In the introduction, the authors define the environmental justice movement as a movement for social and economic justice that shapes environmental policy and gives voice to marginalized communities, particularly racial minorities and the poor. The authors also indicate that case studies (like Kettleman City’s story) will be presented to illustrate the efforts for economic, political and social reform within the environmental justice movement at the grassroots level.
In Chapter One, the authors describe how the environmental justice movement is a movement “fed over time by tributaries,” referring to a number of historical economic, political and social reforms in the United States. The “tributaries” contributing to the environmental justice movement are the Civil Rights and Anti-Toxics Movements, academia, Native American perspectives, the Labor Movement, and traditional environmentalism. The three qualities uniting environmental activists are motives, backgrounds and perspectives. I believe that I share all three qualities. I’m very concerned about public health, particularly with regard to toxins and food safety. Although I’m not a person of color, I am a woman from a middle-class family and I understand how environmental injustice affects families with limited means. As an ecologist, I’m very concerned about the extent to which government agencies actively degrade the environment or neglect to protect the environment, thereby placing citizens in jeopardy.
The case study in Chapter Two exemplifies how communities like Chester have developed into toxic wastelands by political and social processes and the role that coalitions and legal expertise play in the long, grueling efforts for environmental justice. One question I have after reading this chapter and considering the injustice in Chester is, where is the RIGHT place, the just and fair place, for a toxic dump or landfill? In Polk County, our Metro Waste Authority is located in a suburban area of Pleasanthill and boasts positive relationships with their neighbors. No doubt, MWA’s establishment in this area was deliberate in light of case studies like Chester and Kettleman City. But what other standards should companies and federal oversight organizations use when determining appropriate, just locations of facilities, other than simply avoiding marginalized communities? Is Clinton’s Executive Order on environmental justice still adequate and effective?
I was disappointed that the authors did not adequately credit the women’s rights movement with the “evolution” of the environmental justice movement. Suellen Hoy’s Chasing Dirt: the American Pursuit of Cleanliness explains that, at the grassroots level, the environmental justice movement has been led almost exclusively by women. The authors of From the Ground Up note that women are often leaders in issues of health and community wellness, which is certainly true, but they do not, for instance, credit ecofeminists alongside traditional environmentalists. Jill Gay’s article (Feminism, Environmental Justice, Toxic Dumps and Pesticides) explains that federal organizations responsible for public and environmental health, including the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, often overlook women when considering the effects of toxic chemicals on human health. Women have historically experienced disproportionate disadvantage as a result of environmental degradation, particularly from chronic exposure to toxic chemicals like dioxin and pesticides.
The most intriguing topic in this reading was an argument presented by the authors in Chapter One. When describing the contributions that traditional environmentalists made to the environmental justice movement, the authors explain that historically tradition environmentalists have remained removed from issues in environmental justice and racism. As an ecology student, I’ve experienced the environmentalist perspective on this issue. When I studied abroad in Costa Rica, my semester culminated with a speech by my tropical ecology professor, who urged us to give our all to either one of the two issues: human rights or rainforest preservation. The perspective seems harsh, but many environmentalists believe preservation of nature to be more important than conservation for the purposes of human use. As a scientist, I’m not sure whether or not I side with this perspective; this is a troubling topic for me.
