Search

Objective: To examine state‐level environmental inequality trends over time by constructing a new, longitudinal data set and comparing change in environmental and economic inequality. Methods: We use Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) RSEI (Risk‐Screening Environmental Indicator) database to create measures of exposure to industrial air toxins and inequality in exposure by race and poverty status. Measures were calculated for each of three periods: 1990–1994, 2000–2004, and 2010–2014. Results: Exposure declined but inequality persisted. The geographic patterns displayed by race‐ and poverty‐related environmental inequality differ. But, states with higher levels of race‐based inequality had higher levels of exposure. Poverty‐based environmental and economic inequality exhibited a moderate, positive relation that was spatially patterned. Conclusion: While environmental quality improved, we saw little progress in reducing environmental inequality. Though both race‐ and poverty‐based inequality remain, they result from different mechanisms. Future research should examine the relations between deindustrialization and economic, environmental, and political inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the 20 years since a president committed federal government agencies to achieving environmental justice (EJ), states have been at the forefront of policy development. But states have varied in the nature and extent of their EJ efforts. We use Guttman Scaling to measure state EJ effort and test hypotheses regarding the relative importance of problem severity, politics, and administrative variables to variation in state policy development. Our analysis offers a novel characterization of state policy intensity and demonstrates its scalability. Income-based problem severity, environmental group membership, and nonwhite populations were important predictors of state EJ policy intensity during our study period. The political geography of EJ policy also displayed a distinctive southern pattern and the EJ policy intensity model contrasted significantly with a model of environmental policy innovation. The findings suggest that state EJ politics are more indicative of redistributive policy than regulatory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers have found that many contemporary movements, including the environmental justice movement, offer multidimensional conceptions of justice that extend beyond the distribution of societal benefits and burdens. In an effort to understand the role of justice in environmental politics more broadly, we ask (1) how environmental activists throughout the movement understand social justice and (2) whether and how environmental activists vary in the kinds of justice claims they make. Drawing on interviews with samples of environmental activists in British Columbia, Canada, and the U.S. states of Oregon and Washington, Q methodology is used to examine how environmental activists understand justice. We find, within the mainstream of the environmental movement, varying and elaborated understandings of social justice in the environmental context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines how political ideas of environmentalists support as well as impede relations between the environmental movement and other progressive movements. This requires examination of the role and meaning of social justice and democracy in the discourse of environmentalism. This study focuses such an examination on a sample of environmental activists in British Columbia. Q methodology is used to discern patterns of association between particular sets of environmental ideas, and beliefs and values related to democracy and social justice. The authors identify four environmental/political perspectives: alienated ecocentrism, civic communitarianism, insider preservationism and green egalitarianism. These perspectives share a perception of justice focused on fair democratic procedures. Fairness is linked to inclusion and equal treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents a study on the perceptions of power and the management of environmental conflict in the case of forest politics in British Columbia. Forest and environmental issues affecting the province; Role of the Commission on Resources and Environment; Forest policy; Politics of vested interests.

Objective. Observers of environmental politics have noted a division between mainstream national and grassroots environmental groups. This study attempts to determine whether a similar split in the movement can be observed at the state level. Methods. Data from a 1989 survey of 73 environmental groups in Washington State are analyzed. A distinction is made between institutionalized groups that regularly testify at the state legislature and grassroots groups that do not. Analysis focuses on environmental groups' structural characteristics, use of political resources, and choice of political activities. Results. Difference of means tests indicate that there are systematic differences between institutionalized and grassroots groups. The former have more members and larger paid staffs, derive more of their funding from other organizations, and are more bureaucratized. Second, principal components factor analysis reveals three kinds of political resources: mobilization resources, expertise, and organizational assets. Environmental groups rely on the first two more than on the last; grassroots groups are especially reliant on mobilization resources. Finally, logit analyses indicate that mobilization resources are positively related to the use of public outreach activities while expertise and organizational assets tend to be positively related to conventional political activities. Conclusions. These findings suggest that the division within the environmental movement exists within Washington State and structures the course of environmental politics within the state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]