Environmental Justice and Injustice Timeline Specific to Oregon

Presenter(s): Megan Johnson Guthrie − Environmental Geoscience

Faculty Mentor(s): Sarah Wald

Poster 164

Research Area: Environmental Studies

By disregarding our states past, we contribute to the continued mistreatment and injustices that built the foundation of our government, specifically in relation to environment. Systemic white oppression building the foundation of Oregon’s governmental legislations led to a prevalent history of environmental injustices leading up today. In order to shed light on environmental justice and injustices in Oregon, my project involves researching and materializing an environmental justice and injustice timeline specific to Oregon for the organization, Bark. Beginning with what began with Indigenous peoples building communities and forming traditions on the land. To major historical dates, people, and communities contributing
to environmental justice or injustice. To today where governmental policies systemic oppressive, inequitable, and unjust regulations prevent equity and inclusion in environmental use. The environmental justice movement only began to bubble up in US 1980’s so this timeline will include dates, people, and communities that lead to the need of the environmental justice movement. Then after the 1980’s the timeline will focus ore on movements that have improved inclusion and equity in the environment but also including the injustices that continue today. Understanding Oregon’s environmental history can help us and Bark gain insight and understanding on the importance of improving inclusion and equity within our environment. Also, how to contribute change in current and future oppressive, environmental regulations.

Social Smoking & Its Patterns in Relation to Intention to Quit Smoking

Presenter(s): Abby Hyland

Faculty Mentor(s): Larissa Maier & Erin Vogel

Oral Session 1 C

Poster 164

Session: Social Sciences & Humanities

Introduction—Social smokers are a specific group of smokers who smoke mainly or only with others. They usually tend to underestimate the health risks associated with their tobacco consumption and are more confident in their ability to quit smoking. The goal of this study was to identify whether the intention to quit smoking differs between young adult social smokers and non-social smokers entering a social media intervention.

Methods—Young adults (N=179) aged 18-25 were recruited through Facebook to participate in the Smoking Tobacco And Drinking Study (STAND). Validated social smoking and stage of change measures collected at baseline from STAND were examined. Participants were grouped by: self- identification as a social smoker (SS+) or a non-social smoker (SS-), and daily smoker (DS) or non- daily smoker (NDS). A chi-square test was run to examine whether the groups differed in getting ready (GR) or not ready (NR) to quit smoking in the next 30 days.

Results— Two thirds (67.6%, n=121) identified as SS+ and 82.7% (n=148) were DS. About two thirds of SS+ (n=81) and SS- (n=38) were NR to quit. NDS, SS+ (n=20, 74.1%) had the highest proportion of participants who were NR, followed by DS, SS- (n=36, 66.7%), DS, SS+ (n=61, 64.9%), and NDS, SS- (n=2, 50.0%) but differences were not significant (χ2=1.293, p=.731).

Conclusion—The intention to quit smoking in the next 30 days did not differ between SS+ and SS- entering the intervention. Given that the NDS, SS+ group is likely to experience fewer problems related to smoking, they may be the least likely to quit smoking during the intervention.