Race, Waste, and Class: New Perspectives on Environmental Justice

Abstract

Many of our readers will already be familiar with evidence suggesting that residents of poor communities and communities of color in the United States bear a "disproportionate" burden of toxic contamination, both through the generation and release of hazardous chemicals in their neighborhoods and the location of waste management facilities. This is an outcome that the landmark 1987 United Church of Christ (UCC) report on toxic waste and race claimed was not the result of mere coincidence (United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice, 1987). Indeed, empirical evidence of disproportionate economic impact from environmental mismanagement, as well as through the regulatory response to air pollution, had already been noted a decade earlier by geographers and economists, albeit without the suggestion of discriminatory intent (e.g., Harrison, 1975;Berry, et al., 1977).In this special issue, our contributors consider both the evidence supporting the conclusion that race is the central determining factor with toxic exposure and, of greater consequence, they explore the political implications of such for community organizing and empowerment. Addressing the former agenda, a recent report by the U.S. Government Accounting Office examines the racial composition and income level of people living near municipal solid waste landfills and reviews research on the demographics of hazardous waste facility location. It concludes that people of color and low-income people are not overrepresented at nonhazardous municipal landfills and, furthermore, that ten major studies on hazardous waste facility location collectively yield an inconclusive . range of results depending upon the type of facility studied, the research

Una Aproximación Conceptual a la Educación para la Justicia Social y Ambiental

“…La mayoría de especialistas están de acuerdo en esta distribución, pero qué distribuir es uno de los debates abiertos en estos años: de bienes primarios como decía Rawls, de recursos (Dworkin, 1981), de los impactos medioambientales, tanto positivos como negativos (Agyeman y Evans, 2004;Heiman, 1996), o priorizando en un enfoque desde las capacidades (Nussbaum, 2002;Sen, 2010). Y a su vez cómo realizarlo, si teniendo en cuenta al individuo (Dworkin, 1981;Nozick, 1988), a la comunicad (Macintyre, 1984;Sandel, 1982;Taylor, 2003;Walzer, 2001) o a todas las especies (Mosterín y Riechmann, 1995;Nussbaum, 2007).…”

Aportaciones de las Escuelas Alternativas a la Justicia Social y Ambiental: Autoconcepto, Autoestima y Respeto / Contributions of the Alternative Schools to Social and Environmental Justice: Self-concept, Self-esteem and Respect

“…Aunque una gran parte de autores y autoras están de acuerdo en la importancia de la distribución para la consecución de un mundo más justo (lo que sería la justicia redistributiva), el debate se centra en qué distribuir: bienes primarios (Rawls, 1971(Rawls, , 2001, recursos (Dworkin, 1981), impactos medioambientales tanto positivos como negativos (Agyeman y Evans 2004;Heiman, 1996) o capacidades (Nussbaum, 2002(Nussbaum, , 2007Sen, 1995Sen, , 2010. Pero también es cómo conseguir esa distribución, si teniendo en cuenta al individuo (Dworkin, 1981;Nozick, 1988), a la comunicdd (MacIntyre, 1984;Sandel, 1982;Taylor, 2003;Walzer, 2001) o a todas las especies (Mosterín y Riechmann, 1995;Nussbaum, 2007).…”

Transforming Justice in REDD+ through a Politics of Difference Approach

“…This line of research documented how communities were not only denied access to resources or disproportionately exposed to environmental harms, but also excluded from decision-making processes that impact how they interact with their environment (e.g., [20][21][22]). Procedural justice refers to the ability of all individuals impacted by a decision to meaningfully participate in the decision-making process and therewith shape the potential outcomes of the process [23][24][25].…”