Is inclusive more elusive? An impact assessment analysis on designating environmental justice communities in the US

Abstract

As a policy objective, environmental justice (EJ) aims to promote the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to environmental laws and regulations. At the current stage of EJ policy, federal and state regulators have attempted to prioritize populations for receiving federal and state grants and other benefits or to incentivize private investment. Using mapping and screening tools, policymakers have identified communities as “environmental justice communities”, “disadvantaged”, or “overburdened” based on selected social, economic, environmental, and health indicators. The overarching goal of the study is to understand the impacts of the environmental justice policy at the federal and state level, the extent to which the designation of EJ communities is a representative illustration of the populations experiencing environmental burdens, and their link to systemic racism, i.e., redlining.A methodology for assessing the implications of EJ definitions is proposed through a data-driven approach using socioeconomic and environmental indicators and examining previous land use discriminatory decision-making. The findings of the study have direct implications on the distribution of federal and state resources towards underserved and overburdened communities, but also in the methodologies utilized for environmental impact assessments (EIAs). The approach is demonstrated as a showcase study for the State of Connecticut, but the proposed methodology is of significance for future research on environmental impact assessments and policymakers nationwide. Our analysis points to four main key conclusions: a) a sole indicator to designate EJ communities, although it might seem more inclusive, is not representative of the disproportionate burdens communities are experiencing, b) race is a factor that cannot be neglected to identify injustices as is the parameter most correlated with environmental burdens, c) sophisticated tools that combine both social and environmental criteria in the designation provide a more accurate description of the environmentally challenged populations, and d) formerly redlined areas are highly associated with present inequalities, which indicates the value of the historical context in the identification of today's EJ communities, and the value of integrating redlining maps as a screening factor to designate EJ populations.