coursework-banner

ENMT303 Environmental Regulations and Policy Week 7 Discussion

ENMT303 Environmental Regulations and Policy Week 7 Discussion

DQ1 Connections between P2, EJ, and future careers

Below are some questions to help you discuss connections between P2, EJ, and future careers:

What have you learned about P2 and EJ that interests you most this week and why?  What did you think about what Dr. Ryan Emanuel found out about his own tribal history when he began to work on EJ issues? Which of the programs in the Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center reading about the programs that have resulted from P2 legislation interests you most and why?

In addition to sharing the personal connections between your readings and your life and interests, please discuss how P2 and EJ are related.

Were you surprised that there were no regulations to force anyone to prevent pollution? Instead, there are a number of monetary incentives for states to provide assistance to help with source reduction. What policy tools did the Pollution Prevention Act use?  Are similar tools used for EJ with E.O. 12898?

DQ2 Discussion of key terms and concepts

This week, we encouraged holistic thinking by introducing four concepts:

Precautionary principle

Polluter pays

Sustainable development

Accountability and meaningful public involvement

Please take one of those concepts and explain how it can be applied and whether we have applied them in previous legislations.  For example, in our module reading, we were asked the question “How have we treated chemicals we have regulated?”  Innocent until proven guilty or guilty until proven innocent?

DQ3 Environmental Injustice

This was a difficult topic to write about – and will be a difficult topic to discuss. It is typically helpful to start discussions of difficult topics with definitions and assumptions.

Two different definitions of EJ that we have seen this week are:

“Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies.” EPA definition of EJ

“Meaningful and informed engagement, early and often, with impacted people and decision making bodies, as long term partners, for the purpose of determining a fair distribution of benefits, and, if any, acceptable burdens.” Tamara Toles O’Laughlin’s definition, 2019.

Which of these definitions provide more practical guidance on how to address environmental injustice?  Why?

Tamara Toles O’Laughlin states that EJ should have an operational framework of equity, access, and justice. Do you agree or disagree? What do you think of her working definition of equity as a practice involving “habitual refocusing of resources and norms to support those persons, communities, and groups at risk of harm in a given action AND shifting policies, practices and activities to avoid those harms”? (Tamara Toles O’Laughlin from ELI 2019).

What about the assumptions in the equity and justice movement that:

No community, group or people should bear an outsized burden of environmental threats, ecological manipulation or be excluded form decisions that determine their future for any reason, particularly for profit.

Poverty is a function of design and is not biological.

Do you agree with these assumptions? Discuss the basis of these assumptions and then examine the various definitions of EJ that was presented to you this week and how they fit into these assumptions.

Dr. Emmanuel shared that there has been a 100% false negative EJ test? How can that be?

Dr. Ryan Emmanuel discussed some of the results from using the EJ test on the EIS. Can you share a summary of the specific cases he discussed where the final conclusion were that there were no EJ impacts when there clearly were?  How does this relate to the conclusion that “Environmental injustice that does not require a bias intent”?

What are other critical thinking questions we need to ask when doing an EJ test?

Professor Carlton Waterhouse discussed the fact that non-whites in the U.S. are 38% more likely to be exposed to nitrogen dioxide than whites.  And this is more than due to economic disparities since low-income whites have lower nitrogen dioxide exposures than high-income Latinos.  Also, African-American children are four times more likely to have elevated blood lead levels than white children. Had you heard similar statistics before?  And what are your thoughts on those statistics?  What is it about our societal structures that resulted in such disparity?

Professor Hayes in your TED talk viewing this week demonstrated how atrazine pesticides pollution is a case of environmental justice.  Do you agree or disagree?  Explain using evidence for your conclusion.