This thesis will examine possible connection points between the health of a local environmental/climate news ecosystem and that local community’s belief in and vulnerability to the effects of climate change in Central Appalachia and Northern Virginia. The three counties that will be studied in Virginia are Arlington, Buchanan and Wise Counties. This research will be mainly a hypothesis-generating descriptive analysis of data, coupled with both interviews with researchers and local experts, in addition to observations from relevant literature about the possible connections between availability of environmental news with climate change, institutional belief and climate vulnerability data. The local history of resource extraction will also be explored. The point of this thesis is not to prove that a lack of access to strong, locally focused climate and environmental news increases vulnerability to the effects of climate change (although it does raise this as a possibility). Rather, it is to continue a conversation with journalists, media professionals and climate professionals about how to approach understanding and engaging groups left out of the climate conversation and groups who've been traditionally underserved by news media when it comes to climate information and appeals for institutional trust. This conversation is already happening, especially when it comes to the importance of the health of local, community focused news in general in Appalachia, but given the urgency and scale of the climate crisis, merits continuation and some inquiry into environmental news.

Environmental hazards and disaster researchers have demonstrated strong associations between sociodemographic indicators, such as age and socio-economic status (SES), and hazard exposures and health outcomes for individuals and in certain communities. At the same time, behavioral health and risk communications research has examined how individual psychology influences adaptive strategies and behaviors in the face of hazards. However, at present, we do not understand the explanatory mechanisms that explain relationships between larger scale social structure, individual psychology, and specific behaviors that may attenuate or amplify risk. Extreme heat presents growing risks in a rapidly warming and urbanizing world. This dissertation examines the social and behavioral mechanisms that may explain inequitable health outcomes from exposure to concurrent extreme heat and electrical power failure in Phoenix, AZ and extreme heat in Detroit, MI. Exploratory analysis of 163 surveys in Phoenix, AZ showed that age, gender, and respondent’s racialized group identity did not relate to thermal discomfort and self-reported heat illness, which were only predicted by SES (StdB = -0.52, p < 0.01). Of the explanatory mechanisms tested in the study, only relative air conditioning intensity and thermal discomfort explained self-reported heat illness. Thermal discomfort was tested as both a mechanism and outcome measure. Content analysis of 40 semi-structured interviews in Phoenix, AZ revealed that social vulnerability was associated with an increase in perceived hazard severity (StdB = 0.44, p < 0.01), a decrease in perceived adaptation efficacy (StdB = -0.38, p = 0.02), and an indirect increase (through adaptive efficacy) in maladaptive intentions (StdB = 0.18, p = 0.01). Structural equation modeling of 244 surveys in Phoenix, AZ and Detroit, MI revealed that relationships between previous heat illness experience, perceived heat risk, and adaptive intentions were significantly moderated by adaptive capacity: high adaptive capacity households were more likely to undertake adaptive behaviors, and those decisions were more heavily influenced by risk perceptions and previous experiences. However, high adaptive capacity households had lower risk perceptions and fewer heat illness experiences than low adaptive capacity households. A better understanding of the mechanisms that produce social vulnerability can facilitate more salient risk messaging and more targeted public health interventions. For example, public health risk messaging that provides information on the efficacy of specific adaptations may be more likely to motivate self-protective action, and ultimately protect populations.

Low-income areas are more likely to be exposed to poor air quality and hazardous levels of criteria pollutants, including particulate matter. While this relationship is well documented in environmental justice and equity literature, there is less discussion of how it is addressed by regulatory air quality departments and their monitoring networks. Socioeconomic clustering in highly polluted areas presents a challenge for local regulatory agencies as it may result in over- or under-monitoring of certain income brackets. This is significant because, for regulatory bodies, what is monitored determines where environmental regulations are enforced. In this study, I look at the spatial concentrations of low-income neighborhoods and their proximity to regulatory fine particulate matter monitoring stations in Maricopa County, Arizona and Santiago Metropolitan Region, Chile. This study also evaluates which monitors are most often in exceedance of air quality standards for PM2.5. Using census data, individual monitor readings, and monitoring network assessment data to create tables and maps, I illustrate that, in both case studies, regulatory PM2.5 monitors are frequently positioned in proximity to very low-income or highly impoverished communities. The monitors most often and furthest past exceedance of federal air quality standards are those in (or closest) to the poorest parts of the urban center of the region. In both cases, these populations and monitors are heavily concentrated to the south and west of the region’s primary city. This is likely due to compounding factors attributed to urban geography and zoning that should be explored in future studies. I use these findings to suggest that income and poverty level should be evaluated as an environmental justice factor and as an area for improvement in assessments of regulatory monitoring networks, and to provide further evidence in the debate about equitable air quality monitoring.