Annotated Bibliography

Highlighting current issues and debates in the Environmental Justice literature

Prepared by Olivia Manes, 6/14/19

For distribution via the Environmental Justice at Stanford website
https://ejstanford.weebly.com/

Mohai, Paul and Pellow, David and Roberts, J. Timmons, Environmental Justice
(November 2009). Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Vol. 34, pp. 405-
430, 2009.

https://ssrn.com/abstract=1599095 or http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-
environ-082508-094348

Abstract: The article reviews two decades of scholars' claims that exposures to
pollution and other environmental risks are unequally distributed by race and class,
examines case studies of Environmental Justice social movements and the history and
politics of Environmental Justice policy making in the United States, and describes the
emerging issue of global climate justice. The authors engage the contentious literature on
how to quantitatively measure and document environmental injustice, especially the
complex problems of having data of very different types and areas (such as zip codes,
census tracts, or concentric circles) around polluting facilities or exposed populations. Also
considered is the value of perspectives from critical race theory and ethnic studies for
making sense of these social phenomena. The article concludes with a discussion of the
globalization of the Environmental Justice movement, discourse, and issues, as well as with
some policy implications of finding and understanding Environmental Justice. One unique
feature of this review is its breadth and diversity, given the different approaches taken by
the three coauthors.

Author information:

 Paul Mohai has been heavily involved in Environmental Justice research

since helping co-organize the “Michigan Conference on Race and the
Incidence of Environmental Hazards,” which was instrumental in bringing EJ
issues to the eye of the public and the government. His approach is
predominantly quantitative and data-driven, with an academic positionality.
 David Pellow has worked to examine the disproportionate impact of
pollution on marginalized communities, as well as studying the
environmental movement itself. While his work and positionality are
predominantly academic, he also works with community-based
organizations.
 Roberts J. Timmons studies global climate policy and the discourse
surrounding it. His positionality is vey much academic and policy-based.

1
 Annotated bibliography: This review article explores the origins of the
Environmental Justice movement in its contemporary form, reflecting on major
environmental crises that spurred the development of a movement. As a review article, it
reflects on the current state of Environmental Justice as understood in academic circles. It
cuts to the core of Environmental Justice, asking such fundamental questions as “why does
Environmental Justice persist?” In answer to such questions, the piece often compares
debated works in the Environmental Justice academic sphere, and consults quantitative
studies to better inform the reader. It often returns to the question of race versus
socioeconomic status as the basis for Environmental Justice, pointing out contentions
within the movement that remain unresolved. For someone hoping to learn about
intersectionality and allyship, this piece is informative in establishing race/class relations,
and is fundamental for anyone just breaking into Environmental Justice. Some aspects of
this piece worth being conscious of include its authorship (all white men), as well as its
breadth.

Questions raised by this piece:

 Is race or class a greater determinant of environmental discrimination?
 How can we most accurately gather quantitative data on environmental inequality
(i.e. what scientific/data gathering methods work best)?
 How can we link health outcomes to environmental disparities?

McGregor, D. (2018). Mino-Mnaamodzawin: Achieving Indigenous Environmental

Justice in Canada. Environment and Society, 9(1), 7-24.
doi:10.3167/ares.2018.090102

Abstract: This article explores the potential for advancing Environmental Justice (EJ)
theory and practice through engaging with Indigenous intellectual traditions. When
EJ is grounded in Indigenous epistemological and ontological foundations, a distinct
EJ framework emerges, leading to a deeper understanding of Indigenous EJ and to a
renewed vision for achieving it. I highlight the emergence of the Anishinaabe philosophy
referred to as mino-mnaamodzawin (“living well” or “the good life”), common to several
Indigenous epistemologies, that considers the critical importance of mutually respectful
and beneficial relationships among not only peoples but all our relations (including all
living things and many entities not considered by Western society as living, such as water
and Earth itself). Mino-mnaamodzawin is suggested as a foundational contributor to a new
ethical standard of conduct that will be required if society is to begin engaging in
appropriate relationships with all of Creation, thereby establishing a sustainable and just
world.

Author information:
 Deborah McGregor studies Indigenous knowledge systems in Canada, particularly in
dialogue with Environmental Justice and is herself Anishinaabe from Whitefish
River First Nation in Ontario.

2
Annotated Bibliography: This article seeks to disrupt traditional frameworks of achieving
Indigenous Environmental Justice and instead suggests a new path forward that bases
justice in Indigenous knowledge. For those hoping to learn about intersectionality, this
piece poses a provocative argument that because the experiences and situations of
Indigenous peoples are so unique, particularly in their relations with dominant
governments, that the same methods of achieving Environmental Justice for other
marginalized peoples cannot be employed. The article also tries to articulate the diversity
of knowledge among tribes and avoids generalizing Indigenous justice as a monolithic
concept. For those hoping to learn about allyship, this piece emphasizes the notion that
existing forms of justice do not always pose the desired outcomes for Indigenous peoples.
This piece is important in establishing the nuances present when we talk about
“Environmental Justice.” For example, “justice” as imagined within dominant Western
culture does not take into consideration the land as a recipient of justice, and thus excludes
an essential component. Some limitations of this piece include its specificity (it speaks only
to Indigenous peoples and cannot necessarily be applied to other marginalized groups) as
well as running the risk of generalizing “Indigenous” notions of justice.

Questions raised:
 Can Indigenous knowledge fit within traditional EJ frameworks?
 How can allies support Indigenous peoples in their demands for justice without
imposing western notions of justice?

Whyte, Kyle. "Settler Colonialism, Ecology, and Environmental Injustice."

Environment and Society 9, no. 1 (2018): 125-44. doi:10.3167/ares.2018.090109.

Abstract: Settler colonialism is a form of domination that violently disrupts human

relationships with the environment. Settler colonialism is ecological domination,
committing environmental injustice against Indigenous peoples and other groups. Focusing
on the context of Indigenous peoples’ facing US domination, this article investigates
philosophically one dimension of how settler colonialism commits environmental injustice.
When examined ecologically, settler colonialism works strategically to undermine
Indigenous peoples’ social resilience as self-determining collectives. To understand the
relationships connecting settler colonialism, environmental injustice, and violence, the
article first engages Anishinaabe intellectual traditions to describe an Indigenous
conception of social resilience called collective continuance. One way in which settler
colonial violence commits environmental injustice is through strategically undermining
Indigenous collective continuance. At least two kinds of environmental injustices
demonstrate such violence: vicious sedimentation and insidious loops. The article seeks to
contribute to knowledge of how anti-Indigenous settler colonialism and environmental
injustice are connected.

3
Author information:
 Kyle Whyte studies Indigenous knowledge as well as philosophy and
environmental communication. He is Potawatomi and a member of the Citizen of
Potawatomi Nation.

Annotated Bibliography: This piece draws upon Indigenous principles to show the truly
catastrophic and destructive nature of colonialism in the erasure of culture and a
relationship with the land. In particular, it focuses on the principle of “collective
continuance”--which draws upon the ideas of interdependence, adaptation to change, and
responsibility for the land and life. Collective continuance is essential in an EJ framework in
that it emphasizes community response and vision, a vision that can drive grassroots and
community-based change. Such community-based change focuses on the community’s
vision and resurgence, a vision beyond the scope of immediate harms. The article notes
that by the establishment of reservations, there is an inattention to the larger land once
occupied by Indigenous peoples--there is an absence of knowledge about their continued
presence. In the American consciousness, Indigenous people and their relationship to the
land is a thing of the past, a notion Whyte disrupts.

Questions raised:
 How can Indigenous peoples reclaim “types of relationships” under collective
continuance while paying attention to the qualities of those relationships (i.e.
ensuring the do not continue colonial legacies of patriarchy and domination)?
 How can allies support the notion of Indigenous collective continuance and seek
meaningful and reciprocal relationships with Indigenous peoples?

The Haves, the Have-Nots, and the Health of Everyone: The Relationship Between
Social Inequality and Environmental Quality. Lara Cushing, Rachel Morello-Frosch,
Madeline Wander, Manuel Pastor. Annual Review of Public Health 2015 36:1, 193-
209

Abstract: A growing body of literature suggests that more unequal societies have more
polluted and degraded environments, perhaps helping explain why more unequal societies
are often less healthy. We summarize the mechanisms by which inequality can lead to
environmental degradation and their relevance for public health. We review the evidence
of a relationship between environmental quality and social inequality along the axes of
income, wealth, political power, and race and ethnicity. Our review suggests that the
evidence is strongest for air- and water-quality measures that have more immediate health
implications; evidence is less strong for more dispersed pollutants that have longer-term
health impacts. More attention should be paid in research and in practice to links among
inequality, the environment, and health, including more within-country studies that may
elucidate causal pathways and points of intervention. We synthesize common metrics of
inequality and methodological considerations in an effort to bring cohesion to such efforts.

4
Author information:
 Lara Cushing’s research has focused on health outcomes for people
disproportionately affected by environmental exposure.
 Rachel Morello-Frosch specializes in issues of air pollution and its effects on
marginalized communities.
 Madeline Wander specialized in data analysis, particularly as pertaining to
socioenvironmental issues.
 Manuel Pastor’s research focuses on sociology and socioeconomic and racial
inequality.

Annotated Bibliography: This article is insightful to anyone hoping to more deeply

examine the interplay of socioeconomic inequality and environmental inequality. Very
much in dialogue with Mohai et al. (Environmental Justice), this piece addresses the race
versus class question by examining inequality both in a racial sense and also in an
economic sense. Drawing from the data analysis expertise of the authors, it makes use of
common metrics of social inequality and attempts to correlate them to metrics of
environmental quality. From an intersectionality standpoint, this piece proposes a strong
argument that inequality, and environmental injustice, is not confined to those who are
immediately effected, as such issues result in lower environmental quality for everyone.

Questions raised:
 How can policy aim to equalize political involvement in a way that allows for the
voices of those most impacted by decision-makers?
 How can we communicate the environmental impacts of social inequality?
 Given environmental quality affects everyone to some degree, why does social
inequality still result in reduced environmental quality?

Bullard, Robert D., Paul Mohai, Robin Saha, and Beverly Wright. "TOXIC WASTES AND
RACE AT TWENTY: WHY RACE STILL MATTERS AFTER ALL OF THESE YEARS."
Environmental Law 38, no. 2 (2008): 371-411.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/43267204.

Abstract: In 1987 the United Church of Christ’s (UCC) Commission for Racial Justice
published its landmark report Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States. The report
documented disproportionate environmental burdens facing people of color and low-
income communities across the country. The report sparked a national grassroots
Environmental Justice movement and significant academic and governmental attention. In
2007, the UCC commissioned leading Environmental Justice scholars for a new report,
Toxic Wastes and Race at Twenty: Grassroots Struggles to Dismantle Environmental
Racism in the United States. In addition to commemorating and updating the 1987 report,
the new report takes stock of progress achieved over the last twenty years.

5
Annotated bibliography: This report is a follow-up to a report conducted 20 years earlier,
outlining the progress made and, more importantly, areas that remain serious issues. This
report verifies the persistence of racial inequality in the effects of environmental
degradation and environmental crises and thus refutes notions of “equality.” It also
employs data analysis and discusses the utility of different metrics in an EJ context. It is
importance to EJ as a whole is one of validation and also focus in terms of particular issue
areas and topics that still need to be explored and addressed.

Questions raised:
 What are the most effective ways to measure environmental inequality?
 What are some of the ways that data can be manipulated so as to deny the existence
of environmental racism?
 How should we move forward given that some data indicates environmental
disparities have only worsened?

Pulido, Laura and Juan De Lara (2018) “Reimagining ‘Justice’ in Environmental

Justice: Radical Ecologies, Decolonial Thought, and the Black Radical Tradition ”
Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 1 (1-2): 76-98

Abstract: In this article, we rethink the spatial and racial politics of the Environmental
Justice movement in the United States by linking it to abolitionist theories that have
emerged from the Black Radical Tradition, to critical theories of urban ecology, and to
decolonial epistemologies rooted in the geopolitics of Las Americas. More specifically, we
argue that Environmental Justice organizing among multi-racial groups is an extension of
the Black Radical Tradition’s epistemic legacy and historical commitment to racial justice.
The article is divided into two parts. First, we review how this remapping of Environmental
Justice through the lens of the Black Radical Tradition and decolonial border thinking
reshapes our understanding of anti-racist organizing. Part of our remapping includes an
examination of African American and Latinx social movement organizing to reveal how
such geographies of interracial solidarity can reframe abolitionist politics to take nature
and space seriously. In the second part of the article, we present a series of maps that
illustrate the geography, temporality, and inter-racial solidarity between Chicanx social
movement organizations and the Black Radical Tradition. Our mapping includes identifying
sites of interracial convergence that have explicitly and implicitly deployed abolitionist
imaginaries to combat the production of racialized capitalist space. We use Environmental
Justice to argue for a model of abolitionist social movement organizing that invites
interracial convergence by imagining urban political ecologies that are free of the death-
dealing spaces necessary for racial capitalism to thrive

Author information:
 Laura Pulido studies Human Geography and movement in combination with
Chicanx and Ethnic studies.
 Juan De Lara specializes in labor economics and Southern Californian, as well as
issues of class and race.

6
Annotated Bibliography: This piece presents a much more radical approach to the issues
of environmental racism, reconsidering the viability of cooperation with a “liberal” state
and instead placing EJ within the mechanics of “decolonial border thought” and
“abolitionism” very much rooted in Back radical tradition. In terms of intersectionality and
allyship, this piece provokes several questions regarding the ability of marginalized groups
to work together; for example, it cites the shift of SNCC to a black power movement that led
Latinx activists to leave the group and found their own EJ organizations.

Questions raised:
 Can true Environmental Justice be achieved within the bounds of a “liberal
state”?
 Does working with government do more harm than good, or vice versa?
 Is incremental change worth it?
 What is the place of allyship in decolonial thought and Black radical tradition?

Foster, Sheila, Environmental Justice in an Era of Devolved Collaboration. Harvard

Environmental Law Review, Vol. 26, 2002; Fordham Law Legal Studies Research
Paper No. 17. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=291510 or
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.291510

Abstract: This Essay examines the move by environmental and natural resources agencies
to devolve decision making influence to local, multi-stakeholder, collaborative groups. The
emerging use of such decision making mechanisms - such as forestry and watershed
partnerships and community advisory committees - reflects the need for more creative
solutions to the current generation of environmental problems and for improved decision
making processes for identifying and equitably distributing the costs and benefits of
environmental decisions. In seeking more participatory, local and holistic decision making
mechanisms, the move toward devolved collaboration intersects and converges with
another prominent movement, Environmental Justice, in ways that are crucial for the
future of environmental decision making.
This Essay examines the points of convergence and divergence between these two
important currents in modern environmental decision making. On the one hand, the
interest-convergence of these two powerful currents in modern environmentalism has
been a crucial element shaping the direction of environmentalism from the 1990s into the
new century. There are now more voices than ever calling for the creation of democratic,
sustainable communities and for a more comprehensive approach to environmental
problems that address the connections between environmental, economic and civic health.
Yet, despite the interest-convergence of these two powerful currents in modern
environmentalism, there are dangers lurking at their intersection. This Essay argues that
while devolved collaboration can theoretically ameliorate some regulatory inequities, it
may also add renewed legitimacy to racial and class distributional inequities, further
entrenching them in the landscape of environmental decision-making. Perhaps as

7
importantly, devolved collaboration will introduce new equity problems in environmental
decision-making by modifying current patterns of participation and representation in
unforeseen ways. Like its predecessor decision making approaches, this evolving model,
thus far, is indifferent to (or innocent about) the social structural and institutional
conditions necessary to realize its own promises, including its aspiration of more equitable
decisions.
This Essay concludes that the movement toward devolved collaboration should best be
regarded as the collective expression of a core set of normative principles that can guide
the shaping of environmental decision making processes in a context-specific fashion.
These normative principles can be used to tailor a mix of decision making mechanisms to
specific environmental problems in particular ecological, social, economic, and political
contexts. This contextualized approach brings with it the additional virtue of preserving
the accountability of centralized authorities for ensuring fidelity to these principles in
specific contexts instead of leaving this task to unaccountable, fragmented local groups.

Annotated Bibliography: This article is important for anyone interested in the question of
organization and activism. Foster cautions activists to not place complete faith in
grassroots and coalition-based organizing (i.e. “devolved collaboration”) even though they
are not based in more traditional hierarchical government models. Rather, she points out
that many of the same issues with hierarchical government can and will persist under
devolved collaboration unless addressed; indeed, the very notion of a “win-win” situation
inevitably suggests that everyone has an equal stake in an issue, which she criticizes. She
suggests that we remain aware of the dangers that apply to all organizing and coalition-
building work, and continue to address them in devolved collaboration. In terms of
intersectionality, this piece perhaps casts doubt on the notion that everyone is equal in
certain situations; it highlights the role of positionality and the unique experiences of
certain groups, and proposes that those who have the most at stake in an issue should have
proportional representation in policies/discourse surrounding it.

Questions raised:
 What issues/dangers do community-based organizers need to be aware of ?
 How can those with the most stake in an issue be given the most voice?