https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/data/blood-lead-reference-value.htm
  6. Cram, S. 2016. ‘Living in dose: Nuclear work and the politics of permissible exposure’, Public Culture, 28, pp. 519–539.
  7. Demery, A.-J.C. and M.A. Pipkin. 2021. ‘Safe fieldwork strategies for at-risk individuals, their supervisors and institutions’, Nat. Ecol. Evol., 5, pp. 5–9.
  8. Eggen, R.I.L., R. Behra, P. Burkhardt-Holm, B.I. Escher, and N. Schweigert. 2004. ‘Challenges in ecotoxicology’, Environ. Sci. Technol., 38, pp. 58A–64A.
  9. EPA. 2020. ‘Lead in soil’, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-10/documents/lead-in-soil-aug2020.pdf
  10. EPA. 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook 2011 Edition (Final Report) (EPA).
  11. EPA. 2005. ‘Ecological soil screening levels for lead’, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/eco-ssl_lead.pdf
  12. EPA. 2015. ‘Brownfields and urban agriculture: Interim guidelines for safe gardening practices’, https://www.epa.gov/brownfields/brownfields-and-urban-agriculture-interim-guidelines-safe-gardening-practices
  13. Fagin, D. 2012. ‘Toxicology: the learning curve’, Nature, 490, pp. 462–465.
  14. Felter, S. and M. Dourson. 1998. ‘The inexact science of risk assessment (and implications for risk management’, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 4, pp. 245–251.
  15. Filippelli, G.M. and M.A. Laidlaw. 2010. ‘The elephant in the playground: confronting lead-contaminated soils as an important source of lead burdens to urban populations’, Perspect Biol. Med., 53, pp. 31–45.
  16. Flynn, L.Y., A. Kofman, A. Shaw, L. Song, M. Miller, and F. Kathleen. n.d. ‘Poison in the air’, ProPublica, https://www.propublica.org/article/toxmap-poison-in-the-air?token=qSckpj4gt77NMS0djk1uIFCImwpRjeg9
  17. Guthman, J. 2011. Weighing In: Obesity,Food Justice, and the Limits of Capitalism (University of California Press).
  18. Hunter, C.M., D.H.Z. Williamson, M.O. Gribble, H. Bradshaw, M. Pearson, E. Saikawa, P.B. Ryan, and M. Kegler. 2019. ‘Perspectives on heavy metal soil testing among community gardeners in the United States: a mixed methods Approach’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16.
  19. Kasvi, E., Chapter 45, this volume. ‘Uncrewed Airborne Systems’.
  20. Kim, B.F., M.N. Poulsen, J.D. Margulies, K.L. Dix, A.M. Palmer, and K.E. Nachman. 2014. ‘Urban community gardeners’ knowledge and perceptions of soil contaminant risks’, PLOS ONE, 9.
  21. Lewis, D., S. Francis, K. Francis-Strickland, H. Castleden, and R. Apostle. 2020. ‘If only they had accessed the data: Governmental failure to monitor pulp mill impacts on human health in Pictou Landing First Nation’, Social Science and Medicine, 288.
  22. Lupolt, S., R. Santo, B. Kim, C. Green, E. Codling, A. Rule, R. Chen, K. Scheckel, M. Strauss, A. Cocke, N. Little, V. Rupp, R. Viqueira, J. Illuminati, A. Schmidt, and K.E. Nachman. 2021. ‘The safe urban harvests study: a community-driven cross-sectional assessment of metals in soil, irrigation water, and produce from urban farms and gardens in Baltimore, Maryland’, Environmental Health Perspectives, 129.
  23. Lupolt, S.N., J. Agnew, G. Ramachandran, T.A. Burke, R.D. Kennedy, and K.E. Nachman. 2022. ‘A qualitative characterization of meso-activity factors to estimate soil exposure for agricultural workers’, Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, 33, pp. 140–154.
  24. Malone, M. 2021a. ‘Seeking justice, eating toxics: overlooked contaminants in urban community gardens’, Agricultural and Human Values, 39, pp. 165–184.
  25. Malone, M. 2021b. ‘Teaching critical physical geography’, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 45, pp. 465–478.
  26. Malone, M., S. Hamlin, and S.I. Richard. 2023. ‘Uprooting urban garden contamination’, Environmental Science and Policy, 142, pp. 50–61.
  27. Meadow, A., Wilmer, H., and Ferguson, D., Chapter 5, this volume. ‘Expanding research ethics for inclusive and transdisciplinary research’.
  28. Miranda, M.L., D. Kim, M.A.O. Galeano, C.J. Paul, A.P. Hull, and S.P. Morgan. 2007. ‘The relationship between early childhood blood lead levels and performance on end-of-grade tests’, Environmental Health Perspectives, 115, pp. 1242–1247.
  29. Mitchell, R.G., H.M. Spliethoff, L.N. Ribaudo, D.M. Lopp, H.A. Shayler, L.G. Marquez-Bravo, V.T. Lambert, G.S. Ferenz, J.M. Russell-Anelli, E.B. Stone, and M.B. McBride. 2014. ‘Lead (Pb) and other metals in New York City community garden soils: Factors influencing contaminant distributions’, Environmental Pollution, 187, pp. 162–169.
  30. Pulido, L. and J. De Lara. 2018. ‘Reimagining “justice” in environmental justice: Radical ecologies, decolonial thought, and the Black Radical Tradition’, Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 1, pp. 76–98.
  31. Ramirez-Andreotta, M.D., M.L. Brusseau, J. Artiola, R.M. Maier, and A.J. Gandolfi. 2015. ‘Building a co-created citizen science program with gardeners neighboring a superfund site: The Gardenroots case study’, International Public Health Journal, 7.
  32. Saikawa, E. and G.M. Filippelli. 2021. ‘Invited perspective: Assessing the contaminant exposure risks of urban gardening: Call for updated health guidelines’, Environmental Health Perspectives, 129.11.
  33. Sarewitz, D. 2004. ‘How science makes environmental controversies worse’, Environmental Science and Policy: Science, Policy, and Politics: Learning from Controversy Over The Skeptical Environmentalist, 7, pp. 385–403.
  34. Shayler, H., M. McBride, and E. Harrison. 2009. Sources and Impacts of Contaminants in Soils (Cornell Waste Management Institute).
  35. Steffan, J.J., E.C. Brevik, L.C. Burgess, and A. Cerdà. 2018. ‘The effect of soil on human health: an overview’, European Journal of Soil Science, 69, pp. 159–171.
  36. Van Sant, L. 2021. ‘”The long-time requirements of the nation”: The US Cooperative Soil Survey and the political ecologies of improvement’, Antipode, 53, pp. 686–704.
  37. Venton, D. 2020. ‘Ten simple rules for building an anti-racist research lab’, KQED, https://www.kqed.org/science/1966972/ten-simple-rules-for-building-an-anti-racist-research-lab
  38. Winters, J. 2021. ‘EPA might water down its cleanup standards for Seattle’s only river’, Grist, https://grist.org/science/epa-proposal-environmental-justice-lower-duwamish-superfund-seattle/
  39. Wölfle-Hazard, C. 2022. Underflows, Feminist Technosciences (University of Washington Press).
  40. Ybarra, M. 2021. ‘Site fight! Toward the abolition of immigrant detention on Tacoma’s tar pits (and everywhere else)’, Antipode, 53, pp. 36–55.
  41. Yen-Kohl, E., Collective, and T.N.F.C.W. 2016. ‘”We’ve been studied to death, we ain’t gotten anything”: (Re)claiming environmental knowledge production through the praxis of writing collectives’, Capitalism Nature Socialism, 27, pp. 52–67.
  42. Younes, L., A. Kofman, A. Shaw, L. Song, M. Miller, and K. Flynn. 2021. ‘Poison in the air’, https://www.propublica.org/article/toxmap-poison-in-the-air

Export Metadata

UK registered social enterprise and Community Interest Company (CIC).

Company registration 14549556

Metadata

  • By book
  • By publisher
  • GraphQL API
  • Export API

Resources

  • Downloads
  • Videos
  • Merch
  • Presentations
  • Service status

Contact

  • Email
  • Bluesky
  • Mastodon
  • Github

Copyright © 2026 Thoth Open Metadata. Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.