Labor market mobility is widely cited as a good thing for economies to strive towards, so it must surely stand to reason that proximity to significant employers is a good thing for the employment prospects of citizens.  This general perception is muddied when the employer in question is one with side effects.  If the employer also pollutes the environment, for instance, then their presence places extra emphasis on the jobs created for the local community to justify having a polluter in their midst.

A recent study from the University of Massachusetts suggests that such a trade off might not be a good thing where minorities are concerned, with minorities more likely to suffer from pollution than they are to find work.

In many countries around the world, there is a widely held belief that large employers are an untrammelled advantage to local populations and offer jobs by the bucket load.  Whilst this may indeed be true for some, it is not true for minorities.

The researchers compiled data from the U.S. Environmental Agency and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to understand the amount of pollution emitted, job opportunities created, and the race of employees.

The data suggests that living near to facilities, such as oil and gas refineries, didn’t really do much to support employment among ethnic minorities.  Rather, the pollution emitted by such facilities did harm to their health, without giving them jobs in compensation.

This was true across 712 distinct industrial facilities, with just over 10% of jobs at these facilities were held by black people, with just under 10% held by Hispanic people.  This ratio fell even further when one considered higher paid jobs in each facility.

It suggests a rather uneven trade off for ethnic minorities that may make the presence of a polluting employer within a community not worth the damage it does.