The Case of Argentina

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

This chapter presents the results of mapping industrial risk in Argentina and explains the empirical procedures followed to obtain the maps. The chapter is divided into three parts: The first part provides background information about industrial hazardousness in Argentina, while the second one studies the distribution of risk in the country, using the department or municipality as the unit of analysis. The third part presents a case study of the region with the highest concentration of departments/municipalities at high risk: the MABA (Metropolitan Area of Buenos Aires) using the census block group as the unit of analysis. The chapter also explores qualitatively situations of “environmental injustice” and notes that the conclusions regarding the correlation between vulnerability and environmental hazard in the case study differ from those obtained at national level. When the unit of analysis is census block group the spatial distribution suggests an inverse relationship between vulnerability and environmental hazard, where the risk gradient decreases with distance from the city of Buenos Aires as the social gradient of vulnerability increases. Although more detailed studies are required, this result suggests the need to develop indicators including different geographical units of analysis to examine local changes in the distribution of hazard trends.

Keywords

Environmental risks Industrial hazardousness Argentina Metropolitan area Buenos Aires Environmental justice 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Been, V., & Gupta, F. (1997). Coming to the nuisance or going to the barrios? A longitudinal analysis of environmental justice claims. Ecology Law Quarterly, 24, 1–56.Google Scholar
  2. Bowen, W. (2002). An analytical review of environmental justice research: What do we really know? Environmental Management, 29(1), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chudnovsky, D., Pupato, G., & Gutman, V. (2005). Environmental management and innovation in argentine industry. Determinants and Policy Implications. Documento Tecnico N° 36 (Fundación CENIT, Buenos Aires).Google Scholar
  4. CBI. (1998). Worth the Risk: Improving Environmental Regulation. London: Confederation of British Industry.Google Scholar
  5. CIA. (2011). The World FactBook. Central Intelligence Agency, Washington, USA. Retrieved September 7, 2011, from http://https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ar.html Google Scholar
  6. Dasgupta, S., & Wheeler, D. (2001). Small plants, industrial pollution and poverty. In R. Hillary (Ed.), Small and medium-sized firms and the environment (pp. 289–304). Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. ECLAC. (2010). Statistical yearbook for Latin America and the Caribbean. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean.Google Scholar
  8. Heitgerd, J. L, Burg, J. R., & Strictland, H. G. (1995). A geographic information systems approach to estimating and assessing national priorities list site demographics. Racial and Hispanic origin composition. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 4(3), 343–363.Google Scholar
  9. Hochstetler, K. (2002). After the boomerang. Environmental Movement and Politics in the La Plata River Basin. Global Environment Politics, 2, 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hochstetler, K. (2003). Fading green? Environmental Politics in the Mercosur Free Trade Agreement. Latin American Politics and Society, 45(4), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. INDEC. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos. (2003). ¿Qué es el Gran Buenos Aires? 12 p. Versión digital en. http://www.indec.gov.ar
  12. Liu, F. (2001). Environmental justice analysis. Theories, methods and practice. Boca Raton: Lewis Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Newell, P., & Muro, A. (2006). Corporate social and environmental responsibility in Argentina: The evolution of Agenda. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 24, 49–68.Google Scholar
  14. Perlin, S. A., Seltzer, W., Creason, J., & Sexton, K. (1995). Distribution of industrial air emissions by income and race in the United States: An approach using the toxic release inventory. Environmental Science and Technology, 29(1), 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. US GAO. (1983). Siting Hazardous Waste Landfills and their Correlation with Racial Status of Surrounding Communities. United States General Accounting Office.Google Scholar
  16. Vazquez-Brust, D., Plaza-Úbeda, J. A., Natenzon, C., & Burgos-Jimenez, J. (2009). ‘The challenges of businesses’ intervention in areas with high poverty and environmental deterioration: Promoting an integrated stakeholders’ approach in management education’. In C. Wankel & J. Stoner (Eds.), Management education for global sustainability (pp. 175–206). New York: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Vazquez-Brust, D., Liston-Heyes, C., Plaza-Úbeda, J., & Burgos-Jimenez, J. (2010). CSR, stakeholders’ management and stakeholders integration in Latin-America. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 171–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vives, A. (2006). Social and environmental responsibility in small and medium enterprises in Latin America. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 21, 39–50.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Philosophy and LettersInstitute of Geography “Romualdo Ardissone”, University of Buenos AiresBuenos AiresArgentina
  2. 2.The Centre for Business Relationships, Accountability, Sustainability and Society (BRASS)Cardiff UniversityCardiff WalesUK
  3. 3.Unidad de Coordinación de Programas y Proyectos con Financiamiento Externo: Programa de Infraestructura Hídrica de las Provincias del Norte GrandeMinisterio de Planificación Federal, Inversión Pública y ServiciosCABAArgentina

Personalised recommendations