@article{atlas_2002, title={Few and far between? An environmental equity analysis of the geographic distribution of hazardous waste generation}, volume={83}, ISSN={["0038-4941"]}, DOI={10.1111/1540-6237.00089}, abstractNote={ Objective. This article examines whether the generation of hazardous waste is concentrated in communities that are disproportionately minority or low income. Whereas much environmental equity research has focused on commercial facilities managing hazardous waste, facilities that generate and manage their own wastes—which account for over 98 percent of hazardous waste volume—have been ignored. Methods. The demographic characteristics were determined of people in geographic concentric rings around hazardous waste generators accounting for most of the country's 1997 hazardous waste volume. Results. My analyses indicate no tendency for disproportionately minority communities to be near these facilities. In fact, relatively few people are near where most hazardous waste is generated. Although a few of these facilities have large numbers of minority people around them, most are in areas with higher than average white populations. There was, however, a tendency for low‐income communities to be near these facilities. Conclusions. To the extent that there are potential risks from the presence of hazardous waste at facilities, most of this risk is in relatively unpopulated areas. The presence of hazardous waste is not concentrated in areas that are disproportionately minority or low income.}, number={1}, journal={SOCIAL SCIENCE QUARTERLY}, author={Atlas, M}, year={2002}, month={Mar}, pages={365–378} }
 @article{atlas_2001, title={Rush to judgment: An empirical analysis of environmental equity in US Environmental Protection Agency enforcement actions}, volume={35}, ISSN={["0023-9216"]}, DOI={10.2307/3185398}, abstractNote={In 1992, the National Law Journal (NLJ) published a study claiming that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency discriminated against minorities in its civil judicial enforcement actions by penalizing environmental law violators in minority areas far less than in white areas. NLJ claimed that this differential showed a lack of commitment to protecting the environment and public health in minority areas. This article augments, reexamines, and analyzes in a more sophisticated manner the available data. My empirical analyses demonstrate the unreliability of NLJ's methods and conclusions and indicate that minorities have not been discriminated against in these enforcement actions.}, number={3}, journal={LAW & SOCIETY REVIEW}, author={Atlas, M}, year={2001}, pages={633–682} }
 @article{atlas_2001, title={Safe and sorry: Risk, environmental equity, and hazardous waste management facilities}, volume={21}, ISSN={["0272-4332"]}, DOI={10.1111/0272-4332.215163}, abstractNote={Many empirical environmental equity analyses have attempted to determine if hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities (TSDFs) are in disproportionately minority or low‐income areas. These prior analyses did not explain the extent of the risks posed by TSDFs, nor did they weight the distribution of those risks by the individual characteristics of the TSDFs. This study evaluated the risks posed by TSDFs in general and then examined whether any such risks were distributed inequitably when each TSDF was weighted by the amount of hazardous waste that it managed. Based on an assessment of the nature of the hazardous wastes that TSDFs manage, the possible exposure paths to risk from TSDFs, the laws designed to minimize the risks that TSDFs pose, and TSDFs’ safety records, the attention devoted to TSDFs by environmental equity researchers is greatly exaggerated. Furthermore, based on this study’s analyses, there was no pattern of the TSDFs or the risks that they posed being inequitably concentrated in disproportionately minority or low‐income areas. Most of the TSDFs and the hazardous waste that they manage are in areas that are either unpopulated or have fewer minority or low‐income people than the national average. There are, however, some TSDFs that are in highly populated, heavily minority or low‐income areas, which results in such people being more likely overall to be in close proximity to these facilities.}, number={5}, journal={RISK ANALYSIS}, author={Atlas, MK}, year={2001}, month={Oct}, pages={939–954} }
 @article{florida_atlas_cline_2001, title={What makes companies green? Organizational and geographic factors in the adoption of environmental practices}, volume={77}, ISSN={["0013-0095"]}, DOI={10.2307/3594072}, number={3}, journal={ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY}, author={Florida, R and Atlas, M and Cline, M}, year={2001}, month={Jul}, pages={209–224} }