Abstract
Throughout the country, communities of color and low-wealth populations are overburdened by environmental hazards and locally unwanted land uses. Issues of discrimination, racism, and injustice in the siting of industrial hazards, effects on environmental quality, and impacts on health in these communities have been neglected by the mainstream and environmentalist movements. In this commentary, we describe specific efforts of community-based organizations, nonprofits, and state and local agencies to address environmental justice (EJ) issues with an emphasis on six states—North Carolina, Virginia, New Jersey, Minnesota, Maryland, and California. For each of these six states, we discuss the role of community-based organizations in providing the foundation for EJ efforts, progress and challenges, and detail innovative and impactful partnerships. We also describe advancements that have been made in achieving EJ goals at the state and local level through government action, including legislation. Finally, we provide recommendations and strategies that can be used to advance EJ, improve public health, and enhance the quality of life in overburdened and underserved communities.
Introduction
In the 1970s, the U.S. federal government prioritized environmental preservation by passing a series of legislative actions focused on protecting the natural environment. On January 1, 1970, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was signed into law by President Richard Nixon. 1 NEPA required all federal agencies to evaluate the environmental impacts of their actions and created the Council of Environmental Equity. 1 NEPA also required the preparation of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) to assess impacts to the environment and make them available to the public, forcing federal entities to consider prospective environmental impacts before siting hazardous facilities in overburdened communities. 1 The Clean Air Act was passed several years earlier, in 1963, with major amendments made in 1970. 1 The Clean Water Act was passed shortly after in 1972. 1 These two policies placed regulations on polluters of both air and water, as well as wastes associated with each, with the focus on improving human health. 1 However, the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and NEPA insufficiently protected low-income communities of color and resulted in multiple lawsuits. 2 The Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act did not require permit procedures to prevent the placement of hazardous facilities in low-income communities of color. 3 In addition, both policies did not require cumulative or synergistic analyses of regional pollutants in low-income communities of color inundated with polluting entities. 3 Under the Clean Air Act, a functional equivalency test could bypass the EIA requirement of NEPA attenuating claims of environmental injustice in lawsuits. 4 Thus, explicit environmental justice (EJ) provisions are necessary to protect low-income communities of color.
The early EJ movement highlighted the shortcomings of environmental regulations that were not protective of people of color and low-wealth communities. In 1982, African Americans in Warren County participated in sit-ins and other acts to protest a polychlorinated biphenyl landfill in their community. 5 Despite being unsuccessful in their goal, the demonstration sparked research investigation into the prevalence of environmental inequity in low-income communities of color, conversations about environmental racism, and the need for EJ policy. In 1983, the U.S. General Accounting Office published the report, “Siting of Hazardous Waste Landfills and Their Correlation with Racial and Economic Status of Surrounding Communities” and in 1987, the United Church of Christ published their own report, “Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States.” 5 Both reports concluded that race was the strongest predictor in the location of a hazardous waste facility (U.S. General Accounting Office 1983; United Church of Christ 1987). 5 After the demonstrations in Warren County, EJ activists used tactics employed by Civil Rights leaders to protest against locally unwanted land uses in low-income communities of color. Persistent community-based activism and academic research increased the movement's visibility, which gained national prominence in the 1980s and 1990s. 5
People of color, low-wealth populations, and indigenous groups face innumerable EJ issues that require legislative action and enforceable solutions at all levels of governance. Early in the EJ movement, the federal government played a pivotal role in advancing EJ. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) first formed the Environmental Equity Workgroup in 1990 to address allegations about differential exposure to environmental hazards in low-income communities of color. 6 In 1992, the workgroup produced a report entitled “Reducing Risk in All Communities” providing recommendations on how to address disparities in overburdened communities and later that year the U.S. EPA established the Office of EJ. 6 In 1994, President Bill Clinton signed Executive Order 12898 that focused federal attention and resources toward addressing environmental issues that differentially impact low-income people of color with the goal of protecting all populations. 7 This was the first and remains one of the most significant federal actions to promote EJ in the United States. 7
The efforts at the federal level and work of EJ scholars encouraged EJ activism from community leaders and policy development across many U.S. states. In the following sections, we will highlight efforts to advance EJ in six states.
North Carolina
After the 1982 Warren County Protests, North Carolina became an epicenter for EJ activism in the Southeast United States. For example, in 1983, the systematic siting of industrial hog operations in eastern North Carolina in low-income communities of color alarmed local community leaders. 8 The siting of these facilities in black and brown communities epitomized environmental racism and catalyzed the need for action. As the hog industry expanded, in southeast Halifax County, a 98% African American community, the Concerned Citizens of Tillery (CCT) worked with the County Health Department and established an ordinance in 1992 that thwarted the siting of hog facilities by imposing stricter environmental regulations, engaged Tillery citizens, and promoted community-driven environmental monitoring. 9
CCT also founded the Hog Roundtable, an EJ coalition that aims to protect communities from hog-related environmental hazards. 9 In 1996, the CCT-led South-East Halifax Environmental Reawakening program was founded, which aims to restore blighted land, preserve ancestral land-ownership, and build collaborative relationships with public health researchers. 9 Several prominent EJ figures emerged in the fight against hog operations, such as, Gary Grant, the executive director of the North Carolina Environmental Justice Network (NCEJN), founded in 1998, and Naeema Muhammad, organizing codirector of NCEJN, setting the stage for other EJ advocates and organizations across the country. 10
In the late 1990s, CCT community leaders aimed to address the lack of multidisciplinary action-oriented community discussions by hosting an annual statewide EJ summit. The EJ summit served as a space to bring together activists, agencies, and academics to address environmental injustice in the state related to industrial hog farms, landfills, coal ash, and other hazards. In 1998, CCT and other groups held the first Annual North Carolina Environmental Justice Summit. 10 The summit raised awareness about environmental issues that impact low-income communities of color and pushed action-oriented policy directives. 10 Notably, NCEJN emerged after CCT community leaders hosted the EJ summit in 1998. 10 Since the 1990s, a myriad of organizations and community members have aligned with NCEJN to address environmental injustice in North Carolina.
In 1995, the West End Revitalization Association (WERA) was established to fight the illegal approval of a proposed 119-bypass in Mebane, NC that would destroy ∼77 homes and two religious centers (St. Luke Christian Church and Yadkin Masonic Temple) in historically African American neighborhoods that lacked access to basic amenities. 11 The highway plan in conjunction with a lack of access to basic amenities were both examples of environmental racism in Mebane, NC. 11 WERA leaders and residents fought Mebane City council's illegal 119-bypass project and, in February of 1999, filed various administrative complaints with the U.S. Department of Justice that highlighted violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898. 11 WERA leadership continues to advance EJ in other communities in North Carolina through peer training, annual community-based summits, collaborative partnerships with academic institutions, and community-driven scientific research. 12
One major step toward addressing environmental injustice in North Carolina began when the North Carolina's Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) created the Environmental Justice and Equity Board to advocate for low-income communities of color in North Carolina. 13 The board, which consists of 16 members, works with NCDEQ employees to enforce environmental laws and regulations. 13 However, soon after establishing the board, an administrative complaint accused NCDEQ of permitting industrial hog operations known to disproportionately impact low-income communities of color. 13 NCEDQ agreed to alter the permitting process for industrial hog operations and to investigate the negative health effects associated with fecal matter released from swine facilities. 13 After the agreement Naeema Muhammad, NCEJN organizing codirector, stated that “the harmful effects of the hog industry on communities in eastern North Carolina continue, and all of us involved in this struggle need to keep the pressure on. There is still a long way to go to address the harms caused by the swine industry.” 13
Virginia
In 2015, the Virginia Environmental Justice Collaborative was formed from four community based organizations to address EJ issues in the state, including the Southeast CARE Coalition, Appalachian Voices, the Federal Policy Office of WE ACT for Environmental Justice, and New Virginia Majority. 14 The group recommended creating an EJ advisory council, and it became policy in 2017. 15 The group worked on various environmental issues, including pollution-induced asthma in Richmond, and climate-mediated degradation of air quality in Hampton Roads. 15 The Southeastern Community Action for a Renewed Environment Program, also known as the SE CARE coalition, was one of the founding organizations of the Virginia EJ collaborative. Originally, SE CARE focused on EJ issues in Southeastern Newport News, VA when it received funding from the U.S. EPA in 2011. 15 The high prevalence of environmental hazards in Newport News diminishes air quality and contributes to pollution-related ailments among community members.14,15 Since its inception, and with a strong partnership with EPA Region 3, the coalition has worked on multiple projects and initiatives within the city of Newport News to identify and prioritize environmental concerns and public health issues. The coalition helped Newport News receive the “Making a Visible Difference” distinction by the U.S. EPA, which allowed for additional collaboration and utilization of federal resources for the advancement of EJ. 16 In 2015, the SE CARE coalition also launched an air quality initiative focused on Hampton Roads, which sought to reduce toxic air emissions in the area. 14
On October 31, 2017, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe signed Executive Order 73, forming the Advisory Council on Environmental Justice (ACEJ). 17 The council was formed to advise Virginia's executive branch on EJ issues with the goal of advocating against differential exposure to environmental hazards in low-income communities of color. 17 Specifically, the council informed policy-making decisions by providing recommendations on EJ to the VA executive branch. Governor McAuliffe stated that the ACEJ was needed to combat the burden of environmental hazards on low-income populations and communities of color and to give all residents a voice in protecting their air and water quality. 18
Governor Northam later signed Executive Order 29 in January 2019, establishing the Virginia Council of Environmental Justice (VCEJ), a remodeled version of the ACEJ to more effectively incorporate EJ into all state agencies. 19 The council is composed of individuals from various backgrounds, including indigenous tribes, academia, governmental agencies, faith-based organizations, and community-based organizations. VCEJ is responsible for producing reports and recommendations related to transportation systems, climate change resiliency, clean energy transition, outdoor access, and public health outreach. 19 In 2020, VA HB1042 passed in the state legislature creating a council of 27 members on EJ tasked with advising the governor on how to protect at risk communities from hazardous pollutants. 20 Subsequently, on April 22, 2020, VA SB406 passed in the senate, which provides the terminology necessary to characterize low-income communities of color and advance EJ work. 21
New Jersey
In New Jersey, advancements in EJ have occurred due to actions of government officials, grassroots organizations, and activists. In 1998, New Jersey created its “Environmental Equity Task Force Advisory Council” within the Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). 22 In February 2004, executive order 96 was signed by Governor McGreevey. 23 Executive order 96 outlined New Jersey's EJ policy, applying it to all state agencies. Governor Corzine later rescinded executive order 96 when he passed executive order 131 in February 2009. 23 Executive order 131 closely resembled New Jersey's EJ policy; however, it applied a larger focus on environmental hazards and the inclusion of multiple stakeholders. 24 It also recreated the Environmental Justice Advisory Council under the NJDEP. 24 Presently, the NJDEP website highlights EJ work, programs, and projects occurring at the government level within the state. 25
The New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance (NJEJA) spurred the formation of a strong community-driven EJ movement in New Jersey. NJEJA's goal is to serve as a liaison for New Jersey-based organizations whose mission is to raise awareness about EJ concerns and execute justice-oriented solutions in low-income communities of color. 26 In addition, NJEJA helped to establish the Newark Environmental Justice and Cumulative Impacts Ordinance in 2016. 27 The ordinance requires NJEJA to notify at-risk communities about estimated pollution levels associated with proposed industrial projects. 27 In addition, NJEJA collaborated with various EJ agencies to provide insightful policy recommendations. Many of their policy recommendations are intended to address exposure disparities in low-income communities of color related to air pollution, climate change, and energy production. 28 For instance, in 2008, NJEJA in collaboration with the Center for the Urban Environment (CUE) created an EJ climate change policy for New Jersey in hopes of reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. 29
Founded in 1969, the Ironbound Community Corporation (ICC) is another influential EJ group in New Jersey. The ICC is focused on empowering local communities and addressing environmental degradation by conducting clean-up projects in highly polluted areas. 30 The work of ICC and NJEJA has moved political leaders in New Jersey, such as Corey Booker, to advance EJ nationally. In 2017, Senator Cory Booker sponsored a landmark bill known as the Environmental Justice Act of 2017. 31 In the EJ Act of 2017, federal officials would be required to implement an annual EJ plan, continue the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), and EJ grant programs, including the U.S. EPA Environmental Justice Small Grants program and the CARE grant program. 31 Although the bill failed, Senator Booker successfully created the Environmental Justice Caucus within the U.S. Senate alongside two other senators, Tim Carper and Tammy Duckworth, in 2019. 32
Dr. Nicky Sheats, the cofounder and president of NJEJA, is another prominent EJ figure in New Jersey. His work focuses on climate-altering pollutants, particulate matter emissions, and the assessment of cumulative impacts in low-income communities of color. 33 To reduce pollution-mediated climate degradation, the U.S. EPA incorporated Sheats' ideas into the Clean Power Plan to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and copollutants. 34 In July 2016, Dr. Sheats helped create an EJ ordinance in Newark, New Jersey. 35 The ordinance highlights the need for greater regulation of pollution most harmful to communities of color, including carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. 36 Currently, Dr. Sheats and other EJ advocates support SB232, which would place restrictions on the permitting process in low-income communities of color saturated with polluting entities. 37 Specifically, the bill requires a cumulative analysis of pollution burden in underserved communities that can be used to inform the permit approval process. 37 Overall, Dr. Sheats has played an important role in expanding partnerships between researchers and EJ communities. For years, Dr. Sheats worked with the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) on an initiative to improve collaboration between scientists and EJ activists and engage communities in EJ research. 38
Minnesota
After the enactment of executive order 12898, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) placed additional emphasis on EJ and equity issues. In 2008, MPCA updated its EJ policy and in 2012 redrafted the EJ policy that closely mirrored the federal government's policy. 39 It reemphasized the definition of EJ used by the state and clarified the meaning of fair treatment and meaningful involvement of frontline communities. 39 The following year, the agency added EJ goals and objectives to its strategic plan.
In 2015, the MPCA released its EJ Framework, which outlined goals and strategies to better integrate EJ into MPCA's work. 40 As part of the framework, the MPCA worked on identifying areas with EJ issues, engaged the public in EJ efforts, and hosted EJ training sessions. 40 The agency recorded and monitored its progress, crafting reports to evaluate its progress through the end of 2018 and determine future action. 40 In 2016, the agency formed the Environmental Justice advisory group. The EJ advisory group advised the MPCA commissioner on the EJ framework and helped increase engagement and involvement between the public and the agency. 41
The MPCA has formed partnerships with several community-based and nongovernmental organizations focused on EJ. One MPCA partner is the Environmental Justice Advocates of Minnesota (EJAM), a nonprofit organization focused on EJ in the Twin Cities. Some of EJAM's early efforts focused on reducing mercury, arsenic, and lead poisoning in low-income communities of color. 42 In 2005, EJAM worked with Representative Keith Ellison to pass legislation to reduce household lead through tax subsidies. 42 That same year, the organization worked with the Minneapolis city council to pass a mercury reduction ordinance. 42 Moreover, EJAM hosted several forums on arsenic and successfully advocated for providing mandatory right-to-know materials to Minneapolis residents. 42 In 2006, the organization advocated for legislation to reduce power plant emissions by 90% for three of the state's largest coal-fired power plants. 42
The MPCA also formed a partnership with Alliance for Metropolitan Sustainability. This coalition was formed in 1994 by multiple community-based and advocacy organizations focused on advancing justice, equity, and development within the Twin City metropolitan area. In 1995 and 1998, the Alliance helped to pass the Livable Communities Act and a voluntary inclusionary policy in Minneapolis. 43 The coalition also worked to secure millions of dollars in funding for brownfield redevelopment and affordable housing in 1995 and between 1999 and 2001. 43 In 2015, the Alliance partnered with other organizations to create equitable development principles and Scoreboard with the purpose of ensuring that principles and practices of equitable development, EJ, and affordability were applied to all communities. 43
To supplement the work of EJ organizations in Minnesota and highlight regional inequities, Twin Cities developed an EJ mapping tool. The Center for Earth, Energy, and Democracy (CEED), another MPCA partner, created this mapping tool to visualize data in the metropolitan area and advance advocacy work. 44 A story map for the Twin Cities, previously made through the EJ mapping tool, shows variables within the tool. 45 The storyboard includes maps depicting percentage people of color, poverty, and children of color at the block group level. 45 The tool also includes variables for blighted housing, land use and green space, energy vulnerability, highway and railroad paths, and air quality monitors within Minneapolis. 45
California
In California, grassroots activists, community-based organizations, and local legislators have made great strides to address environmental injustice and related health issues. In 1999, California became one of the first states to respond to President Bill Clinton's Executive Order 12898 by codifying the coordination of its EJ program in statute. 46 The California Environmental Justice Program rapidly expanded, creating smaller subprograms intended to go beyond the permitting and planning process to tackling pre-existing EJ concerns. 46 Consequently, California legislators and EJ advocates sought to use financial resources to advance EJ and protect the health of CA residents.
In 2002, the California EPA codified the Environmental Justice Small Grant Program into the California Public Resources Code. 47 The purpose of the grant program is to provide financial assistance on a competitive basis to eligible community groups, including, but not limited to, grassroot organizations that are located in areas affected by environmental pollution and hazards and that are involved in work to address EJ issues. 47 The grant program has provided 179 community groups and nonprofit entities with grants to assist in their EJ work. In 2019, CalEPA Secretary Jared Blumenfield awarded $1,500,000 to 34 CA EJ projects. 48 A few organizations that received the CalEPA apportionment included the Environmental Health Coalition, PODER, CRPE, Comite Civico del Valle, the United Farmworkers of America, and the California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA). 49
In April 2013, CalEPA and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) announced a publicly available program that provides a statewide analysis of communities that are differentially burdened by multiple sources of pollution. 50 The California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen) amalgamates various environmental, sociodemographic, and health factors to produce an EJ score for every census tract in the state. 51 Each census tract's score is produced comparatively, giving high scores to areas experiencing an elevated pollution burden relative to low-scoring regions. 51 CalEnviroScreen is used by policymakers to direct funding to neighborhoods with inflated EJ scores. For example, Assembly Bill 693 directs the California Public Utilities Commission to award $1 billion for 10 years to install solar technology in low-income communities of color identified by CalEnviroScreen. 52 Los Angeles County also uses CalEnviroScreen to allocate funding to high-need jurisdictions identified in the screening tool. However, some neighborhoods have expressed concern about inaccurate scoring, which may create funding gaps in low-resource communities.
To improve enforcement of EJ initiatives, CalEPA created the Environmental Justice Compliance and Enforcement Working Group pilot program, which facilitated EJ compliance and enforcement initiatives in Fresno and Los Angeles. 53 After a successful 3-year trial period, the newly renamed and statewide CalEPA Environmental Justice Taskforce was granted permanent funding by the California General Assembly through the 2016 Budget Act. 53 The Environmental Justice Task Force is composed of 11 state agencies dedicated to ameliorating environmental injustice through four primary goals. The Environmental Justice Task Force's main goal is to attain compliance in low-income communities of color disproportionately exposed to harmful pollution. 53 The Task Force's three remaining goals aim to achieve compliance and enforcement by (1) identifying the areas in need with CalEnviroScreen to deliver targeted compliance assistance and enforcement efforts; (2) providing stakeholders with meaningful opportunities for input on potential EJ concerns and the implementation of proposed solutions; and (3) increasing coordination between CalEPA and local, state, and federal agencies to facilitate compliance and enforcement efforts pertaining to the environment in differentially impacted areas. 53 CalEPA's Environmental Justice Task Force applies principles from the aforementioned goals to several initiatives in areas that need assistance.
Recently, California has passed several EJ initiatives that effectively target low-income communities of color. In 2016, SB1000 passed and mandated local legislative agencies to consider the inequitable distribution of hazards in low-resource communities. 54 Specifically, the bill requires transparency from local governments regarding zoning and planning decisions, exposure mitigation, and access to health-promoting environments. 54 In 2017, California passed AB617, which established the Community Air Protection Program (CAPP). CAPP aims to reduce exposure to harmful air pollutants in low-income neighborhoods. 55 AB617 incentivizes the use of cleaner technologies, requires polluting entities to utilize modern scrubber technology, and mandates greater transparency of emission data. 55 Consequently, AB617 and SB1000 address EJ issues holistically, which is critical for the advancement of EJ.
Maryland
Shortly after President Clinton's Executive Order on Environmental Justice was released, Maryland began focusing on statewide EJ concerns. In 1997, Maryland created the Maryland Advisory Council on Environmental Justice (MACEJ) by House Bill 1350 as a response to the federal initiative to promote EJ. 56 The council's main purpose was to provide recommendations on how to address EJ issues in the state to the Governor of Maryland and its General Assembly. 56 In 2001, Governor Glendening established the Commission on Environmental Justice and Sustainable Communities (CEJSC) through executive order. 57 Commission focused on examining EJ issues and producing methods to create sound healthy communities. 57 In 2003, the commission was codified through Maryland General Assembly legislation. During the early years under the leadership of Vernice Miller-Travis and others, the Commission was a model entity providing recommendations on how to address environmental injustice in the state. However, more recently the Commission has been a failure because the Maryland Department of Environment (MDE) has done a poor job providing support to the Commission and MDE does not have an adequate plan to address EJ issues related to permitting, regulatory enforcement, and other areas. 58
At the local level, individual cities and counties have employed measures to address environmental injustice because of the failed Commission and MDE's lack of leadership and effort. In Baltimore City, the state's largest municipality, there have been multiple efforts to promote EJ and sustainability. Established in 2002, United Workers is an advocacy organization that focuses on human rights and worker rights in Baltimore. 59 Since 2013, United Workers has focused on three major goals: (1) public subsidies for developers, (2) EJ, and (3) housing. 59 United Workers uses multipronged environmental strategies and human rights principles to combat environmental pollution in Curtis Bay. 60 Curtis Bay is a neighborhood in Southern Baltimore that hosts numerous environmental hazards, including oil processing facilities, chemical plants, sewage treatment plants, and other polluting entities. 61 According to the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP), Curtis Bay residents are exposed to 90% of the most polluted air in Baltimore City and the city comprises 33% of all point source pollution in Maryland. 61
In 2010, Baltimore City passed legislation that qualified incineration as a renewable energy source. 62 Energy Answers, a proposed incinerator would burn 4000 tons of trash and deposit 1000 pounds of lead and 240 pounds of mercury into the air making it the largest incinerator in the country. 62 Destiny Watford, a local high school student founded Free Your Voice, a human rights organization with the help of United Workers committed to community viability and social justice to protest the siting of the incinerator near her community in Curtis Bay. 63 Community-organizing from Free Your Voice, technical assistance from groups such as EIP and academic researchers, and loss of support from public entities, including the local school district, which ironically would have paid for energy from the incinerator whose emissions would have poisoned kids such as Destiny who attended Ben Franklin High, stopped the incinerator project in 2016. 63 In 2019, Baltimore City passed the Baltimore Clean Air Act to reduce emissions from the two largest incinerators in the city. 64 The Baltimore Clean Air Act requires incinerator suppliers to apply the strictest pollution control technologies and track emissions of six criteria air pollutants or shut down entirely. 64 The Baltimore Clean Air Act will reduce 38% of toxic air emissions from stationary sources in Baltimore City. 65
Inequitable access to affordable healthy food, insufficient greenspace, and inadequate climate change mitigation efforts also impact thousands of residents in Baltimore City. A quarter of Baltimore City residents experience food insecurity (Baltimore City Department of Planning, 2020). 66 The Department of Planning, Office of Sustainability (BOS), Baltimore City Health Department (BCHD), and the Baltimore Development Corporation (BFPI) formed an intergovernmental collaboration to combat food inequity and dissect the underlying cause of food disparities in Baltimore City. 67 During the COVID-19 global pandemic, BFPI provided access to affordable healthy food by distributing meals to surrounding communities. In addition, the Baltimore City Health Department implemented the Virtual Supermarket Program, which uses digital technology to supply healthy food to community members with low-vehicle ownership. 67
In July 2019, Baltimore City experienced an 11 day heatwave, the hottest month recorded in global history. 68 To address the lack of greenspace and heat-trapping materials in Baltimore City, community members are planting trees behind the Amazing Grace Evangelical Lutheran Church and other low-coverage areas. 69 Baltimore's Growing Home Campaign provides vouchers to homeowners interested in purchasing trees at local nurseries. 70 In 2 months, 1700 trees were planted as part of their “Green Renaissance” forest conservation and sustainability plan. 70 Buildings in Baltimore emit 79% of the city's greenhouse gas emissions. 71 By 2020, the Baltimore Climate Action Plan mandates significant reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by ∼7000 metric tons and requires a 30% participation rate from commercial and residential buildings. 71
Brandywine is an unincorporated community of color with high-, medium-, and low-income groups in Prince Georges' County, MD. The small town has been used as a sacrifice zone for the County and the Washington, DC region. It hosts a Superfund site, surface mining operations, a sludge lagoon, concrete batching facilities, and power plants. 72 In May 2016, Brandywine residents and Patuxent riverkeeper filed a grievance against the Department of Transportation and U.S. EPA's Office of Civil Rights regarding the differential permitting of power plants in the community. 72 The grievance raised concerns about exposure risks associated with industrial emissions, including ozone formation, lung irritants, and disturbances. 73 If implemented successfully, the community would have a total of five power plants in a 13-mile radius and three in a 3-mile radius in the future. 73 In addition, Brandywine is 72% black, which is higher than the average for the County and state corroborating claims of environmental injustice and racism by EJ advocates, researchers, and community members. 73 Brandywine has other pathogenic features, including poverty, racism, food deserts, and insufficient greenspace. For example, a high proportion of Brandywine residents live in USDA-designated food deserts and a fly ash landfill is located near the only community park in the town. 74 As an unincorporated community, Brandywine lacks political representation that severely diminishes the community's political power, attenuates claims of racial expendability, and allows companies to economically exploit the area and use Brandywine as a dumping ground for various hazardous practices and waste products. 72
A public official stated that environmental injustice cannot exist in Prince George's County because the County and County's representatives are predominantly black, suggesting that black leadership is inherently nondiscriminatory. 72 This official reflects the sentiment of others in political office in the County, that the economic exploitation of other blacks is legal, basically there is nothing wrong with black on black environmental crime. A perceived victory for EJ in the County was the establishment of its Environmental Justice Commission (PGEC) by the Maryland General Assembly through House Bill 183 in 2018. 75 The commission's goal is to collect data related to EJ issues, develop practical recommendations for the County, and address region-specific gaps in EJ progress. 75 However, this commission has been a failure in advancing EJ just like the statewide commission. 58 One reason for its failure is it reports to the Prince Georges' County delegation in the state legislature and not the County Executive's Office or the County council.
Lessons Learned, Best Practices, and Recommendations
From the challenges and successes achieved by grassroots organizations, state and local agencies, here is a list of recommendations that can help states become more successful at addressing environmental injustice and related health, social, and economic issues.
Governmental agencies need to recognize the value of multisectoral partnerships with community-based organizations. As seen in each of the six states, community-based organizations know their communities and the environmental injustices that most affect them. Additional resources and support from the government is mutually beneficial, especially when there are multiple community organizations focusing on different issues and potential solutions within the region.
Local, regional, and state organizations should develop and promote the use of tools to advance EJ. The Twin Cities Environmental Justice Mapping tool created by the Center for Earth Energy and Democracy and CalEnviroScreen 3.0 have become useful EJ tools for their respective stakeholders. Actions and tools such as these have enabled community-based organizations to work more effectively with other stakeholders to address EJ issues. State officials and agencies have also collaborated with the EPA to amplify their collective impact in overburdened communities using both their own tools and those developed by the EPA, such as EJ SCREEN.
To advance EJ, state agencies and community-based organizations should replicate and modify strategies, frameworks, action plans, and recommendations made by scholars and governmental agencies that have been shown to work or produce tangible results.
Meaningful involvement of stakeholders in statewide and local environmental lawmaking, decision making, and program and initiative creation through establishment of EJ commissions or councils such as the model of the NEJAC.
Build a culture of community participation, education, and outreach in which residents are empowered and involved, information distribution and interaction are elevated, and healthy, equitable, and sustainable communities can form.
Work to ensure that underserved communities' water systems are supplied with drinking water that meets applicable health standards, with an emphasis on reducing sources of lead contamination and eliminating lead exposure disparities.
Achieve air quality that meets national ambient air quality standards and reduce human exposure to contamination from hazardous waste sites, with emphasis on people of color, low-income groups, and vulnerable communities.
Promote interagency and intra-agency coordination, agency education and training on EJ principles, and integrate EJ into all local, state, and federal policies.
Establish and strengthen more grassroots partnerships to engage community members to participate in crucial scientific research on local EJ and public health issues, with strengthened consideration of community research and science in decision making.
Inclusion and meaningful involvement of impacted stakeholders and community members in review, permitting, and remediation processes.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
We thank the undergraduate and graduate students in the Community-Engagement, Environmental Justice, and Health (CEEJH) laboratory at the University of Maryland, College Park, contributing to this article.
Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.
Funding Information
No funding was received for this article.