Skip Navigation
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Your Environment. Your Health.

Environmental health risks and housing values: evidence from more than 1600 toxic plant openings and closings

Environmental Health Economic Analysis Annotated Bibliography

Details

Research article Cost-benefit analysis (CBA)
Authors
Currie J, Davis L Greenstone M, and Walker R
Journal
Am Econ Rev
Summary
This cost-benefit analysis examined the external costs of industrial plants that emit toxic pollutants on housing values and birth outcomes in five US States. The authors found that: 1) toxic air pollutants affect ambient air quality within only one mile of plants; 2) plant openings lead to 11 percent declines in housing values within 0.5 miles or loss of about $4.25 million for these houses; and 3) the incidence of low birthweight increased by 3% within 1 mile of operating industrial plants. Reliable measures of these different costs and benefits can help policymakers efficiently make siting decisions.
Population
Not available

Health Outcomes

  • Birth outcomes (low birthweight)

Environmental Agents

List of Environmental Agents:

  • Air pollutants

Source of Environmental Agents:

  • Industrial plants

Economic Evaluation / Methods and Source

Type:

  • Cost-benefit analysis (CBA)

Cost Measured:

  • Lost housing values

Potential Cost Measures:

  • Effects of criteria pollutants (particulates, ozone) which may harm human health over a broad geographic area
  • impacts on non-residential property

Benefits Measures:

  • Local economic benefits of a plant opening (e.g., jobs, increased wages)

Potential Benefits: (Not available)

Location:

  • Texas, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida

Models Used: (Not available)

Methods Used:

  • The authors used a partial equilibrium model to compare housing values and birth outcomes in areas near a toxic plant to those in slightly further away in five U.S. states. The authors — 1) merged data on toxic emissions, housing transactions, infant health, and plant opening and closing dates; 2) used a difference-in-difference strategy to characterize the transport of toxic emissions; 3) employed an econometric regression model to examine effects of plant openings and closings on housing values, exploring effects of plant and community characteristics; and 4) examined the relationship between infant health outcomes and distance from a plant, controlling for maternal characteristics using a two-step, group-level estimator.

Sources Used:

  • Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) to identify plants emitting airborne toxic pollutants (US EPA); Longitudinal Business Database to determine plant open/close date (US Census Bureau); Standard Statistical Establishment List to obtain plant names and addresses (US Census Bureau); county registrar websites for housing transaction data; additional sources cited in publication

Economic Evaluation / Methods and Source

Citation:

  • Currie J, Davis L Greenstone M, and Walker R. 2015. Environmental health risks and housing values: evidence from more than 1600 toxic plant openings and closings. Am Econ Rev.

Pubmed:

DOI:

NIEHS Funding: (Not available)

Other Funding:

  • John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
  • US EPA (RE: 83479301-0)
Back
to Top