Exposure to air pollution is one of the greatest health risks in many countries, for example causing an estimated 28,000 – 36,000 premature deaths a year in the UK. Low-income households are exposed to higher levels of outdoor and indoor air pollution. What leads to these indoor exposure inequalities and what can be done to reduce them?
New peer
reviewed research by Ferguson et al. in "Systemic inequalities in indoor air pollution exposure in London, UK" collects
evidence from various models, datasets, and previously published studies to
show why low-income households may be exposed to higher levels of indoor air
pollution in London. It then links these factors together to demonstrate how
these exposure disparities are in part due to housing and environmental factors
that are outside of the control of the occupants themselves, and are therefore an
area of systemic inequality.
Most studies that examine inequalities in air pollution exposure rely on outdoor air pollution concentrations, and in many UK cities, evidence shows that outdoor air pollution is highest in more deprived neighbourhoods. However, in the UK as with other developed countries, people spend around 80-90% of their time indoors, meaning indoor air pollution is likely to be more important when looking at overall exposure. Emerging evidence suggests that low-income populations in developed countries also experience higher concentrations of air pollution in the indoor environment (Ferguson et al. 2021). To understand why low-income households may be exposed to higher levels of indoor air pollution – and more at-risk from this exposure - the authors collected evidence from various models, datasets and previously published studies using London as a case study. Factors which influence exposure are related to the surrounding environment, housing quality, and occupant behaviours.
Levels of outdoor air pollution can be impacted by the number of local sources, such as road transport, and pollution can enter into houses through cracks, vents, opened windows or ventilation systems. This paper supports previous research by showing how low-income households tend to live in areas with higher levels of outdoor air pollution, as well as providing new evidence of how low-income neighbourhoods tend to be closer to busy roads. The paper shows that, whilst low-income housing is on average more airtight than the rest of the building stock, indoor concentrations of air pollution from outdoor sources are still higher in low-income households due to higher outdoor levels.
Another important factor is housing quality. While the greater airtightness seen in low-income housing can help reduce the amount of outdoor air pollution that reaches the indoor environment, it can also limit the ability to remove pollution from indoor sources, for example air pollution generated by activities such as cooking or smoking. This means it is particularly important to have additional ventilation options, such as extract fans, but evidence indicates that low-income households are much more likely to have broken extract fans. In addition, such individuals are more likely to live in dwellings with shared walls and floors, increasing the chances of pollution entering from neighbouring dwellings, and are more likely to live in smaller dwellings that can accumulate air pollution from indoor sources faster.
A third important factor is the behaviour of occupants. Evidence collected in this paper shows how low-income households are more likely to smoke indoors, tend to spend more time cooking, and may be less likely to open windows to ventilate due to security concerns. Dwellings are more likely to be overcrowded, with more people creating pollution indoors. And, low-income individuals are also more likely to spend time at home, increasing the relative importance of indoor air pollution for such groups.
Finally, low-income populations have higher underlying rates of disease than the rest of the population, which may act to make them more susceptible to negative health effects due to these exposures. Acting together as a system, these factors can increase indoor air pollution concentrations and the amount of time spent exposed to them, for a sub-group of the population already vulnerable to poor health outcomes. Exposure to indoor air pollution is therefore considered an area of systemic inequality. The negative consequences may reinforce themselves – for example, as exposure to air pollution makes an individual sicker, they may need to spend longer at home, further increasing the role of indoor air pollution on health. And, many of these factors, such as the surrounding environment, neighbours, and housing quality are outside of the control of a population sub-group that largely rents their homes from landlords or housing providers, and do not have the financial resources to move elsewhere or political power to demand change.
Therefore, any measures to address indoor air pollution inequalities need to address these systemic issues if they hope to succeed. Rather than focusing on behaviours and health outcomes, policies that improve low-income housing and the surrounding environment are going to be critical to address health inequalities from air pollution in the future.
Ferguson, L., Taylor, J., Zhou, K., Shrubsole, C., Symonds, P., Davies, M., Dimitroulopoulou, S. (2021). Systemic inequalities in indoor air pollution exposure in London, UK. Buildings and Cities, 2(1), 411-434. https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.100
The research was funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (UK) Centre for Doctoral Training in Energy Demand and the Public Health England PhD Studentship Fund. Additional support is from the Wellcome Trust for the ‘Complex Urban Systems for Sustainability and Health’ (CUSSH) project.
Health inequalities and indoor environments: research challenges and priorities [editorial]
M Ucci & A Mavrogianni
Operationalising energy sufficiency for low-carbon built environments in urbanising India
A B Lall & G Sethi
Promoting practices of sufficiency: reprogramming resource-intensive material arrangements
T H Christensen, L K Aagaard, A K Juvik, C Samson & K Gram-Hanssen
Culture change in the UK construction industry: an anthropological perspective
I Tellam
Are people willing to share living space? Household preferences in Finland
E Ruokamo, E Kylkilahti, M Lettenmeier & A Toppinen
Towards urban LCA: examining densification alternatives for a residential neighbourhood
M Moisio, E Salmio, T Kaasalainen, S Huuhka, A Räsänen, J Lahdensivu, M Leppänen & P Kuula
A population-level framework to estimate unequal exposure to indoor heat and air pollution
R Cole, C H Simpson, L Ferguson, P Symonds, J Taylor, C Heaviside, P Murage, H L Macintyre, S Hajat, A Mavrogianni & M Davies
Finnish glazed balconies: residents’ experience, wellbeing and use
L Jegard, R Castaño-Rosa, S Kilpeläinen & S Pelsmakers
Modelling Nigerian residential dwellings: bottom-up approach and scenario analysis
C C Nwagwu, S Akin & E G Hertwich
Mapping municipal land policies: applications of flexible zoning for densification
V Götze, J-D Gerber & M Jehling
Energy sufficiency and recognition justice: a study of household consumption
A Guilbert
Linking housing, socio-demographic, environmental and mental health data at scale
P Symonds, C H Simpson, G Petrou, L Ferguson, A Mavrogianni & M Davies
Measuring health inequities due to housing characteristics
K Govertsen & M Kane
Provide or prevent? Exploring sufficiency imaginaries within Danish systems of provision
L K Aagaard & T H Christensen
Imagining sufficiency through collective changes as satisfiers
O Moynat & M Sahakian
US urban land-use reform: a strategy for energy sufficiency
Z M Subin, J Lombardi, R Muralidharan, J Korn, J Malik, T Pullen, M Wei & T Hong
Mapping supply chains for energy retrofit
F Wade & Y Han
Operationalising building-related energy sufficiency measures in SMEs
I Fouiteh, J D Cabrera Santelices, A Susini & M K Patel
Promoting neighbourhood sharing: infrastructures of convenience and community
A Huber, H Heinrichs & M Jaeger-Erben
New insights into thermal comfort sufficiency in dwellings
G van Moeseke, D de Grave, A Anciaux, J Sobczak & G Wallenborn
‘Rightsize’: a housing design game for spatial and energy sufficiency
P Graham, P Nourian, E Warwick & M Gath-Morad
Implementing housing policies for a sufficient lifestyle
M Bagheri, L Roth, L Siebke, C Rohde & H-J Linke
The jobs of climate adaptation
T Denham, L Rickards & O Ajulo
Structural barriers to sufficiency: the contribution of research on elites
M Koch, K Emilsson, J Lee & H Johansson
Life-cycle GHG emissions of standard houses in Thailand
B Viriyaroj, M Kuittinen & S H Gheewala
IAQ and environmental health literacy: lived experiences of vulnerable people
C Smith, A Drinkwater, M Modlich, D van der Horst & R Doherty
Living smaller: acceptance, effects and structural factors in the EU
M Lehner, J L Richter, H Kreinin, P Mamut, E Vadovics, J Henman, O Mont & D Fuchs
Disrupting the imaginaries of urban action to deliver just adaptation [editorial]
V Castán-Broto, M Olazabal & G Ziervogel
Building energy use in COVID-19 lockdowns: did much change?
F Hollick, D Humphrey, T Oreszczyn, C Elwell & G Huebner
Evaluating past and future building operational emissions: improved method
S Huuhka, M Moisio & M Arnould
Normative future visioning: a critical pedagogy for transformative adaptation
T Comelli, M Pelling, M Hope, J Ensor, M E Filippi, E Y Menteşe & J McCloskey
Nature for resilience reconfigured: global- to-local translation of frames in Africa
K Rochell, H Bulkeley & H Runhaar
How hegemonic discourses of sustainability influence urban climate action
V Castán Broto, L Westman & P Huang
Fabric first: is it still the right approach?
N Eyre, T Fawcett, M Topouzi, G Killip, T Oreszczyn, K Jenkinson & J Rosenow
Social value of the built environment [editorial]
F Samuel & K Watson
Understanding demolition [editorial]
S Huuhka
Data politics in the built environment [editorial]
A Karvonen & T Hargreaves
Latest Commentaries
5th Anniversary Essays
These commissioned essays from Buildings & Cities' authors and readers explore how the research landscape is changing. New essays are continuously being added to the collection during 2024 as part of B&C's anniversary.
Collectively, these essays offer fresh insights into the processes and issues that are currently inadequate or missing in the built environment research landscape. A wide perspective from different disciplines and geographies creates a positive, collective vision for shaping the research agenda. Recommendations are made for what needs to change.
We hope this will provoke and inspire research funders, researchers and other stakeholders to discuss, reflect and act. Ideas range from systemic change to key research questions to improving engagement to change of focus.
The Challenges of Evidence-Based Design
While some progress has been made, particularly in areas like healing architecture where the impact of design on human well-being is more directly observable, much work remains to be done to extend evidence-based design to broader fields of architecture, urban planning and design. Meta Berghauser Pont (Chalmers University of Technology) explains the challenges and pathways needed for a shift toward evidence-based design in urban planning and urban design.