Data Gaps & Dirty Skies:
Global disparities in air quality monitoring

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Story written by students of Climate Talks /Emory University
The full interactive article can be accessed here

“People living in lower and middle-income countries are the most exposed to air pollution. They are also the least covered in terms of air quality measurement.”
— World Health Organization, 2024

In a world increasingly driven by data, what do we do when the numbers don’t always tell the whole story?

All over the world there is a glaring disparity: Global North countries have significantly more air quality monitors compared to their counterparts in the Global South. This isn’t just a gap in the data — it’s an injustice (World Air Quality Report, 2021). Data on air quality is important because it enables scientists to assess pollution risks accurately; policy makers to enact more effective air quality reforms; healthcare workers to better treat their patients; and environmentalists to protect our ecosystems. Without this data, vulnerable populations are left exposed, and those that can make a difference are left to navigate these unseen dangers blind.

Low- and middle-income countries have the worst air quality and the least amount of data.

97% of cities with populations of more than 100,000 in low- and middle-income countries do not meet the World Health Organization’s air quality guidelines, compared to 49% in high-income countries. Despite their great need for quality data, low- and middle-income countries also have the fewest number of air quality monitors (Nicolaou and Checkley, 2021).

“Without robust air pollution measurement equipment in place, these countries do not have access to the air quality data required to understand and act on pollution trends.”
— Clarity Movement, 2022

Data from air quality monitors can be leveraged to improve public health.

The health impacts of air pollution are wide ranging, but it is most known to cause respiratory disease — both acute and chronic (Vallero, 2014). This can range from allergic reactions to complete respiratory failure and chronic diseases like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Air pollution can impact almost every organ in the body and is defined as a risk for all-cause mortality (World Health Organization, 2024). This underscores the importance of having quality data on air pollution to inform interventions.

Take a closer look.

We invite you to watch the video below to take a closer look at the data that air quality monitors provide on a local level. For each city, you will see the average annual Air Quality Index, as well as annual the levels of particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) and other gaseous air pollutants including Ozone (O3), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) and Carbon Monoxide (CO) — if such data is available in that region. You will also see the health implications that can be identified based on this data. Notice how access to data differs by city.

Case Study: The BioLab Fire & an Air Pollution Crisis

Continuous air quality monitoring is useful in times of crisis. Let’s zoom in to a recent air pollution disaster that took place in Conyers, Georgia to get a better sense of how air quality data can help minimize public health risks in times of emergency.

Around 5:00 AM on September 29, 2024, a BioLab employee in Conyers, Georgia, heard a popping sound in Plant 12, a storage warehouse used to hold pool treatment chemicals. Moments later, the warehouse burst into flames. What ensued was a dangerous chemical blaze that was not only felt in the city, but across the region for days to come. While the fire itself was hazardous, the true danger laid in the dark, thick, toxic smoke that billowed in the air.

Something is in the air.

The smoke contained chlorine and hydrochloric acid — poisonous substances that can cause respiratory failure among other health risks (Simmons Hanly Conroy Law Firm, 2024). One air quality monitor found that chlorine levels in the air were nearly 22 higher than the US Environmental Protection Agency‘s standards. The fire and the subsequent smoke plume sparked mass concern about air quality in the region. While the immediate government response has been criticized, many institutions were able to alert their residents to the incident and communicate the potential risks because of the data collected by local air quality monitors. There were indeed public health implications, including an uptick of people going to the Emergency Room for unexplained skin rashes, difficulty breathing, and unyielding headaches. Because of quality data on air pollution, hospital staff could accurately attribute their ailments to the recent fire.

What can we learn from Conyers, Georgia?

These actions to protect public health would not have been possible without the data that air quality monitors provided and the infrastructure to disseminate that information to the people. In Georgia, having data didn’t just inform decisions — it became the tool that turned chaos into realtime, collective action (City of Atlanta, 2024). The recent BioLab fire demonstrates that when facing disaster, data is an important tool that can be utilized by scientists, policy makers, healthcare workers, and environmentalists to protect both people and our planet.

Air quality data should be available in the places that need it most

So why aren’t air quality monitors everywhere?

According to the Clean Air Fund, “Many countries, particularly low- and middle- income countries, struggle with limited resources and infrastructure to track and manage their air quality levels.” This can be attributed to centuries of extractivism at the hands of the Global North, which has limited countries’ opportunities to develop these public systems. Further, according to The State of Global Air Quality Funding “only 1% of international development funding” for air quality is given in the form of grants, meaning almost all funding is given through loans or other “strings attached” mechanisms limiting what the funds can be used for.

This is climate injustice.

Low- and middle-income countries have the worst air quality and the least amount of data to inform interventions. These same countries emit the least, but are simultaneously experiencing the most extreme impacts of climate change — including those related to air pollution. Thus, we are calling on non-governmental organizations, Global North governments, and other concerned entities to take a bold step to promote equity and help distribute low-cost air quality monitors to the Global South countries that are disproportionately affected by air pollution.