Environmental Justice Policy Research Articles

Disproportionate impacts of building materials production facilities on neighboring communities

Abstract The construction and building materials (CBM) production industries, such as cement, steel, and plastics that are responsible for a substantial share of global CO2 emissions, face increasing pressure to decarbonize. Recent legislative initiatives like the United States (US) federal Buy Clean Initiative and the World Green Building Council’s decarbonization plan for Europe highlights the urgency to reduce emissions during CBM production stages. However, there remains a gap in addressing the localized environmental and social impacts of these industries as well as a necessary understanding of how decarbonization efforts may change local impacts. This study introduces a framework for quantifying the disproportionate impacts (Id) of 12 CBM production facility categories on communities of color and low-income demographics across the US. Using geographical and environmental data from the 2017 National Emissions Inventory (NEI), we assess these impacts at four spatial scales: census tract, county, state, and national. Results show that across all scales, many CBM production facilities impose disproportionate impacts. The geographical disproportionate impact (IG,d) shows the greatest burdens at the broadest spatial scales, whereas the environmental disproportionate impact (IE,d) indicates highest burdens at more localized levels. Based on this spatial understanding, we provide methods that can be implemented to support community engagement and mitigate damages to populations neighboring industrial materials manufacturing. These findings offer valuable insights into the relationship between facility locations, emissions, and demographic groups, providing a basis for more targeted environmental justice policies aimed at mitigating these disproportionate impacts.

Could Justice40 reproduce injustices in the critical mineral sector?

The United States is reprioritizing domestic extraction and processing of critical minerals, with billions of dollars of investments. Because of their uses in low-carbon technologies, the mining and processing of these resources falls under the scope of the Justice40 Initiative, the Biden administration’s flagship environmental justice policy. Justice40 prioritizes green investments to benefit communities deemed disadvantaged, including all recognized Tribes. This can lead to the siting of “green” mineral projects in disadvantaged communities (DACs), which is problematic if such projects are unwelcome or reproduce environmental injustices. These unintended consequences are our focus. We analyze how DACs are defined and operationalized, before examining whether and under what conditions critical mineral projects could be considered beneficial for local communities. We suggest three ways to better align Justice40’s spirit with its (currently problematic) application to critical minerals and other controversial projects – (1) centering free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) and the transparency and power restructuring needed to achieve it; (2) incentivizing community ownership to strengthen economic benefits and democratize decision making; and (3) bringing currently-exempted critical mineral activities within the purview of Justice40, particularly for the Department of Defense.

Addressing environmental justice in clean energy policy: Comparative case studies from the United States and Nigeria

This paper explores the intersection of environmental justice and clean energy policy through a comparative analysis of case studies from the United States and Nigeria. Environmental justice, defined as the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people in environmental decisions, is increasingly recognized as a critical aspect of transitioning to clean energy systems. By examining clean energy policies and initiatives in both countries, this study aims to identify successes, challenges, and lessons learned in addressing environmental justice considerations. In the United States, the analysis focuses on federal and state-level clean energy policies, assessing their impact on marginalized communities and efforts to promote equity in access to clean energy resources. Similarly, in Nigeria, attention is given to government-led clean energy initiatives and their implications for environmental justice, particularly in rural and underserved areas. Through a comparative lens, this paper highlight’s common themes and divergent approaches to addressing environmental justice in clean energy policy between the two countries. It identifies opportunities for cross-country collaboration and knowledge sharing to advance equitable and sustainable energy transitions globally. The findings underscore the importance of integrating environmental justice principles into clean energy policy development and implementation, with recommendations provided for policymakers and stakeholders to promote inclusivity, fairness, and community engagement in shaping the future of clean energy.

An Interactive Mapping and Case Discussion Seminar Introducing Medical Students to Climate Change, Environmental Justice, and Health.

Integrating climate change and health into a medical school curriculum is critical for future physicians who will manage health crises caused by a rapidly changing climate. Although medical schools have increasingly included climate change in the curriculum, there remains a need to address the link between the climate crisis, environmental justice, and historical policies that shape environmental health disparities in local communities. In academic years 2021-2022 (AY22) and 2022-2023 (AY23), second-year medical students participated in a 2.5-hour seminar utilizing didactic teaching and small breakout groups that included interactive mapping activities and case scenarios. Learner knowledge and attitudes were self-assessed using pre- and postcurriculum surveys and a quiz. Qualitative thematic and content analysis was used to evaluate short-answer quiz responses and feedback. Of 357 students who participated in the seminar, 208 (58%) completed both the precurriculum and postcurriculum surveys. Self-assessed ability increased significantly for all educational objectives across both years. Attitudes on the importance of climate change knowledge for patient health also improved from a mean of 3.5 precurriculum to 4.2 postcurriculum (difference = 0.7, p < .01) in AY22 and from 3.6 pre- to 4.3 postcurriculum (difference = 0.7, p < .01) in AY23 on a 5-point Likert scale. This climate change and health session highlighting the link between environmental policy and climate change health vulnerability in the local context was successful in improving students' self-assessed ability across all stated educational objectives. Students cited the interactive small-group sessions as a major strength.

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

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.

Minority faith and environmental justice

AbstractDecades of research indicate that most Census‐measured U.S. racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately impacted by environmental disamenities, all else equal; the study of this is referred to as Environmental Justice (EJ) research. Yet both U.S. and world history show that another minoritized group is religious minorities. If so, this has health consequences and policy implications. Houses of worship (HOWs) are visible and physical symbols of religion. We use tax records to locate Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist or Hindu HOWs within census tracts for the entire contiguous United States. We combine these data with EJSCREEN data to analyze whether air pollution risks are greater in their presence. We find that, even holding constant race, ethnicity, and poverty, two non‐census‐measured religious minorities' HOWs are disproportionately impacted by air pollution in the United States: Jews and Muslims. This new knowledge has consequences for EJ policy and social justice‐motivated environmental research.Related ArticlesAsh, John. 2010. “New Nuclear Energy, Risk, and Justice: Regulatory Strategies for an Era of Limited Trust.” Politics &amp; Policy 38(2): 255–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2010.00237.x.Fowler, Luke. 2022. “Searching for Green Elephants and Other Mythical Creatures during the Trump Years: Partisanship and Congressional Voting on Environmental Legislation.” Politics &amp; Policy 50(5): 913–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12499.Tubadji, Annie. 2023. “You'll Never Walk Alone: Loneliness, Religion, and Politico‐economic Transformation.” Politics &amp; Policy 51(4): 661–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12538.

Increasing wildfires and changing sociodemographics in communities across California, USA

Research has documented how recent wildfires are characteristic of a new fire regime marked by larger, more severe, and damaging wildfires. However, there is less information on how these fire regimes are affecting communities with different sociodemographic characteristics across socio-ecologically diverse regions. Therefore, we spatiotemporally and statistically analyzed the sociodemographic characteristics of communities affected by wildfire in California, USA during 2010–2020. Second, we analyzed if specific sociodemographic groups and disadvantaged communities (DACs) were increasingly affected across socio-ecoregions (SE) during this analysis period. We used available US Census, California Environment Protection Agency, and wildfire perimeter data according to SEs and geospatial and trend analyses. Statewide findings show that higher income, Whites, and renters were indeed significantly and increasingly affected during the analysis period. However, Hispanics and Asian Americans were also increasingly affected statewide, particularly during 2016–2020, and noticeably in certain SEs. For example, Asian Americans were increasingly being affected in the Coastal Sage SE, while Hispanics were more affected in the Central Valley, Sierra Nevada, and Klamath SEs. Finally, we found that urban areas were statistically and increasingly being more affected statewide by wildfires. However, pollution-burdened DACs, as defined by the State of California, were increasingly, but not significantly, being affected by wildfires. The approach and findings can also be used to better define “communities”, formulate environmental justice policies, and understand socio-ecological trajectories.

Socioeconomic vulnerability and differential impact of severe weather-induced power outages.

In response to concerns about increasingly intense Atlantic hurricanes, new federal climate and environmental justice policies aim to mitigate the unequal impact of environmental disasters on economically and socially vulnerable communities. Recent research emphasizes that standard procedures for restoring power following extreme weather could be one significant contributor to these divergent outcomes. Our paper evaluates the hypothesis that more economically and socially vulnerable communities experience longer-duration power outages following hurricanes than less vulnerable communities do, conditional on the severity of the impact of the storm itself. Using data from eight major Atlantic hurricanes that made landfall between January 2017 and October 2020 and induced power outages for over 15 million customers in 588 counties in the Southeast, we demonstrate a significant relationship between socioeconomic vulnerability and the duration of time that elapses before power is restored for 95% of customers in a county. Specifically, a one-decile change in the socioeconomic status theme in the Social Vulnerability Index, a measure of vulnerability produced by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, produces a 6.1% change in expected outage duration in a focal county. This is equivalent to a 170-min average change in the period of time prior to power restoration.

What does environmental justice look like in Vermont? Centering perspectives from the margins

Until 2022, Vermont was one of the few US states that did not have an Environmental Justice (EJ) policy. In 2016, the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) initiated a process to create an EJ policy based on an agreement with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A coalition of academics, non-profit organization leaders, legal experts, and community-based partners formed in response to the DEC’s initial approach because it lacked a robust process to center the voices of the most vulnerable Vermonters. The coalition developed a mixed-method, community-based approach to ask, “What does EJ look like in Vermont?” This article reports the door-to-door survey portion of that broader research effort. The survey of 569 Vermont residents purposively sampled sites of likely environmental harm and health concerns and sites with existing relationships with activists and community organizations engaged in ongoing EJ struggles. The survey results use logistic regression to show that non-white respondents in the sites sampled were significantly more likely to be renters, to report exposures to mold, to have trouble paying for food and electricity, to lack access to public transportation, were less likely to own a vehicle, to have a primary care doctor, and reported higher rates of Lyme disease than white respondents. Our findings contribute to EJ theory regarding the co-productive relationship between environmental privilege and environmental harms within the context of persistent characterizations of Vermont as an environmental leader with abundant environmental benefits.

Defining environmental justice communities: Evaluating digital infrastructure in Southeastern states for Justice40 benefits allocation

Evaluating the impact of the Justice40 Initiative requires clearly defining and publicly disclosing both the “benefits” of the clean energy transition and the “disadvantaged communities” who should receive these benefits. Robust digital infrastructure at the state level is necessary to ensure that federal clean energy and climate funding intended for disadvantaged communities reaches those communities. This paper evaluates the digital environmental infrastructure capabilities of southeastern U.S. states (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia) using accessibility, timeliness, methodology, and usefulness metrics drawn from the open government data and environmental data justice literature. The results of this evaluation are compared to each state's environmental justice policies. Southeastern states' environmental digital infrastructure tends to exclude qualitative information, data collected by non-governmental actors, and multi-media information. The states that have developed clear definitions and mapping tools relating to EJ communities (Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia) tend to score well across the evaluation metrics. Policy recommendations to advance environmental justice policy in southeastern states include developing EJ mapping tools, advocating for a Justice40 oversight committee at the state level, defining EJ communities, and ensuring transparency in reporting the expenditures of federal funds.

Ecoworship and Federal Environmental Law

&#x0D; &#x0D; &#x0D; As the growing land stewardship movement has joined with rising evangelical environmentalism, religious worship has intersected with ecological protection to spark the rise of a new variety of ecoworship. Given the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent willingness to expand constitu- tional protections for religious exercise and trim bulwarks against Establishment Clause challenges, religious claimants now have bolstered powers to assert exemptions from governmental mandates based on their free exercise of faith. The growing role of faith-based environmentalism and institutional religions in private environmental protection will likely lead to similar claims for religious exemptions for pro-environmental activism based on faith. Most legal scholarship so far has squarely focused on the general foundational question of how federal and state constitutional laws apply to protect religiously motivated actions both within and outside environmental law.&#x0D; This Article takes a different tack. Federal environmental law is over- whelmingly statutory, and state environmental laws rely on a similar base. It is time to re-read these statutes through the newly expanded constitutional lens. This path yields two notable results. First, the increased accommodation for Free Exercise claims and revamped Establishment Clause parameters will inevitably shape the way that courts will interpret environmental statutes that impinge on religious activities. This interpretive tendency has a deep historical provenance in federal and state courts, although it is difficult to extract from the outsized historical shadow of Holy Trinity Church v. United States. Second, an altered interpretation of federal statutory terms through the new religious exercise lens could grant special status to proactive environmental initiatives impelled by religious beliefs, as essentially protected environmental worship. This reinterpreted statutory language could expand standing for certain claimants raising federal statutory claims, force the federal government to reassess the way it selects clean-up remedies or environmental permit limits in certain contexts, redefine the scope of environmental justice policies, and alter the degree of regulatory limitations on environmentally protective uses of land by religious actors.&#x0D; &#x0D; &#x0D;

Evaluating Meaningful Engagement Under Environmental Justice Mandates: A Case Study of California’s SB1000 Implementation in Santa Ana

California Senate Bill 1000 (2016) requires that general plans include environmental justice strategies and policies that address the needs of Disadvantaged Communities (DACs). This article draws upon principles for engagement developed by environmental justice activists to explore Santa Ana’s 2014-2020 general plan update and understand whether SB1000 contributed to meaningful engagement in DACs. A review of planning documents and interviews with key informants reveals that the initial general plan framework was captured by NIMBYs and that the City was unable to pivot to meet SB1000 mandates. Moreover, the City resisted activist and State demands to halt general plan adoption amid COVID-19. Ultimately, in the case of Santa Ana, SB1000 has not led to meaningful engagement with disadvantaged communities.

Who Is Planning for Environmental Justice—and How?

Problem, research strategy, and findings Environmental justice (EJ) seeks to correct legacies of disproportionately burdening low-income and Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) communities with environmental hazards that contribute to health inequalities. Federal and state policies increasingly require plans to assess and incorporate EJ principles. The current lack of accessible data and plan evaluation on EJ has been a barrier to policy setting and benchmarking. We created a framework for analyzing content across a large corpus of plans by using quantitative text analysis on 461 California city general plans, also known as comprehensive plans. To verify results and identify specific policies, we conducted content analysis on a subset of seven plans. Demonstrating the broad applicability of EJ principles in planning, policies spanned all required elements of general plans: housing, circulation, land use, health, safety, open space, air quality, and noise. We found that the most headway in EJ planning has been made in cities with a majority population of color and well before the 2018 California state mandate to address EJ. Policies were primarily focused on preventing adverse exposures as opposed to correcting for legacies of inequality. Further, although all policies address vulnerable populations and places, very few specifically address race or racism. Thus, EJ has been largely operationalized as health equity. Takeaway for practice We identified 628 EJ policies focused on vulnerable populations across the seven city plans included in content analysis. The smorgasbord of policy approaches provides fodder for cities across the United States to incorporate an EJ approach to planning. Gaps in focus areas reveal room for policy innovation (e.g., emphasis on language justice, formerly incarcerated individuals, and noise ordinance policing). We invite planners and community advocates to search across California’s plans for EJ policy inspiration and to use the appendix of EJ policies cataloged in this research as a benchmark of city-level innovation.

The Road to Justice40: Organizer and Policymaker Perspectives on the Historical Roots of and Solutions for Environmental Justice Inequities in U.S. Cities

Background: Environmental justice policies have grown in prominence over the past several decades. However, few studies have sought to characterize the perceptions of organizers and policymakers across U.S. cities engaged in implementing contemporary environmental justice policies and investments. Methods: We conducted 19 in-depth interviews with municipal policymakers and organizers to understand how communities experience and understand the root causes of environmental injustices in U.S. cities, the characteristics of existing and proposed policies intended to address environmental injustices, and perceptions and lessons learned for equitably engaging communities and overcoming barriers and unintended consequences. Results: A range of municipal policies are being implemented to address injustices in U.S. cities, including grant-based programs for targeting green amenities and infrastructure toward communities most in need and requirements for land use decisions and industrial activities. These efforts are broadly consistent with Justice40 goals. Respondents shared key lessons for implementing environmental justice policies in U.S. cities, including emphasis on procedurally just and meaningful engagement, building trust in government and self-efficacy, procedural and distributional equity in program design and implementation, anticipating and addressing unintended consequences such as green gentrification, and balancing environmental justice improvements with other quality-of-life interventions. Conclusion: This article fills a critical research gap and provides insights for Justice40 implementation by focusing on the perspectives of policy implementers and organizers working in urban communities with histories of discrimination and neglect and identifying opportunities to inform environmental justice policy implementation by examining the root causes of environmental injustices. To achieve progress, more must be done to help communities build support for environmental justice policies, target and allocate resources, facilitate meaningful engagement, and avoid unintended consequences.

Climate and Environmental Justice Policies in the First Year of the Biden Administration

Abstract When President Biden took office in January 2021, it was widely expected that he would reverse Trump-era policies and take steps to address climate change, racial justice, and rising inequality. Then-candidate Biden made strong commitments to addressing the climate crisis, including stating that “the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face.” But with the parties evenly split in the Senate, this meant legislating ambitious climate policy would be difficult. This article analyzes the Biden Administration’s climate and environmental justice initiatives in its first year. The Biden administration successfully advanced some environmental policy through legislation but relied primarily on ambitious executive orders and with a particular focus on integrating equity and justice considerations into climate and environmental policy, while encountering challenges from Republican state officials.

Environmental justice and climate change policies.

Climate change is an environmental justice issue because it is likely to cause disproportionate harm to low-income countries and low-income populations in higher-income countries. While climate change mitigation and adaptation policies may be able to minimize these harms, they could make them worse unless they are developed and implemented with an eye toward promoting justice and fairness. Those who view climate change as an environmental justice issue should be wary of endorsing policies that sound like they promote the cause of social and economic justice, but in fact do not. While climate change policies may help to mitigate the effects of climate change on poor people, there is no guarantee that they will be just at the local, national, or global level. Those who care about global climate justice must remain actively engaged in policy formation and implementation to ensure that justice does not get shortchanged in the response to global warming.

The Subtle Production of Quiescence: Tracing the Neoliberalization of Environmental Justice Policy Implementation

Background: California lawmakers passed Assembly Bill 617 (AB 617) in 2017 to help remedy the fact that the state's carbon cap-and-trade system ignored toxic air contaminants disproportionately clustered in racially marginalized, working-class, and Indigenous communities. AB 617 authorizes non-neoliberal approaches to change that are essential for addressing environmental injustice, and many AB 617 implementation committee members desire stronger environmental regulations on hazardous industrial activity. However, AB 617 implementation to date has taken strikingly neoliberal forms. In this article, we ask how AB 617 implementation became a site of quiescence about neoliberalism—that is, one in which community member participants' individual grievances did not translate into collective demands for counter-neoliberal policy implementation. Methods: To trace the law's implementation, we draw on ethnographic observation of AB 617 community steering committee meetings in which AB 617 implementation plans were developed, observation of other related meetings, and confidential interviews with committee members. Results and Discussion: We find that community quiescence about neoliberalism stems not only from limited resources and regulatory constraints, as others have noted, but also from subtle practices. The mere presence of powerful industry actors in the steering committees has inhibited community members from challenging industry's environmental impacts. In addition, powerful actors' “community” discourse obscures industry actors' conflicts of interest on these committees and their outsized influence over these committees' recommendations and has curtailed discussion of regulatory restrictions on hazardous industrial activity. Conclusion: Although AB 617 was ostensibly designed to empower residents who have historically been excluded from regulatory decision making, dynamics of AB 617 implementation effectively reproduce industry's disproportionate influence over regulatory decision making. Intentionally or not, these practices have the effect of silencing residents' and activists' interest in securing stronger regulatory restrictions on hazardous industrial activity.

Book Review: From the inside out: The fight for environmental justice within government agencies by Jill Harrison

In From the Inside Out: The Fight for Environmental Justice within Government Agencies (MIT Press, 2019), Jill Harrison offers a nuanced study of why U.S. state agencies fail at implementing robust environmental justice (EJ) policies. Through a rigorous interview and ethnographic based methodology Harrison details the discourses, ideologies, and everyday practices and through which government agency staff, daily, undermine and even outright reject EJ policies and programs. The book is a richly empirical study that makes valuable contributions to academic and activist understandings of the government's failure to respond meaningfully to environmental injustices, and offers specific recommendations for how to reform government agencies. It is a timely monograph as EJ advocates seek to reimagine government agencies in the wake of the Trump administration, and in the context of an expanded public consciousness of racism following the killing of George Floyd and subsequent uprisings during the summer of 2020.

Children's Rights, Environmental Justice, and Environmental Health Policy in the United States.

Environmentalists have forewarned that our planet is in peril because of serious degradation and pollution of the earth's land, air, water, and food sources. Climate change is present and worsening at an alarming rate. Gaping disparities exist between high-income and low-income countries and high-income and low-income zip codes in the United States, resulting in marginalized and vulnerable populations bearing the greatest burden from the ill effects of pollution and environmental toxins. Infants and children carry the greatest risk for pollution-related diseases and exposure to chemical toxins as their bodies are rapidly developing. This review article provides a historical overview of children's rights to protection from environmental health risks, effects of environmental injustice, and U.S. statutory and regulatory policies responsible for protecting food, air, and water quality. The authors advocate for policy and clinical strategies to support children's health and the right to environmental protection.

From ‘marginal to marginal’: environmental justice under the Trump administration

ABSTRACT How damaging was the Trump administration to environmental justice (EJ) efforts and policy? Since federal EJ oversight at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is governed by executive order, rather than statute, approaches to it have varied by presidential administration. In this paper, we draw on interviews with current and recently retired EPA employees along with staffing and budget data, to examine how EJ has historically been supported and enacted within the agency, with a focus on identifying impacts of the Trump administration on EPA’s EJ work. We find that while leadership support for EJ and emphasis across the agency have changed across presidential administrations, the EJ program has always held a marginal position in terms of allocation of resources and emphasis in regulatory decision-making. Starting from this position of long-term marginalization, EPA’s EJ program was further marginalized by the Trump administration. Though EPA employees expressed divided opinions as to how consequential the Trump administration’s actions were on enacting EJ internally, many thought that the administration’s emphasis on deregulation had significant health consequences in EJ communities. We argue that the impacts of the Trump administration, like those of future administrations, must be assessed within a historical context.