Exploring viable buyout pathways for enhanced health in Galena Park, TX

Abstract

This study addresses the pressing need for effective solutions to public health concerns in environmental justice communities, where traditional approaches often fall short. Buyouts, the purchase of an eligible property with the intent to reduce risk, have emerged as a promising strategy; yet, their implementation faces challenges related to cost and the identification of willing participants. To explore this issue, a cross-sectional study (N = 130) was conducted, focusing on the factors influencing willingness to participate in buyout programs. The study found that residents living near Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) facilities and in flood-prone areas are significantly more likely to consider buyouts (Odds Ratio = 3.416, P-Value <0.001), even after adjustments for various factors. This finding is pivotal, as it narrows the focus to a specific geographic region, which not only bears the brunt of adverse health impacts but also presents an opportunity for targeted interventions. The introduction of green space solutions in these high-risk zones also emerges as a feasible improvement strategy, offering potential health benefits to the community. This research sheds light on the nuances of implementing buyout programs in environmentally burdened communities, providing valuable insights for policymakers and urban planners seeking to enhance public health outcomes.

1. Introduction

Research consistently shows that industrial activities and subsequent environmental contamination disproportionately affect communities of lower socioeconomic status and communities of color (Johnston & Cushing, Citation2020). The proximity to such industries can have negative health implications, and the unequal distribution of these environmental health risks has been linked to practices of racial residential segregation in the United States (Morello-Frosch and Lopez, Citation2006). Johnston and Cushing’s (Citation2020) literature review points out that residential proximity to industries such as oil and gas extraction, agriculture, and chemical and metal manufacturing is often found in communities with high poverty indicators. This is corroborated by literature from the 1980s and 1990s, which found that hazardous waste landfills were disproportionately located in minority-majority communities in the Southeast; a similar pattern was observed with municipal incinerators and landfills in Houston, and several other studies highlighted this disparity with hazardous and toxic sites across the United States (Brown, Citation1995). Brown (Citation1995) also suggests that this environmental health disparity can exacerbate issues of overall neighborhood quality, perpetuating a cycle of property devaluation and stigma. Health implications of this disproportionate spread of industrial facilities include increased risks of various cancers, respiratory diseases like asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or COPD, and reproductive issues such as low birth weight, preterm birth, and other birth and reproductive complications (Jephcote et al., Citation2020; Johnston & Cushing, Citation2020). This major public health disparity is critically important to address through risk mitigation and cannot be ignored in environmental health research on industrial exposures and disasters.

Of particular concern are the public health impacts associated with living in close proximity to industrial sites. In the community of Galena Park, TX, USA a cross-sectional study (N = 130) was conducted to explore this issue (Sansom et al., Citation2023). The study used the 12-item Short Form Health Survey for general physical health, self-reported noncancerous chronic conditions, and self-reported cancer diagnoses. The findings revealed significantly lower general physical health scores in medium and high-risk areas. While not statistically significant, there was a twofold increased risk of chronic conditions and a higher, albeit non-significant, risk of cancer in the highest-risk areas compared to the lowest-risk areas. This research highlights the importance of geographic location in health outcomes, even within small communities. Risk perceptions are a critical aspect of public health practice due to their significant impact on individual and population decision-making for health behaviors and willingness to engage in forms of risk mitigation (Fischhoff, Bostrom & Quadrel, Citation1993). In relation to environmental health hazards like contaminant exposure and hazard or technological events, risk perceptions might influence decisions to obey hazard warnings, shelter-in-place, engage in hazardous response training, and even move from a heavily exposed community (Sansom et al., Citation2021). In order to protect populations from the health effects associated with acute and chronic exposure to pollutants and hazardous chemicals, it is essential to understand factors that contribute to risk perception and effective communication.

Environmental justice is also an urban planning issue, typically associated with public health, waste management, and laws. Overlapping issues between environmental justice and urban planning include inequitable housing practices, poor land use practices, and industrial siting too near residential areas or in areas likely to cause issues or accidents (Environmental Protection Agency, Citation2022a). Equitable development, a relatively new approach to urban planning, focuses on environmental justice through public involvement and interdisciplinary problem-solving (American Institute of Architects, Citation2021; Environmental Protection Agency, Citation2022a). This approach is designed to allow all residents of a community, regardless of demographics, to access resources that help them thrive (American Institute of Architects, Citation2021). For successful, equitable development, strategies must consider historical and current conditions with the intention of eliminate experienced inequities and focus on allowing minority voices to influence decisions impacting their communities (American Institute of Architects, Citation2021). Inequities in education, employment, and housing severely limit opportunities for low-income residents to relocate away from polluted areas (Center for Science and Democracy & t.e.j.a.s., Citation2016), emphasizing the need for engaging these communities and addressing these inequities.

A systematic review by Fitzpatrick-Lewis et al. (Citation2010) found no single best practice for communicating about environmental health risks, and that targeted approaches containing multiple differing components work most effectively. The studies analyzed represented a variety of different populations and countries, and the methods of interest included print and verbal communication, media, word-of-mouth, educational programs, technical versus non-technical language, and source-credibility (Fitzpatrick-Lewis et al., Citation2010). Other factors like trust, previous knowledge of the risk, and previous experience with the risk were studied, and the authors concluded that they affect risk communication strategies (Fitzpatrick-Lewis et al., Citation2010). Specifically for acute hazard events (both natural and anthropogenic), previous experience, including loss and/or damages, made future warnings more effective (Fitzpatrick-Lewis et al., Citation2010). This may pose a particular challenge to communicating the risk of infrequently occurring disasters. Overall, the review finds that communication methods incorporating personal interactions and credible sources are more effective, but tailoring the approach to the community of interest is of critical importance (Fitzpatrick-Lewis et al., Citation2010).

1.1. Community buyout experiences

Buyouts, or the voluntary acquisition of hazard-damaged or at risk property, have often been considered a strategy to mitigate environmental justice issues, with the challenge being in assessing where and who would benefit from such efforts. Limited data exists on the outcomes of buyout programs, but their popularity and potential scale have been increasing (Binder et al., Citation2015; Koslov et al., Citation2021). These programs are primarily aimed at communities prone to environmental disasters, including both man-made and natural disasters. For instance, Corpus Christi, Texas, with its heavy industrial cluster including six oil refineries, is known for its susceptibility to such disasters. This led to the creation of the Environmental Justice Housing Fund (EJHF) to assist residents of fence-line communities like Dona Park in relocating away from heavy industry (Ozymy & Jarrell, Citation2017). However, relocation efforts can be challenging as residents often have deep-rooted ties to their communities or seek higher compensation for their properties than market value, as was the case in Corpus Christi (Ozymy & Jarrell, Citation2017).

Following Hurricane Sandy’s devastation in New York, the state implemented a home buyout program to facilitate the relocation of residents from hazard-prone areas (Binder et al., Citation2015). This program’s reception varied significantly between neighborhoods: Oakwood Beach residents mostly supported it, while Rockaway Park residents predominantly opposed it, highlighting the complex interplay of community identity, demographic diversity, and disaster experience in shaping attitudes towards buyouts (Binder et al., Citation2015).

Koslov et al. (Citation2021) examined 11 neighborhoods affected by Hurricane Sandy, categorizing them into groups based on their response: buyout, wanted buyout, and rebuild in place. This study revealed that the decision to stay or relocate is influenced by a myriad of factors, including community attachment, financial incentives, and the psychological impact of disasters (Koslov et al., Citation2021). In New York, the state’s more generous financial compensation for buyouts, attributed to the high cost of living in the area, played a significant role in residents’ decisions to relocate (Koslov et al., Citation2021). Those who chose to stay often did so because of a strong sense of community and place attachment despite diminishing insurance claims and the stress associated with rebuilding in disaster-prone areas (Koslov et al., Citation2021).

As of December 2022, the Harris County, TX Flood Control District’s Home Buyout Program has been a testament to the willingness of residents to relocate from risk areas when provided with adequate financial resources. With over 4,000 applicants and 1,600 approvals for a collective 516 million dollars’ worth of homes, the program highlights a significant demand for buyouts in flood-prone areas (Harris County Flood Control District, Citation2022). While Harris County does not have a specific program for home buyouts related to industrial proximity, the success of its flood-related buyout program demonstrates the potential for similar initiatives in areas affected by industrial pollution.

The examples above illustrate that while buyouts are a viable strategy for mitigating the risks associated with living near environmental hazards, their effectiveness and acceptance vary based on numerous factors. These include the financial generosity of the program, the severity of risk, community attachment, and residents’ experiences with disasters. Understanding these dynamics is crucial in designing and implementing buyout programs that not only offer financial relief but also respect and address the complex social and emotional ties people have with their communities. In doing so, buyout programs can become more than just a financial transaction; they can be a means to enhance environmental justice, reduce risk, and foster new beginnings for communities facing the brunt of environmental hazards.

There are also growing concerns with the implementation of buyout programs, particularly regarding their perceived voluntariness and the social impact they impose on affected communities. While in the context of natural hazards, research has found social impacts can include the disruption of community relationships, ecological stress, crowding in new environments, and psychological anxiety with buyouts (Riad & Norris, Citation1996). While these programs aim to mitigate long-term risks, homeowners often report feeling coerced into participation due to financial pressures, limited alternative options, or the declaration of their properties as substantially damaged, which restricts rebuilding opportunities. These concerns are amplified by the disruption of social networks and displacement from established support systems, disproportionately affecting low-income and minority groups. Procedural issues, such as unclear communication, perceived inequities in property valuations, and strategic moratoriums on rebuilding, further erode trust in the process. Such challenges underscore the need for buyout programs to prioritize transparency, equity, and the social well-being of participants, ensuring that decisions are genuinely voluntary and that the long-term impacts on communities are thoughtfully addressed (De Vries & Fraser, Citation2012).

This research originates from a multi-year initiative in the City of Galena Park. It is focuses on examining the specific factors influencing residents’ willingness to participate in property buyout agreements (Atoba et al., Citation2023). This study builds on the foundation of previous research, which has extensively explored the health implications of living in close proximity to industrial areas and the potential benefits of implementing green space solutions (Sansom et al., Citation2023). By focusing on the factors that drive residents’ decisions regarding buyouts, this research seeks to provide a more nuanced understanding of the interplay between environmental risks, community attachment, spatial location, and individual perceptions. This insight is crucial for developing effective and empathetic buyout programs that address environmental justice issues and resonate with the needs and expectations of the community.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Site location

Galena Park, a small city on the northern bank of the Houston Ship Channel, is uniquely positioned to address the objectives of this research, given its significant exposure to environmental hazards. Nearly 40% of its residents live within a mile of facilities covered by the Environmental Protection Agency’s Risk Management Program (RMP) (Desikan, Citation2019). This program requires facilities housing hazardous chemicals to create plans for potential chemical accidents, prevention strategies, and emergency response protocols (Environmental Protection Agency, Citation2022b). This exposure rate is notably higher compared to nearby, wealthier, predominantly white, non-Hispanic communities (Desikan, Citation2019). The proximity to RMP-regulated facilities puts these communities at high risk of serious impacts from industrial incidents. Annually, approximately 150 catastrophic and 425 less severe chemical accidents occur at these facilities (Center for Science and Democracy & t.e.j.a.s., Citation2016). Moreover, the potential impact radius of some RMP facilities can extend up to 25 miles, leaving residents little time to evacuate in the event of a hazardous release (Center for Science and Democracy & t.e.j.a.s., Citation2016).

Galena Park’s history with the petrochemical industry dates back to its incorporation in 1935, being named after the Galena-Signal Oil Company (City of Galena Park, Citationn.d..). Its residents have long been concerned about pollution and public health issues but face challenges due to a lack of resources and knowledge for effective action (Air Alliance Houston, Citation2022). The city’s proximity to high- traffic roads, railways, and petrochemical sites contributes to its poor air quality, with Houston known for having high levels of toxic chemicals in the air, such as benzene, mercury, 1–3 butadiene, and formaldehyde (Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services, Citationn.d..).

Demographically, Galena Park has a population of approximately 10,461 across 3,019 households, with 86.4% identifying as Hispanic or Latino and 35% born outside the United States (United States Census Bureau, Citation2021). The median household income is $47,849, with 27.5% living in poverty and only 69.2% of those under 65 having health insurance. Educational attainment is low, with 36.6% of residents over 25 not completing high school and only 7.1% holding at least a bachelor’s degree (United States Census Bureau, Citation2021). These socioeconomic factors, coupled with limited healthcare access, contribute to major health issues remaining unaddressed.

Given this backdrop, the research conducted in Galena Park is uniquely tailored to explore the complex interactions between environmental risks, socioeconomic factors, and community health. The city’s high exposure to industrial pollutants and its diverse, economically disadvantaged population provide an essential case for understanding the challenges and needs in the context of environmental justice. This research aims to delve into the community’s perspectives on industrial hazards, the readiness for relocation, and their expectations from mitigation strategies. Doing so will offer critical insights for policy development and urban planning aimed at improving environmental justice and public health in Galena Park and similar communities across the nation.

2.2. Questionnaire and data collection

An adapted version of the Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) methodology from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was employed to gather a representative sample for the study. To ensure comparability across the three delineated spatial areas (outlined in Section 2.3), specific random areas within each zone were designated for data collection. Within the city, 30 zones were chosen at random, distributed across the three identified risk map locations. The objective of this CASPER approach was to conduct 210 interviews, which has been demonstrated to provide generalizability to the target community, irrespective of its population density (Schnall et al., Citation2017).

During six days of data collection in the autumn of 2021, teams trained in survey methodology navigated public streets in the residential parts of the city. Exclusions from the survey canvassing were homes that were entirely fenced, abandoned, or considered unsafe by the interview team. The EpiAssist program at Texas A&M University Health Science Center School of Public Health played a crucial role in facilitating the survey collection process (EpiAssist, Citation2022). Texas Target Communities at Texas A&M University (TTC, Citation2022) managed the logistical aspects and community engagement for the project. Each survey team comprised two or three members, including graduate students from the EpiAssist program, trained faculty, and at least one member proficient in Spanish. Participants under 18 years of age were not included in this research.

The survey process, which lasted about 20 minutes per household, was conducted through interviews. It gathered data on various aspects, including demographic details, the duration of residence in the homes and city, and residents’ environmental risk perceptions, particularly concerning air, soil, and water quality. Additionally, it assessed their health concerns in relation to previous hazard experiences, industrial activities, and their residential location.

2.3. Spatial analytics

In assessing the spatial distribution of flooding and contaminant transferal risks in Galena Park, residential properties were analyzed for their exposure to historical flooding and proximity to contaminant sites, delineating them into three zones of high, medium, and low risk. This assessment involved creating a composite risk score for each property by integrating four key components: flood probability, storm surge exposure, and proximity to toxic and industrial facilities. These components were quantified using a 5-point ordinal scale derived from existing models and datasets, including the NOAA’s Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model for storm surges and the EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory for toxic facility proximity. The final risk assessment for each property was determined by combining these scores, providing a comprehensive view of the varying degrees of environmental risk across Galena Park. More detailed methods can be viewed in Sansom et al. (Citation2023).

2.4. Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics for demographics and other variables were computed. We classified race into four categories: non-Hispanic white, non-white Hispanic, African American, and other, due to the limited number of respondents outside these groups. Environmental concerns were summed together (participant identified air, soil, and water concerns in their environment) for a composite score. The analysis used logistic regression to pinpoint the key drivers influencing residents’ willingness for buyouts and reports crude and adjusted odds ratios and correspondent confidence intervals. This method was chosen for its suitability in handling binary outcome variables like willingness to participate in buyouts. Statistical calculations were performed using STATA 18 (College Station, TX) and Microsoft Excel (Redmond, WA).

3. Results

The demographic distribution (Table 1) of respondents in a study reveals that participants were predominantly female, accounting for 57.69% of the total, while males comprised 42.31%. In terms of race and ethnicity, the largest group was non-white Hispanics (61.54%), followed by non-Hispanic Whites (18.46%), African Americans (14.62%), and a smaller percentage identified as ‘Other’ (5.39%). The age distribution was fairly broad, with the largest groups being those aged 35–44 (23.08%) and 65 or older (20.77%), while the 18–24 age group was the smallest (5.39%). Regarding education, the most common level was high school graduates or GED holders (40.00%), followed by individuals with some high school education (23.08%). A smaller proportion had a college degree (11.54%) or higher. Regarding language preference, most respondents preferred English (61.54%), with a substantial minority preferring Spanish (38.46%). The values in the table may not sum up to 100% due to rounding. This distribution suggests a diverse sample in terms of gender, race, age, education, and language preference.

Table 1.

Distribution of study respondents

Characteristic	N (%)*
Sex
Male	55 (42.31)
Female	75 (57.69)
Race/Ethnicity
Non-Hispanic White	24 (18.46)
Non-White Hispanic	80 (61.54)
African American	19 (14.62)
Other	7 (5.39)
Age in Years
18,Äì24	7 (5.39)
25,Äì34	20 (15.39)
35,Äì44	30 (23.08)
45,Äì54	25 (19.23)
55,Äì64	21 (16.15)
65+	27 (20.77)
Education
Some High School	30 (23.08)
High School Graduate or GED	52 (40.00)
Some College	8 (6.15)
Vocational Degree	20 (15.39)
College Degree	15 (11.54)
Graduate Degree	4 (3.08)
Doctoral Degree	1 (0.77)
Language Preference
English	80 (61.54)
Spanish	50 (38.46)

An approximate balance was achieved among the three different risk locations (low, medium, and high), based on location and flood experience, with 50 individuals in the low-risk, 36 in the medium-risk, and 44 in the high-risk groups. The predominant racial classification in each risk group was non-white Hispanic, with the highest risk group comprising 65.2% non-white Hispanics and the lowest risk group having 60.1%. The mean ages across these groups were closely aligned, being 49.2, 47.9, and 49 years for the low, medium, and high-risk groups, respectively. Residential properties within the FEMA 100-year floodplain had high flood risk scores, aligning with historical flood events like Hurricane Harvey in 2017. Properties with high contaminant risk scores were primarily located in the southern part of Galena Park, close to petrochemical facilities. The highest contaminant risk scores were observed in residential properties near petrochemical storage tanks and the Houston Ship Channel. These areas have also experienced historical flooding over several years (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Site location and risk zones.

Table 2 details the logistic regression analysis exploring the impact of various covariates on the willingness of residents to accept a buyout program. The variables examined include sex, race, neighborhood tenure, education level, environmental concerns (regarding water, air, and soil quality), perceived health risks (belief in negative health impacts from the environment), and risk zone location (proximity to Toxic Release Inventory facilities and flood risk). The analysis indicates that sex, race, neighborhood tenure, and education level are not significant predictors of willingness to accept a buyout, as evidenced by their respective p-values of 0.565, 0.554, 0.669, and 0.741. Environmental concerns, however, show a positive coefficient (1.279) with a p-value close to the significance threshold (0.052), suggesting that increased environmental concerns may positively influence the willingness for a buyout. Perceived health risks also have a positive coefficient (0.388) but are not statistically significant (p-value 0.357). The variable ‘Risk Zone’ shows a significant positive influence (coefficient of 1.219) on the willingness to accept a buyout, with a p-value of 0.034, indicating a higher likelihood of residents in riskier zones accepting buyouts. The coefficients, standard errors, p-values, and 95% confidence intervals are provided for each variable, offering a detailed view of their impacts on residents’ buyout decisions.

Table 2.

Logistic Regression Comparing Covariates Sex, race, tenure, education, environmental concerns, health concerns, and risk zone location on willingness to accept a buyout program

Variable	Coefficient	Std. Error	P-Value	95% Confidence Interval
Sex	,àí0.503	0.875	0.565	,àí2.212 to 1.212
Race	0.183	0.31	0.554	,àí0.424 to 0.791
Tenure in Neighborhood	,àí0.011	0.027	0.669	,àí0.064 to 0.041
Education	,àí0.107	0.324	0.741	,àí0.742 to 0.528
Environmental Concerns	1.279	0.659	0.052	2.570 to,àí0.011
Perceive Health Risk	0.388	0.421	0.357	,àí0.437 to 1.214
Risk Zone	1.219	0.575	0.034	0.092 to 2.345

Table 3 analyzes the association between residents’ willingness for a buyout and the prevalence odds ratio (POR) categorized by risk level (low, medium, high) and adjusted for age, sex, and perceptions of environmental risks. When comparing the medium-risk group to the referent (low-risk) group, the crude POR is 1.148 (with a 95% confidence interval of 0.387 to 3.402), and the adjusted POR (accounting for age, sex, and environmental perceptions) is slightly higher at 1.258 (95% CI: 0.405 to 3.909). However, the high-risk group shows a significantly higher likelihood of willingness for a buyout, with a crude POR of 3.416665 (95% CI: 1.374 to 8.497) and an adjusted POR of 4.065 (95% CI: 1.535 to 10.762). These figures indicate that residents in high-risk areas are substantially more likely to be willing to participate in a buyout program, especially when considering adjustments for age, sex, and environmental perceptions. The confidence intervals suggest a degree of uncertainty in these estimates, particularly for the medium-risk group. However, the trend shows increased willingness for buyouts in higher-risk areas.

Table 3.

Crude and adjusted prevalence odds ratio (POR) and 95% confidence intervals on willingness for buyout by location

Willingness for Buyout	POR	95% Confidence Intervals	Adj POR*	95% Confidence Intervals
Low Risk	1 (ref)		1 (ref)
Medium Risk	1.148	0.387 to 3.402	1.258	0.405 to 3.909
High Risk	3.416	1.374 to 8.497	4.065	1.535 to 10.762

4. Discussion

This research revealed a notable connection between environmental risks and the willingness of Galena Park residents to engage in property buyout programs. Particularly, those living in areas with heightened industrial hazards and a history of flooding showed a stronger inclination toward accepting buyouts. Employing a thorough methodology, including an adapted Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) approach. The study shed light on the significant impact of environmental risk perceptions on public health decision-making. Residents in high-risk demonstrated a keen awareness of health hazards such as the likelihood of chronic conditions and cancer, which correlated with their readiness to participate in buyout programs.

The strength of this research was further enhanced by the collaboration with local community organizations like the Environmental Community Advocates of Galena Park (ECAGP, Citationn.d.). This partnership provided valuable insights into the community’s perspective, ensuring that the study’s findings were deeply rooted in the actual experiences and concerns of the residents. This collaborative approach has been instrumental in delivering a nuanced understanding of the interplay between environmental challenges and community response strategies. By aligning scientific inquiry with community engagement, the study explored the environmental and socioeconomic factors that drive buyout program participation and highlighted the importance of community-driven approaches in addressing complex environmental justice issues.

This study, while providing valuable insights, has several limitations inherent to its design and methodology. As a cross-sectional study, it is important to note that causal relationships cannot be established. The associations observed between environmental risks, health outcomes, and willingness for buyouts only suggest correlations and not direct causation. This limitation is crucial for interpreting the study’s findings, especially in policy-making and community-planning contexts. Another limitation lies in the sample size. Although the research aimed to obtain a representative sample of 210 participants, this target was not met. The study also employed an interviewer-administered survey method, which may lead to response bias, which could skew the results, particularly in assessing the participants’ environmental risk perceptions. Furthermore, there is a significant possibility of unmeasured confounding by other socioeconomic factors not captured in the study. Variables such as insurance status, access to transportation, and trust in the medical system, which were not collected, could significantly influence the residents’ knowledge.

The discovery that the majority of negative public health measures, including cancers and non-cancerous chronic conditions, are concentrated in high-risk zones (Sansom et al., Citation2023), which also correspond to the areas with the highest willingness for buyout participation, as revealed here, presents a significant opportunity in environmental health management. This correlation is beneficial for several reasons, particularly in the context of Galena Park, where the geographic concentration of health risks makes buyout programs not only more targeted but also financially feasible. Firstly, the concentration of health issues in a relatively small geographic area allows for a more efficient allocation of resources. Buyout programs, often constrained by budgetary limitations (Siders & Gerber-Chavez, Citation2021), can achieve greater impact when focused on specific high-risk areas where the need and willingness to relocate are most pronounced. In areas like Galena Park, where industrial pollutants have seemingly had detrimental effects on public health, targeting buyout initiatives in these zones ensures that resources are directed where they are most needed and can be most effective. Furthermore, the integration of green space solutions in areas vacated through buyouts presents a dual advantage. Research has shown that green spaces not only act as buffers between populations and polluting entities but also play a role in reducing environmental pollutants (Cai et al., Citation2023; Newman et al., Citation2022; Prybutok et al., Citation2021; Wang et al., Citation2024; Meyer et al., Citation2018). The implementation of such green spaces in high-risk zones can lead to a significant decrease in ambient pollution levels, contributing to the overall improvement of air, soil, and water quality. This, in turn, benefits the broader community, including areas adjacent to these newly created green spaces.

The potential of green spaces extends beyond mere pollution reduction. They offer recreational and aesthetic benefits, contribute to biodiversity, and can improve residents’ mental and physical health in surrounding areas (Aronson et al., Citation2017; Rigolon et al., Citation2021). The transformation of high-risk zones into green spaces can thus catalyze positive environmental and social change, fostering a healthier and more sustainable urban ecosystem. Moreover, the willingness of residents in high-risk zones to participate in buyouts, and the feasibility of implementing green space solutions make this approach a viable and effective strategy for addressing environmental justice issues. It aligns with the principles of equitable development and recognizes the need for proactive measures to protect vulnerable communities from the adverse effects of industrial pollution. By focusing on these high-risk zones, buyout programs and subsequent green space initiatives can achieve tangible improvements in public health, environmental quality, and community well-being.

There are still numerous concerns and unknowns surrounding the implementation and evaluation of buyout programs, particularly regarding the challenges in defining what constitutes ‘success’. Success is often narrowly framed by agencies as the removal of properties from hazard-prone areas or the avoidance of future disaster costs, without adequately addressing the long-term social and economic outcomes for affected individuals and communities. For instance, questions about the loss of community cohesion, the disruption of social networks, and the equity of resource allocation remain unresolved. Additionally, the impact of buyouts on land-use dynamics and the broader implications for vulnerable populations are frequently overlooked. The absence of a universally agreed-upon framework for measuring success highlights the need for a more holistic approach that includes community voices and considers both material and non-material outcomes. Future research should aim to address these gaps, exploring not only the technical and economic aspects of buyouts but also their social, cultural, and psychological dimensions to ensure more equitable and effective programs (Manda et al., Citation2023).

The challenges associated with buyout programs for renters and multi-family housing residents highlight critical gaps in the design and implementation of these initiatives. Renters, often excluded from buyout considerations, face unique vulnerabilities, as their lack of property ownership disqualifies them from direct compensation. Without targeted policies, renters are frequently left to navigate uncertain housing markets, often relocating to areas with comparable or even greater environmental risks, perpetuating cycles of vulnerability and displacement. Additionally, the transient nature of rental housing can erode community cohesion and social networks, increasing the negative effects of relocation (Dundon & Camp, Citation2021).

Compounding these issues, gentrification often follows buyout programs, driving up property values and rents in redeveloped areas. Longtime residents, particularly renters, may find themselves priced out of their communities, further exacerbating social and economic inequities. Further, the mere act of creating green spaces in this area could increase cost with neighboring homes. As landlords seize opportunities to capitalize on rising property values, rental housing stock diminishes, reducing affordable housing options and pushing displaced individuals into precarious living situations. This dynamic underscore the need for comprehensive policies that address not only relocation but also the broader implications of environmental justice, housing equity, and community stability. Without these measures, buyout programs risk displacing vulnerable populations without delivering meaningful improvements in their quality of life (Fisher, Citation2015).

Despite the challenges and uncertainties associated with buyout programs, this research offers a hopeful outlook on their potential to address pressing environmental justice issues. However, willingness or perceived desire for a buyout is only one component of a much-needed comprehensive approach to ensure equitable and fair outcomes. By leveraging the willingness of high-risk communities like Galena Park to participate in buyouts and integrating strategies such as the creation of green spaces, there is an opportunity to make transformative changes. These efforts must be coupled with measures to address systemic challenges, such as ensuring post-buyout stability, mitigating risks of displacement or gentrification, and incorporating the needs of renters and multi-family households. Through continued collaboration with community organizations and a commitment to equitable development, buyout programs can evolve from simple relocation initiatives into powerful tools for community empowerment, environmental restoration, and sustainable public health improvements.

Availability of data and material

Data is available for any reasonable request