Exposure, perception and institutional response at the abattoir community interface: quantifying the environmental-justice gap in complaint driven regulation in Bo and Kenema Cities, Sierra Leone

Abstract

Background Communities living around urban abattoirs in sub-Saharan Africa bear a substantial environmental burden, yet whether residents accurately perceive that burden, and whether regulatory systems respond to it, is poorly understood. We examined the relationship between measured environmental exposure and perceived health risk, and the performance of the community complaint-and-response system, at the abattoir community interface in Bo and Kenema Cities, Sierra Leone. Methods In a community-based cross-sectional study of 950 residents (Bo = 497; Kenema = 453) living around confirmed abattoirs, we measured a five-item nuisance exposure index (Cronbach’s α = 0.802), perceived health risk, awareness, complaint behavior and satisfaction with authorities, together with a facility assessment of 16 abattoir operators. Associations were tested with chi-square and Cramér’s V, and the exposure perception relationship with Spearman correlation. Results Perceived risk correlated closely with measured exposure (Spearman ρ = 0.723, p < .001), indicating that residents were, in aggregate, accurate risk detectors. However, exposure and attribution decoupled for a substantial minority: 29.8% of highly odour-exposed residents were unaware of the nearby abattoir. Complaint propensity rose steeply across exposure tertiles (3.8% to 27.1%; p < .001), but so did the probability of institutional response among complainants (7.7% in the lowest to 56.8% in the highest exposure tertile). Thus, both complaint and response concentrated in the most-exposed, vocal households, leaving the quietly-exposed and the unaware doubly excluded. Facility assessment revealed pervasive deficiencies (PPE absent at 13 of 16 facilities; open dumping at 14 of 16). Conclusions Residents accurately perceive their environmental burden, but a complaint-driven regulatory system channels institutional response toward the most vocal, most-exposed households while systematically excluding the unaware and the quietly-exposed. Shifting regulatory triggers from citizen complaint to monitored exposure indicators would better align institutional response with actual environmental burden.