Frequently Asked Questions

Q. What is environmental racism?

A. “Environmental racism can be defined as the intentional siting of hazardous waste sites, landfills, incinerators, and polluting industries in communities inhabited mainly by African-American, Hispanics, Native Americans, Asians, migrant farm workers, and the working poor. People of color are particularly vulnerable because they are perceived as weak and passive citizens who will not fight back against the poisoning of their neighborhoods in fear that it may jeopardize jobs and economic survival.” (1)

Q. What has race got to do with income?

A. Due to historical factors, race has a lot to do with economic status. Often, low-income areas will be home to one or more communities of color. Of course, a low-income neighborhood does not always equate to a community of color, nor are people of color always poor. Indeed, one can find many communities around the nation that are low-income, majority white and exploited due to their lack of bargaining power. One nationally known incident is the $333 million lawsuit won by the predominantly white, working-class community of Hinkely, California, for the Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s contamination of groundwater with poisonous chrominum-6. However, it is very likely, in the United States, that a low-income community will also be a community of color.

Q. What kinds of environmental injustice are there?

A. Procedural Inequity - This issue addresses questions of fair treatment – the extent that governing rules, regulations, and evaluation criteria are applied uniformly. Examples of procedural inequity are “stacking” boards and commissions with pro-business interests, holding hearings in remote locations to minimize public participation, and using English-only material to communicate to non-English speaking communities.

Geographical Inequity - Some neighborhoods, communities, and regions receive direct benefits, such as jobs and tax revenues, from industrial production while the costs, such as the burdens of waste disposal, are sent elsewhere. Communities hosting waste-disposal facilities often receive fewer economic benefits than communities generating the waste.

Social Inequity - Environmental decisions often mirror the power arrangements of the larger society and reflect the continuing racial bias in the United States. Institutional racism has influenced the siting of noxious facilities and has let many African-American communities (and other communities of color) become “sacrifice zones.”(2)

Q. What are some examples of environmental hazards?

A. The health hazards faced by communities suffering from environmental injustice come from a variety of sources. Most often the problems result from exposure to emissions from toxic waste facilities, landfills, or industrial facilities; however diesel exhaust, sewage treatment plants, power plants, pesticides, metals from recycling plants, and byproducts of mining have also been found to disproportionately impact low-income areas and communities of color.

Q. Aren’t there other laws that protect people from environmental hazards?

A. Yes, but, due to the inequities outlined above, these laws end up being ineffectual for some populations. The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) calls for environmental impact assessments but not community impact assessments. It also does not address cumulative or synergistic impacts of environmental pollutants, nor does it address discriminatory practices which target poor areas and communities of color.

An Executive Order was signed by President Bill Clinton on February 11, 1994, to focus federal attention on the environmental and human health conditions among these populations with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all. The Order directs federal agencies to develop environmental justice strategies that identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on communities of color and low-income areas. The Order intends to promote nondiscrimination in federal programs substantially affecting human health and the environment, and to provide low-income families and communities of color with access to public information on, and an opportunity for public participation in, matters relating to human health or the environment.

The Presidential Memorandum accompanying the Order underscores certain provisions of existing law that can help ensure that all people live in a safe and healthful environment. It is important that states provide the protection and participation opportunities that federal laws do not provide.

Visit the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) web site to read Executive Order 12898.

Q. What strategy has the EPA formulated to address environmental justice issues?

A. The EPA began developing a strategy to address environmental justice concerns prior to the signing of the Executive Order. The final document, Environmental Justice Strategy: Executive Order 12898, is consistent with the Executive Order and ensures the integration of environmental justice into the Agency’s programs, policies, and activities. The strategy contains five major areas:

1. Public Participation and Accountability, Partnerships, Outreach, and Communication with Stakeholders;
2. Health and Environmental Research;
3. Data Collection, Analysis, and Stakeholder Access to Public Information;
4. American Indian and Indigenous Environmental Protection; and
5. Enforcement, Compliance Assurance, and Regulatory Reviews.

For more information, please see the EPA’s Environmental Justice web site.

Q. What are brownfields and how are they connected to environmental justice?

A. Brownfields are defined by the EPA as abandoned, idle, or under-used industrial and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination. By undertaking the restoration of these areas, health concerns and economic and aesthetic liabilities would all be addressed.

As urban sprawl continues to carry higher-income families into the suburbs, urban areas are increasingly degraded and polluted; housing is devalued and low-income families (with a majority of these made up of people of color) have little recourse. Whether the low-income families move to the area because they need cheaper housing or because they are unable to relocate after housing prices fall is irrelevant; the bottom line is that they become trapped in a cycle of disadvantage with potentially severe health consequences.

Please see SERC’s “Cleaning Up Brownfields” for more information.

Q. What is a Title VI complaint? How does it relate to environmental justice?

A. Title VI is part of the Civil Rights Act that “prohibits exclusion from participation in, denial of benefits of, and discrimination under federally assisted programs on grounds of race, color, or national origin.” It also prohibits discrimination by a federal authority, financial assistance programs or activities “by way grant, loan, or contract other than contract of insurance or guaranty; rules and regulations; approval by President; compliance with requirements; reports to Congressional committees; effective date of administrative action.”

Title VI complaints are filed when people suspect that they’ve been discriminated against in terms of notice of toxic facilities permits and siting, public hearings, acceptance of grants, loans, or other federal assistance programs that may assist them in acquiring environmental or social justice.

For more information, please see Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964.(3)

Q. What is the NEJAC?

A. “The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is a federal advisory committee that was established by charter on September 30, 1993, to provide independent advice, consultation, and recommendations to the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on matters related to environmental justice.”(4)

NEJAC consists of 25 members appointed from stakeholder groups including community-based organizations; business and industry; academic and educational institutions; state and local government agencies; tribal government and community groups; non-governmental organizations and environmental groups.

NEJAC has six subcommittees organized around themes to help develop strategic options for the EPA. The subcommittees are: 1) Waste and Facility Siting; 2) Enforcement; 3) Health and Research; 4) Air and Water; 5) Indigenous Peoples; and, 6) International.(5)

Both of SERC’s sample bills provide for a state level Advisory Council to assist the state government in achieving environmental justice within the state.