Environmental Ethics: MODULE 2: Environmental Racism

AGENDA

Recap: environmental disparities
Environmental disparities--but is it environmental racism?
Preview: Wenz, "Just Garbage"-- another view on what's unjust about the disparities

From the Ground Up: Environmental Racism and the Rise of the Environmental Justice Movement (2001). CHAPTER 3 "Environmental Racism"

Luke Cole (environmental activist)
Sheila Foster (law professor now at Georgetown)

p. 54-58: unequal distribution of environmental burdens, based on race/ethnicity

They focus on Covanta trash incinerator in Chester, Pennsylvania--biggest one in the country--protests continue today -- article

p. 58, "The problem of causation"

Should we call the disparities environmental racism?

Cole and Foster:

Disparities alone don't signify racism
Disparities caused by racism = environmental racism

Counterargument: disparities always/mostly have benign causes (i.e. not racism)

lifestyle choices
market forces
NOT racist intentions

Cole & Foster--rebuttal of the three arguments

Counterargument #1: lifestyle choices (EPA 1992)

Environmental disparities are caused by lifestyle choices.
If they're caused by lifestyle choices, they're not caused by racism. THERFORE
Environmental disparities are not caused by racism

EPA's examples

Latinos are disproportionately exposed to pesticides because more Latinos choose farm labor.
Asians are disproportionally exposed to contaminated fish because more Asians choose to eat more fish.
Blacks suffered longer power-cuts because more Blacks choose to live in cities, which had longer outages.
Non-whites are more often nature-deprived because more non-whites choose to live in cities

Note: Communities are considered nature deprived if their census tract
has a higher proportion of natural area lost to human activities than the state-level median. Source link

C&F REPLY: We have to ask why? See p. 59-60.

One valid example of a disparity between two groups caused by lifestyle choice, not racism or any sort of prejudice. Is sthere one?

______________________

Counterargument #2: Market forces

Landfills, petrochemical plants, incinerators, etc., are built, causing the lowering housing prices around then; lower-income then people move in, who are disproportionally non-white.
Those are "market forces" not racism.
Environmental disparities are not caused by racism.

C&F REPLY: What is their reply? What is their point in the passage below?

p. 62

What do they mean by this?

Counterargument #3: No racist intentions

To sue for environmental discrimination, you must show that a particular person is who was responsible for the environmental conditions had racist intentions.
Explicit racist intentions are uncommon today. THEREFORE,
Environmental disparities are not caused by racism.

C&F REPLY: As a legal matter, yes, intentional discrimination must be shown for a successful lawsuit.