Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Environmental Racism
Environmental Racism
OLD PROBLEM
Environmental Racism
Environmental Racism
the consequences for those who are victims of polluted environments. ."2 The study
revealed several key issues:
Race was the most significant variable associated with the location of hazardous
waste sites.
Although socioeconomic status was also an important variable in the location of these
sites, race was the most significant even after controlling for urban and regional
differences. The report indicated that three out of every five Black and Hispanic
Americans lived in communities with one or more toxic waste sites. Over 15 million
African-American, over 8 million Hispanics, and about 50 percent of Asian/Pacific
Islanders and Native Americans are living in communities with one or more abandoned
or uncontrolled toxic waste sites. Many of the at-risk communities are victims of land-use
decision-making that mirrors the power arrangements of the dominant society. "2
Historically, exclusionary zoning has been a subtle form of using government authority
and power to foster and perpetuate discriminatory practices. A study by the
Environmental Protection Agency concluded that socioeconomic conditions and race are
the major factors determining environmental discrimination. Communities inhabited by
Environmental Racism
poor whites are also vulnerable to toxic threats. In its two-volume report, Environmental
Equity (1992), the Environmental Protection Agency alluded to the difficulties of
assessing the impact of environmental hazards on low income and minority communities.
But later they admitted that those communities suffer a disproportionate share of the
burden. For more than a decade environmental racism in the United States has been welldocumented by NGOs, universities, and even the US government.1 However, the
government has provided no effective remedies to the victims of these racist practices,
nor has it taken effective action to stop such practices from occurring in the future.
Some real life examples of hazards facing minority communities in the United States
were in:
New Mexico - Farm workers work on crops that are treated with toxic pesticides
and pesticide exposure can result in death, birth defects, cancer, nerve disorders,
skin diseases and other problems. The Federal Government has failed to protect
farm workers and it was feared that this environmental protection would become
weaker under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). "In the case
of our farm worker community, the state of New Mexico has committed a tragic
injustice by the discriminatory exclusion of agricultural workers from the workers
compensation system."1
than 100 reservations have been approached by such firms. Many waste-disposal
companies have attempted to avoid state regulations (which are often tougher than
federal regulations) by targeting Native lands. Because of their quasi-independent
status, Native American reservations are not covered by state environmental
regulations. In 1991, a Connecticut-based company proposed to build a 6,000 acre
municipal landfill on Sioux land. Solid waste from other areas would be dumped
on Sioux land. Local residents founded the Good Road Coalition and appealed to
the Tribal Council to rescind the contract signed with the company. They were
able to block construction of the landfill.
On a global scale, it has been noted 1 that there is a direct relationship between the
increasing globalization of the economy and environmental degradation of habitats and
the living spaces for many of the worlds peoples. In many places where Black, minority,
poor or Indigenous peoples live, oil, timber and minerals are extracted in such a way as to
devastate eco-systems and destroy their culture and livelihood.1 Waste from both highand low-tech industries, much of it toxic, has polluted groundwater, soil and the
atmosphere. The globalization of the chemical industry is increasing the levels of
persistent organic pollutants, such as dioxin, in the environment. Further, the mobility of
corporations has made it possible for them to seek the greatest profit, the least
government and environmental regulations, and the best tax incentives, anywhere in the
world.
The destructive effects of environmental racism, therefore, are not exclusive to the United
States. "Racism and globalization come together in the environment, with the
phenomenon referred to as 'global environmental racism' , which is a manifestation of a
policy which has found domestic expression in countries like the United States, but which
also has a global dimension."1 Environmental racism, although not new, is a recent
example of the historical double standard as to what is acceptable in certain communities,
villages or cities and not in others. One example of this double standard is the
environmentally devastating method of extraction of natural resources, utilized by
multinational corporations in developing countries. This has been the case with the Ogoni
and other peoples of the Niger Delta in Nigeria, the Uwa people of Northeast Columbia,
the Amungme of West Papua, Indonesia, the Indigenous People of Burma, and numerous
Environmental Racism
others. First, a double standard exists as to what practices are acceptable in certain
communities, villages or cities and not in others. Second, people of color around the
world pay a greater and disproportionate price for economic development, resources
extraction and industrialism in terms of their health, quality of life and livelihood.
Although corporate greed and the lack of corporate accountability explains a tremendous
amount of what is described above, racism in the form of environmental racism, plays a
significant role that must not be overlooked. Financial institutions and trade agreements
have control over the movement of capital and goods across borders. Corporations have
become more powerful than nation states and are not accountable to anyone except their
shareholders. Their mobility has made it possible for them to seek the greatest profit, the
least government regulations, and the best tax incentives, anywhere in the world.
However, workers are exposed to economic and environmental blackmail; they either
accept low-paying, often non-unionized jobs with environmental health risks, or the jobs
will move to another country. Some have argued that resource wars will be the impetus
for the major conflicts in the 21st Century.1 Traditional land rights and sacred cultural
sites are under-valued when it interferes with gaining access to resources and therefore
profit. The impact that extraction and processing industries have on human health and
quality of life doesnt matter. People are increasingly unwanted and unneeded for
increased profit; they are becoming disposable. However, perhaps because of the
focusing their investment efforts on new overseas drilling opportunities where their return
on capital is higher.
To fight against environmental degradation and repressive economic policies, people
have classically relied on changing national governments, their policies and agencies.
Also, national networking and national resistance strategies have been used. But as
Karliner (1997) and others have noted that, "as the centers of political and economic
power shift from the nation-state toward an international economic system increasingly
dominated by transnational corporations, shifting also are the strategies, tactics and
targets of movements working on social and environmental justice."1 Richard Falk
(1993) posits that a new paradigm, "globalization from below", is needed during this
historical period.
Globalization from below is based on a global civil society that seeks to extend ideas of
moral, legal and environmental accountability to those now acting on behalf of the state,
market and media. Others have noted the need for transborder alliances1, a global civil
society and global social movements. It is clear that global networking and global
resistance are necessary strategies to solve the problems of environmental racism.
I believe there should be strategies enacted to achieve full and effective parity in regards
to this issue. The Regional PrepComs organized by the United Nations, and those being
Environmental Racism
10
Reference List
1.
Robinson, Dr Deborah M. (n.d).Environmental racism: old wine in an new bottle.
Retrieved May 22, 2004 from http://www.wcc-coe.org/wcc/what/jpc/echoes/echoes-1702.html
2.
3.
Wright, Richard T. & Nebel, Bernard J. (2002)Environmental science: toward a
sustainable future. New Jersey: Prentice Hall