Nhi-Ha Le

ESSAY: NHI-HA LE

UNDER THE SAME SKY: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CONNECTION BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL INEQUALITY AND INCOME AND RACIAL INEQUALITY

How important is it to live a sustainable lifestyle? The answer to this question may seem obvious to some but obscure to others; ultimately, the differences in each individual’s experiences cause such differences in opinions. Based on one’s access to housing in society, he/she may face environmental stressors more intensely or less intensely than others. In this case, those who experience environmental stressors such as air pollution or water contamination may feel compelled to live more sustainably because of their on-hand exposure to the influence of these issues. Conversely, those who are privileged enough not to experience the effects of these stressors may feel less compelled to live sustainability and see sustainable habits as less of a necessity. In order to analyze this issue, one must first understand what environmental inequality is and how it affects communities. Environmental inequality is systemic; environmental inequality proliferates by leaning on more significant issues such as red-lining and low intergenerational mobility. After understanding the concept of environmental inequality, one would go on to question the necessary degree to which each individual must practice sustainability so that the greater community can practice sustainability within their wealth constraints while also making an impact on the environment. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the individual to be conscious of their choices regarding the environment (within their capacity), and it is the responsibility of larger, more powerful bodies (ex. government or large companies) to use their purchasing power to encourage sustainability and limit their environmental impact.

What is environmental inequality? Environmental inequality is a phenomenon in which certain marginalized groups experience and are more negatively affected by environmental stressors; because each individual interacts with his/her community in different ways, each experiences a different degree of environmental stressors. These groups face disparate exposure, meaning they disproportionately experience higher exposure to environmental pollutants, and disparate health impacts, which are unequally distributed negative health consequences due to proximity to pollutants (Downey). For example, based on a recent report from the European Environment Agency (EEA), more impoverished regions of Europe experience higher risks of health problems, such as vector borne diseases or adverse reactions to heatwaves and floods, resulting from environmental stressors because they are more exposed to air pollution, noise, and high temperatures in urban areas than those with higher standards of living (Canzleben and Kazmierczak). This example illustrates the increased environmental stressors faced by the lower class. However, environmental inequality is not limited to the marginalization of lower-income classes; it can also affect minority groups negatively. In America, another example of compromised health resulting from environmental inequality exists; due to racial red-lining, Black and Hispanic citizens are typically constrained to specific neighborhoods

that experience concerning proximity to landfills, factories, and other similar locations (Rochaun Meadows-Fernandez). These locations increase exposure to particulate matter such as fine inhalable particles (dust and soot) released by burning fossil fuels (Rochaun Meadows-Fernandez). According to the 2015 edition of the U.S.A. Environmental Research Letters, Black and Hispanic individuals are exposed to particulate matter at a 50% higher rate than White individuals (Mohai and Saha). Furthermore, according to a 2016 Reuters report, the blood lead levels of approximately 3,000 poor and Black individuals were two times higher than those of individuals from Flint, Michigan, a city facing a water contamination crisis (Pell and Schneyer). In this way, environmental inequality is an issue that not only stems from differences in wealth classes and, consequently, opportunities but also racial discrimination in housing. The issue itself encompasses sustainability, social justice, and healthcare.

As previously established, environmental inequality is closely linked to income inequality due to the proximity of low-income housing to polluted areas and cyclical poverty. According to an article by EarthJustice, most holding sites for hazardous waste in the United States are located near federally funded housing. The article stated that approximately 77,000 people risk contamination by toxic chemicals solely because of their residence in federally assisted housing and that upwards of 70% of hazardous waste sites sit no more than a mile away from federally assisted housing (Holford and Pickett). Furthermore, there was even an account in East Chicago, Indiana, that stated that the soil under homes in the West Calumet Housing Complex was contaminated with lead, causing 680 children living in the housing complex to experience higher blood lead levels, which could be a serious health concern (Holford and Pickett). These statistics show that those of lower socioeconomic status, who may require housing assistance from the federal government, experience higher health risks caused by environmental stressors such as air pollution by toxic chemicals and lead poisoning. Therefore, these data illustrate environmental inequality. According to a study by the National Library of Medicine, such exposure to pollutants can cause low-income children residing in toxic environments to experience health issues such as asthma, cancer, lead poisoning, obesity, and hyperactivity (Cureton). This scenario exemplifies how lower-income classes may be disproportionately affected by environmental stressors solely because of their financial situation and experience adverse health crises. The negative health consequences of environmental inequality proliferate through generations of low-income families due to low intergenerational mobility and the vicious cycle of poverty. Intergenerational mobility refers to an individual’s mobility to move from one income class to another based on the resources available in their communities and national economic growth (Song et al). According to a study done by the Urban Institute of Elevate the Debate, although intergenerational mobility is high in the United States, other countries experience better mobility (McMurrer, Condon, and Sawhill)—having comparatively lower rates of intergenerational mobility lead to greater inability to move from one’s socioeconomic status. In cases where the individual is of low socioeconomic status, this fact implies that depending on the person’s location and the resources available, he/she may not be able to accumulate a

higher income, resulting in a cycle of poverty that sustains environmental inequality for these people.

Environmental inequality does not only target those of lower-income classes; it also marginalizes minorities. Like income inequality, communities of color face disproportionate risks of environmental hazards and have a higher chance of living in an area ridden with pollution (Patnaik et al.). According to a study done by the Princeton Student Climate Initiative, people of color are disproportionately affected by environmental issues stemming from air quality, ocean acidification, and natural disasters (Patnaik, Son, Feng, Ade). An example of how people of color are more negatively affected by air pollution than white Americans is the difference between Porter Ranch and Jefferson Park, two neighborhoods located in Los Angeles, California. In Porter Ranch, a predominantly White neighborhood, citizens experienced a methane leak and were shortly evacuated and provided temporary housing by the city of Los Angeles (Patnaik, Son, Feng, Ade). Conversely, Jefferson Park, a neighborhood containing a population that consists of 90% Black Americans or Americans of Latin American descent, is located close to an oil drilling site that has undergone controversy after controversy but is ultimately remaining open (Patnaik, Son, Feng, Ade). This difference in treatment of these two neighborhoods, as well as the continued exposure to air pollutants generated by greenhouse gas emissions from the oil drilling site, illustrates an example of environmental inequality as it shows how marginalized groups are disproportionately affected by environmental stressors. An example of how ocean acidification negatively affects marginalized groups is the Quinault tribe of Washington’s food supply. This Native American tribe relies heavily on seafood to fuel their diet and economy due to their coastal location. However, due to rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere and commercial fishing strategies, the pH of the ocean water is lowering, resulting in an increased number of dead fish (Patnaik, Son, Feng, Ade). This ocean acidification negatively impacts the Quinault tribe, a racial minority, as it devastates their lifestyle for the benefit of large companies. Lastly, according to a study by Rice University and the University of Pittsburgh, predominantly white counties experienced increased wealth following natural disasters due to reinvestment initiatives yet minorities families experienced decreasing wealth (Rice University and the University of Pittsburgh). This study shows that in light of environmental events, such as natural disasters, different racial groups experience the effects of the event differently because of environmental inequality coupled with racial discrimination.

After understanding environmental inequality’s definition and role in society as it pertains to income and racial inequality, one may wonder what the force sustaining environmental inequality is. At its root, the issue itself is systemic; upon analyzing each scenario, it is evident that government treatment towards the effects of these environmental stressors varies depending on the population in question. Therefore, those with higher socioeconomic statuses and power in the government control the policy and programs that have the potential to solve the issue of environmental inequality but have ultimately failed to do so. According to a BioMed Central Medicine Journal study, the wealthiest 10% of the world’s population produces approximately 45% of global emissions, which dramatically increases Earth’s

carbon footprint (Downey). However, the group most affected by the actions of the wealthiest 10% of individuals are those at the bottom of the income distribution; poorer countries are more impacted by the environmental consequences of climate change resulting from CO2 emissions as they are more vulnerable to an extreme change in temperature and air pollutants (Downey and Hawkins). This information proves that the population least affected by environmental stressors is responsible for a large portion of said stressors. Meanwhile, those who play a minuscule role in those environmental stressors carry the burden of the stressors’ negative health consequences.

One organization that indirectly aids the issue of environmental inequality is Turnip Green Creative Reuse in Nashville, Tennessee. Turnip Green’s missions consist of appreciating teachers and artists, promoting environmental education, and encouraging community unity and creativity. Turnip Green prides itself on not discriminating based on “race, color, religion (creed), gender, gender expression, age, national origin (ancestry), disability, marital status, sexual orientation, or military status” (Turnip Green Creative Reuse). Turnip Green collects a variety of different donations and encourages customers to purchase these donations at a price of the customer’s choice; in this way, Turnip Green is allowing the community to have the opportunity to practice reusing and recycling old materials, which lessens the burden of such items in the local landfill. The landfill in Nashville serves as a device for environmental inequality. Bordeaux, a historically Black-dominated neighborhood located in the northwest part of downtown Nashville, sits next to the landfill, where the city’s waste goes to rot. Living near the landfill exposes citizens to a myriad of health crises, including the increased possibility of developing asthma due to the inhalable air pollutants caused by the accumulation of toxic waste (Wadhwani). Turnip Green’s mission to provide resources at the customer’s preferred price as well as their mission to lessen the burden of the landfill indirectly reduces the influence of environmental inequality in Nashville by working to reduce the landfill, a significant source of pollution, and provide resources. In this way, Turnip Green truly embodies its mission to denounce discrimination while promoting sustainability.

All in all, environmental inequality refers to the inequality faced by individuals of marginalized income groups or racial backgrounds pertaining to the influence of environmental stressors on their lives. Those of wealthier income groups expend more energy and generate higher amounts of carbon emissions than those of poorer income groups. However, due to their higher disposable income, those in the upper percentile of income are able to escape the consequences of environmental stressors, such as air pollution, ocean acidification, and natural disaster. Conversely, those of lower income create less CO2 emissions yet are more vulnerable to the effects of environmental stressors because they have less access to disposable income that would ease the influence of such stressors. Furthermore, similar phenomenons occur when comparing more privileged racial groups to less privileged racial grounds. Such feats are examples of environmental inequality, an issue that extends beyond sustainability and is linked to healthcare concerns and social justice issues. To return to the question initially stated, “How important is it to live a sustainable lifestyle,” one would realize that different people would answer this question differently;

those who are less affected by the environment may feel as though small efforts are sufficient to reduce environmental collapse yet those who are more affected by environmental stressors may value sustainability movements more. Although everyone may acknowledge the importance and necessity of making sustainable choices, they may not feel compelled to take action immediately. On a larger scale, however, the answer to this question may ultimately be irrelevant. As stated before, oftentimes, some individuals would experience a disproportionately harmful amount of the adverse effects of environmental stressors as a result of a lack of government intervention. In other words, they may not have the resources to help improve the environment yet simultaneously feel the effects of such environmental issues because the government has not made sufficient initiative to help them. Therefore, perhaps advocating for increased government intervention in sustainability movements or subsidies for non-profits that would increase the scope of their initiatives may be a necessary step in healing the Earth and easing environmental inequality. Despite living under the same sky, each individual has differing burdens to carry regarding environmental stressors, many of which are caused by factors the individual cannot control.

WORKS CITED Anita Wadhwani, Tennessee Lookout January 12. “Fight over Landfill in Historically

Black Nashville Neighborhood Heads to Court.” Tennessee Lookout, 12 Jan. 2022, https://tennesseelookout.com/2022/01/12/fight-over-landfill-in-historically-blacknashville-neighborhood-heads-to-court/. Cureton, Shava. “Environmental Victims: Environmental Injustice Issues That Threaten the

Health of Children Living in Poverty.” Reviews on Environmental Health, vol. 26, no. 3, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh.2011.021. Downey, Liam. “Assessing Environmental Inequality: How the Conclusions We Draw Vary

According to the Definitions We Employ.” Sociological Spectrum, vol. 25, no. 3, 2005, pp. 349–369., https://doi.org/10.1080/027321790518870. Ganzleben, Catherine, and Aleksandra Kazmierczak. “Leaving No One behind –

Understanding Environmental Inequality in Europe.” Environmental Health, vol. 19, no. 1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-020-00600-2. Holford, Valerie, and Lane Pickett. “Most U.S. Hazardous Waste Sites in Close Proximity to Federally Funded Housing.” EarthJustice, 30 June 2020, https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2020/most-us-hazardous-waste-sites-in-closeproximity-to-federally-funded-housing. MCMurrer, Daniel P., et al. “Intergenerational Mobility in the United States.” Urban

Institute Elevate the Debate , 1 May 1997, http://webarchive.urban.org/publications/406796.html. Mohai, Paul, and Robin Saha. “Which Came First, People or Pollution? Assessing the

Disparate Siting and Post-Siting Demographic Change Hypotheses of Environmental

Injustice.” Environmental Research Letters, vol. 10, no. 11, 2015, p. 115008., https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/11/115008. Patnaik, Aneesh, et al. “Racial Disparities and Climate Change - Psci.” Princeton

University, The Trustees of Princeton University, 15 Aug. 2020, https://psci.princeton.edu/tips/2020/8/15/racial-disparities-and-climate-change. Pell, M.B., and Joshua Schneyer. “The Thousands of U.S. Locales Where Lead Poisoning

Is Worse than in Flint.” Reuters Investigates, 19 Dec. 2019, https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-lead-testing/.

Rochaun Meadows-Fernandez, A. “The Double Jeopardy of Environmental Racism.”

Hopkins Bloomberg Public Health , 14 Oct. 2020, https://magazine.jhsph.edu/2020/double-jeopardy-environmental-racism . Ruth, David. “Natural Disasters Widen Racial Wealth Gap.” EurekAlert, 20 Aug. 2018, https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/460222. Song, Xi, et al. “Long-Term Decline in Intergenerational Mobility in the United States since the 1850s.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117, no. 1, 2019, pp. 251–258., https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1905094116. Turnip Green Creative Reuse. “Green Mission and Core Values .” Turnip Green Creative

Reuse, 2022, https://www.turnipgreencreativereuse.org/what-we-do.

REFLECTION: NHI-HA LE

SERVICE SCHOLAR REFLECTION

Over the summer, I volunteered at Turnip Green Creative Reuse for 35 hours over one month. Initially, I chose to work with Turnip Green as my Senior Service Project because they targeted an issue I am passionate about: sustainability. I have experience with the organization and its leaders from previous service work. Furthermore, I specifically chose an organization that would allow me to contact others and learn more about my community while also working to benefit the environment. At Turnip Green, I helped organize donations, facilitated the donation process, communicated with visitors and customers, and talked with artists who worked in Turnip Green’s outreach program to help Metropolitan Schools’ Art teachers. The donations mentioned above are objects usually thrown into the landfill, but the donors have instead given them to Turnip Green. These jobs not only helped me grasp the severity of the everfilling landfill in the Nashville area but also met others who are passionate about sustainability. I was grateful to serve my community while also learning about the unique viewpoints and jobs surrounding the sustainability of those also working at Turnip Green. For example, the person who oversaw the volunteers, Daniel Green, told me about how he used his talent for building to help improve Turnip Green’s infrastructure and utilized donations of wood and old nails to create new furniture and fixtures so that the organization did not need to buy it.

Throughout this volunteering process, I was able to expand my perspective outside of the bubble of my immediate community, learn about what made Turnip Green more than a reuse organization, and understand and connect the issue of sustainability with topics I am studying today. In terms of self-observations, the most impactful part of my experience was the connections I made with the community and the environment. By working closely with the donations of others, I was able to grasp the massive amount of waste that humans produce. Working in this agency has allowed me to be more environmentally conscious and more conscientious about my decisions regarding waste and consumption. For example, after working with a large volume of fabric donations, I became more aware of the choices I made when I bought clothing. Furthermore, the organization allowed me to immerse myself in a community that was different from my immediate surroundings; it was an opportunity to involve myself

in an unfamiliar facet of the Nashville community. One notable experience I had was with a Metro school teacher; she and her husband were regulars to the organization, and she talked to me about how Turnip Green’s mission to reduce waste in the landfill while collecting unique donations helps inspire her to be more creative and sustainable in her classroom. Furthermore, the agency itself is more than just a place for donations. Apart from helping advance art education in Metropolitan Public Schools, Turnip Green’s pick your price policy on purchasing donations allows those with compromised disposable income to access various resources. By extending the accessibility of involvement to a range of socioeconomic groups and promoting sustainability, Turnip Green also works to improve community building and environmental education. Working at Turnip Green has allowed me to understand the scope of environmental stressors in our local Nashville community. Sustainability is a concept that can be applied so closely to our local community, despite being a worldwide effort. By working with donations that would otherwise go into the landfill if Turnip Green did not exist, I fully understood the massive amount of waste that entered the landfill each day. Knowing that Turnip Green only takes a piece of waste out of the landfill, I can further grasp the immense amounts of waste that would exist outside of what Turnip Green can obtain. By taking AP Environmental this year, I was able to further my knowledge of sustainability and our effect on the environment academically. Also, learning about subsidies and taxation in classes like AP Economics and AP Government and Politics allowed me to better grasp what the government can do to further aid these organizations.

As a student interested in the humanities, I wanted to connect concepts surrounding sustainability to people. As I was contemplating and solidifying my research topic for Service Scholar, I noticed one aspect of my work at Turnip Green that was especially significant to me; by encountering a variety of different customers and workers at the organization, I learned of the different ways that everyone benefits from working with Turnip Green and of their unique stories and standpoints about sustainability. This plethora of opinions interested me because it led me to question what made their perspectives and personal initiatives so different? After long contemplation, I concluded that each person’s unique experiences and situations built his/her approach to contributing to sustainability. Knowing this, I decided that I wanted to research environmental inequality or the unequal ways in which environmental stressors impact marginalized people.

All in all, my experience working in Turnip Green has expanded my knowledge regarding sustainability and contributed to my personal growth as an individual and contributor to society. It allowed me to broaden my perspective by allowing me to integrate the viewpoints of the many others who walked through the organization’s doors and to be more knowledgeable about my community and the situations that each faces. Furthermore, it increased my environmental awareness and allowed me to question my habits and lead a more sustainable life. I hope to contribute my experiences in Turnip Green to the Ensworth Community by researching environmental inequality and speaking about my experiences with the organization.