Environmental Justice Is The Fair Treatment Of The Environment And Well Being Of Humans

Environmental ethics has widely circled around human interactions with biotic ecosystems. Little voice has been given to city residents who are overexposed to environmental hazards. It is a subject rarely touched upon by mainstream environmentalist. Though conservation efforts receive much media attention and advocacy, environmental pollution in urban areas inhabited by minorities and the impoverished receive less attention despite it clearly being a grave injustice. It fact, it can be argued that minority and impoverished neighborhoods are deliberately targeted by corporations and governmental agencies because of the inherit vulnerability of the inhabitants. It is no secret that the impoverished in this country frequently live in areas characterized

This makes me qualified to do this research paper. Additionally, I am able to contact experts on the issue who can offer their opinion and knowledge on the issue. The sources used in this paper will be from Academic Search Premier. Academic Search Premier has a plethora of resources I can use for my empirical paper. The sources (articles) I will use will be peer reviewed and they will from the year 2007 and onward. I will try to steer clear of articles that are older than this because the data may not reflect the current situation. Therefore, the data will be more recent. The first source I will be using is a peer review article by Hines. The article talks specifically about the statics in Emelle Alabama and the detrimental effects of hazardous waste dumping in the county. The second article will be by Hurley who looks at the environmental racism history of America and how that affects minorities now. The third article is by Mcdoll who gives the background on how minorities are mistreated and treated unfairly when it comes to choosing where noxious waste facilities

Environmental inequality from a social justice perspective is based on the notion that there is discrimination in the policies that allow for establishing the sites and permits for industrial waste, which results in minorities and those living in poverty suffering from a greater share of the effects of pollution. This leads to environmental racism which is the underlying fact that racial and ethnic groups that are underprivileged, are

Today we’re faced with multiple forms of inequalities and injustices. None of them are in no way, shape or form are okay or justifiable. While we as a people are striving to deal with the obvious forms of injustices, there is another form that is a real quiet one, but it can be heard throughout the world that we are living in and is a severe problem that needs to be addressed. The type of injustice that I’m speaking on is called: Environmental Racism. This has been a definite issue that not only affects the environment, but it also has effects on communities, individuals and it effects the economic system in the long run as well. Environmental Racism needs to be brought up in conversations within our communities as well as our local governments, so they will not forget their remains a problem.

One of the first influences on the deliberation on Environmental Justice was The Civil Rights Movement in the United States of America. Leaders like Martin Luther King, Jr. fought hard to ensure that social transformation and power be established for African Americans, especially those in the southern states as well as those in the northern inner-city parts. Activists like King altered the philosophy on Environmental Justice arguing that there was a lopsided effect that proved that environmental hazards were not accidental. What environmentalists advocated instead was that environmental dangers resulted from racial segregation that placed power plants, nuclear plants, and other potential ecological hazards in areas with a high concentration of minority and low income groups. Several activists defined this as “environmental racism.”

Those who argue that environmental racism is a serious problem in America and the whole world, and their number are growing, are correct in at least one of their assertions. Racism exists. environmental problems exist. these facts, however, do not reveal whether or not environmental racism has occurred in any given instance. this might be an unimportant distinction but for the fact that some argue that civil right laws be applied to pollution events and related regulatory violations.

It determines where should malls , starbucks , parks , industries , power plants be established. Segregated baltimore has given the white community an upper hand ,because better resources are allocated near them.According to the theory of social privilege, “if you are labeled white, you possess privileges connected with an ideology based on beliefs, values, behaviors, habits, and attitudes, which result in the unequal distribution of power and privilege based on skin color.”(Family 1). The racial difference would then influence the establishment of residence. It would also influence the environment in the residence . For example, “it show how whites in many US cities enjoy a disproportionate share of environmental amenities, such as access to parks and open space, clean air, and tree.”(Boone 2).It shows that ,accessibility to the cleaner environment is also influenced by the racial prejudices.We all know that Industries are the backbone for development ,but they also create a lot of environmental problems to the surrounding areas.If so then,where would these polluting sites be more likely to be established? In a white neighbourhood or In a black neighbourhood ?

In “Disproportionate Siting” author Dorcetta Taylor discusses the common claims of unequal exposure to environmental hazards being due to racial and class discrimination (33). Taylor states, “Proponents of this thesis argue that hazardous facilities are disproportionally located in minority and low-income areas and that these patterns are the result of discrimination” (33). In regards to racial and social class discrimination, she argues that the claim of racism is the more controversial of the two with many scholars arguing on both sides (Taylor, 34). She then delves into different studies that argued that race was a factor in explaining location of and exposure to environmental hazards (Taylor, 35). Taylor then discusses the studies that

In the book, Sacrifice Zones, Steve Lerner takes readers through twelve separate stories of communities in the United States that have been unwillingly exposed to high levels of environmental toxicity. In each of these cases, citizens of those communities reacted to and pushed back against being exposed to toxic chemicals, sometimes successfully and sometimes less so. In every case, the people most heavily exposed to these health hazards were minorities and low-income citizens, which, Lerner argues, is why government officials and corporate decision-makers chose knowingly to risk exposing them. This paper will outline Lerner’s book and argue that despite a long history of protests, lawsuits, media attention and nationwide outrage, willing exposure of low-income and minority Americans to toxic chemicals in the pursuit of government and corporate interests is still a major problem today.

Environmental inequality, contrary to what we may imagine, is a social and political problem rather than a simple environmental problem. Environmental inequalities are deeply tangled with political, economic structures and institutions; adding more problems to the social inequalities that already affect our daily lives (Brehm, 2013). So, what exactly is environmental inequality? It refers to the fact that low-income people and people of color are disproportionately likely to experience various environmental problems by living in high risk and polluted areas. If we look at this problem closely we realize “that black, white, and Hispanic households with similar incomes live in neighborhoods of dissimilar environmental quality” (Downey, 2008) and that most people who suffer the consequences of living in neighborhoods with high hazard levels are racial minorities. This allows us to conclude that environmental inequality it is also linked to racism.

In the Brullard reading, Toxic Wastes and Race at Twenty: 1987-2007, Brullard discusses racial and socioeconomic disparities in relation to environmental issues from 1987 to 2007. 1987 is significant because it is the year when a report about environmental racism entitled Toxic Wastes and Race was published. This report raised awareness about the idea of environmental injustice and spurred further research on the subject. In Chapter 3, Brullard outlines two different methods used in this research: analysis of census data and “distance-based” methods. Brullard explains that using different research methods leads to slightly varying results, but studies using both methods still show racial disparities in relation to environmental hazards. In Chapter 4, Brullard argues that these disparities still exist in 2007, and that they exist all over the United States. In Chapter 7, he provides a contemporary example: the Holt family. The Holt family’s well water was contaminated because it was located near a landfill. The government, while

When one discusses acts of racism, slander or the stereotyping of a group of people may come to mind. However, the concept of environmental racism is rarely considered. This form of racism positions dominant environmental framing as racially driven, in which people of color (i.e. minorities) are affected disproportionately by poor environmental practices. Communities of color throughout the United States have become the dumping grounds for our nation’s waste disposal, as well as home to agricultural and/or manufacturing industries that pollute the land. Government regulations and cultural practices have all contributed to environmental racism. The government’s policies have also negatively impacted low income groups as well as people of

The town of Mossville, Louisiana, serves as a prime example of community resilience a bit closer to home. Mossville is rural community of predominantly low income African American citizens. Within a two-mile radius of the town lie over 30 petrochemical and industrial plants which release thousands of pounds of carcinogens like benzene, ethylene dichloride, vinyl chloride, and dioxin—a persistent organic pollutant recognized as “the most toxic substance known to science,” into the community (Martin 2010), transforming this town into a sacrifice zone. According to Professor White’s lecture on vulnerability, a sacrifice zone can be defined as a geographical area of predominantly low income and minority communities that has been permanently impaired by environmental damage or economic disinvestment (White 4/24). The water and air contamination from the corporations have caused myriad adverse health effects throughout the community, including reproductive problems, hormone disruption, cancer, and impaired physical and cognitive development in children (Martin 2010). In 1988, a federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry found that the blood of Mossville residents contained a level of dioxin three times higher than the national average (Martin 2010). The town of Mossville is an example demonstrating the adverse effects big

Hazards and pollutants are apparent in a variety of outcomes. Possible outcomes include asthma, cancer and chemical poisoning (Gee and Payne-Sturges 2004: 1647). Furthermore, “Although debated, the main hypothesis explaining these disparities is that disadvantaged communities encounter greater exposure to environmental toxins such as air pollution, pesticides, and lead” (Gee and Payne-Sturges 2004: 1647). Therefore, disadvantaged groups, such as people of color and the poor, experience greater environmental risks. Additionally, “Blacks in particular are exposed to a disproportionate amount of pollution and suffer the highest levels of lead and pesticide poisoning and other associated health problems” (Jones and Rainey 2006: 474). People of color, essentially, compete to live healthily. For example, African-Americans and Africans alike, struggle with the negative affects of oil refineries and unresponsive governments. The same can be said for Hispanics in California and the natives of Ecuador, who are forced to cope with the pollution of the Texaco oil refineries (Bullard 2001: 4). Environmental racism not only exploits natural resources, it abuses and profits from the communities involved. Governments and polluting facilities will continue to capitalize on the economic susceptibilities of poor communities, states, nations and regions for their “unsound” and hazardous operations (Bullard 2001: 23).

Living in a highly industrialized world that is ruled by capitalism, the concern for the environment often takes a back seat. Individuals or companies nowadays prioritize achieving optimal profit without putting into mind what their respective actions or productions may have an effect on the environment. They do not realize how important the role of our environment plays in the quality of human life. We can say that a good environment leads to a better quality life, while a bad environment could lead to a harmful and unproductive life. Now, it becomes unfair and unjust when the risks and costs of a company affect a certain group of people and on the opposite side of the spectrum another group of individuals enjoy the benefits without costs. The individuals that are affected badly are usually from Third World Countries where the distribution of risk and costs are not even (Low and Gleeson 1999). This is where Environmental Justice comes in. Environmental Justice mainly concerns the welfare of human beings (Low and Gleeson 1999). Talking about cities where capitalism surges from, it has been argued that these cities are ‘unfairly structured’ (Low and Gleeson 1999). Basically, what this is saying is that the wealthier you are, the better or cleaner the environment. On the other hand, if you are poor, then the environment around you will have more health risks. This kind of injustice or disparity is what adds fuel to the fire of environmental justice. In