Menu Menu

A beginner’s guide to environmental racism

Environmental racism was coined nearly forty years ago in 1982, but COVID deaths, the Flint water crisis and the effects of climate change on the Global South has brought this idea to the forefront of activist’s minds. 

Environmental racism is a form of systematic racism in which communities of colour are disproportionately affected by policies and practices undertaken by governments and corporations.

This often manifests itself via communities being forced to live in close proximity to hazardous sources of toxic waste, such as landfills and power stations.

Here’s all you need to know to familiarise yourself with environmental racism – from its origins, to famous examples, as well as what’s being done to change the situation.


Where did the term come from?

Environmental racism was raised as an issue with the environmental justice movement in the United States in the 1970s and 1980s.

It was African-American civil rights leader Benjamin Chavis, who had previously been the executive director of the United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice, who first coined the term in 1982.

Chavis defined it as ‘racial discrimination in environmental policy-making… the deliberate targeting of communities of colour for toxic waste facilities, the life-threatening presence of poisons and pollutants and the history of excluding people of colour from leadership of the ecology movements.’

Another pioneer of the environmental justice movement, Dr Robert D. Bullard, also pointed out how institutionalised racism from both government and corporate practices were responsible for environmental racism.

In a 2007 study, Bullard found that ‘race’ was the most important factor in ‘predicting the location of the nation’s commercial hazardous waste facilities.’

He found that African-American children were 5x more likely to have lead poisoning (as a result of proximity to waste) than Caucasian children.

Bullard was also able to prove that race was an even more significant factor than class or wealth; Black Americans making $50-60,000 a year were still more likely to live in polluted areas than white Americans making $10,000.


Where do we see environmental racism?

Although you may not have heard of the term ‘environmental racism’ before, there is a good chance you have heard of cases where it exists.


Flint, Michigan

The Flint Water Crisis is one of the most famous and frequently cited examples of environmental racism in the last decade.

In 2014, the city changed its water supply to the Flint river in order to save money, however failed to treat the new supply adequately.

This exposed Flint’s majority-Black population to dangerous levels of lead, E. coli and other contaminants and diseases.

Up to 12,000 children drank tap water containing high levels of lead and 12 citizens died from Legionnaires’ disease.

Despite reports of hair loss, skin rashes and discoloured water, the community’s complaints were ignored for 18 months.

The crisis lasted up until 2019, leading the Michigan Civil Rights Commission to conclude that the slow official reaction was a ‘result of systematic racism.’


Guiyu, China

One of the largest factors in environmental racism is the dumping of waste from the Global North to the Global South, where many developing countries have looser environmental restrictions than the polluting countries themselves.

In 2017, 44 million tonnes of e-waste was generated (electronic products which are at the end of their useful life).

80% of this e-waste was exported to countries in Asia, including China.

One site for this waste was Guiyu where the discarded computer parts contaminated the town’s water supply with lead, copper, and cadmium.

Even a slight increase in lead levels can drastically affect IQ and academic performance.

The lead levels found in the water in Guiyu were 190x higher than the World Health Organisation’s limits.


COVID deaths

A report by the UK government showed that COVID deaths were higher in Britons of colour than white British people.

The findings of the report clearly reflect some of the key tenets of environmental racism, including living in areas that put them at higher risks.

People of colour are more likely to live in urban, overcrowded and deprived areas, and to have jobs that put them more at risk of exposure.

This is due to a phenomenon called ‘white flight’ where non-minorities leave urban areas for safer and healthier suburban areas, whereas minority communities are left in polluted and overcrowded spaces.

These living conditions also mean they are more exposed to harmful pollutants, leading to higher rates of cardiovascular diseases in people from a Bangladeshi or Pakistani background, for example.

Not only this, but because it’s more likely that British people of colour moved from another country than white Britons, they are also more susceptible to facing barriers in accessing services, such as language or cultural differences.


How does climate change come into this?

Growing fears of climate change have also highlighted the global nature of environmental racism.

Climate change has disproportionately affected the Global South and communities of colour, despite generally contributing much less pollutants.

Whilst it is the Global North which produces 92% of carbon emissions, it is countries in the South that are affected, who have fewer resources to ward off its negative impacts.

Quito in Ecuador is facing frequent and severe landslides as a result of heavier rainfall, resulting in the destruction of homes and death.


What is being done?

It’s not all bad news though; the environmental justice movement has worked to raise awareness of environmental racism.

They have used academic studies, media campaigns, civil disobedience and marches to highlight the plight of affected peoples and call for governments to change their policies.

The EU has funded initiatives to look into environmental racism, which affects the Romani people particularly in Europe.

One of these was the Environmental Justice Organisations, Liabilities and Trade project which ran from 2011-2015, and involved scientists and policy-makers from 20 different countries.

However, it is not enough for developed countries to merely tighten up their own environment to help their citizens, as this will merely shift more dumping activities towards the Global South.

There must be an international and united effort to end environmental racism, by tackling climate change, as well as discriminatory corporate and government practices that put the most vulnerable at risk.

Accessibility