Environmental Justice

In 1982, a proposed landfill in Warren County, North Carolina was protested by residents of an African-American community that was located close to the planned facility. Some observers asserted that local officials had been practicing a form of environmental racism, citing studies that hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities are disproportionately located in areas occupied predominantly by minorities. Others argued that poor communities are often ill-represented in political circles and therefore are the easiest places to locate objectionable facilities. Eventually the EPA granted the permits for this waste disposal site, which brought nationwide protests.

In response to protests stemming from this and similar incidents, President Clinton, on February 11, 1994, issued an executive order (EO 12,898) mandating that the Environmental Protection Agency establish an Office of Environmental Justice. In April 1998, the EPA defined environmental justice as fair treatment, meaning that "no group of people, including racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic groups, should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal, state, local and tribal programs and policies." According to the EPA definition, deliberate discrimination need not be involved. Any citing which disadvantages protected groups more than proportionately is in violation of EPA's rules. The difficulty arises in defining what to measure and in comparison to what.

As a first step in evaluating whether a group is unduly disadvantaged, a policy maker must consider who is affected. Most ethnic data relate to census tracts, zip codes, city boundaries, and counties. If the facility is to be located in a wealthy county, but located near the county border close to a poor community, how does the policy maker draw the line? Should prevailing winds be considered? Many industrial sites are located where land is cheap; people of low income may choose to live in those areas to minimize living expenses. How are these decisions weighed?

Another difficulty arises in determining whether and how particular groups will be disadvantaged. Landfills, chemical plants, and other industrial works bring benefits to some although they may harm others. They create jobs, change land values, and generate revenues that are spent in the community. How do officials compare the benefits with the losses? How should potential health risks from a facility be compared with the overall health benefits that jobs and higher incomes bring?

There are conflicting studies of the question of disparate impacts. A study in Massachusetts and a recent GAO report, for example, found no disproportionate impact by ethnicity; a study in Chicago found that industrial sites were located close to high-income areas. Decisions about sighting of industrial and waste facilities inevitably generates controversy. The following resources address some of the issues involved:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Environmental Justice
http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/ej/
The EPA includes access to the EJ Quarterly and National Environmental Justice Advisory Council documents on their page. The site also provides links to related information such as brownfields (abandoned industrial sites) often located in inner city areas.

Sprawl Atlanta: Social Equity Dimensions of Uneven Growth and Development
http://www.ejrc.cau.edu/
This site includes an analysis of variables that have contributed to social inequities resulting from urban sprawl and unplanned growth in Atlanta.

...And Environmental Justice for All?
http://www.brook.edu/dybdocroot/views/articles/foreman/1997priorities.shtml
Brookings Institution scholar Christopher Foreman Jr. reviews the conflicting evidence about the relationship between race and the likelihood of living near a commercial hazardous-waste site.

Social Equity and Environmental Justice
http://arcticcircle.uconn.edu/SEEJ/
Several case studies posing environmental dilemmas are listed on this Arctic Circle page. Students are encouraged to critically analyze and discuss the cases. References are given for further research on most topics.

This information is gathered from The Environmental Literacy Council

The Council is dedicated to helping citizens, especially young people, participate wisely (in making choices about the environment). An independent, non-profit organization, the Council gives teachers the tools to help students develop environmental literacy: a fundamental understanding of the systems of the world, both living and non-living, along with the analytical skills needed to weigh scientific evidence and policy choices.

Notes

The Councils website (last updated in the summer of 2003) is easy to use and may be one starting point for young people, and those helping them, in learning about environmental issues.

The Council reports that is funded through government grants, private foundations and corporate support. Please take a look at their website. TVS Jr.