Environmental Injustice: Are There Patterns to Pollution?
Jason Donoghue
Mesquite Junior High School – Gilbert, AZ
What Is Environmental
Injustice?
Environmental justice (also called injustice, or inequity) is a phrase that
began being used several years ago in the 1980s after attention began
to be placed on factories and industrial areas that were being
investigated for purposefully locating themselves in areas due to their
proximity to minority populations and areas that economically might be
struggling. The question has been argued for years after, do these
companies seek these areas out hoping to find less resistance to the
toxic materials they house, transport or release into the air?
Schools of
Thought
Throughout the research over the past 20 plus years studies have
come up with several different factors, or potential causes of injustice
or inequity, however none of which has proven or disproven beyond
a shadow of a doubt whether or not injustice purposefully occurs, or
that it is the result of other factors. Below are some of the theories or
explanations that have been developed over the years:
•Indirect vs. Direct discrimination:
•Direct Discrimination – Sites were placed knowing that they
would have a negative impact, and were placed purposefully in
minority or lower socio-economic neighborhoods.
•Indirect Discrimination - Exposure that people are receiving are
due to factors beyond the control of the polluting facility.
History
The national spotlight was placed on this issue over 20 years ago
beginning with a national look at the issue by looking at where
Superfund waste sites were placed around the country and the
demographics of the zip codes in which they were located or in close
proximity to. “In 1987 the United Church of Christ (UCC) published the
results of research that looked at all uncontrolled toxic waste sites in
the United States. They found that CERCLIS [Superfund] sites were
most often located in zip codes where the population was
disproportionately Black and poor.” (Hogan & Stretesky, 1998)
Today
One story in 2007 brought this issue back into the spotlight. A specific
case involving a young boy and his mother from Texas caught the
attention of reporters, and their story appeared on CNN, and in an
article on CNN.com. The story talks about six-year old Valentin
Marroquin, who was a healthy vibrant young boy, and for apparently no
reason became quite ill. Doctors diagnosed him with leukemia. There
seemed to be no logical explanation for what happened to Valentin,
who before this appeared to be in perfect health. His mother began to
seek out answers and continually came back to where they lived. The
Marroquin’s resided in a Houston suburb that was located on the
shipping channel where “Day after day, oil refineries and petrochemical
companies pump hazardous pollutants, including known cancercausing chemicals like benzene and 1-3 butadiene, into the air.” (Fox,
2007)
Technology
Over the years new types of technology have been utilized to assist
researchers in measuring exposure levels, and potential hazardous
impacts a specifics type of pollutant might have. When looking at a
nine county area surrounding Philadelphia, Diane Sicotte & Samantha
Swanson used the EPA’s new Risk Screening Environmental
Indicators (RSEI), to determine if there were any connections between
the worst pollution facilities and racial/ethnic minorities, and those on
the lower end of the socio-economic scale. Below is a map showing
their findings. The dark cluster at the center is the city of Philadelphia,
in which you can see a lower proportion of white population but the
highest concentration of the worst polluting facilities.
•RSEI facilities release pollutants into air, water, and land.
Children have little if any voice when it comes to where their parents
choose to move them, and have no voice at all when it comes to
speaking out about the pollution that they may be exposed to. This is
of critical importance when it comes to environmental injustice
because children living in areas that may be receiving an inequitable
amount of pollution are going to be at greater risk for the following
medical conditions:
Conclusions
The main conclusion that can be taken away from this research is that
even though there are disagreements amongst researchers, most all
agree that injustice does occur and in most cases it is unfortunately
tied to race and/income levels of a community. The biggest takeaway
that most researchers agree on is that more research is needed, and
that all of the different lines of research needs to be streamlined.
•Race vs. Income:
•Those that have agree that siting of these sites is
disproportionate to other areas tend take one of two stances on
why the sites were placed where they were. One camp believes
that race plays a larger role, while the other believes income is a
greater indicator of whether or not a site would be placed in a
neighborhood.
People usually equate pollution with toxic releases into the air,
however when looking at the issue if injustice it becomes apparent that
there are many other realms in which people might be facing
hazardous materials in other forms than just through the air. One such
situation is how hazardous materials are transported. Below is a map
that displays the hazardous waste spills that have occurred during
transportation in the Los Angeles area, in relation to the distribution of
minority population.
The forgotten victims in all of this are the children that live in these
areas, especially the children at the early development and adolescent
stage, who may not be able to be heard on these issues. “Lanphear et
al. (2006) argue that regulations to protect children from exposure to
environmental hazards are necessary” (Paulson, 2006).
•Increased frequency and severity of asthma attacks
•Chronic obstructive disease
•Increased respiratory problems
•Increased respiratory hospital admissions
•Increased daily mortality
•Minority Move-In:
•This is the theory that the populations in areas that contain
polluting facilities moved in after the facility was already placed
there due to falling land and property values as a result of the
site.
Types of Injustice
Impact on Children
7th Grade Curriculum
Connection
With the seventh grade standards for the state of Arizona we are
required to cover the period of industrialization and immigration in the
late 1800’s and early 1900s. During this time immigrants faced
discrimination in many forms, from the conditions they were forced to
work in, to the places they had to live. What happened to these
immigrants, specifically the conditions and places they had to live
could be something that the students can compare to what appears to
be happening to minorities or areas that have a low socioeconomic
status in our world today.
8th Grade Curriculum
Connection
Our forefathers wrote the Declaration of Independence solidifying our
stance on a desire to become a free country and throw off rule by the
British monarchy for several reasons, one of the most apparent was
their belief that a government serves the people, and one of its primary
roles is to protect its citizens, and their natural rights. Their argument
for this “break-up” from England was that the monarchy and parliament
was no longer protecting the rights of those living in the colonies. Is the
government serving its purpose as the forefathers had intended when
it comes to citizens that might be living in an area where factories are
storing, transporting or releasing toxic materials? This is a question
that can be posed to the class during a unit on government.
Specifically discussing the roles and responsibilities of government
and citizens.
It is apparent that people are looking at this issue from several
different angles, the problem is that there is no standardized way to
quantify how one looks at injustice, or measures levels of toxicity. Until
some way of standardizing how injustice is measured, or looked at is
developed there will always be arguments of who is at fault and who
should be responsible.
Key References
1. Ash, M., and Fetter, T. R. (2004). Who Lives on the Wrong
Side of the Environmental Tracks? Evidence from the EPA’s
Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators Model. Social
Science Quarterly 85 (2): 441-462.
2. Fox, Maryanne. “Mother fears ‘stinky’ neighborhood’ caused
son’s cancer.” CNN.com. 19 October 2007. 22 October 2007.
<http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/18/poor.environment/index.h
tml>.
3. Hogan, M. J., & Stretesky, P. (1998). Environmental Justice: An
Analysis of Superfund Sites in Florida. Social Problems. 45 (2):
268-287.
4. Metzger, R., Delgado, J. L., Herrell, R. (1995). Environmental
Health and Hispanic Children. Environmental Health
Perspectives. 103 (6): 25-32.
5. Paulson, J. A. (2006). An Exploration of Ethical Issues in
Research in Children’s Health and the Environment.
Environmental Health Perspectives. 114 (10): 1603-1608
6. Schweitzer, L. (2007). Environmental justice and hazmat
transport: A spatial analysis of southern California.
Transportation Research. (11): 408-421.
7. Sicotte, D., and Swanson, S. (2007). Whose Risk in
Philadelphia? Proximity to Unequally Hazardous Industrial
Facilities. Social Science Quarterly. 88 (2): 515-534.