Urban Planning Reading Response- Climate, Sustainability, and Environmental Planning

urban planning discussion question and need the explanation and answer to help me learn.

Write a brief (no more than one-page, double-spaced) reaction paper, 4 readings in total.
Follow this Paper Topic: Environmental Justice
Requirements: 150-200 words, one double space
Reading Response Requirements Write a brief (no more than one-page, double-spaced) reac�on paper, 4 readings in total. Follow this Paper Topic: Environmental Jus�ce The Paper Must Include: 1. Statement of what you believe are the cri�cal themes of the ar�cles. 2. Your reac�on to these arguments. 3. Two discussion ques�ons you would like to pose to the class based on the topic. (NO general ques�ons) • Ques�ons may be points in support or cri�que of the main claims made in the readings, ques�ons that come to mind as you are reading, or more! Reac�on papers will be graded based on their comple�on of the described three components. Readings: Focus on the required readings
WE, THE PEOPLE OF COLOR, gathered together at this multinational People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, to begin to build a national and international movement of all peoples of color to fight the destruction and taking of our lands and communities, do hereby re-establish our spiritual interdependence to the sacredness of our Mother Earth; to respect and celebrate each of our cultures, languages and beliefs about the natural world and our roles in healing ourselves; to ensure environmental justice; to promote economic alternatives which would contribute to the development of environmentally safe livelihoods; and, to secure our political, economic and cultural liberation that has been denied for over 500 years of colonization and oppression, resulting in the poisoning of our communities and land and the genocide of our peoples, do affirm and adopt these Principles of Environmental Justice: The Principles of Environmental Justice (EJ) 1) Environmental Justice affirms the sacredness of Mother Earth, ecological unity and the interdependence of all species, and the right to be free from ecological destruction. 2) Environmental Justice demands that public policy be based on mutual respect and justice for all peoples, free from any form of discrimination or bias. 3) Environmental Justice mandates the right to ethical, balanced and responsible uses of land and renewable resources in the interest of a sustainable planet for humans and other living things. 4) Environmental Justice calls for universal protection from nuclear testing, extraction, production and disposal of toxic/hazardous wastes and poisons and nuclear testing that threaten the fundamental right to clean air, land, water, and food. 5) Environmental Justice affirms the fundamental right to political, economic, cultural and environmental self-determination of all peoples. 6) Environmental Justice demands the cessation of the production of all toxins, hazardous wastes, and radioactive materials, and that all past and current producers be held strictly accountable to the people for detoxification and the containment at the point of production. 7) Environmental Justice demands the right to participate as equal partners at every level of decision-making, including needs assessment, planning, implementation, enforcement and evaluation. 8) Environmental Justice affirms the right of all workers to a safe and healthy work environment without being forced to choose between an unsafe livelihood and unemployment. It also affirms the right of those who work at home to be free from environmental hazards. 9) Environmental Justice protects the right of victims of environmental injustice to receive full compensation and reparations for damages as well as quality health care. 10) Environmental Justice considers governmental acts of environmental injustice a violation of international law, the Universal Declaration On Human Rights, and the United Nations Convention on Genocide. 11) Environmental Justice must recognize a special legal and natural relationship of Native Peoples to the U.S. government through treaties, agreements, compacts, and covenants affirming sovereignty and self-determination. 12) Environmental Justice affirms the need for urban and rural ecological policies to clean up and rebuild our cities and rural areas in balance with nature, honoring the cultural integrity of all our communities, and provided fair access for all to the full range of resources. 13) Environmental Justice calls for the strict enforcement of principles of informed consent, and a halt to the testing of experimental reproductive and medical procedures and vaccinations on people of color. 14) Environmental Justice opposes the destructive operations of multi-national corporations. 15) Environmental Justice opposes military occupation, repression and exploitation of lands, peoples and cultures, and other life forms. 16) Environmental Justice calls for the education of present and future generations which emphasizes social and environmental issues, based on our experience and an appreciation of our diverse cultural perspectives. 17) Environmental Justice requires that we, as individuals, make personal and consumer choices to consume as little of Mother Earth’s resources and to produce as little waste as possible; and make the conscious decision to challenge and reprioritize our lifestyles to ensure the health of the natural world for present and future generations. More info on environmental justice and environmental racism can be found online at www.ejnet.org/ej/ Delegates to the First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit held on October 24-27, 1991, in Washington DC, drafted and adopted these 17 principles of Environmental Justice. Since then, the Principles have served as a defining document for the growing grassroots movement for environmental justice.
TheMultipleLayersofEnvironmentalInjusticeinContextsof(Un)naturalDisasters:TheCaseofPuertoRicoPost-HurricaneMariaGustavoA.Garcõ«a-Lo«pezABSTRACTHurricaneMariahashaddevastatingimpactsinPuertoRico.Yetthiscatastrophehasnotbeenfeltequallybyall.Thevulnerabilitytoimpactsandabilitytorecoverfromhurricanesandotherdisastersaredirectlyshapedbyexistingsocioeconomicandracialinequalities.Thesituationpost-MariainPuertoRicohasbeenlabeledaclearcaseofenvironmentalinjustice.Thisarticledocumentsthehurricane’snexuswithenvironmentaljustice(EJ).ItdiscussesEJimpactsrelatedtotoxicpollution,water,energy,andfood,andconnectstheseimpactsintersectwithmultiplelayersofpre-existinginjustices.Itthendiscusseshowtheseimpactshavebeenmagnifiedbythenationalandfederalgovernment’sineptandunjustresponses,andbyhistoriesofunjustplanningandcolonial–neoliberalinstitutions.Thearticleconcludeswithsomepositiveoutlooksofhowthehurricanehasalsoopenedawindowto‘‘rethink’’PuertoRicoandtoself-organizedinitiativesforenactingadifferent,morejust,andecologicalcountry.Keywords:politicalecology,unnaturaldisasters,colonialism,justtransition,PuertoRicoINTRODUCTIONOnSeptember20,HurricaneMarialandedinPuertoRicoasaCategory4stormwith>155mphwinds,thestrongesthurricanetohitthecountryin80years.Thehurricanewasdestructive,butitiswhathappenedsincethenwhichhasbeentherealcatastro-phe.AsIfinishwritingthisarticle,4monthsafterthehurricane,40%ofthepopulationand40%ofschoolsstillremainwithoutelectricity,10%arestillwithoutwater,between500and1000peopleareestimateddead,andabout500peoplestillawaitinrefugeecentersforrelocation.Theeconomicdamagesarees-timatedatbetween$45and$95billion,1thealreadyhighlevelsofpovertyhavebeenexacerbated,2andtherehasbeenahistoricmigratorywaveof*200,000PuertoRicansmovingtotheUnitedStates.3Ascriticaldisasterandenvironmentaljustice(EJ)scholarshaveshown,thevulnerabilitytoimpactsandDr.Garcı´a-Lo´pezisanassistantprofessoratGraduateSchoolofPlanning,UniversityofPuertoRico,RioPiedras,SanJuan,PuertoRico.1JoelCintro´nArbasettiandCarlaMinet.‘‘TheDilemmaofRebuildingPuertoRicoorPayingtheDebt.’’CenterforIn-vestigativeJournalism,17October2017..Lastaccessed17October2017.2ElNuevoDõ«a.‘‘Marı´aaumentara´elniveldepobreza[Mariawillincreasethelevelofpoverty].’’ElNuevoDõ«a,28November2017.3CaribbeanBusinessEspan÷ol.‘‘PuertoRicoperdio´6%desupoblacio´ntrashuraca´nMarı´a[PuertoRicolost6%ofitspo-pulationafterhurricaneMaria].’’9March2018..Lastaccessed9March2018.ENVIRONMENTALJUSTICEVolume11,Number3,2018ªMaryAnnLiebert,Inc.DOI:10.1089/env.2017.0045101
abilitytorecoverfromhurricanesandotherso-callednaturaldisastersaredirectlyshapedbyexistingso-cioeconomicandracialinequalities,aswellasbystateinstitutionsandotherpolitical–economicstructures.4,5,6,7Thesituationpost-MariainPuertoRicohasbeenla-beledaclearcaseofenvironmentalinjustice.8,9Incon-trasttothenowpopularizedsloganssuchas‘‘weareonecountryunited’’and‘‘#PuertoRicoSeLevanta’’(‘‘PuertoRicorises’’),itisbecomingevidentthatthehurricane’simpactsandtherecoveryprocesshavenotbeenthesameforeveryone.Moreover,recentreflectionslinkthisunjustdisastertoPuertoRico’shistoriccolonialconditionandrelatedhistoryofsocialandenvironmentalexploita-tion.10,11,12Inthesemultipleways,disasterssuchasMaria’sareunnatural.Inthisarticle,Idelvedeeperintothehurricane’snexuswithEJ.Iuseacombinationofjournalisticaccountsandmyownparticipantobservationsasaresidentintheis-landinvolvedingrassrootsreliefandrecoveryefforts.Thearticleisnotintendedasaresearchprojectreportbutasaseriesofcriticalobservations.Itseekstocontributetodebatesaboutenvironmentalinjusticeinthecontextofnaturaldisasters,byshowingitsmultiplelayers—multiplescales(fromlocaltoglobal),dimensions/issues,androotcauses.IdocumentthemultipleEJimpactsrelatedtotoxicpollution,water,energy,andfood,andarguehowtheseimpactsintersectwithpre-existingpatternsofunequaldistributionofharm,historiesofunjustandundemo-craticenvironmentalpolicyandplanning,andcolonial–neoliberalgovernanceregimes.THEMULTIPLELAYERSOFINEQUALITYANDENVIRONMENTALINJUSTICEINPUERTORICO,BEFOREANDAFTERMARIAEJissueshavemanylayers—multiplescales(fromlocaltoglobal),multipledimensions/issues,andmultipleroots(causes).Theconceptofenvironmentalinjusticereferstotheinequalitiesindistributionofenvironmentalharms(exposuretopollution)orgoods(greenspace),thelackofrealparticipationindecisionmaking,andlimitedcapabilitiesforautonomy.13,14,15Environmentalinjusticealsomanifestsitselfthroughdisavowingmarginalizedcommunities’politicalagencyandlivelihoods.16,17Theseinjusticesarelinkedtohistoricallyenduringclass,racial,andcolonialstructures,reproducedfromlocaltoglobalscales.18Thus,asVelicuandKaikaargue,achievingEJrequiresmorethanredistribution,participation,orrec-ognition;itdemandsundoingdominantpowerrelationsandreimaginingandpracticingequality.19Onalargescale,PuertoRicoitselfisacaseofenvi-ronmentalinjustice,consideringitshistoricrelationof‘‘environmentalcolonialism’’totheUnitedStates.20,21PuertoRico’seconomyandnaturalresourceshavebeenexploitedforthebenefitofU.S.corporationsandtheU.S.government’simperialaspirations,asevidencedbythehighnumberofmilitarybasesandhighlypollutingcor-porations,andtheEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)exceptionstofederalrules.22Ithas17superfund4PiersBlaikie,TerryCannon,IanDavis,andBenWisner.AtRisk:NaturalHazards,PeopleÕsVulnerabilityandDisasters.(Routledge,2014).5ShirleyLaskaandBettyHearnMorrow.‘‘SocialVulner-abilitiesandHurricaneKatrina:AnUnnaturalDisasterinNewOrleans.’’MarineTechnologySocietyJournal40(2006):16–26.6TaniaLo´pez-MarreroandBenWisner.‘‘NotintheSameBoat:DisastersandDifferentialVulnerabilityintheInsularCaribbean.’’CaribbeanStudies40(2012):129–168.7RobertBullard.‘‘DifferentialVulnerabilities:EnvironmentalandEconomicInequalityandGovernmentResponsetoUn-naturalDisasters.’’SocialResearch75(2007):753–784.8PhilMcKenna.‘‘What’sHappeninginPuertoRicoIsEn-vironmentalInjustice.’’Slate,27September2017..Lastaccessed27September2017.9VannR.NewkirkII.‘‘PuertoRico’sEnvironmentalCata-strophe.’’TheAtlantic,18October2017..Lastaccessed18October2017.10PedroCaba´n.‘‘CatastropheandColonialism.’’Jacobin,December12,2017..Lastaccessed12December2017.11CatalinaM.deOnı´s.‘‘EnergyColonialismPowerstheOngoingUnnaturalDisasterinPuertoRico.’’FrontiersinCommunication3(2018):2.12HildaLlore´ns,RuthSantiago,CarlosGarcia-Quijano,andCatalinaM.deOnı´s.‘‘HurricaneMaria:PuertoRico’sUn-naturalDisaster.’’SocialJusticeBlog,2017..Lastaccessed15December2017.13JulianAgyeman,DavidSchlosberg,LukeCraven,andCaitlinMatthews.‘‘TrendsandDirectionsinEnvironmentalJustice:FromInequitytoEverydayLife,Community,andJustSustainabilities.’’AnnualReviewofEnvironmentandResources41(2016):321–340.14IsabelleAnguelovskiandJoanMartı´nezAlier.‘‘The‘En-vironmentalismofthePoor’Revisited:TerritoryandPlaceinDisconnectedGlocalStruggles.’’EcologicalEconomics102(2014):167–176.15DavidSchlosberg.‘‘TheorisingEnvironmentalJustice:TheExpandingSphereofaDiscourse.’’EnvironmentalPolitics22,(2013):37–55.16IrinaVelicu.‘‘DemonizingtheSensibleandthe‘RevolutionofOurGeneration’inRosiaMontana.’’Globalizations12,(2015):846–858.17IrinaVelicuandMariaKaika.‘‘UndoingEnvironmentalJustice:Re-imaginingEqualityintheRosiaMontanaAnti-miningMovement.’’Geoforum84(2017):305–315.18LauraPulido,.‘‘GeographiesofRaceandEthnicityII:EnvironmentalRacism,RacialCapitalismandState-SanctionedViolence.’’ProgressinHumanGeography41,(2017):524–533.19VelicuandKaika.‘‘UndoingEnvironmentalJustice:Re-imaginingEqualityintheRosiaMontanaAnti-miningMovement.’’20Jose´M.Atiles-Osoria.Apuntesparaabandonarelderecho:estadodeexcepcio«ncolonialenPuertoRico[Notestoabandonthelaw:stateofcolonialexceptioninPuertoRico].(EditoraEducacio´nEmergente,2016).21CarmenM.Concepcio´n.‘‘ElConflictoAmbientalySuPotencialHaciaunDesarrolloAlternativo:ElCasodePuertoRico[Theenvironmentalconflictanditspotentialforanalter-nativedevelopment:ThecaseofPuertoRico].’’AmbienteyDesarrollo4(1988):125–135.22Concepcio´n.‘‘ElConflictoAmbientalySuPotencialHaciaunDesarrolloAlternativo:ElCasodePuertoRico[Theen-vironmentalconflictanditspotentialforanalternativedevel-opment:ThecaseofPuertoRico].’’102GARCI´A-LO´PEZ
sites.MorethanhalfofthepopulationlivesunderthepovertylineanditremainsthepoorestofallU.S.territories.Colonialinstitutionshavealsosignificantlylimiteddemoc-racy,imposingapermanentstateofemergency,manifestedmostvividlytodayinthePROMESAfederallawanditscreationofaFiscalControlBoardoverthecountry.23,24Atalocalscale,PuertoRicohasmany‘‘EJcommu-nities,’’whichhavebeensubjectedtoenvironmentalracism.25Thus,theunnaturaldisasterwasalsoshapedbythedifferentvulnerabilitiestonaturaldisasterswithinPuertoRico,whereeveryoneis‘‘notinthesameboat.’’26TheeffectsofMariawereshapedbythesepre-existingrelationsofinjustice(withinPuertoRicoandbetweenPuertoRicoandtheUnitedStates),and,aswewilldis-cusshereunder(TheState’sProductionofEnvironmentalInjusticeSection),bytheineptresponsesfromacol-lapsedstate,productofdecadesofcolonialism,andmorerecentlyneoliberalausterityanddebtpolitics.BetweennowaterandcontaminatedwaterAlmostamonthafterthehurricane,therewerestillabout36%ofthoseconnectedtothepublicwatersystem(PuertoRicoAqueductandServerAuthority,PRASA)withoutaccesstowater;thisamountedtonearlyonemillionpeople.27Thesenumbersalsoshowedstarkrural–urbaninequalities:although80%ofclientsinthemet-ropolitanareahadwaterbythattime,inthewestitwasonly45%andinthenorth32%.28ByNovember6,46daysafterMaria,PRASA’swebsitereportedthat17%ofclientswerestillwithoutwater.29Atday70,10%ofPRASAclientsstilldidnothavewater.However,therewerepressreportsintheradioaboutentire(rural)mu-nicipalitiessuchasLasPiedrasandMorovis,ruralcom-munitiesinRioGrandemunicipality,andtheCaimitocommunityinSanJuanwherewaterhadbeenlackingforweeksatatimeorwasatbestintermittent.InVieques,anactivistexplainedtomeinameetinginearlyNovemberthatseveralcommunitieshadbeenwithoutwaterforweeks.Fortheseandothercommunitiesinruralareas,intermittentwaterservicehasalwaysbeenaproblem.Intheabsenceofwell-functioningtreatmentplantsandtotallackofenvironmentalmonitoringofwaterqualitybythegovernment,potentialcontaminationfromwaterbecameaseriousconcern.AsofOctober16,>1monthafterthehurricane,almost40%(20outof51)ofsewagetreatmentplantswerenotfunctioning.30Thehurricane’simpactsontherainwaterandsanitaryinfrastructureledtoanincreaseindischargesandthuswatercontamination.Thegovernmentrecommendedthatallwaterfromthetapshouldbeboiledbeforeconsumption—althoughmostpeopledidnothaveelectricitytodoso.IntheSanJuanBayEstuary,monitoringbyafederalprogramdetectedenterococcilevelsthataresignificantlyhigherthanthenorm,aswellasdischargesofoilsandfuels;beachesandwaterbodiesoftheEstuarysystemwerefoundtobeinnoncompliancewithwaterqualitystandards.31ThesameprogramfoundthattwooffivebeachesintheEstuarydidnotmeetwaterqualitylevels.Inmostlyruralareas,suchasthetownofJuncosinthesoutheast,thousandsofresidentswithoutwaterwerebathing,washingclothes,andevendrinkingfromplacespotentiallycontaminatedbytheseuntreatedwaters.32Theuseofthesewaterbodies,thedamagedhouses,andthemountingtrashledtoanotherproblem:anoutbreakofleptospirosis(bacteriatransmittedbyraturine),whichhaskilledseveralpeople.InthecoastaltownofDorado,peopleweresodesperateforwaterthattheytookitfromwellsthathadbeenclosedbytheEPAbecauseofcontamination.33BetweendirtyenergyandnoenergyEnergyproductionanddistributioninPuertoRicohavebeenincrisisforatleastadecade.Thepublicutility(PuertoRicoElectricPowerAuthority,PREPA)has>7billionU.S.Dindebtduetodecadesofmismanagement.Themoneyborroweddidnottranslateintoamodernandrobustinfrastructure,nortoadiversificationofsources.Ninety-eightpercentofenergyproductioncomesfrom23Atiles-Osoria.Apuntesparaabandonarelderecho:estadodeexcepcio«ncolonialenPuertoRico[Notestoabandonthelaw:stateofcolonialexceptioninPuertoRico].24LuisJ.TorresAsencio.‘‘LaLey76–2000ynuestroestadopermanentedeemergencia[Law76-2000andourpermanentstateofemergency].’’80grados,17February2016..Lastaccessed17February2016.25CarmenM.Concepcio´n.‘‘JusticiaAmbiental,LuchasCo-munitariasyPolı´ticaPu´blica[EnvironmentalJustice,Commu-nityStrugglesandPublicPolicy].’’RevistadeAdministracio«nPu«blica31–32(2000):89–113.26Lopez-MarreroandWisner.‘‘NotintheSameBoat:Dis-astersandDifferentialVulnerabilityintheInsularCaribbean.’’27Bendery,Jennifer.‘‘AmidPuertoRico’sWaterCrisis,Un-ionsStepinWhereTrumpIsFailing.’’HufÞngtonPost,23October,2017..Lastaccessed22January2018.28ElNuevoDia.‘‘Elestadodelaislaa21dı´asdelhuraca´nMarı´a.[Thestateoftheisland21daysafterhurricaneMaria]’’21October2017..Lastaccessed21October2017.29Acueductospr.com30DavidLeonhardt.‘‘PuertoRico’sCrisisbytheNumbers.’’NewYorkTimes,17October2017..Lastaccessed17October2017.31ElNuevoDõ«a.‘‘LacalidaddelaguadelEstuariodelaBahı´adeSanJuanretrocede[ThewaterqualityoftheSanJuanBayEstuaryrecedes].’’11November,2017..Lastaccessed11November2017.32Univision.‘‘Milesdepuertorriquen˜ostomanaguacon-taminadayseban˜anenellaporfaltadelserviciotraselpasodelhuraca´nMarı´a[ThousandsofPuertoRicansdrinkcontaminatedwaterandbatheinitduetolackofserviceafterhurricaneMaria’spassing].’’18October,2017..Lastaccessed18October2017.33Univision.‘‘Milesdepuertorriquen˜ostomanaguacontaminadayseban˜anenellaporfaltadelserviciotraselpasodelhuraca´nMarı´a[ThousandsofPuertoRicansdrinkcontaminatedwaterandbatheinitduetolackofserviceafterhurricaneMaria’spassing].’’LAYERSOFENVIRONMENTALJUSTICEINPUERTORICOPOST-MARIA103
fossilfuelsproducedinlargeandoutdatedfacilitiesthatthentransmititacrossthewholeislandthroughabove-groundlines.34Thehistoricalevolutionofenergypro-ductionislinkedtoahistoryof‘‘energycolonialism.’’35Mariaknockedout80%ofthesepoorlymaintainedtransmissionlines—about55,000electricpolesand6500linesofcable—leaving100%ofcitizenswithoutelec-tricity.Thegeographicpatternofthereturntoelectricityhasshownatendencytofocusonthemetropolitanarea,whichiswheremostpopulationinthecountrylives,butisalsothewealthiestregion.TheCondadoneighborhood,thewealthiestinSanJuan,wasthefirstareatoreceiveelectricityinthewholeisland.Asofmid-December,powerwasrestoredto65%ofproductioncapacity(whichdoesnotequal65%ofcitizens),andninemu-nicipalitiesstillhadzeroelectricity.36Othermunicipali-tieshadminimalconnection,suchasHumacao,whichonlyhaditshospitalenergized,orVegaBaja,whichonlyhad10%electricity.ThemapinPREPA’swebsiteshowedthesewerelocatedinthecentralmountainousandsoutheasternregions,thepoorestofthecountryandthehardesthitbythehurricane.37WithinSanJuan,therewerealsodifferencesbasedonwealth:thepoorestcom-munities,suchasthoseintheCan˜oMartı´nPen˜aregion,werestillwithoutelectricityasofmid-December.Inthiscontext,citizenshaveturnedtothewidespreaduseofbackupelectricgenerators—anestimated100,000wereinoperationasofmid-November,38leadingsometocallPuertoRico‘‘GeneratorIsland.’’39Wealthstronglyshapedtheabilitytohaveandoperatethesegenerators.Afterthehurricane,residentsfromCondadoItalkedtoexplainedtheyneverlostelectricitybecausetheyhadhugebackupelectricitygenerators,whichprovidedalloftheamenitiesincludingcentralizedairconditioning,andcostdozensofthousandsofdollarstoruneachweek.Incontrast,residentsofpoorneighborhoodcouldnotaffordageneratororiftheydid,itwasoflimitedcapacitythattheycoulduseonlyminimally.Inthecontextofagovernment‘‘emergencydecree’’removingregulationsfortheoperationofgen-erators,theirexcessiveusehasbecomeasignificantairandnoisepollution,healthproblems,andsourceofin-tracommunityconflict.DoctorsalertedabouttheirobservedincreaseincasesofrespiratoryillnessesafterMaria:thesehavebeenaggravatedbythegovernment’slackofplan-ning,coordination,andeducationbetweenagencies;lackofsufficientpersonneltoattendcitizencomplaints;andlackofmonitoringbythestateandfederalagencies.40FlyingcoalashandtoxicßoodingTheconcernsaboutenergyproductionrelatetolong-standingenvironmentalinjusticeconflictsinthesouthofPuertoRico.AmainissuehasbeenthecoalashproducedbytheAppliedEnergySystems(AES)coalpowerplantinthesoutherntownofGuayama,locatednexttoalow-incomeandminoritycommunityof45,000people.Arecentanalysisshowedthatin2015,thecountrygenerated15,166,481metrictonsofCO2(4.37m3percapita),ofwhich76.6%(11,623,118)weregeneratedinthisregion,withtheAESplantbeingthesecondhighestemitterinthecountry.41Sinceitstartedoperationsinthe1990s,AEShasbeendisposingtheashesillegallythroughoutmarginalizedcommunitiesofthesouthregion.AlthoughtheashisnotconsideredahazardouswastebytheEPA,multiplestudieshaveconfirmeditstoxiccompositionwithheavymetalssuchasarsenic,mercury,andchromium,whereashealthstudiesshowhighratesofhealthproblemsintheregion.42Forthepastyear,AEShasillegallystoredagiantfive-floorhighmountainofhundredsofthousandsoftonsofcoalashinitspremises,raisingconcernsaboutfugitiveash.43BeforehurricaneIrmaandagainbeforeMaria,thegovern-ment’sEnvironmentalQualityBoard,afterpressurefromcommunityactivists,requiredthatAEScoverthemountain;inbothoccasionsAESrefused,puttingnearbyresidentsindanger.Picturesfromalocalnewspapershowedthatthemountainhadbecomeerodedandcracked.44Aresidentsaid34INESI—InstitutoNacionaldeEnergı´aySostenibilidadIslen˜a.EstadodeSituacio«nEnerge«ticadePuertoRicoÐInformeAnual2015[StateoftheEnergySituationofPuertoRico-AnnualReport2015].(OficinadePolı´ticaPu´blicaEnerge´tica,GobiernodePuertoRico,2015).35deOnı´s.‘‘EnergyColonialismPowerstheOngoingUn-naturalDisasterinPuertoRico.’’36ElNuevoDia.‘‘Rossello´culpadenuevoalUSACEportardarenrepararlaredenerge´tica[Rosello´blamesUSACEagainfordelayingtorepairtheelectricitygrid].’’18December,2017..Lastaccessed18December2017.37.Lastaccessed15De-cember2017.38DamarisSuarez.‘‘Agenciasdegobiernonoactu´anantepe-ligrosqueconllevanlosgeneradoresele´ctricos[Governmentagenciesdonotactondangersfromelectricgenerators].’’CentrodePeriodismoInvestigativo,13November2017..Lastaccessed13November2017.39RuthSantiago.‘‘ReflectionsonthePowerGridDebate,‘GeneratorIsland’andtheTelecommunicationsFailureinPuertoRico.’’LatinoRebels,15October2017..Lastaccessed15October2017.40Suarez.‘‘Agenciasdegobiernonoactu´anantepeligrosqueconllevanlosgeneradoresele´ctricos[Governmentagenciesdonotactondangersfromelectricgenerators].’’41INESI.EstadodeSituacio«nEnerge«ticadePuertoRicoÐInformeAnual2015[StateoftheEnergySituationofPuertoRico-AnnualReport2015].42RuthSantiago.‘‘ImminentandSubstantialEndangermenttoHumanHealthandtheEnvironmentfromUseofCoalAshasFillMaterialatConstructionSitesinPuertoRico:ACaseStudy.’’Procedia-SocialandBehavioralSciences37(2012):389–396.43ThecontractofAESwiththeElectricPowerAuthorityprohibitedthatAESstoretheashformorethan180daysinitspremises;theenvironmentalpermitgiventotheAESfurtherestablished,perthecompany’sownplans,thattheashcouldnotbedepositedanywhereinPuertoRico.44JasonRodriguezandOmarAlfonso.‘‘Huraca´nMarı´ades-gasto´yagrieto´montan˜adecenizasenGuayama[HurricaneMariaworedownandcrackedtheashmountaininGuayama].’’LaPerladelSur,5October2017..Lastaccessed5October2017.104GARCI´A-LO´PEZ
hewasmoreworriedabouttheashthanabouthavinglosthisroof.45TodatetheresultsofanEPAinvestigationonthishavenotbeenreleased.Thestate’sEnvironmentalQualityBoard,foritspart,took1monthtosendateamtoinvestigatehowthemountainofcoalashmayhavedis-persedintoandpollutednearbyresidentialareas,waterbodies,andotherecosystems;thefindingsfromthisin-spectionhavenotbeenmadepublic.46Toaddtothisin-justice,thecommunitiesnexttothispowerplantandtotheashesdonotreceiveanyofthiselectricityandindeedare,after>4months,amongthosestillwithoutelectricity.Communitiesnexttosuperfundsites,petrochemicalfacilities,andothertoxicstoragefacilitiesmaybeatparticularriskfromfloodingcausedbyHurricaneMar-ia,47aswasstarklydemonstratedwiththecaseofHarveyinTexas,wheredozensofindustrialfacilitiesandsu-perfundsitesspilledtoxicwastes.48,49Onemonthafterthehurricane,5of18toxic-wastesitesinPuertoRicohadnotbeeninspectedtoassesspotentialtoxicspill-overs;theEPAclaimedithadnotbeenabletosendpersonnel.50Theresultsofthoseinspectedhavenotbeenmadepublictodate.EatingwhateverfoodtheshipsbringAnoldsayinginPuertoRico,popularduringthecrisisperiodofthe1930safterHurricaneSanFelipe,wasthatonehadtoeat‘‘whatevertheshipbrought.’’Ourstrongdependencyonimportedfoodtoday—about85%ofallfoodconsumed—hasforyearsbeenpointedoutasasourceofextremevulnerabilityforfoodsecurity,especiallycon-sideringclimatechangeanditsimpactsontransportationinfrastructure.51Thisdependencyalsohasnegativeimpactsonhealth—muchfoodiscannedornottruly‘‘fresh’’andhashighpesticidecontent.Italsohasasignificantimpactonhouseholdandnationaleconomy:duetotheembargoimposedbytheU.S.JonesAct,foodinPuertoRicocostsabout25%–30%morethanwhatitshould.52Inthiscon-text,Mariacreatedanimmediatefoodshortagecrisis,whichhadbeenpredictedbymanybutforwhichtherewasnoclearplanimplemented.TheJonesAct—asymbolofourcolonialcondition—53furtheredthiscrisis,asitde-layeddeliveryoffoodandotheraidtotheisland.Whenafewsupermarketsbegantoopeninthemet-ropolitanareaafewdaysafterthehurricane,longlinesandsomechaosformed.Themultiplelayersofinjusticeranmuchdeeperthanthelinesatthesupermarket.Somepeopleinthelinehadasalarythatkeptflowing,othersdidnothavesuchagoodsalary,orhadlosttheirjob(asthousandsdid).Thousandsothershadtousefoodstamps,buttheywerenotbeingacceptedinmanysupermarketsbecause‘‘theydidnothavethesystemup,’’asIlaterlearnedfromafriendwhostruggledtofindaplacethatacceptedhercard.Peopleinruralareas,whoinPuertoRicoarepoorer,werehardesthit.Manycouldnotevengotothesupermarket,becausetherewasnoneortheirroadswereblocked.Pressreportsconfirmedthataidwasnotreachingthemountainareas.Twoweeksafterthehurricane,anin-tervieweewhocamefromtheUnitedStatestovisithissisterandbringsuppliestoher‘‘describedpregnantwomenandchildrenchasinghiscar,believinghewaswithFEMA,beggingforfoodandwater.’’Hesaid:‘‘Weareafamilywithresources.Ifmysisterisgoingthroughthis,whataboutothers?’’54Thereportercontinuedde-scribingtheeverydaybasiclifecrisisfacedneartheruraltownsofYabucoaandSanLorenzo,justnorthwestofwhereMariamadelandfall:‘‘Whichlifesavinglineshouldtheystandintoday?Alineformedicine?Alineforgas?Alineforcash?Alineforfoodandwater?Andwhere,theywonder,cantheyevenfindfoodandwater?’’OnOctober11,FEMAofficialsadmittedtheirconcernaboutahugefoodshortageintheisland:itwasallegedlyproviding200,000mealsaday,buttherewasashortfallof2millionmealsaday.55TheseimagescontrastedsharplywiththoseintheCondadoneighborhoodonly3weeksafterthehurricane,whereIsawlivemusicandpeoplehappilydrinkingandeating,poweredbymassivegener-atorsinmydailyvisitstoahoteltousemycomputer.56Apparently,thetemporaryalcoholprohibitionineffectatthetimeinthewholecountrydidnotseemtoapplytorichpeople,federalagents,andtourists;eventherighttohave45Univision.‘‘Milesdepuertorriquen˜ostomanaguacon-taminadayseban˜anenellaporfaltadelserviciotraselpasodelhuraca´nMarı´a[ThousandsofPuertoRicansdrinkcontaminatedwaterandbatheinitduetolackofserviceafterhurricaneMaria’spassing].’’46JasonRodriguez.‘‘¿Excusas?ReclamanalaJCArendircuentassobremontan˜adecenizas[Excuses?JCAisdemandedtoofferexplanationsabouttheashmountain].’’LaPerladelSur,2November2017.47McKenna.‘‘What’sHappeninginPuertoRicoIsEnviron-mentalInjustice.’’48VanR.NewkirkII.‘‘TheLoomingSuperfundNightmare.’’TheAtlantic,12September2017..Lastaccessed12September2017.49SammyRoth.‘‘HurricaneHarveyfloodwatersbrimmingwithrawsewage,toxicchemicals.’’TheDesertSun,5Sep-tember2017..Lastaccessed5September2017.50Leonhardt.‘‘PuertoRico’sCrisisbytheNumbers.’’51MyrnaComas.Vulnerabilidaddelascadenasdesuminis-trosdealimentosdePuertoRico,elcambioclima«ticoyestra-tegiasdeadaptacio«n[VulnerabilityofthechainoffoodsupplyinPuertoRico,climatechangeandstrategiesofadaptation].(UniversityofPuertoRico,Mayagu¨ez,2010).52TheActrequiresallimportstoPuertoRicotouseU.S.ships,themostexpensiveintheworld.53deOnı´s.‘‘EnergyColonialismPowerstheOngoingUn-naturalDisasterinPuertoRico.’’54CNBC.‘‘‘I’mSoHungry.’DeepinPuertoRico’sCoun-tryside,WeSeeFirsthandthePost-MariaCrisis.’’3October2017..Lastaccessed3October2017.55TheGuardian.‘‘PuertoRico:USOfficialsPrivatelyAc-knowledgeSeriousFoodShortage.’’11October2017..Lastaccessed11October2017.56CNBC.‘‘‘I’mSoHungry.’DeepinPuertoRico’sCoun-tryside,WeSeeFirsthandthePost-MariaCrisis.’’LAYERSOFENVIRONMENTALJUSTICEINPUERTORICOPOST-MARIA105
funwasrestrictedtocertainprivilegedgroups.Scarcityofwater,energy,andfoodwasclearlybasedonwealth.Compoundingthissituation,Mariadestroyedabout80%ofthecropsinPuertoRico.57Almosttheentireplantainandbananacropswerelost,about50%ofthecoffeecrops,>2millionpoultry,andthousandsofcows.Thismeansthatthepercentageoffoodimportedislikelytohaveincreasedtoabout97%(20%of15%,i.e.,3%beingproducedlocally).Thelossesareestimatedat$200millionincropdamagesand$1.8billioninrelatedinfrastructure(plus$45millionfromhurricaneIrma).Thisislikelytoincreasepricesandexacerbatefoodshortagesontheisland.Itisalsolikelytomeanaworseneddietandhealth,moredependentonhighlysaltyandcannedproducts.THESTATE’SPRODUCTIONOFENVIRONMENTALINJUSTICEStatepoliciesandactionspreviousto,during,andafterdisasterstendtoreproduceinequalities.58,59TheUNHighCommissioneronHumanRights,60concludedthatPuertoRicoremainedinanalarmingsituationandwithoutaneffectiveemergencyresponsemorethanamonthafterHurricaneMaria.InPuertoRico,apopularsayingamongcommentatorsandactivistsinthisperiodhasbeenthat‘‘hurricanesarenatural,butdisastersarepolitical.’’Gov-ernmentlackofpreparationandplanningatlocal,state,andfederallevelshasbeenidentifiedbyjournalisticin-vestigationsandexpertassessments.61,62,63,64Atthelocallevel,thegovernmentdidnotfollowitsownhurricanedisasterpreparednessandresponseplans,theresponsewaspoorlycoordinated,andthestateagencyinchargeofemergencymanagementwasside-linedinthedecision-makingprocess.65ReportspointedoutthatPREPAdidnothavethematerialsneededfortherepairs(e.g.,poles),whichhadnotbeenorderedontime,66,67andthatPREPAemployeeswerecorruptlychargingthousandsofdollarsfora‘‘speedier’’con-nection.68TheWhitefishscandalandthemultiplede-laysinrepairingtheelectricgridarefurtherevidenceofineptitudeandalsocorruption.Civilsocietyandpolit-icaloppositionleadershavearguedthatregionswheretherulingpartyhasmajoritysupportarebeinggivenpreferenceintherepairs.Atthefederallevel,1monthafterthehurricane,FEMAhaddistributed6.2milliongallonsofbottledandbulkwater,whichequaledonly9%oftheisland’sdrinkingwaterrequirementpertheWHOguidelines.69Thefooddistributedwasalsogrosslyinsufficientevenforthosereceivingit,perFEMA’sownadmissions.AfriendfromaruralcommunityinHumacaopostedapictureofthefoodshewasgivenbyFEMA2weeksafterMaria:abagwithtwosmallbottlesofwater,acanofVirginiasausages,aNutri-Grainbar,andapackoftropicalSkittles.Bythattime(mid-October),theagencyhaddistributed38,000tarps—notevenone-sixthoftheestimated200,000affectedroofs.70Whenquestionedaboutwhyaidwasnotreachingmanyplaces,aFEMAspokespersongavetheincredulousex-planationthattheywereimpossibletoreach,onlytoberefutedbyevidencebyapressgroupwhowentthenextdaytothosesameareasclaimedbyFEMAtobeinac-cessible.Forthefirstcriticalweekposthurricane,theportswerefullofcontainerswaitingtobetransportedtosu-permarketsandotherlocations,butinexplicablycouldnotgetout—apparentlyhoardedbyFEMA.71Thereare57NewYorkTimes.‘‘PuertoRico’sAgricultureandFarmersDecimatedbyMaria.’’24September,2017..Lastaccessed24September2017.58TimothyW.Collins.‘‘Marginalization,Facilitation,andtheProductionofUnequalRisk:The2006PasodelNorteFloods.’’Antipode42(2010):258–288.59BenWisner.‘‘RiskandtheNeoliberalState:WhyPost-MitchLessonsDidn’tReduceElSalvador’sEarthquakeLos-ses.’’Disasters25(2001):251–268.60OHCHR–UNOfficeoftheHighCommissioneronHumanRights.‘‘PuertoRico:HumanRightsConcernsMountinAb-senceofAdequateEmergencyResponse.’’30October,2017..Lastaccessed30October2017.61StephenCollinson.‘‘TrumpWhiteHousefeelsheatonPuertoRico.’’CNNPolitics,29September,2017..Lastaccessed29September2017.62TimDickinson.‘‘PuertoRicoIsBecomingTrump’sKa-trina.’’RollingStone,26September2017..Lastaccessed26September2017.63ElNuevoDõ«a.‘‘ElGobiernonouso´suplancatastro´fico[Thegovernmentdidnotuseitsplanforcatastrophes].’’15November2017.64OmayaSosaPascualandPatriciaMazzei.‘‘Huraca´nMarı´a:do´ndefallo´eloperativoderespuesta[HurricaneMaria:Wheretheresponseoperationfailed].’’CentrodePeriodismoIn-vestigativo,22October2017..Lastaccessed22October2017.65ElNuevoDõ«a.‘‘ElGobiernonouso´suplancatastro´fico[Thegovernmentdidnotuseitsplanforcatastrophes].’’66PrimeraHora.‘‘Sevaconelcorazo´nrotoysinresolver[Heleaveswithhisheartbrokenandwithoutresolving].’’23November,2017..Lastaccessed23November2017.67ElNuevoDia.‘‘Rossello´culpadenuevoalUSACEportardarenrepararlaredenerge´tica.[Rosello´blamesUSACEagainfordelayingtorepairtheelectricitygrid]’’68PrimeraHora.‘‘Elchanchulloparaconectarlaluzabarcadiversospueblos[Thecorruptiontoconnecttheelectricityisspreadthroughseveraltowns].’’22November2017..Lastac-cessed22November2017.69MathewRozsa.‘‘PuertoRico’sGovernorBegs:‘WeNeedEqualTreatment’fromFEMA.’’Salon,19October2017..Lastaccessed19October2017.70Rozsa.‘‘PuertoRico’sGovernorBegs:‘WeNeedEqualTreatment’fromFEMA.’’71ElNuevoDõ«a.‘‘Milesdevagonesconmercancı´aperma-necenenlosmuelles[Thousandsofwagonswithmerchandiseremaininthedocks].’’25September,2017..Lastaccessed25September2017.106GARCI´A-LO´PEZ
widespreadreportsthatreliefaidandfederaldisasterfundshavebeenembezzledbylocalandstategovernmentofficialsandarebeingdistributedthroughclientelist-partisanlogics,andtheFBIhasanticipatedarrests.72Foritspart,thestategovernmentblamedtheU.S.CorpsofEngineers’slowbureaucracyinthedelaysinrepairingtheenergygrid.73InPuertoRico,thelackofpreparednesswascombinedwithalackoffinancialresourcesduetoahistoriceco-nomiccrisis,asystemiclackofinfrastructuralinvestmentandmaintenance,andanenormousfiscaldeficit($74billionindebt)—itselftheproductofdecadesoffailedeconomicpoliciesandpossiblycorruption.74TheOHCHRreport75emphasizedthatthehurricanehasaggra-vatedtheisland’sexistingdirepovertyandhumanrightssituationcausedbydebtandneoliberalausteritymeasures.Inthecaseofthefederalgovernment,therewasanobviousunequaltreatmentincomparisonwithU.S.states,relatedtotheconditionofPuertoRicoas‘‘second-class’’colonialcitizens.TheOHCHRobserved‘‘thedissimilarurgencyandprioritygiventotheemer-gencyresponseinPuertoRico,comparedtotheU.S.statesaffectedbyhurricanesinrecentmonths.’’Forin-stance,FEMAhasonlydeployed1700personneltoPuertoRicoandtheVirginIslandssinceMaria,whereasitsent2600personneltotheGulfCoastafterHarvey.76Theunequalslownesswasalsoevidentintheautho-rizationofreconstructionaidtorepairPuertoRico’sin-frastructure.Onemonthafterthehurricane,thisaidhadnotbeenapprovedforPuertoRico,butithadalreadybeenapprovedfortheU.S.VirginIslands,andittook10daystobeapprovedforTexaspost-Harvey.77Pre-sidentTrump’svisitclearlyevidencedthiscolonialdis-dain:only3weeksafterthehurricane,hecomplainedthatwewere‘‘throwingtheU.S.budgetoutofwhack,’’tweetedthathecouldnotkeepFEMAandotherfederalofficialsinPR‘‘forever,’’andthatwereungratefulandwanted‘‘everythingdoneforus.’’TheEJissueswerecompoundedbyinjusticesandundemocraticproceduresinland-useplanningandenvironmentalregulation.AsinthecaseofNewOr-leansafterKatrina78andFloridaafterIrma,79ongoinganalysesunderscorehowthegovernment’splanninghas‘‘magnified’’thedisaster,promotingurbanizationinareashighlyvulnerabletoflooding,landslides,coastalerosion,andstormsurges,whileweakeningenvironmentallegislationanddeveloping‘‘fast-track’’permittingprocesses.80Historically,theseactionshavebeentakenwithoutregardfortheaffectedcommuni-ties.81Asof2010,342,000peoplelivedinfloodwaysorcoastalareassubjecttostormsurges,and49%ofthepopulationlivedinareassusceptibletoland-slides.82Manyofthoselivingintheseareasarelow-incomecommunities.Theseimpactsareultimatelyrelatedtoclimatejustice:whiletheless-wealthycountriessuchasPuertoRicohavecontributedleasttoclimatechange,theywillbearthebiggestimpacts.83Ourhundredsofthousandsofmigrantsareindeed‘‘climaterefugees.’’Lastly,theseunjustoutcomesareframedinacontextofahistoryofenvironmentalcolonialism,asreflectedmostclearlyintheJonesAct,PROMESAAct,FEMA’sunequaltreatmentafterthehurricane,andthehistoryofimposedenvironmentallydestruc-tiveandunjustindustrializationcalled‘‘OperationBootstrap.’’84,85,86,87CONCLUSIONSThisarticlehasdocumentedsomeofthemanylayersofenvironmentalinjusticethatexistedpreviousto,andweremagnifiedby,HurricaneMariainPuertoRico.Itfocusedonissuesoftoxicpollution,water,energy,andfood,andtheirdistributionalinequalities;itlinkedtheseinequalitiestohistoricalpatternsofunequalen-vironmentalpolicyandplanning,colonialism,cor-ruption,andneoliberalausterity.Thesestructuralconditionsarearguablytherealdisasterinthecountry.Furthermore,thesepatternsarelikelytoworsenas72Noticel.‘‘FBIanticipaarrestosenlaislaporfondosfeder-alespostMarı´a[FBIanticipatesarrestsintheislandforfederalfundspost-Maria].’’27December2017..Lastaccessed27December2017.73ElNuevoDia.‘‘Rossello´culpadenuevoalUSACEportardarenrepararlaredenerge´tica[Rosello´blamesUSACEagainfordelayingtorepairtheelectricitygrid].’’74HeribertoMartı´nez-OteroandIanSeda-Irizarry.‘‘TheOri-ginsofthePuertoRicanDebtCrisis.’’Jacobin,10August2015.75OHCHR.‘‘PuertoRico:HumanRightsConcernsMountinAbsenceofAdequateEmergencyResponse.’’76Rozsa.‘‘PuertoRico’sGovernorBegs:‘WeNeedEqualTreatment’fromFEMA.’’77Vox.‘‘FEMAHasYettoAuthorizeFullDisasterHelpforPuertoRico.’’16October2017..Lastaccessed16October2017.78LaskaandMorrow.‘‘SocialVulnerabilitiesandHurricaneKatrina:AnUnnaturalDisasterinNewOrleans.’’79AnnieSneed.‘‘HurricaneIrma:Florida’sOverdevelopmentHasCreatedaTickingTimeBomb.’’ScientiÞcAmerican,12September2017..Lastaccessed12September2017.80LuisJorgeRiveraHerrera.‘‘Elgobiernomagnificalosde-sastres[Thegovernmentmagnifiesdisasters].’’ElNuevoDõ«a,15September2015.81Concepcion.‘‘JusticiaAmbiental,LuchasComunitariasyPolı´ticaPu´blica[EnvironmentalJustice,CommunityStrugglesandPublicPolicy].’’82McKenna.‘‘What’sHappeninginPuertoRicoIsEnviron-mentalInjustice.’’83J.TimmonsRoberts‘‘TheInternationalDimensionofCli-mateJusticeandtheNeedforInternationalAdaptationFund-ing.’’EnvironmentalJustice2(2009):185–190.84Atiles-Osoria.Apuntesparaabandonarelderecho:estadodeexcepcio«ncolonialenPuertoRico[Notestoabandonthelaw:stateofcolonialexceptioninPuertoRico].85Caba´n.‘‘CatastropheandColonialism.’’86deOnı´s.‘‘EnergyColonialismPowerstheOngoingUn-naturalDisasterinPuertoRico.’’87Llore´nsetal..‘‘HurricaneMaria:PuertoRico’sUnnaturalDisaster.’’LAYERSOFENVIRONMENTALJUSTICEINPUERTORICOPOST-MARIA107
climatechangeadvances.Thetragedyisthattheformsofgovernanceneededtoredresstheseinjustices—moreecologicalanddemocratic,andnonextractivist—areinherentlyatoddswiththeneoliberal–colonialistproject.88NoteverythingintheaftermathofMaria,however,hasbeennegative.Thehurricaneprovideda‘‘wake-up’’call,avisibilizationofpoverty,environmentalinjustice,andthedifferentialvulnerabilitytodisasters.Thishasopenedadebatefortheneedforatransformationofthecountrybasedonsocialjustice,directdemocracy,andsustain-ability.Thishasincludedcallsforeliminatingthedebt89andtheJonesAct,andtheneedtorethinkourenergysystem.CasaPueblo,alongstandinggrassrootsenvi-ronmentalorganization,hasdevelopedacampaigncalled#50consol,whichproposestoproduce50%ofourenergywithrenewables,mainlysolar.The‘‘OurPowerCam-paign,’’developedbytheU.S.-basedClimateJusticeAlliance,hasgiveninternationalvisibilitytotheseissuesunderthebannerofa‘‘justrecoveryandtransition’’planneddemocratically,aswellastotheneedforin-creasedfoodsovereigntythroughagroecologicalprac-tices.90Thehurricanehasalsofosteredcommunitybuilding,asevidencedbythedozensofcommunityini-tiativesacrossthecountrythathavefilledtheresponsegapthatthestateleft,including‘‘socialkitchens’’andcommunity-ledaiddistribution,healthclinics,andpsy-chologicalandeducationalactivities.Theseinitiativesgivehopethattherecanbeprogresstowardajusttran-sitioninPuertoRico.AUTHORDISCLOSURESTATEMENTNocompetingfinancialinterestsexist.Addresscorrespondenceto:GustavoA.Garcia-LopezGraduateSchoolofPlanningUniversityofPuertoRico,RioPiedrasPOBox23354SanJuan00931-3354PuertoRicoE-mail:gustavo.garcia9@upr.edu88NaomiKlein.ThisChangesEverything:CapitalismversustheClimate.(NewYork:Simon&Schuster,2017).89RafaelBernabe.‘‘Algunasleccionesdelhuraca´n[Somelessonsfromthehurricane].’’80grados,6October2017..Lastaccessed6October2017.90ElizabethYeampierreandNaomiKlein.‘‘ImagineaPuertoRicoDesignedbyPuertoRicans.’’TheIntercept,20October2016..Lastaccessed20October2017.108GARCI´A-LO´PEZ
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttps://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=raag21Annals of the Association of American GeographersISSN: 0004-5608 (Print) 1467-8306 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/raag20Rethinking Environmental Racism: White Privilegeand Urban Development in Southern CaliforniaLaura PulidoTo cite this article: Laura Pulido (2000) Rethinking Environmental Racism: White Privilege andUrban Development in Southern California, Annals of the Association of American Geographers,90:1, 12-40, DOI: 10.1111/0004-5608.00182To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1111/0004-5608.00182Published online: 15 Mar 2010.Submit your article to this journal Article views: 10346View related articles Citing articles: 226 View citing articles
Annals of the Association of American Geographers , 90(1), 2000, p. 12Ð40© 2000 by Association of American GeographersPublished by Blackwell Publishers, 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, and 108 Cowley Road, Oxford, OX4 1JF, UK. Rethinking Environmental Racism:White Privilege and Urban Development in Southern California Laura Pulido Department of Geography, University of Southern California Geographic studies of environmental racism have focused on the spatial relationships betweenenvironmental hazards and community demographics in order to determine if inequity exists.Conspicuously absent within this literature, however, is any substantive discussion of racism. Thispaper seeks to address this shortcoming in two ways. I Þrst investigate how racism is understoodand expressed in the literature. I argue that although racism is rarely explicitly discussed, a nor-mative conceptualization of racism informs the research. Not only is this prevailing conceptionoverly narrow and restrictive, it also denies the spatiality of racism. Consequently, my second goalis to demonstrate how various forms of racism contribute to environmental racism. In addition toconventional understandings of racism, I emphasize white privilege, a highly structural and spa-tial form of racism. Using Los Angeles as a case study, I examine how whites have secured rela-tively cleaner environments by moving away from older industrial cores via suburbanization. Isuggest that the historical processes of suburbanization and decentralization are instances ofwhite privilege and have contributed to contemporary patterns of environmental racism. Thus,in addition to interpreting racism as discriminatory facility siting and malicious intent, I also ex-amine a less conscious but hegemonic form of racism, white privilege. Such an approach not onlyallows us to appreciate the range of racisms that shape the urban landscape, but also illuminatesthe functional relationships between placesÑin particular between industrial zones and residen-tial suburbs, and how their development reßects and reproduces a particular racist formation. Key Words: environmental racism, Los Angeles, white privilege, suburbanization. he concept of environmental racismÑthe idea that nonwhites are dispropor-tionately exposed to pollutionÑemergedmore than ten years ago with the UnitedChurch of ChristÕs study, Toxic Waste and Race inthe United States (1987). Given the social, eco-logical, and health implications of environmen-tal hazards, geographers have explored environ-mental racism with the goal of contributing tobetter policymaking. Studies have sought to de-termine if inequalities exist and the reasons forsuch disparities, and to make recommendations(Cutter 1995). While these are obviously im-portant research contributions, studying envi-ronmental racism is important for an additionalreason: it helps us understand racism.Although the study of racial inequality is notnew to geographers (Gilmore 1998; Woods1998; Jackson and Penrose 1994; Kobayashi andPeake 1994; S. Smith 1993; Anderson 1987),environmental racism offers us new insights intothe subject, particularly its spatiality. Unfortu-nately, scholars of environmental racism havenot seriously problematized racism, opting in-stead for a de facto conception based on mali-cious, individual acts. There are several prob-lems with this approach. First, by reducingracism to a hostile, discriminatory act, many re-searchers, with the notable exception of Bullard(1990), miss the role of structural and hege-monic forms of racism in contributing to such in-equalities. Indeed, structural racism has been thedominant mode of analysis in other substantiveareas of social research, such as residential segre-gation (Massey and Denton 1993) and employ-ment patterns (Kirschenman and Neckerman1991), since at least MyrdalÕs An American Di-lemma (1944). Not only has the environmental-racism literature become estranged from socialscience discussions of race, but, in the case of T
Rethinking Environmental Racism13 urban-based research, it is divorced from con-temporary urban geography. A second and re-lated concern is that racism is not conceptual-ized as the dynamic sociospatial process that itis. Because racism is understood as a discrete actthat may be spatially expressed, it is not seen asa sociospatial relation both constitutive of thecity and produced by it. As a result, the spatial-ity of racism is not understood, particularly therelationship between places. Yet pollution con-centrations are inevitably the product of rela-tionships between distinct places, including in-dustrial zones, afßuent suburbs, working-classsuburbs, and downtown areas, all of which areracialized. A Þnal problem with a narrow under-standing of racism is that it limits claims,thereby reproducing a racist social order. By de-Þning racism so narrowly, racial inequalities thatcannot be attributed directly to a hostile, dis-criminatory act are not acknowledged as such,but perhaps as evidence of individual deÞcien-cies or choices. Yet if we wish to create a morejust society, we must acknowledge the breadthand depth of racism.In this paper, I investigate how racism is con-ceptualized in the environmental-racism litera-ture. Using Los Angeles as a case study (Figure1), I apply an alternative concept of racism,white privilege, in addition to more commonunderstandings of discrimination, to explaindisparate environmental patterns. I identifythree speciÞc issues that contribute to a narrowconception of racism: Þrst, an emphasis on indi-vidual facility siting; second, the role of inten-tionality; and third, an uncritical approach toscale. Typically, a study may acknowledge envi-ronmental inequity if nonwhites are dispropor-tionately exposed to pollution, but environmen-tal racism is only conceded if malicious intent onthe part of decisionmakers can be proven. 1 I ar-gue that the emphasis on siting, while obviouslyimportant, must be located in larger urban pro-cesses, and thus requires us to Òjump scalesÓ inour analysis (N. Smith 1993). This is especiallytrue given recent Þndings that pollution con-centrations are closely associated with industrialland use (Baden and Coursey 1997; Boer et al.1997; Pulido et al. 1996; Anderton et al. 1994b;Colten 1986). This research recasts issues of in-tentionality and scale, as it requires us to exam-ine the production of industrial zones, their rela-tion to other parts of the metropolis, and thepotentially racist nature of the processes bywhich these patterns evolved.Because of the limitations of the prevailingapproach to racism, I seek to broaden our under-standing through a complementary conceptionof racism: white privilege. My understanding ofracism begins from the premise that race is a ma-terial/discursive formation. Because race existsin various realms, racial meanings are embeddedin our language, psyche, and social structures.These racial meanings are both constitutive ofracial hierarchies and informed by them. Thus,it would be impossible for our social practicesand structures not to reßect these racial under-standings. Given the pervasive nature of race,the belief that racism can be reduced to hostile,discriminatory acts strains logic. For instance,few can dispute that U.S. cities are highly segre-gated. Can we attribute this simply to discrimi-natory lenders and landlords? No. Residentialsegregation results from a diversity of racisms.Moreover, there is growing evidence that racialresponses are often unconscious, the result oflifelong inculcation (Devine 1989; Lawrence1987). Thus, focusing exclusively on discrimi-natory acts ignores the fact that all places are ra-cialized, and that race informs all places. Clearly,our preoccupation with discrete discriminatoryacts ignores vast dimensions of racism.A focus on white privilege enables us to de-velop a more structural, less conscious, and moredeeply historicized understanding of racism. Itdiffers from a hostile, individual, discriminatoryact, in that it refers to the privileges and beneÞtsthat accrue to white people by virtue of theirwhiteness. Because whiteness is rarely problem-atized by whites, white privilege is scarcely ac-knowledged. According to George Lipsitz, ÒAsthe unmarked category against which differenceis constructed, whiteness never has to speak itsname, never has to acknowledge its role as anorganizing principle in social and cultural rela-tionsÓ (1995:369). White privilege is thus an at-tempt to name a social system that works to thebeneÞt of whites. White privilege, together withovert and institutionalized racism, reveals howracism shapes places. Hence, instead of asking ifan incinerator was placed in a Latino commu-nity because the owner was prejudiced, I ask,why is it that whites are not comparably bur-dened with pollution (see Szasz and Meuser1997)? In the case of Los Angeles, industrializa-tion, decentralization, and residential segrega-tion are keys to this puzzle. Because industrialland use is highly correlated with pollution con-centrations and people of color, the crucial
14Pulido question becomes, how did whites distancethemselves from both industrial pollution andnonwhites?This study does not attempt to prove that en-vironmental racism exists in Los Angeles, as sixstudies have already done so (Sadd et al. 1999;Boer et al. 1997; Pulido et al. 1996; Burke 1993;Szasz et al. 1993; UCC 1987). Nor do I suggestthat this particular narrative of racism, whiteprivilege, operates in all places in the same way.Rather, my goal is to consider the larger sociospa-tial processes of inequality that produce environ-mental racism. In this paper, I Þrst develop theconcept of white privilege. Second, I review howracism and space have been conceptualized in theliterature and the geography of urban environ-mental racism. Third, drawing on both primaryand secondary sources, I examine the historicalprocesses and their racist underpinnings thathave contributed to the environmental racismwe see in Los Angeles today. I conclude by sum-marizing my Þndings and their implications.Figure 1.Los Angeles-area communities identiÞed in this study.
Rethinking Environmental Racism15 Racism and White Privilege A clear deÞnition of race and white racism isin order. I employ Omi and WinantÕs idea of raceas Òa concept which signiÞes and symbolizessocial conßicts and interests by referring to dif-ferent types of human bodiesÓ (1994:55). ThisdeÞnition not only recognizes the physical, ma-terial, and ideological dimensions of race, butalso acknowledges race as contributing to thesocial formation. SpeciÞcally, it allows us to seerace as more than colored bodies. It enables us torecognize the pervasive and hegemonic nature ofrace, its multiscalar nature, and its multiple formsof existence, including ideas, words, actions, andstructures. This approach to race serves as a basisfor a broader and more ßuid deÞnition of whiteracism. I deÞne white racism as those practicesand ideologies, carried out by structures, institu-tions, and individuals, that reproduce racial in-equality and systematically undermine the well-being of racially subordinated populations.Because there are multiple motives and formsof racism (Goldberg 1993; Cohen 1992; Omi1992), there are various ways of analyzing rac-isms. In this paper, I consider only two: scale andintention. In any attempt to understand racism,scale is an important analytical tool in that it isboth deÞned by racism and transcends it. Con-sider the various scales at which racism exists:the individual, the group, the institution, soci-ety, the global. While all are distinct, there is adialectical relation between these scales. So, forinstance, an individual racist act is just that, anact carried out at the level of the individual.Nonetheless, that individual is informed by re-gional and/or national racial discourses, and his/her act informs and reproduces racial discoursesand structures at higher scales. Thus, we can fo-cus on a particular scale, but we must always becognizant of its relationship to other scales ofracism.A second crucial issue is the question of in-tent. While most social science scholars ac-knowledge institutional and structural racism,popular understandings focus heavily on indi-vidual malicious intent. Indeed, this trend is re-ßected in court rulings that have increasingly re-quired proof of intent (e.g., Washington v.Davis ). 2 For many, a hostile motive is considerednecessary for an action or inequality to qualify asracist. While aware of the power of hostile andmalicious acts, we cannot allow their reprehen-sible nature to obscure the range of racist mo-tives that exist. For instance, in this society,there are white supremacists, those who avoidpeople of color, and those who advocate aÒcolor-blindÓ society. Each of these positionsevinces a different motive. And while they maynot be morally comparable, they are all racistbecause they systematically undermine the well-being of people of color (Delgado 1995).White privilege is a form of racism that bothunderlies and is distinct from institutional andovert racism. It underlies them in that both arepredicated on preserving the privileges of whitepeople (regardless of whether agents recognizethis or not). But it is also distinct in terms of in-tentionality. It refers to the hegemonic struc-tures, practices, and ideologies that reproducewhitesÕ privileged status. In this scenario, whitesdo not necessarily intend to hurt people of color,but because they are unaware of their white-skinprivilege, and because they accrue social andeconomic beneÞts by maintaining the statusquo, they inevitably do. White privilege thrivesin highly racialized societies that espouse racialequality, but in which whites will not tolerateeither being inconvenienced in order to achieveracial equality (Lipsitz 1998; Delgado 1995;Quadagno 1994; Edsall and Edsall 1991), or de-nied the full beneÞts of their whiteness (Harris1993). It is precisely because few whites areaware of the beneÞts they receive simply frombeing white and that their actions, without ma-licious intent, may undermine the well-being ofpeople of color, that white privilege is so power-ful and pervasive.White privilege allows us to see how the ra-cial order works to the beneÞt of whites,whether in the form of economic and politicalbeneÞts (Ignatiev 1995; Oliver and Shapiro1995; Almaguer 1994; Harris 1993), or psycho-logical ones (Roediger 1991; Fanon 1967).White privilege is distinct from both white su-premacy, a more blatant and acknowledged formof white dominance (Fredrickson 1981:xi), aswell as from more individual, discriminatoryacts. Rather, it ßourishes in relation to theseother forms. Because most white people do notsee themselves as having malicious intentions,and because racism is associated with maliciousintent, whites can exonerate themselves of allracist tendencies, all the while ignoring their in-vestment in white privilege. It is this ability tosever intent from outcome that allows whitesto acknowledge that racism exists, yet seldomidentify themselves as racists.
16Pulido Evidence of white privilege abounds. It in-cludes the degree to which whites assume own-ership of this nation and its opportunities, peo-ple of colorÕs efforts to ÒpassÓ in order to accesswhiteness, whitesÕ resistance to attempts to dis-mantle their privilege, and, conversely, evenwhitesÕ efforts to shed their privilege. 3 Considerthe case of white resistance. White resistance tointegrating schools, housing, and the workplacehave all been well documented (Quadagno1994; Almaguer 1994; Massey and Denton1993; Foner 1974; Saxton 1971). This resis-tance is hardly surprising and is justiÞed by anynumber of rationales. What is important is thefact that whites resist because they feel theyhave something to lose. According to Lipsitz(1998), they have a Òpossessive investment inwhiteness,Ó meaning, whiteness pays off andwhites wish to retain those beneÞts. Legalscholar Cheryl Harris has observed, ÒThe set ofassumptions, privileges, and beneÞts that ac-company the status of being white have becomea valuable asset that whites sought to protectand that those who passed sought to attainÑbyfraud if necessary. Whites have come to expectand rely on these beneÞts, and over time, theseexpectations have been afÞrmed, legitimated,and protected by lawÓ (1993:1713). This ÒpayoffÓ can take the form of higher property values,better schools, or the ability to exclude people ofcolor from the workplace. That whites feel theyhave the right to exclude others attests to thedegree to which they assume ownership of thisnationÕs opportunities. 4 The privileged positionof whites is visible in almost every arena, includ-ing health, wealth, housing, educational attain-ment, and environmental quality. 5 White privilege is particularly useful in thestudy of urban landscapes because it is simulta-neously historical and spatial. Attempts to un-derstand contemporary racial inequality in lightof white privilege must be rooted in the past,precisely because of the absence of a hostile mo-tive or single act. Since landscapes are artifactsof past and present racisms, they embody gener-ations of sociospatial relations, what might becalled the Òsedimentation of racial inequalityÓ(Oliver and Shapiro 1995:5). Similarily, whiteprivilege, as a form of racism, is spatially ex-pressed, indeed it is partially contingent upon aparticular set of spatial arrangements. Take thecase of neighborhoods. The full exploitation ofwhite privilege requires the production of placeswith a very high proportion of white people.ÒToo manyÓ people of color might reduce aneighborhoodÕs status, property value, or gen-eral level of comfort for white people.A brief example may demonstrate how whiteprivilege allows us to historicize environmentalracism: A polluter locates near a black neigh-borhood because the land is relatively inexpen-sive and adjacent to an industrial zone. This isnot a malicious, racially motivated, discrimina-tory act. Instead, many would argue that it iseconomically rational. Yet it is racist in that it ismade possible by the existence of a racial hierar-chy, reproduces racial inequality, and under-mines the well-being of that community. More-over, the value of black land cannot beunderstood outside of the relative value of whiteland, which is a historical product. White landis more valuable by virtue of its whiteness(Oliver and Shapiro 1995:147Ð61), and thus itis not as economically feasible for the polluter.Nor is it likely that the black communityÕs prox-imity to the industrial zone is a chance occur-rence. Given the Federal governmentÕs role increating suburbia, whitesÕ opposition to integra-tion, and the fact that black communities havebeen restricted to areas whites deemed undesir-able, can current patterns of environmental rac-ism be understood outside a racist urban history?The Þnal issue of white privilege is, at whoseexpense? It is impossible to privilege one groupwithout disadvantaging another. White privi-lege comes at the expense of nonwhites. Histor-ically speaking, suburbanization can be seen as aform of white privilege, as it allowed whites tolive in inexpensive, clean, residential environ-ments (Jackson 1980). It was a privilege deniedto most people of color, but one they also borethe cost of, both in terms of an erosion ofcentral-city quality of life, and in their directsubsidization of white suburbia through their taxdollars (Guhathakurta and Wichert 1998).White privilege is useful in discussing suburban-ization and environmental racism because itshifts our understanding of racism beyond dis-crete siting acts, while also emphasizing the spa-tiality of racism. Racism and Space in Environmental Racism Research Currently, many methodological issues arebeing debated within the environmental justiceliterature (Cutter 1995; see Been 1995). Unfor-
Rethinking Environmental Racism17 tunately, the nature of racism is not one of them.In a review of thirty recent empirical studies,only a handful attempted any substantive dis-cussion of racism itself (Baden and Coursey1997; Pulido et al. 1996; Hamilton 1995; Krieg1995; Bullard 1990; UCC 1987), 6 although oth-ers have probed the nature of race and racism ingeneral (Szasz and Meuser 1997; Goldman1996; Pulido 1996; Bullard 1994; Zimmerman1994). Instead, the literature is largely charac-terized by Òcommon senseÓ assumptions that re-ßect uncritical, popular understandings of rac-ism. 7 A similar pattern exists in terms ofspatiality. While space has received consider-able attention, spatiality, meaning the relation-ship between social space and society (Soja1989), has not. Instead, spatial discussions havecentered on issues of distance, location, andscale, eschewing a more theoretical conceptionof space (see Cutter and Solecki 1996:395 for anexception). An appreciation of spatiality, how-ever, encourages greater attention to race, as it isone of the key social forces shaping our cities(and the U.S. as a whole). In this section, I re-view how racism and space are expressed in theliterature by showing how three practices con-tribute to an overly restrictive conception ofracism and space. First, I discuss the emphasis onfacility siting, second, the role of intentionality,and, third, spatial scale. I will address the Þrsttwo together, as they are closely related. Siting and Intentionality in Discrete Acts of Racism Although an earlier generation of scholarsexplored the relationship between demograph-ics and pollution (Berry et al. 1977), it was notuntil the 1980s that these issues were framed asenvironmental justice (McGurty 1995; see Szaszand Meuser 1997 for a complete review). Theinitial literature on environmental racism docu-mented discriminatory outcomes (Bullard 1990;UCC 1987; U.S. GAO 1984), but did not delveinto the processes producing them. Drawing ontraditional social science understandings of rac-ism, Bullard (1996) argued that discriminatoryoutcomes were evidence of racism, regardless ofthe mechanism (siting, housing discrimination,job blackmail), precisely because of the racistnature of the economy and the larger social for-mation. He deÞnes environmental racism asÒany policy, practice, or directive that differen-tially affects or disadvantages (whether in-tended or unintended) individuals, groups, orcommunities based on race or colorÓ (1996:497). Subsequent scholarship, however, has notonly challenged the existence of environmentalracism, 8 but has produced an overly restrictiveconception of racism. As a result, siting, as a dis-crete and conscious act, is often analyzed solelywith respect to the locations of racially subordi-nated groups (Bullard 1996:493) without sufÞ-cient attention to the larger sociospatial pro-cesses that produced such patterns. Likewise,interpretations of environmental racism are con-sidered suspect without ÒproofÓ of intentionality.Historical studies are a good example of howthis shift towards a more restrictive conceptionof racism has occurred. In addition to enhancingour understanding of environmental inequities(Baden and Coursey 1997; Pulido et al. 1996;Yandle and Burton 1996; Krieg 1995; Been1994), 9 historical research has also problema-tized racism by asking, what if the people cameÞrst? While potentially a fruitful line of inquiry,the narrow conception of racism informing theliterature has resulted in challenges to claims ofracism: What were the intentions of the respon-sible parties? For some scholars, if people subse-quently moved to polluted locales, and if themotive is unknown, claims of racism, cannot besubstantiated: which came Þrst? Were the LULUs [locally unde-sirable land uses] or sources of environmentalthreats sited in communities because they werepoor, contained people of color and/or politicallyweak? Or, were the LULUs originally placed incommunities with little reference to race or eco-nomic status, and over time, the racial composi-tion of the area changed as a result of white ßight,depressed housing prices, and a host of other socialills? (Cutter 1995:117). This quote summarizes an oft-stated sequence ofevents and conception of the problem. I do notdispute its accuracy, but rather its underlyingconception of racism, and the absence withinthe larger literature of alternative explanations.This scenario is predicated on understandingracism as a discrete and hostile act. In effect, the siting of environmental hazards becomes the ex-pression of a potentially racist act. Were pollut-ers or the state consciously targeting nonwhiteneighborhoods? Geographers have, understand-ably, preferred to address a more narrow set ofconcerns, rather than the more fundamental
18Pulido issues of environmental degradation (Heiman1990) or racism (Pulido 1996; Goldman 1996): An issue as controversial as environmental equityrequires research that assesses the spatial coinci-dence between environmental disamenities andminority or disadvantaged populations, prior to ananalysis of causation and the role of racial intent(Bowen et al. 1995:655). While a laudable position, the resulting researchagenda remains theoretically weak and offersonly a limited understanding of how racism, en-vironmental quality, and urban processes inter-sect. The following quotes illustrate not onlythe emphasis on siting, but also the extent towhich siting and the motive accompanying it,versus outcomes, are key to ascertaining if rac-ism exists. Clearly, discriminatory siting is not the primary culprit behind these cases of Òenvironmental racism.Ó In-stead, HoustonÕs disproportionate distribution oflandÞlls can properly be attributed to the dynam-ics of the housing market (Boerner and Lambert1994:16, emphasis added).There is, therefore, signiÞcant evidence of dispro-portionate siting. The evidence is ßawed, how-ever, in several respects. First, the evidence doesnot establish that the siting process, rather thanmarket forces such as residential mobility, causedthe disparity. . . . Second, the evidence does notestablish that siting decisions intentionally discrimi-nated against people of color or the poor (Been1993:1014, emphasis added).A reasonable distinction is that between injusticein outcome and injustice in intent. Injustice inoutcome is what most research has investigated, itcan be ascertained by examining a point in timeand seeing if minorities or the poor are dispropor-tionately represented in areas where waste is. In-justice in intent concerns siting decisions that areracist in intentÑthe actual disproportionate siting ofwaste in poor, minority communities (Baden andCoursey 1997:4, emphasis added). There are two points that emerge from these au-thorsÕ attempts to analytically sever racism fromlarger social processes (such as housing mar-kets): First, they exhibit the tendency to limitracism to siting, and second, they impose the re-quirement of intentionality. Siting. The emphasis on siting is signiÞcantfor two reasons. First, it reproduces an erroneousunderstanding of urban dynamics as it separateslarger sociospatial processes from explanationsof environmental inequity. Second, it is, unfor-tunately, the primary mechanism considered interms of discrimination. This can be seen, for in-stance, in the way that discriminatory siting iscarefully distinguished from market forces, whichsupposedly are nonracist. Baden and Coursey(1997) go even further by making explicit whichhistorical scenarios are potentially racist andwhich are not (Table 1). They offer six scenariosto explain a communityÕs proximity to danger-ous sites. Only scenarios 4 and 6, however, sug-gest a clear judgment of environmental racism(1997:14). The authors make clear that siting isthe only mechanism that can be equated withenvironmental racism. In referring to scenarios1, 2, and 3, they note, Òif people move into anarea known to be dangerous they may be able to Table 1. Baden and CourseyÕs Six Sequential Scenarios and Conclusions EventScenario123Description1SitingDangerPeoplePeople move into an area known to be dangerous.2SitingPeopleDangerPeople move into an area which is later determined to be dangerous.3DangerSitingPeopleA dangerous facility is sited, then people move into the area.4DangerPeopleSitingPeople live in an area, then a facility known to be dangerous is sited near them.5PeopleSitingDangerA facility that is not known to be dangerous is sited in a region where people live and is later determined to be dangerous. 6 People Danger Siting A dangerous facility is sited in a community. Source: Baden and Coursey (1997:14).
Rethinking Environmental Racism19 claim racism in lending or economic inequality,but the charge of discriminatory waste siting istenuousÓ (1997:14). This is not untrue, but it ishighly problematic and illustrative of a limitedunderstanding of racism and space. Neither thenarrow conception of racism, nor the fetishizingof siting helps us understand the nature of envi-ronmental racism in an urban context. In par-ticular, it does not recognize that space is essen-tial to the (re)production of a particular racialformation, nor does it acknowledge the funda-mental relationships between racism and the pro-duction of industrial zones, pollution, and resi-dential areas (Arnold 1998). Intentionality. In the quote by Been, above,the author has clearly found evidence of dispro-portionate siting. Yet without using the wordÒracism,Ó she contextualizes her Þndings so thatthe reader is alerted that charges of racism can-not be fully substantiated. She does so, Þrst, bysuggesting that market dynamics have not beenconsidered, and second, by referring to the ques-tion of intentionality. Nor, she writes, does theevidence Òestablish that siting decisions inten-tionally discriminated against people of color.ÓIn effect, intentionality becomes the litmus testas to whether or not a racist act has been com-mitted. Intentionality not only underlies discus-sions of racism, but also serves several purposesin deÞning it, as critical scholars of legal racismhave pointed out (Armour 1997; Crenshaw etal. 1995; Delgado 1995). First, the requirementof intentionality reduces the likelihood of view-ing collective actions as racist, as it is more difÞ-cult to prove group, rather than individual, in-tent. Second, the emphasis on intentionalityallows for a continual contraction in the deÞni-tion of racism, as seen in recent court rulings( Washington v. Davis ). Finally, by the require-ment of malicious intent, entire dimensions ofthe social arena are exonerated from contri-buting to racial inequality, including the un-conscious (Devine 1989; Lawrence 1987). Thenormal functioning of the state and capitalismare thus naturalized, as racism is reduced to anaberration. 10 A good example of limiting the domain ofracism can be seen in conceptions of the market.Instead of viewing the market as both consti-tuted by racism and an active force in (re)pro-ducing racism, scholars have treated it as some-how operating outside the bounds of race (fora fuller discussion, see Pulido 1996:146Ð47;Mohai and Bryant 1992). This is troubling,given the extent to which discrimination andracism have been proven in the Òfree market,Óincluding in employment (Kirschenman andNeckerman 1991), banking (Dymski and Veitch1996), and housing (Holloway 1988). Do notthese various forces shape a city, and inßuencewhere pollution will be concentrated? Such alimited conception of racism prevents us fromeither grasping the power and spatiality of rac-ism or identifying its underlying effectivity inperpetuating environmental injustice. Scale and Racism In addition to siting and intent, spatial scaleis also implicated in producing a narrow concep-tion of racism, as it too reßects normative under-standings of race and space. Scale is a major meth-odological issue in the environmental-racismliterature (Bowen et al. 1995; Cutter 1995; Per-lin et al. 1995; Zimmerman 1993). Not only haveresearchers examined environmental inequityat different scales, but the question of what is themost appropriate scale has also been contested.Evidence suggests that different units of analysis,such as counties, zip codes, or census tracts, mayproduce different Þndings. For instance, county-level data may reveal a pattern of environmen-tal racism, but a census-tract analysis of the samearea may not (Bowen et al. 1995; Anderton etal. 1994a). Zimmerman illustrates how spatialscale may confound attempts to ÒproveÓ racism. How boundaries can affect the outcome of an eq-uity analysis in the judicial context was under-scored in the East Bibb case. . . . The court used acensus tract to deÞne the boundary around anexisting landÞll, and, on that basis, ruled that apredominantly white community surrounded thelandÞll; plaintiffs, in contrast, argued that a largerarea encompassing both the existing site and aproposed waste site was predominantly black(70%). Another case, Bean v. Southwestern WasteManagement Corporation , employed statisticalanalyses both city-wide and for an area more prox-imate to a solid waste facility (deÞned at the cen-sus tract level). . . . The court, using statisticalÞndings at both geographic levels, ruled that eventhough no discrimination existed at the tractlevel, smaller neighborhoods within tracts wherethe facilities were located are important consider-ations in determining patterns of discrimination(1993:652Ð53). 11
20Pulido This quote not only demonstrates the problemsassociated with treating racism as an either/orphenomenon, but also suggests the extent towhich a limited understanding of scale is tied toa narrow conception of racism. Both are con-ceived as discrete objects, rather than as socialprocesses. I do not mean to suggest that courtsshould not rely on such Þndings, or that discreteacts of racism are not important, but as geogra-phers, one of our tasks should be to explain pat-terns and processes. This requires that we criti-cally interrogate our concepts and tools. In thiscase, not only must we acknowledge structuralracism and reconceptualize it as a power rela-tion, but we also need to contextualize scale. AsNeil Smith has argued, we need to recognizescale as socially produced, rather than to treat itas a Òmethodological preference for the re-searcherÓ (1993:96). Besides appreciating thefuzzy edges of spatial units, we must recognizethat places are the products of a speciÞc set ofsocial relations (Massey 1994; Soja 1989).Moreover, the relevant social relations do notreside solely within the spatial unit under con-sideration. Rather, places are produced by otherplaces, what Massey (1994) calls Òstretched outÓsocial relations. Thus, not only must our analysisoperate at several scales simultaneously, but wemust also consider the functional role of thoseplaces and their interconnections. This has im-plications for how we use scale in studies of rac-ism. We must bear in mind that our selectedscale of analysis may not necessarily coincidewith the scale of racist activity. If racism is con-stitutive of the urban landscape and varioustypes of racisms operate simultaneously, thengreat care must be taken in our treatment ofscale. Racism and its consequences do not nec-essarily cease at the edges of census tracts or cityboundaries.Accordingly, instead of treating spatial unitsas if they exist in a vacuum, the study of indus-trial pollution requires that our focus not be lim-ited to the individual facility, but rather shouldaddress the larger industrial zone in which it islocated (Arnold 1998). In turn, the industrialzone must be understood in relation to working-class suburbs, afßuent suburbs, Òinner-cities,Ó 12 and downtown areas. All of these places repre-sent speciÞc class relations that are functionallylinked. At the same time, all these places are ra-cialized, and racism works in particular ways intheir formation and evolution.Collectively, these three practices, the em-phasis on siting, intentionality, and a static con-ception of scale, have a limited ability to explainthe geography of urban environmental hazards,particularly their concentration in industrialzones (Baden and Coursey 1997; Sadd et al.1999; Pulido et al. 1996; Anderton et al. 1994b;Cutter and Tiefenbacher 1991). Anderton et al.,in their national study of transfer, storage, anddisposal facilities (TSDFs), found Òthe clearestand most consistent Þnding across the country isthe apparent association between the locationof TSDFs and other industrial enterprisesÓ(1994b:239). 13 This Þnding suggests the need toclarify the relationship between industrial zones,suburbanization, inner cities, and race. As Beenhas suggested, Many factories and other sources of hazardouswaste were traditionally located in the center citybecause of greater access to transportation andmarkets. In some cities, developers providedcheap housing for workers in the surroundingareas. As workers moved away , either because fac-tories closed or because more desirable housingbecame affordable elsewhere, the cheap housingin the center cities became disproportionatelypopulated by the poor and by people of color(Been 1993:1017, emphasis added). This process of how Òworkers moved awayÓ isone key to understanding contemporary pat-terns of environmental racism. It is my task tounpack this process. Environmental Racism, Urban Space, and White Privilege in Southern California 14 Environmental Racism in Los Angeles County There have been six systematic studies of en-vironmental racism in Los Angeles (Þve at thecounty level and one at the city), examiningthree environmental hazards: uncontrolledtoxic waste sites (UCC:1987), TSDFs (Sadd etal. 1999), and air toxins based on the Toxic Re-lease Inventory (TRI) (Boer et al. 1997; Pulidoet al. 1996; Burke 1993; Szasz et al. 1993). Table2 summarizes these studies. All studies foundthat nonwhites were disproportionately exposed.Most vulnerable were working-class Latinos. 15 The fact that three different hazards havebeen examined sheds light on distinct aspects ofthe urban environment. For instance, uncon-
Rethinking Environmental Racism21 trolled waste sites are often abandoned sites,thereby illuminating past industrial activities(Newton 1998; Krieg 1995; Colten 1986). TRIdata, which lists facilities emitting at least 10,000pounds of air toxins annually, reßects largelycontemporary industrial activities. TSDFs, de-spite their relatively small number, receive aninordinate amount of attention because they arehigh-proÞle projects requiring extensive permit-ting. In cities, they are often located in indus-trial zones because of their hazardous nature, aswell as their proximity to waste generators.The Þrst study to suggest that environmentalracism existed in Los Angeles was the UnitedChurch of Christ (UCC 1987) report. Al-though national in scope, it examined the distri-bution of uncontrolled hazardous-waste sites inmajor cities, including Los Angeles, and foundthat Latinos were disproportionately exposed.In Figure 2, I have reproduced the original UCCmap showing the concentration of waste sites inthe eastern part of the city. Out of 57 waste sites,35 (61.4 percent) were located in zip codes thatwere at least 50-percent Latino (UCC 1987:38). 16 This area is not only one of the older in-dustrial zones but also a longstanding Chicanobarrio (Pulido et al. 1996; Sanchez 1993; Romo1983). The area is legendary for its foul-smellingair, and includes one of the most polluted zipcodes in the state (Kay 1994).The next group of studies examined facilitiesreleasing air toxins (TRI). Figure 3 presents amap based on the data analyzed in the Sadd etal. (1999) study. 17 This dataset contains by farthe largest number of pollution events. Burke(1993) identiÞed three key variables associatedwith census tracts containing TRI facilities: thehigh presence of minority populations (primar-ily Latinos), lower incomes, and high-populationdensities. The study by Sadd et al. found thatsites were concentrated in the Òheavily urban-ized metropolitan Los Angeles area . . . in whichthe percentage of African American or Latinoresidents exceeds the mean for the study areaÓ(1999:111). They, along with Szasz et al. (1993)also found that facilities were concentrated in Table 2. Summary of Six Studies Examining Environmental Hazards in Los Angeles Author/YearHazardUnit of AnalysisAnalytic MethodsFindingsUnited Churchof Christ (1987) a Abandoned toxic waste sitesCity of LA (except harbor connector) Zip codesDescriptive analysisLatinos disproportionately impactedBurke (1993)Facilities emitting air toxins (TRI)Urbanized Los Angeles County census tractsBivariate mapping, generalized linear modeling, logit analysisLatinos disproportionately impactedSzasz et al. (1993)Facilities emitting air toxins (TRI)Los Angeles County census tractsDifference of means, regression analysis, comparison of means, two-way aggression analysisBlack and Latino households earning $20Ð40,000 disproportionately impactedPulido et al. (1996)Air toxin emission clusters (TRI)Urbanized Los Angeles County census tractsDescriptive and historical analysesLatinos disproportionatelyimpactedBoer et al. (1997)Transfer, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs)Los Angeles County census tractsVisual analysis, univariate and multivariate analysesWorking-class blacks andLatinos disproportion-ately impactedSadd et al. (1999) Air toxins (TRI) (facilities, size of emissions, relative toxicity) Six southern CA counties (Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernadino, and Imperial) census tracts Univariate comparisons, binomial logit, ordered logit, tobit regression analysis Blacks and Latinos in urbanized, central Los Angeles disproportionately impacted a The primary UCC study examined the relationship between commercial hazardous-waste facilities and community demo-graphics. The study of abandoned hazardous wastes was a smaller component of the larger project and was less methodologi-cally rigorous.
22Pulido working-class areas, rather than poor or wealthyones (see also Cutter and Solecki 1996). Thestudy by Pulido et al. (1996) focused on emis-sion clusters and found that the largest concen-tration of sites were located in the greater eastLos Angeles and south Los Angeles areas. 18 The Þnal hazard studied is TSDFs. Figure 4represents data analyzed by Boer et al. (1997).In this study, the authors found a pattern similarto Sadd et al. (1999) and Szasz et al. (1993): thedisproportionate exposure of working-class com-munities of color. Using a multivariate model,the authors found that Òrace remains a factoralong with industrial land use and employmentin manufacturing; rising income, on the otherhand, has a positive, then a negative effect onthe probability of TSDF locationÓ (1997:795).They found that 5.2 percent of blacks and Lat-inos lived in a census tract containing a TSDF,but only 2.9 percent of whites did.The results of these six studies suggest impor-tant racial and spatial patterns associated withthese three forms of pollution. First, it appearsthat most industrial hazards in southern Califor-nia are concentrated in the greater central andsouthern part of Los Angeles County. This oldercore is inhabited by people of color, while whiteslive on the periphery. Within this large zone,one group of hazards follows a major transporta-tion corridor, the Interstate-5 freeway and therailroad, stretching from east Los Angelesthrough downtown and into the eastern SanFernando Valley. A second major groupingforms a wide swath from downtown to the har-bor. This distribution reßects both contempo-rary and historic industrial patterns. Second, aspreviously stated, all studies found evidence ofenvironmental racism, even when accountingfor income. This substantiates Perlin et al.Õs(1995) Þnding that pollution is concentrated ina few large urban areas with substantial minoritypopulations. Third, it is working-class Latinos,and to a lesser extent, African Americans, whoare disproportionately impacted. This reßectsboth patterns of residential segregation, as wellas LatinosÕ historic and continuing role as theFigure 2.Southern CaliforniaÕs Þrst study of environmental racism: The United Church of ChristÕs study of un-controlled hazardous wastes in Los Angeles city, 1987. The UCC study did not include the entire cityÑthe Òshoe-string,Ó or narrow corridor connecting the main part of the city with the harbor, is not shown.
Rethinking Environmental Racism23Figure 3.Distribution of Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) emission sites and non-Hispanic white population inSouthern California.
24PulidoFigure 4.Distribution of Transfer, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) and non-Hispanic white population inSouthern California.
Rethinking Environmental Racism25 regionÕs low-wage working class (Scott 1996a;Morales and Ong 1993; Ong and Blumenberg1993). What is signiÞcant is the degree to whichalmost no whites live in these areas and there-fore are not exposed to the hazards under con-sideration. 19 As the maps in Figures 2Ð4 suggest,there is simply far less pollution in the out-lying areas. I maintain that we can only under-stand these contemporary patterns by examin-ing the historical development of urban spaceat the regional scale and that these processesare inherently racialized. While some forms ofenvironmental racism are directly attributableto overt acts of discrimination, I will empha-size how white privilege contributed to thislarger pattern. The Historical Geography of White Privilege and Environmental Racism in Los Angeles The data suggest that people of colorÕs dispro-portionate exposure to pollution in Los Angelesis not by chance. Although the geography of en-vironmental racism is the result of millions ofindividual choices, those choices reßect a par-ticular racial formation, and are a response toconditions deliberately created by the state andcapital (Hise 1998; Harvey 1985; Walker 1981).My goal is to show the historical evolution ofthese patterns and how racism contributed tothe spatial patterns associated with environ-mental racism.Before offering this historical geography,however, it is useful to consider how Los Ange-les is both similar to and unique from other ur-ban areas. Although the nature and deÞnition ofsuburbia is contested (Kling et al. 1995; Sharpeand Wallock 1994; Garreau 1991; Fishman1987), there is no denying that urban regionshave undergone a fundamental restructuringover the last Þve decades, as whites and themiddle class of all colors have moved outwardswith signiÞcant consequences for inner cities.This process of deconcentration has been de-scribed as a Òmassive regional dispersal of popu-lation, industry, and commerce,Ó entailing Òtherestructuring of both the central city and theoutlying areasÓ (Gottdiener and Kephart 1995:33Ð34).Los Angeles has not escaped these profoundshifts, but its experience is also unique (Dearand Flusty 1998; Soja 1989, 1996; Davis 1992).Unfortunately, the reality of Los Angeles is of-ten obscured by the many misconceptions of theregion (Soja 1996:427). For example, because ofits legendary sprawl, many overlook the histori-cal and contemporary signiÞcance of Los Ange-lesÕs inner cities. Though inner cities are oftenconsidered to be sites of poverty and pathos, thisis too simple a reading. While both the eastsidebarrio and South Central are home to poor peo-ple of color, they are also sites of vibrant com-munities and an assortment of industry andwarehousing. In addition, perhaps because ofthe inßuence of Hollywood and Disneyland,many do not realize that Los Angeles is the lead-ing manufacturing county in the nation. Ac-cordingly, the historical geography of industryhas been a powerful force in shaping the region(Soja 1989).Suburbanization is also unique in Los Ange-les, where, although not pioneered there, subur-bia peaked, as real-estate speculation and Òlivingthe good lifeÓ became economic and social cor-nerstones of the region (Fishman 1987:155). Fi-nally, while many U.S. cities have historicallybeen characterized by bipolar racial structures(usually black/white), only recently have theybecome multiracial. In contrast, Los Angeleshas always been racially diverse. This is impor-tant in that the long presence of various racial/ethnic groups illustrates how nonwhites differ-entially experienced racism, underscoring theprofundity of white privilege. Early Residential and Industrial Patterns,1848Ð1920s. Early suburbanization emanatedpartly from the refusal of middle-class whites tolive near immigrants and people of color.Whites pursued suburbanization for many rea-sons, but regardless of their motives, theirchoice was predicated on white privilege. Histo-rian Robert Fogelson (1993) has pointed outthat soon after the Anglo takeover of Los Ange-les (1848), the city was transformed from a spa-tially clustered community to a rapidly expand-ing city. This transformation was driven byseveral forces, including a growing population,land speculation, and the fact that many newlyarrived white Angelenos were native-born andrefused to live near socially subordinated groups.Fogelson has argued that because the whiteswho came to Los Angeles were relatively secureÞnancially, they were more concerned with life-style issues, rather than economic survival, andtheir afßuence led them to embrace suburbia.Hence, whitesÕ residential desires and real-
26Pulido estate interests were two of the more powerfulforces that shaped early Los Angeles: the unique dispersal of Los Angeles reßected notso much its chronology, geography, or technologyas the exceptional character of its population. Itwas not like Chicago . . . inhabited largely by im-poverished and insecure European immigrants,who . . . were conÞned to the cityÕs teeming tene-ments and crowded ghettos. . . . Los Angeles waspopulated principally by native[-born] Americanswith adequate resources and marketable skills,who faced the problems of adjustment conÞdentlybecause of a common language and similar back-ground. . . . Moreover, the native[-born] Ameri-cans came to Los Angeles with a conception ofthe good community which was embodied insingle-family houses, located on large lots, sur-rounded by landscaped lawns, and ÒisolatedÓ frombusiness activities. Not for them multi-familydwellings . . . separated by cluttered streets and . . .industry. Their vision was epitomized by the resi-dential suburb (Fogelson 1993:144). In addition to the exclusionary desires of whiteAngelenos, suburbanization was also promotedby industrialists who sought to provide housingfor the white working class as a means of avoid-ing labor unrest. According to one promotionalbrochure, The real secret of the efÞciency of the workers ofSouthern California may be found in their homelife. . . . A tenement is unknown here and theworkers live in their own little bungalows sur-rounded by plenty of land for fruits, vegetables andßowers, and where children romp and playthroughout the entire year. . . . This spells con-tentment and contentment spells efÞciency ( LAChamber of Commerce Industrial Department1926). As whites moved outward, Chicanos, AfricanAmericans, Japanese Americans, Chinese Amer-icans and the remnant Indian population wererelegated to San Pedro, Watts, and the centralcity (including downtown and the eastside)(Anderson 1996:342Ð46; Horne 1995:27;Sanchez 1993; Romo 1983; Warren 1986Ð1987). Beginning in the 1920s, residential seg-regation was violently enforced (Massey andDenton 1993; De Graff 1970). As a result, forthousands of ÒMexicans, Japanese, and Negroeswho lived amidst commerce and industry in thesmall ghettos of central Los Angeles and SanPedro[,] there were a million white Americanswho resided in the suburbs sprawling north toHollywood, east to Pasadena, south to LongBeach, and west to Santa MonicaÓ (Fogelson1993:147). These early differences in environ-mental quality were codiÞed by zoning laws inthe 1920s, which resulted in a concentration ofindustrial activity in nonwhite and immigrantareas (The Zoning Map Company 1930). This early process of white outmigration wascharacterized by various forms of racism. Forone, the fact that nonwhites were consideredundesirable reßects a racial hierarchy. Moreconscious was the exclusion of people of colorfrom white housing developments. While mostdevelopers practiced overt discrimination by de-nying housing to people of color, they may havehad distinct motives. Some may have opposednonwhites living with whites, while others maysimply have realized that the presence of non-whites would reduce property values. Regardlessof the motive, however, all these actions werepredicated on white privilege and served to un-dermine the well-being of people of color. Thisis an example of how white privilege can coexistwith other forms of racism in shaping residentialpatterns.Until the 1920s, the industrial sector wasweak and clustered downtown due to limited in-frastructure. During the 1920s, however, civicleaders sought to build the regionÕs manufactur-ing base in order to diversify the economy. Be-tween 1919 and 1933, Los Angeles County rosefrom twenty-seventh to sixth in terms of thevalue of manufactured goods (LA Chamber ofCommerce Industrial Department 1934). Sev-eral factors guided this growth, including thesuccess of the Òbranch plantÓ strategy, capitalÕsdesire to escape organized labor and zoning reg-ulations (LA Chamber of Commerce IndustrialDepartment 1929), and the coordinated effortsof industrialists, developers, and planners totransform the basis of Los AngelesÕs landscapefrom tourism and land speculation to manufac-turing (Hise 2000 forthcoming; Fogelson 1993).The resulting manufacturing and residentialgeographies have had an enduring inßuence.Mexicanos and industry were continually pushedeastwards from the central Plaza, towards theLos Angeles River (Romo 1983; Sanchez 1993),further cementing the barrioÕs role as an in-dustrial district. Industrialists and plannerschose to develop this site, given its proximityto the railroad, in hopes of generating cargotonnage (Los Angeles Central Manufacturing
Rethinking Environmental Racism27 District 1923). Partly because of the existing in-dustrial infrastructure (railroads, industriallyzoned land, already-contaminated land), andthe availability of a large pool of low-wage labor,the eastside remains an important industrialarea.The production of urban space in Los Ange-les in the 1920s shows how race and class inßu-enced the location of both residential and in-dustrial districts. Afßuent whites moved toresidential suburbs like Pasadena, Bel Aire,Rancho Palos Verdes, and Beverly Hills, andwere never seriously threatened with industrialactivity. Instead, industry developed in conjunc-tion with nonwhite spaces (the eastside andsouth of downtown) and the white workingclass. As previously mentioned, industrialistsÕdesire to avoid labor unions (concentrateddowntown) and to placate white labor throughhome ownership led to the development of in-dustrial suburbs. The creation of communitieslike Torrance, Huntington Park, and Bell of-fered a suburban experience to all whites, re-gardless of class (Parson 1984). The strength ofthe color line can be seen in the way Bell, for in-stance, boasted of providing Òhomes for indus-trial workers [with] no Negroes and very fewMexicans and ChineseÓ (LA Chamber of Com-merce Industrial Dept. 1925). Likewise, Comp-ton described itself as having Òinexpensivehomes of individuality, where ßowers and gar-dens may be grown the year Õround. White helpprevailsÓ (LA Chamber of Commerce IndustrialDept. 1925). Yet, despite the overwhelmingpower of white privilege in (re)producing thecolor line, it is also evident that this articulationof racism is predicated not only on class divi-sions within the white population (which al-lowed for the creation of afßuent communities),but also an attempt to incorporate those whowere previously considered to be Ònot quitewhiteÓ (Brodkin 1998) into new forms of con-solidated whiteness.As suburbanization continued, what wereonce the near suburbs became the inner city, aswhite workers moved away, and people of colorsubsequently took their place, a process knownas ethnic succession. 20 Consequently, wealthywhites were never systematically burdened bypollution, while over time, the white workingclass was able to escape by taking advantage ofnew housing opportunities. Thus, regardless ofclass differences, all whites enjoyed white privi-lege, albeit to varying degrees. Residential and Industrial Expansion in theWorld War II Era. The Depression and WorldWar II greatly intensiÞed the process of whitesuburbanization, but instead of it being a privateproject, the state actively subsidized suburban-ization, to the detriment of people of color liv-ing in the central city (Guhathakurta andWichert 1998; Ebner 1987:234Ð35). Figure 5shows the exodus set in motion by the policyand economic shifts of World War II. Not onlydid whites continue their outward migration,but millions of newly arrived white Angelenossettled in the suburbs. In contrast, newly arriv-ing African Americans and Mexicanos were rele-gated respectively to the ghetto and barrio. AndJapanese Americans, upon their postwar releasefrom concentration camps, clustered in blackand brown spaces, such as the Crenshaw areaand Boyle Heights, as well as in rural communi-ties like Gardena (Warren 1986Ð1987).The economic growth triggered by defensedollars not only provided jobs, but housing theseworkers created a construction boom. Hise hasargued that this period is pivotal to explainingthe contemporary fragmentation of southernCalifornia: Òthe emergence of Los Angeles as afully urbanized region occurred around a set ofdecentralized industrial growth poles . . . [andthe] industrial and housing policy associatedwith the defense emergency accelerated thisemergent pattern of decentralizationÓ (1993:97Ð98) (Figure 6).Federal policies, such as Titles I and VI of theFederal Housing Act (FHA), sought to increasethe housing supply (Doti and Schweikart 1989),in an overtly racist way. Perhaps of greatest sig-niÞcance was the institutionalization of redlin-ing practices by the Home Owners Loan Corpo-ration (HOLC) and the FHA. Although thesemeasures were intended to protect small home-owners from foreclosure, they ranked neighbor-hoods in descending order from ÒAÓ to ÒD,Ó withprofound consequences for future urban devel-opment. ÒAÓ ratings were reserved for Ònewer,afßuent suburbs that were strung out along cur-vilinear streets well away from the problems ofthe cityÓ (in Jackson 1980:424). At the otherextreme were nonwhite neighborhoods. Indeed,HOLCÕs survey of the Los Angeles area showsthe suburban communities of Pasadena, BeverlyHills, Santa Monica, and Palos Verdes as all ÒAÓareas. Working-class white communities wereÒB,Ó and Black, Latino, and Asian neighbor-hoods, primarily in the eastside, central Los
28Pulido Angeles, and south of downtown, were ÒCÓ andÒDÓ (U.S. Division of Research and Statistics1939). A conÞdential report by the survey teamillustrates the degree to which black and brownpeople were considered a problem and a poten-tial threat to white residential development: Negroes do not constitute a racial problem in thearea as a whole, for although they too have beenincreasing rapidly in number, their ratio to the to-tal county population has remained constantsince 1890. The Negro race is fairly well conÞnedto a few sections within the county. They occupyone large area southwest of the business district. . . .Although Beverly Hills shows a larger than aver-age number of Negroes, these are made up entirelyof servants and they do not own property in the com-munity. . . . The major racial problem existing inLos Angeles, and one which is not revealed by thecensus data, is that created by the large numbers ofMexicans, who are classed as Whites by the Cen-sus Bureau. . . . While many of the Mexican raceare of high caliber and descended from the Span-ish grandees who formerly owned all the territoryin southern California, the large majority of Mexi-can people are a deÞnite problem locally and their im-portation in the years gone by to work the agricul-tural crops has now been recognized as a mistake(Bowden and Mayborn 1939, emphases added). The results of such overt and institutionalizedforms of racism were evident in dramatic urbaninequalities. For instance, despite the outlawingof restrictive covenants in 1948 (which Califor-nians subsequently repealed), less than two per-cent of the housing Þnanced with federal mort-gage insurance was made available to blacks(Anderson 1996:345). Moreover, in 1955, theFigure 5.Racial/ethnic outmigration from central Los Angeles between 1940 and 1960.
Rethinking Environmental Racism29 ratio between single-family and multifamilystarts was more than nine to one in Los Angeles(Cohan 1956:46). Because they were largely ex-cluded from the new suburbs, the limited pro-duction of multifamily units meant greatercrowding in the barrio and ghetto. Minoritycommunities were also disadvantaged insofar asmassive funds were channeled into suburbia. 21 Not only was less money available for inner-citydevelopment, but such projects were often builtliterally at the expense of nonwhites. For exam-ple, Los AngelesÕs freeway system, upon whichthe suburban structure was predicated, waslargely built through communities of color, par-ticularly Chicano neighborhoods, resulting insevere disruption to the community and itshousing stock (Avila 1998). The result of thesepractices was evident in growing racial and eco-nomic polarization. In 1960, the average in-come in central and east Los Angeles was $5916,while it was $8575 in the outlying, newly devel-oping areas (ÒLos Angeles 1965: Market andMediaÓ 1965:M12). 22 A related segregation tool was suburban cityincorporation. The exclusionary nature of sub-urbanization is underscored by the fact thatonce people arrived, they sought to insulatetheir investment through incorporation. Notonly did this protect their tax dollars, but it of-fered them more control over local land use, in-cluding industry, schools, and the ability to ex-clude outsiders, through, for example, restrictivecovenants, advertising practices, and minimumlot-size standards (Miller 1981; Babcock andBosselman 1973). Between 1955 and 1960,twenty-Þve communities incorporated in LosAngeles County (Miller 1981:22), resulting in atotal of more than 76 incorporated cities (ÒLosAngeles 1965: Market and MediaÓ 1965:M3). 23 The issue of incorporation versus suburban-ization demonstrates the multiple forms of rac-ism shaping the region. For some, moving toFigure 6.Distribution of industrial concentrations in Southern California, 1961.
30Pulido suburbia might simply be taking advantage ofopportunities based on oneÕs white skin. Whilethis opportunity is predicated on institutional-ized racism, incorporation is potentially a moreconscious and deliberate act to maintain oneÕsprivilege (often in the form of property values).In Torrance, for instance, an integration cam-paign led by the Congress on Racial Equality(CORE), a civil rights group, was Þercely re-sisted by whites. White opposition ranged fromparades featuring Nazis and the Klu Klux Klan,to white homeowners planting American ßagsand signs on their lawns saying Òwithout prop-erty rights there are no human rightsÓ (Weeks1963). While the reference to Òproperty rightsÓmay appear disingenuous, it is quite telling inthat it reveals the necessity of preserving white-ness in order to protect oneÕs investment and aparticular quality of life.What is signiÞcant is not that some whitesrefused to live among nonwhites, but the extentto which social status and a desired quality of lifeare predicated on homogeneous whiteness.That suburbanites effectively wall out those un-like themselves after arriving [in suburbia], how-ever, suggests that a major force driving their mi-gration is the wish to escape racial and classintermingling. In the United States, upward mobil-ity and social status are predicated on living apart fromracial and economic groups considered inferior. . . .Thus, it is not simply the racism of individuals butalso the collectively perceived threat that raceand class differences pose to homeownership andsocial standing that drives suburbanites to keeptheir territory segregated (Sharp and Wallock1994:9, emphasis added).The quote emphasizes the connection betweenindividual actions and social structures. Whilesome undoubtedly had malicious intentions,others did not. Yet, in order to preserve and fullyexploit the privilege associated with whiteness,presumably well-intentioned individuals re-spond to market forces and social structures inways that reinforce racist hierarchies.This process highlights not only the spatial-ity of racism, but also the fact that space is a re-source in the production of white privilege. In-deed, neighborhoods are not merely groupingsof individuals, homes, and commerce, they areconstellations of opportunities with powerful con-sequences, for both the recipient and nonrecipi-ent populations. Although whites must go toever greater lengths to achieve them, relativelyhomogeneous white spaces are necessary for thefull exploitation of whiteness (Frankenberg 1993).Beginning in the 1950s, the urban exoduswas driven by the relocation of key industriesand government services. Led by Northrop,Hughes, and Lockheed, aerospace Þrms left cen-tral Los Angeles in a leapfrog pattern, creatingindustrial agglomerations (Scott 1996b; Lock-heed Aircraft Corporation 1953). As a result,well-paying defense jobs shifted to Los AngelesÕsperiphery (Law et al. 1993), and racial and eco-nomic polarization became more entrenched.There was a strong relationship between the de-fense industry and white workers. White work-ers followed the industry, which moved to areasamenable to whites. For instance, a labor-mar-ket survey described Fullerton as undergoing aÒsigniÞcant expansion in industries related tothe missile programÓ (California Dept. of Em-ployment 1960), and as having a labor force thatwas primarily Ònative-born whiteÓ (CaliforniaDept. of Employment 1952).Many factors contributed to this industrialand urban decentralization. Besides populationgrowth, new production methods required largerlots, which were increasingly hard to Þnd in LosAngeles. Indeed, 76 percent of Los AngelesÕscapital investment in 1955 was spent on exist-ing businesses as they sought to expand (Banks1956:63). In addition, there was a desire to es-cape congestion, and quality of life concernsgreatly intensiÞed after the Watts riots (1965).Consequently, new communities were builtalong Los AngelesÕs periphery, including theSan Fernando valley, the South Bay, andOrange County (Kling et al. 1993:3; Scott1990:ch. 9). Between 1960 and 1965, Los Ange-les County experienced a population growthrate of 21.4 percent, while Orange County aver-aged 137.5 percent (ÒLos Angeles 1965: Marketand MediaÓ 1965:M14). Despite Orange CountyÕsexceptional growth, however, relatively fewpeople of color moved there. While Los Ange-lesÕs population was 19.2 percent nonwhite in1960, Orange County was only 8.8 percent non-white (LA Chamber of Commerce 1964).Besides affordable housing and well-payingjobs, white Angelenos were lured to new, attrac-tive, segregated communities, such as Irvine, thequintessential planned community. The devel-oper, the Irvine Company, believed that both af-fordable and integrated housing would reduceproperty values and deter desirable buyers. OneofÞcial explained that a multiracial advertise-
Rethinking Environmental Racism31ment, Òwould scare off every white person I hadeven the slightest hopes of gettingÓ (Schiesl1995:68).Nonetheless, by the 1970s, a decrease inovert racism and a strong economy allowed peo-ple of color to enjoy more housing options. TheSan Gabriel Valley became the path of upwardmobility for Chicanos, and Asian Americansbecame increasingly dispersed throughout theregion. Eventually, the enforcement of civilrights laws enabled blacks to move beyond cen-tral and south Los Angeles.Contemporary Patterns.Due to 150 yearsof racism as well as recent social and economicshifts, southern California remains highly segre-gated, despite a reduction in overt forms of rac-ism. Three interrelated factors help explain whythe central city remains a nonwhite place, andwhites continue to dominate the periphery: im-migration, residential mobility, and economicrestructuring. These factors also help explainwhy Latinos, in particular, are disproportion-ately exposed to industrial pollution.Immigration has dramatically affected boththe economy and residential patterns of the re-gion. Between 1970 and 1990, the Asian popu-lation of Los Angeles increased by 451 percent(Cheng and Yang 1996:308), while between1980Ð1990, the Latino population rose fromtwo million to well over three million (Morrisonand Lowry 1994:28). Although these new arriv-als settled throughout the region, many clus-tered in east, central, and south Los Angeles. Atthe same time, African Americans, while stillheavily concentrated in south Los Angeles,have been moving east to the Òinland empireÓand even returning to the South (Johnson andRoseman 1990). Immigrants have moved intothese black and brown spaces because they areaffordable and accessible. Immigrants do notsettle just anywhere, however. Their decisionsare informed by the geography of past racialregimes. As a result, central Los Angeles con-tinues to be a nonwhite space (Allen and Turner1997:46). This growth is juxtaposed by the lossof 352,000 whites between 1980 and 1990 (Sa-bagh and Bozorgmehr 1996:86). Not only dowhites continue to move to Orange County (es-pecially popular are the southernmost commu-nities where whites sometimes constitute up to90 percent of the population), but the ßight ofwhite Angelenos has spread to San Diego, cen-tral California, and throughout the West (Freyand Liaw 1998). Even white ÒholdoutÓ commu-nities feel their days are numbered. Accordingto one Lakewood resident, ÒIÕve got three blacks[families] on my block, right now . . . and well,you know the problem with blacks, they havefriends, and they have visitors. That is the prob-lem. We canÕt encourage our people to stay ifthis keeps up. Our housing stock has stayedpretty solid, but some people canÕt be encour-aged much more to stayÓ (quoted in Brill 1996:110).The complexion of Orange County, particu-larly the inland areas, has changed considerably,as the number of Latinos and Asian/PaciÞc Is-landers has grown. Nonetheless, blacks still con-stitute only 1.8 percent of the population (Rose-man and Lee 1998:208). The net result of allthese shifts is that although people of color cannow be found throughout the region, they areconcentrated in the mature suburbs, the easternSan Fernando Valley, and the San Gabriel Val-ley.24 Central Los Angeles remains almost com-pletely nonwhite, and whites continue to con-gregate along the periphery.As Figures 2Ð4 suggest, many of the indus-tries and land-uses associated with environmen-tal hazards are concentrated in central Los An-geles, and, to a lesser extent, along industrialarteries. Both blacks and Latinos are dispropor-tionately exposed, but for somewhat differentreasons. As the most segregated population,black Angelenos were conÞned to south LosAngeles beginning in the 1920s (De Graff1970). While many blacks have left, south LosAngeles is still heavily black (Allen and Turner1997:62), and contains portions of an old indus-trial corridor. Despite the fact that blacks wereonly intermittently hired in them, south LosAngeles housed many Fordist industries, themajority of which left in the 1970s and 1980s(Oliver et al. 1993:122). This Òrust beltÓ notonly harbors various environmental hazards but,as a politically weak and industrially orientedarea, attracts projects like incinerators and theproposed PaciÞc Pipeline (Aspen Environmen-tal Group 1993). Thus, blacksÕ exposure to envi-ronmental hazards is largely a function of severespatial containment and the historic practice oflocating hazardous land uses in black areas.In contrast, LatinosÕ exposure is more a func-tion of their role as low-wage labor within theracialized division of labor and the historic rela-tionship between the barrio and industry. Lati-nos have always lived close to industry, but un-
32Pulidolike blacks, they have, at times, been hired inlarge numbers (Morales and Ong 1993; Ong andBlumenberg 1993). LatinosÕ contemporary ex-posure cannot be understood outside of indus-trial and immigration shifts. Over the lasttwenty years, the region has undergone a simul-taneous industrial decline and expansion (Soja1989:200). While the Þnance and service sec-tors have grown dramatically, manufacturingdeclined in Los Angeles in the 1980s. In the1990s, however, a selective reindustrializationwas realized (Scott 1996a) by high-technologyindustries and low-wage Latino labor. As a re-sult, Latinos live near industry, since both areconcentrated in central Los Angeles and indus-trial corridors, and they are exposed to hazardson the job (Ong and Blumenberg 1993). Thus,their exposure is a function of their class and im-migrant status, as well as their racial position.As Latinos, they live where brown and blackpeople have historically lived, or in spaces va-cated by the white working class.Environmental hazards are concentrated incentral Los Angeles (including the inner sub-urbs) in several distinct ways. First, because asigniÞcant portion of these communities are in-dustrially zoned, industry continues to locatethere (Cordoba Corp. 1987:22). Yet because ofthe poverty of central Los Angeles and its landfragmentation and poor services, few of thelarge, well-Þnanced Þrms in growth sectorsmove there.25 Instead, small polluting activitiesand large-scale hazards, such as incinerators,are drawn to these areas, as Òcleaner industriesare dissuaded from locating in the area becauseof the toxic contaminationÓ (LA Design ActionPlanning Team 1990:12). According to one ofÞ-cial from Paramount, an inner suburb, Òwe pro-vide a place for industry that nobody wantsÓ(Carbajal in Flanigan 1999). Scott has pointedout that low-technology, labor-intensive indus-tries are now clustered near downtown; metal-lurgical and machinery industries are foundin old industrial zones throughout the region,including the eastern San Fernando Valley,South Central, and northern Orange County;and high-technology industries are located onthe fringe (1996a:220Ð21; see also Kaplan1998).Consider the Eastside and Southeast Plan-ning Districts in the city of Los Angeles. In bothcases, 20 percent of the land is zoned as indus-trial (City of Los Angeles Dept. of City Plan-ning 1988:9; Garrow et al. 1987:54). Not sur-prisingly, both of these communities weretargets for incinerator projects in the 1980s. TheCity of Los Angeles proposed a waste-to-energyincinerator for South Central, but ConcernedCitizens of South Central, a group of largely Af-rican American women, successfully resisted theproject. In the second case, the city of Vernon,adjacent to Boyle Heights, proposed a hazardouswaste incinerator. This time, the City of LosAngeles assisted the Mothers of East L.A. in de-feating the project (Blumberg and Gottlieb1989).Conßicting land uses are also a serious prob-lem that intensiÞes potential environmentalhazards. One planning document described theeastside as consisting of:small, older, single family homes situated betweenor adjacent to large commercial and industrialbuildings. . . . The noise, dirt, heavy truck andtrailer trafÞc along industrial/residential edges alsoseverely detracts from the quality of life of nearbyresidents. Views from homes to loading docks,auto wrecking and repair yards, and heavy ma-chinery do not provide the amenities traditionallyassociated with residential life (Garrow et al.1987:54).Beyond the general unsightliness, such land usespose a severe threat to residents. Because of thelack of buffers and the hazardous nature of in-dustry, there have been mass evacuations,school contaminations (Frammolino 1999), ex-plosions (Sahagun 1989), potential cancer clus-ters (Gold 1999), and workers killed (Malnicand Ramos 1997). Newer suburban communi-ties do not have the same concentration ofhazardous industrial activities, and enjoy moreeffective zoning and land-use regulations. Over-all, there are simply fewer pollution clustersalong the coast (see Figures 2Ð4). With the ex-ception of the port, coastal communities arecleaner (and whiter) than the central city. Be-sides the fact that the suburbs house better-capitalized Þrms more likely to have the bestavailable technology, the coastal breeze blowspollution inland, thus further cleansing thecoastal suburbs.In short, looking at the region as a whole, it isclear that people of color are disproportionatelyexposed to a particular set of environmentalhazards. Such patterns are not the result of anysingle decision or particular act. Instead, theyare the result of urban development in a highlyracialized society over the course of 150 years.
Rethinking Environmental Racism33ConclusionI have argued that restrictive conceptions ofracism characterize the environmental racismliterature. In particular, the emphasis on siting,intentionality, and scale have contributed toconceptualizing both racism and space as dis-crete objects, rather than as social relations.These dominant conceptions are problematicbecause they prevent us from understandinghow racism shapes places and the relationshipsbetween places, and thereby limits our ability todetect environmental racism. I have sought tochallenge this approach by employing the con-cept of white privilege, which offers a morestructural and spatial understanding of racism.Such a shift requires acknowledging that multi-ple forms of racism exist, including less con-scious forms not characterized by malicious in-tent and hostility. White privilege allows us tosee how environmental racism has been pro-ducedÑnot only by consciously targeting peo-ple of color (as in the incinerator cases)Ñbut bythe larger processes of urban development, in-cluding white ßight, in which whites havesought to fully exploit the beneÞts of theirwhiteness.In urban areas, explanations of environmen-tal inequality must include careful consid-eration of residential patterns, land use, andindustrial development. The history of subur-banization reveals that although many forcescontributed to decentralization, it has largelybeen an exclusionary undertaking. Moreover,the state has played a central role in craftingsuch opportunities, choices, and landscapes. Al-though, in Los Angeles, nonwhites have alwayslived adjacent to industry, people of color haverecently begun moving into the suburbs, andhave taken over what were once white indus-trial suburbs. Over time, these industrial suburbshave become part of the inner city, and are in-creasingly populated by people of color. As a re-sult, central Los Angeles with its concentrationof industrial hazards, remains a nonwhite space.In contrast, whites continue to move to the pe-riphery, which is relatively cleaner. These pat-terns developed over a century and continue toinform the present, illustrating how variousforms of racism shape our landscapes.This paper raises a host of policy, scholarly,and political issues. From a policy perspective, Ihave argued for the need to direct more atten-tion to industrial zones and pollution clusters,rather than just the siting process and individualfacilities. While the latter are clearly important,particularly in terms of future pollution, mostindustrial pollution does not involve new sit-ings, but is the product of already existing facili-ties, land uses, and zoning.Scholarship on environmental racism canalso be strengthened. It is essential that re-searchers begin to situate their work in terms ofa larger sociospatial dialectic. Such a movewould not only illuminate the geographic andhistorical context in which these patterns de-veloped, but would also help us appreciate theextent to which places are shaped by variousforms of racism. Relatedly, the fact that manygeographers are hesitant to pursue these avenuesof research underscores the need for greaterbreadth within our discipline and the limita-tions of specialization. As a discipline that is in-timately associated with both human-environ-ment relations and the study of space, we shouldbe at the forefront of contributing new theoreti-cal, empirical, and technical insights on thetopic of environmental justice.The issue of racism itself raises both scholarlyand political concerns. I believe that as geogra-phers, we need to diversify and deepen our ap-proach to the study of racial inequality. Our tra-ditional emphasis on mapping and countingneeds to be complemented by research thatseeks to understand what race means to peopleand how racism shapes lives and places. For in-stance, within the Þeld of environmental rac-ism, a key question that has not been seriouslyaddressed is differential exposure. In otherwords, how might different experiences and his-tories of racism result in distinct geographies ofexposure, say for instance, between the Sho-shone nation, rural Blacks in the South, and anurban Asian American community in the SanFrancisco Bay area? Not only are such questionsimportant in and of themselves, but they wouldhelp geography build bridges to other disci-plines, such as ethnic studies.But the question of racism within the disci-pline goes beyond research. And, as I haveshown, our approach to the subject, unfortu-nately, speaks volumes about the collective pol-itics of our discipline. What are we to make of abody of literature that purports to address thequestion of racism but is estranged from main-stream scholarly understandings of racism? Whydo so many scholars cling to such a narrow con-ception of racism? What are the consequences
34Pulidoof such an approach in terms of our research,teaching, and political efÞcacy? Perhaps a seri-ous interrogation on the subject of racism is inorder. At the very least, I hope that this paperdemonstrates how individual scholars contrib-ute to the reproduction of larger discourses andconceptions of raceÑregardless of their mo-tives. The point is not to lay blame, but to be-come aware of the larger political and moralconsequences of our actions.AcknowledgmentsI would like to thank Hallie Krinski and AngelGomez for their research assistance, Clay Kraft for hiscartographic skills, and Jim Sadd for sharing his haz-ards data. Many friends and colleagues have com-mented on drafts of this paper or made valuable sug-gestions: Dionne Espinoza, Melissa Gilbert, GregHise, Jim Lee, George Lipsitz, Bill Lynn, Mike Mu-rashige, Leland Saito, and Jennifer Wolch. I would es-pecially like to thank the Þve anonymous reviewersfor their comments. I alone am responsible for allshortcomings. Versions of this paper were presentedat the University of Minnesota, University of Wash-ington, Temple University, and the University ofCalifornia at San Diego and Santa Cruz.Notes1.A word on terminology is in order. In earlystudies, the term Òenvironmental racismÓ wasused to denote disparate patterns. Over time, theterm Òenvironmental equityÓ became popular asit was more inclusive, encompassing both racialand economic disparities. Many activists, how-ever, also saw it as an effort to depoliticize the an-tiracist consciousness underlying the movement.Moreover, as Heiman (1990) has pointed out,environmental (in)equity implies the problem iswith the allocation of pollution and environ-mental hazards, rather than with a particulareconomic system. Activists eventually adoptedthe term Òenvironmental justice,Ó as it was inclu-sive and offered a more politicized conception ofthe problem. While supportive of the environ-mental justice movement, I use the term envi-ronmental racism to highlight racial disparities.At times, I will use Òenvironmental inequitiesÓ torefer to allocation issues.2.Washington v. Davis was an employment discrim-ination suit in which the Court ultimately ruledthat a law that produced a racially disparate im-pact regardless of motive is not unconstitutional.3.Many thanks to John Paul Jones for this insight.4.An oft-cited example of this is Senator JesseHelmÕs 1992 campaign TV ad featuring a whiteworking-class man denied a job, what shouldhave been his job, because of afÞrmative action(Omi and Winant 1994:182).5.This is not to deny the vast differences withinthe categories of ÒwhiteÓ and Òpeople of color.ÓWhites are obviously fragmented by class, gen-der, sexuality, and ethnicity (Brodkin 1998).Likewise, various nonwhite groups are differen-tially racialized. For instance, although AsianAmericans have the highest incomes of all peo-ple of color, they also are frequent targets of hatecrimes. The point is that Òthe color lineÓ remainsa central axis of difference and inequality.6.The following studies included no signiÞcant dis-cussion or problematization of racism: Sadd et al.1999; Boer et al. 1997; Scott et al. 1997; Cutterand Solecki 1996; Yandle and Burton 1996; Bo-wen et al. 1995; Perlin et al. 1995; U.S. GAO1995; Adeola 1994; Anderton et al. 1994a,1994b; Been 1994; Boerner and Lambert 1994;Cutter 1994; Lester et al. 1994; Burke 1993; Hird1993; Szasz et al. 1993; Zimmerman 1993; Mohaiand Bryant 1992; Napton and Day 1992; Cutterand Tiefenbacher 1991; Hurley 1988. But Pol-lock and Vittas (1995), in a useful discussion, re-consider their Þndings in light of alternativeconceptions of racism.7.This does not imply that the researchers them-selves are not familiar with social scientiÞc un-derstandings of race, but only that these ideashave not found their way into the literature.8.In most cases, scholars simply want to establish ifsuch inequities exist, but there has also been amove on the part of both corporations and polit-ically conservative institutions to refute suchclaims (Anderton et al. 1994a, 1994b; Boernerand Lambert 1994; see Goldman 1996). I too, ofcourse, am an ideologically committed scholar,one who would like to reframe the debate froman antiracist perspective.9.I do not include HurleyÕs seminal study of Gary,Indiana in this grouping because it appeared atroughly the same time (1988) as the UCC report(1987). Clearly, he was ahead of his time.10.The notion of racism as an aberration, or as an ir-rationality is an entrenched part of the liberaldiscourse on racism. For a critique, see Crenshawet al. (1995). On the history of racism, see Gold-berg (1993).11.The cases cited are East Bibb Twigs NeighborhoodAssociation v. Macon-Bibb County Planning andZoning Commission. 888 F. 2d 1573 (11th Cir.),afÞrmed 896 F. 2d (11th Cir. 1989), and Bean v.Southwestern Waste Management Corporation, 482F. Supp. 673 S.D. Tex. 1979. In Bean, local resi-dents felt that the siting decision was discrimina-tory but lost because they could not prove
Rethinking Environmental Racism35discriminatory purpose under Washington v.Davis.12.I place the term Òinner cityÓ in quotes to de-note both the fact that it is socially constructedand problematic as a policy and social scienceconcept.13.The work of Anderton et al. (1994a and b) hasbeen widely criticized on several grounds. TheauthorsÕ Þnding of no environmental racism hasbeen challenged on methodological grounds (Been1995), as has their participation in industry-sup-ported research (Goldman 196:132Ð34). None-theless, their emphasis on industrial land use hasincreasingly been corroborated.14.For this study, southern California is limited toLos Angeles and Orange Counties.15.Mexicano refers to persons of Mexican origin,mostly Mexican immigrants; Chicanos to per-sons of Mexican ancestry born in the U.S.; andLatinos, all Latin Americans.16.Although the UCC study was based on 1980census data and is therefore somewhat dated, thispart of the city has only become more Latinoduring the 1980s and 1990s. Latinos now consti-tute upward of 90 percent of the population inthis area (see Allen and Turner 1997).17.Many thanks to Jim Sadd and EnvironmentalData Resources, Inc. for allowing me to use thisdataset. For both Figures 3 and 4, we took envi-ronmental hazards data from Sadd et al. (1999)and Boer et al. (1997) and overlaid it on 1990census data.18.The single largest emitter was an oil reÞnery inTorrance, a mixed, middle-income city (see alsoBurke 1993); at a more reÞned scale, however, itwas found that the neighborhoods immediatelyadjacent to the reÞnery were primarily Latino.19.An important exception might be Superfundsites. Military production is responsible for seri-ous ground and groundwater contamination,such as the Lockheed site in North Hollywood/Burbank, and Rocketdyne in the western SanFernando valley. There has been no systematicstudy of this form of pollution throughout theregion.20.This is an important issue that few have seriouslyaddressedÑthe historic exposure of the whiteworking class. The fact that working-class whitesmay have been disproportionately exposed in thepast does not detract from the argument that en-vironmental racism exists today. Rather, it sug-gests the changing nature of race, and the needto historicize its spatiality.21.This occurred through both a diversion of fundsand a direct subsidy. For instance, the Bradly-Burns Act of 1956 authorized local municipali-ties in California to collect a one-cent sales taxfor their own use. Because many urban residentsshopped in new suburban malls, they in effectsubsidized outlying areas, thereby allowing themto maintain low or nonexistent property taxes(Davis 1992:166).22.I reached these Þgures by averaging the reportedincomes for the following communities as identi-Þed in the Los Angeles Times media market. Forthe inner city, I included the Northeast, East,Central, and Southeast. For the periphery, theSan Fernando Valley, Glendale, South Coast,and Orange County (ÒLos Angeles 1965: Marketand MediaÓ 1965:15, M12).23.An important impetus for this incorporationboom was the planned community of Lakewood,which pioneered a contract-based form of mu-nicipal government (Brill 1996:98). Many com-munities emulated this plan, what has beencalled the ÒLakewoodizationÓ of southern Cali-fornia (Davis 1992:166).24.This is in keeping with studies suggesting thatdespite the growing presence of people of colorin suburbia, they remain segregrated and live inmore marginal suburbs (Phelan and Schneider1996).25.Indeed, the eastside, south central, and northeastcorner of the San Fernando Valley have all beendesignated as Enterprise Zones, in the hopes ofattracting economic development.ReferencesAdeola, F. 1994. Environmental Hazards, Health, andRacial Inequity in Hazardous Waste Distribu-tion. Environment & Behavior 26:99Ð126.Allen, J., and Turner, E. 1997. The Ethnic Quilt: Popu-lation Diversity in Southern California. North-ridge: Center for Geographical Studies, Califor-nia State University Northridge.Almaguer, T. 1994. Racial Fault Lines: The HistoricalOrigins of White Supremacy in California. Berke-ley: University of California Press.Anderson, K. 1987. The Idea of Chinatown: ThePower of Place and Institutional Practice in theMaking of a Racial Category. Annals of the Asso-ciation of American Geographers 77:580Ð98.Anderson, S. 1996. A City Called Heaven. In TheCity, ed. A. Scott and E. Soja, pp. 336Ð64. Berke-ley: University of California Press.Anderton, D.; Anderson, A.; Rossi, P.; Oakes, J.;Fraser, M.; Weber, E.; and Calabrese, E. 1994a.Hazardous Waste Facilities: ÒEnvironmental Eq-uityÓ Issues in Metropolitan Areas. EvaluationReview 18:123Ð40.Anderton, D.; Anderson, A.; Oakes, J; and Fraser, M.1994b. Environmental Equity: The Demograph-ics of Dumping. Demography 31:229Ð48.Armour, J. 1997. Negrophobia and Reasonable Racism.New York: New York University Press.
36PulidoArnold, C. 1998. Planning Milagros: EnvironmentalJustice and Land Use Regulation. Denver Uni-versity Law Review 76(1):1Ð153.Aspen Environmental Group. 1993. PaciÞc PipelineProject: Draft Environmental Impact Report, Exec-utive Summary. California Public Utilities Com-mission.Avila, E. 1998. The Folklore of the Freeway: Space,Culture, and Identity in Postwar Los Angeles.Aztlan 23(1):15Ð32.Babcock, R., and Bosselman, F. 1973. ExclusionaryZoning. New York: Praeger Publishers.Baden, B., and Coursey, D. 1997. The Locality ofWaste Sites within the City of Chicago: A De-mographic, Social and Economic Analysis.Working paper series 97-2. Chicago: Irving B.Harris Graduate School of Public PolicyStudies, University of Chicago.Banks, F. 1956. Industry Puts Up $190,000,000. Mid-winter: Los Angeles Times 75th Anniversary, Jan-uary 3, part 1: 63Ð64.Bean v. Southwestern Waste Management Corporation.1979. 482 F. Supp. 673. S.D. Tex.Been, V. 1995. Analyzing Evidence of EnvironmentalJustice. Journal of Land Use and EnvironmentalLaw 11(1):1Ð36.ÑÑÑ. 1994. Locally Undesirable Land Uses in Mi-nority Neighborhoods: Disproportionate Sitingor Market Dynamics? Yale Law Journal 103:1383Ð1422.ÑÑÑ. 1993. WhatÕs Fairness Got to Do with It? En-vironmental Justice and the Siting of LocallyUndesirable Land Uses. Cornell Law Review78:1001Ð85.Berry, B., ed. 1977. The Social Burdens of Environmen-tal Pollution: A Comparative Metropolitan DataSource. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publications.Blumberg, L., and Gottlieb, B. 1989. Saying No toMass Burn. Environmental Action January/February:28Ð30.Boer, J.; Sadd, J.; Pastor, M.; and Snyder, L. 1997. IsThere Environmental Racism? The Demo-graphics of Hazardous Waste in Los AngelesCounty. Social Science Quarterly 78: 793Ð810.Boerner, C., and Lambert, T. 1994. EnvironmentalJustice? Policy Study 21. St. Louis: Center forthe Study of American Business. Bowden, T., and Mayborn, D. 1939. ConÞdentialityReport of a Survey in Metropolitan Los Angeles,California. For the Division of Research andStatistics, Home Owners Loan Corporation.Records Relating to the City Survey Files,1935Ð40, Record Group 95, Box 101. NationalArchives and Records Administration, CollegePark, MD.Bowen, W.; Salling, M.; Haynes, K.; and Cyran, E.1995. Toward Environmental Justice: SpatialEquity in Ohio and Cleveland. Annals of the As-sociation of American Geographers 85:641Ð63.Brill, A. 1996. Lakewood, California ÒTomorrowlandÓat 40. In Rethinking Los Angeles, ed. M. Dear,E. Schockman, and G. Hise, pp. 97Ð112. Thou-sand Oaks, CA: Sage.Brodkin, K. 1998. How Jews Became White Folks. NewBrunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Bullard, R. 1996. Environmental Justice: ItÕs Morethan Waste Facility Siting. Social Science Quar-terly 77: 493Ð99.ÑÑÑ. 1994. Overcoming Racism in Environmen-tal Decisionmaking. Environment 36(4):10Ð20,39Ð44.ÑÑÑ. 1990. Dumping in Dixie. Boulder, CO: West-view Press.Burke, L. 1993. Environmental Equity in Los Ange-les. MasterÕs thesis, Department of Geography,University of California, Santa Barbara.California Department of Employment, Research andStatistics Division. 1960. Community LaborMarket Surveys. California Historical Society,Los Angeles (LA) Area Chamber of CommerceCollection, Special Collections, Box 71. Uni-versity of Southern California.ÑÑÑ. 1952. Community Labor Market Surveys. Cal-ifornia Historical Society, LA Area Chamber ofCommerce Collection, Box 71. University ofSouthern California.Cheng, L., and Yang, P. 1996. Asians: The ÒModelMinorityÓ Deconstructed. In Ethnic Los Angeles,ed. R. Waldinger and M. Bozorgmehr, pp. 305Ð44. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning.1988. Southeast Los Angeles District Plan.Cohan, C. 1956. Southland Building at New Peak.Midwinter: Los Angeles Times 75th Anniversary.January 3:44Ð45.Cohen, P. 1992. ÒItÕs Racism What DunnitÓ: HiddenNarratives in Theories of Racism. In Race, Cul-ture and Difference, ed. J. Donald and A. Rat-tansi, pp. 62Ð103. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Colten, C. 1986. Industrial Wastes in Southeast Chi-cago: Production and Disposal, 1870Ð1970. En-vironmental Review 10:93Ð106.Cordoba Corp. 1987. Final Application, Eastside Em-ployment Incentive Area. Los Angeles: Commu-nity Development Department, City of LosAngeles.Crenshaw, K.; Gotanda, N.; Peller, G.; and Thomas,K., eds. 1995. Critical Race Theory. New York:New Press.Cutter, S. 1995. Race, Class and Environmental Jus-tice. Progress in Human Geography 19:107Ð18.ÑÑÑ. 1994. The Burdens of Toxic Risks: Are TheyFair? B & E Review OctoberÐDecember:3Ð7.ÑÑÑ and Solecki, W. 1996. Setting EnvironmentalJustice in Space and Place: Acute and ChronicAirborne Toxic Releases in the SoutheasternU.S. Urban Geography 17:380Ð99.ÑÑÑ and Tiefenbacher, M. 1991. Chemical Haz-
Rethinking Environmental Racism37ards in Urban America. Urban Geography 12:417Ð30.Davis, M. 1992. City of Quartz. New York: VintageBooks.De Graff, L. 1970. The City of Black Angels: Emer-gence of the Los Angeles Ghetto, 1890Ð1930.PaciÞc Historical Review 39:323Ð52.Dear, M., and Flusty, S. 1998. Postmodern Urbanism.Annals of the Association of American Geographers88:50Ð72.Delgado, R. 1995. The Rodrigo Chronicles. New York:New York University Press. Devine, P. 1989. Stereotypes and Prejudice: TheirAutomatic and Controlled Components. Per-sonality and Social Psychology 56:5Ð18.Doti, L., and Schweikart, L. 1989. Financing thePostwar Housing Boom in Phoenix and Los An-geles, 1945Ð1960. PaciÞc Historical Review58:173Ð91.East Bibb Twigs Neighborhood Assn. v. Macon-BibbCounty Planning and Zoning Commission. 1989.888 F. 2d 1573 (11th Cir.). Ebner, M. 1987. Re-Reading Suburban America: Ur-ban Population Deconcentration, 1810Ð1980.In American Urbanism, ed. H. Gillette, Jr. and Z.Miller, pp. 227Ð42. Westport, CT: GreenwoodPress.Edsall, T., and Edsall, M. 1991. Chain Reaction. NewYork: W. W. Norton.Fanon, F. 1967. Black Skins, White Masks. New York:Grove Press.Fishman, R. 1987. Bourgeois Utopias. New York: BasicBooks.Flanigan, J. 1999. Downey Takes Lead to Revive Gate-way Cities. Los Angeles Times, June 16: C1, C4.Fogelson, R. 1993. The Fragmented Metropolis: LosAngeles, 1850Ð1930. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press.Foner, E. 1974. Organized Labor and the Black Worker,1619Ð1973. New York: International.Frammolino, R. 1999. Report Lists L.A. Schools ThatPose Toxic Risks. Los Angeles Times, June 26: B1,B5.Frankenberg, R. 1993. White Women, Race Matters.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.Fredrickson, G. 1981. White Supremacy: A Compara-tive Study of Race in American and South AfricanHistory. New York: Oxford University Press.Frey, W., and Liaw, K. 1998. Immigrant Concentra-tion and Domestic Migrant Dispersal: Is Move-ment to Nonmetropolitan Areas ÒWhite FlightÓ?The Professional Geographer 50:215Ð32.Garreau, J. 1991. Edge City: Life on the New Frontier.New York: Doubleday.Garrow, P.; Lau, J.; and Loong, S. 1987. Urban Ecologyand Design for the Eastside Employment IncentiveArea. Los Angeles: Department of City Planning.Gilmore, R. 1998. Globalisation and U.S. PrisonGrowth: From Military Keynesianism to Post-Keynesian Militarism. Race & Class 40(2/3):171Ð88.Gold, M. 1999. A School, Factories and Plenty ofFear. Los Angeles Times, February 27: A1, A20,A21.Goldberg, T. 1993. Racist Culture. Cambridge, MA:Blackwell.Goldman, B. 1996. What Is the Future of Environ-mental Justice? Antipode 28:122Ð41.Gottdiener, M., and Kephart, M. 1995. The Multinu-cleated Metropolitan Region: A ComparativeAnalysis. In Postsuburban California, ed. R.Kling, S. Olin, and M. Poster, pp. 31Ð54. Berke-ley: University of California Press.Guhathakurta, S., and Wichert, M. 1998. Who Paysfor Growth in the City of Phoenix: An Equity-Based Perspective on Suburbanization. UrbanAffairs Review 33:813Ð38.Hamilton, J. 1995. Testing for Environmental Rac-ism: Prejudice, ProÞts, Political Power? Journalof Policy Analysis and Management 14:107Ð32.Harris, C. 1993. Whiteness as Property. Harvard LawReview 106:1709Ð91.Harvey, D. 1985. The Urbanization of Capital. Balti-more: Johns Hopkins University Press.Heiman, M. 1990. From ÒNot in My Backyard!Ó toÒNot in AnybodyÕs Backyard!Ó: Grassroots Chal-lenges to Hazardous Waste Facility Siting. Amer-ican Planning Association Journal 56:359Ð62.Hird, J. 1993. Environmental Policy and Equity: TheCase of Superfund. Journal of Policy Analysis andManagement 12:323Ð43.Hise, G. 2000 forthcoming. Constructing ÒNatureÕsWorkshopÓ: Industrial Districts and Urban Ex-pansion in Southern California, 1910Ð1950.Journal of Historical Geography.ÑÑÑ. 1998. Magnetic Los Angeles. Baltimore: JohnsHopkins University Press.ÑÑÑ. 1993. Home Building and Industrial Decen-tralization in Los Angeles: The Roots of thePostwar Urban Region. Journal of Urban History19(2):95Ð125.Horne, G. 1995. Fire This Time: The Watts Uprisingand the 1960s. Charlottesville: University Pressof Virginia.Hurley, A. 1988. The Social Biases of EnvironmentalChange in Gary, Indiana, 1945Ð1980. Environ-mental Review 12(4):1Ð19.Ignatiev, N. 1995. How the Irish Became White. NewYork: Routledge. Jackson, K. 1980. Race, Ethnicity, and Real EstateAppraisal: The Home Owners Loan Corpora-tion and the Federal Housing Administration.Journal of Urban History 4:419Ð52.Jackson, P., and Penrose, J., ed. 1994. Constructions ofRace, Place, and Nation. Minneapolis: Univer-sity of Minnesota.Johnson, J., and Roseman, C. 1990. Increasing BlackOutmigration from Los Angeles: The Role of
38PulidoHousehold Dynamics and Kinship Systems. An-nals of the Association of American Geographers80:205Ð22.Kaplan, K. 1998. Tech Coast: Entrepreneurs and Of-Þcials Seek to Ride an Innovation Wave to Ri-val That of Silicon Valley. Los Angeles Times,March 9: D1, D12.Kay, J. 1994. CaliforniaÕs Endangered Communitiesof Color. In Unequal Protection, ed. R. Bullard,pp. 155Ð88. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Kirschenman, J., and Neckerman, K. 1991. WeÕdLove to Hire Them, But . . . The Meaning ofRace for Employers. In The Urban Underclass,ed. C. Jenks and P. Peterson, pp. 203Ð32. Wash-ington: Brookings Institution.Kling, R.; Olin, S.; and Poster, M. 1995. The Emer-gence of Postsuburbia: An Introduction. In Post-suburban California, ed. R. Kling, S. Olin, andM. Poster, pp. 1Ð30. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press.Kobayashi, A., and Peake, L. 1994. Unnatural Dis-course: ÒRaceÓ and Gender in Geography. Gen-der, Place & Culture 1:225Ð44.Krieg, E. 1995. A Socio-Historical Interpretation ofToxic Waste Sites: The Case of Greater Boston.American Journal of Economics and Sociology 54:1Ð14.LA Design Action Planning Team. 1990. BoyleHeights, Los Angeles. Planning Department,Box C1518, Los Angeles City Archive.Law, R.; Wolch, J.; and Takahashi, L. 1993. Defense-less Territory: Workers, Communities, and theDecline of Military Production in Los Angeles.Environment and Planning C: Government andPolicy 11:291Ð315.Lawrence, C. 1987. The Id, the Ego and Equal Pro-tection: Reckoning with Unconscious Racism.Stanford Law Review 39:317Ð88.Lester, J.; Allen, D.; Milburn-Lauer, D. 1994. Race,Class, and Environmental Quality: An Exami-nation of Environmental Racism in the Ameri-can States. Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of the Western Political Science Asso-ciation, Albuquerque.Lipsitz, G. 1998. The Possessive Investment in White-ness. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.ÑÑÑ. 1995. The Possesive Investment in White-ness: Racialized Social Democracy and theÒWhiteÓ Problem in American Studies. Ameri-can Quarterly 47:369Ð87.Lockheed Aircraft Corporation. 1953. 168 Commu-nities Contribute to Lockheed Leadership. TheLos Angeles Times Annual Midwinter, January 2.California Historical Society, LA Area Cham-ber of Commerce Collection, Box 118. Univer-sity of Southern California.Los Angeles Central Manufacturing District. 1923.Central Manufacturing District of Los Angeles.California Historical Society, LA Area Cham-ber of Commerce Collection, University ofSouthern California.Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce. 1964. The Re-searcher: 1964 Statistical Summary. CaliforniaHistorical Society, LA Area Chamber of Com-merce Collection, Box 64. University of South-ern California. ÑÑÑ. Industrial Department. 1934. General Indus-trial Report of Los Angeles County, California.California Historical Society, LA Area Cham-ber of Commerce Collection, Special Collec-tions, University of Southern California.ÑÑÑ. 1929. General Industrial Report of Los AngelesCounty, CA and Surrounding Communities. Cali-fornia Historical Society, LA Area Chamber ofCommerce Collection, Special Collections,University of Southern California.ÑÑÑ. 1926. Facts about Industrial Los Angeles: Na-tureÕs Workshop. California Historical Society,LA Area Chamber of Commerce Collection,Special Collections, University of SouthernCalifornia.ÑÑÑ. 1925. Industrial Communities of Los AngelesMetropolitan Area. California Historical Society,LA Area Chamber of Commerce Collection,Special Collections, University of SouthernCalifornia.Los Angeles 1965: Market and Media. 1965. Los Ange-les Times. California Historical Society, LAArea Chamber of Commerce Collection, Box118. University of Southern California.Malnic, E., and Ramos, G. 1997. Explosion Kills 4,Injures 25 at L.A. Toy Factory. Los AngelesTimes, November 6: A1, A30, A31.Massey, Doreen. 1994. Space, Place, and Gender. Min-neapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Massey, Douglas, and Denton, N. 1993. AmericanApartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Un-derclass. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.McGurty, E. 1995. The Construction of EnvironmentalJustice: Warren County North Carolina. Ph.D.dissertation. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.Miller, G. 1981. Cities by Contract: The Politics of Mu-nicipal Incorporation. Cambridge: MIT Press.Mohai, P., and Bryant, B. 1992. Environmental Rac-ism: Reviewing the Evidence. In Race and the In-cidence of Environmental Hazards, ed. B. Bryantand P. Mohai, pp. 163Ð246. Boulder, CO: West-view Press.Morales, R., and Ong, P. 1993. The Illusion ofProgress: Latinos in Los Angeles. In Latinos in aChanging Economy, ed. R. Morales and F. Bon-illa, pp. 55Ð84. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Morrison, P., and Lowry, R. 1994. A Riot of Color:The Demographic Setting. In The Los AngelesRiots, ed. M. Baldassare, pp. 19Ð46. Boulder,CO: Westview Press.Myrdal, G. 1944. An American Dilemma: The Negro
Rethinking Environmental Racism39Problem and Modern Democracy. New York:Harper and Row.Napton, M., and Day, F. 1992. Polluted Neighbor-hoods in Texas, Who Lives There? Environment& Behavior 24:508Ð26.Newton, M. 1998. L.A. to Get $3.3 million for Pollu-tion Cleanup. Los Angeles Times, March 18: B1,B8.Oliver, M., and Shapiro, T. 1995. Black Wealth, WhiteWealth. New York: Routledge.Oliver, M.; Johnson, J.; and Farrell, W. 1993. Anat-omy of a Rebellion: A Political-Economic Anal-ysis. In Reading Rodney King, Reading Urban Up-rising, ed. R. Gooding-Williams, pp. 117Ð41.New York: Routledge.Omi, M. 1992. Shifting the Blame: Racial Ideologyand Politics in the Post-Civil Rights Era. CriticalSociology 18:77Ð98.ÑÑÑ and Winant, H. 1994. Racial Formation in theUnited States. New York: Routledge.Ong, P., and Blumenberg, E. 1993. An UnnaturalTrade-Off: Latinos and Environmental Justice.In Latinos in a Changing U.S. Economy, ed. R.Morales and F. Bonilla, pp. 207Ð25. NewburyPark, CA: Sage.Parson, D. 1984. Organized Labor and the HousingQuestion: Public Housing, Suburbanization andUrban Renewal. Society and Space 1:75Ð86.Perlin, S.; Setzer, R.; Creason, J.; and Sexton, K.1995. Distribution of Industrial Air Emissionsby Income and Race in the United States: AnApproach Using the Toxic Release Inventory.Environmental Science Technology 29(1):69Ð80.Phelan, T., and Schneider, M. 1996. Race, Ethnicity,and Class in American Suburbs. Urban AffairsReview 31:659Ð80.Pollock, P., and Vittas, M. 1995. Who Bears the Bur-dens of Environmental Pollution? Race, Ethnic-ity and Environmental Equity in Florida. SocialScience Quarterly 76:294Ð310.Pulido, L. 1996. A Critical Review of the Methodol-ogy of Environmental Racism Research. Anti-pode 28(2):142Ð59.ÑÑÑ; Sidawi, S.; and Vos, R. 1996. An Archaeol-ogy of Environmental Racism in Los Angeles.Urban Geography 17(5):419Ð39.Quadagno, J. 1994. The Color of Welfare. New York:Oxford University Press.Roediger, D. 1991. The Wages of Whiteness. NewYork: Verso.Romo, R. 1983. History of a Barrio: East Los Angeles.Austin: University of Texas Press.Roseman, C., and Lee, S. 1998. Linked and Indepen-dent African American Migration from Los An-geles. The Professional Geographer 50:204Ð14.Sabagh, G., and Bozorgmehr, M. 1996. PopulationChange: Immigration and Ethnic Transforma-tion. In Ethnic Los Angeles, ed. R. Waldinger andM. Bozorgmehr, pp. 79Ð107. New York: Sage.Sadd, J.; Pastor, M.; Boer, J.; and Snyder, L. 1999.Every Breath You Take . . . The Demographicsof Point Source Air Pollution in Southern Cali-fornia. Economic Development Quarterly 13(2):107Ð23.Sahagun, L. 1989. Toxic Neighbors: Measure WouldForce Metal Platers out of Residential Areas. LosAngeles Times, August 28: Metro 1, 6.Sanchez, G. 1993. Becoming Mexican American: Eth-nicity, Culture and Identity in Chicano Los Ange-les, 1900Ð1945. New York: Oxford.Saxton, A. 1971. The Indispensable Enemy. Berkeley:University of California Press.Schiesl, M. 1995. Designing the Model Community:The Irvine Company and Suburban Develop-ment, 1950Ð88. In Postsuburban California, ed.R. Kling, S. Olin, and M. Poster, pp. 55Ð91.Berkeley: University of California Press.Scott, A. 1996a. The Manufacturing Economy: Eth-nic and Gender Divisions of Labor. In Ethnic LosAngeles, ed. R. Waldinger and M. Bozorgmehr,pp. 215Ð44. New York: Sage.ÑÑÑ. 1996b. High Technology Industrial Develop-ment in the San Fernando Valley and VenturaCounty. In The City, ed. A. Scott and E. Soja,pp. 276Ð310. Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress.ÑÑÑ. 1990. Metropolis: From Division of Labor toUrban Form. Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress.Scott, M.; Cutter, S.; Menzel, C.; and Minhe, J. 1997.Spatial Accuracy of the EPAÕs EnvironmentalHazards Databases and Their Use in Environ-mental Equity Analysis. Applied GeographicStudies 1(1):45Ð61.Sharpe, W., and Wallock, L. 1994. Bold New City orBuilt Up ÕBurb? RedeÞning Contemporary Sub-urbia. American Quarterly 46:1Ð30.Smith, N. 1993. Homeless/Global: Scaling Places. InMapping the Futures: Local Cultures, GlobalChange, ed. J. Bird, B. Curtis, T. Putnam, and G.Robertson, pp. 87Ð119. London: Routledge.Smith, S. 1993. Residential Segregation and the Pol-itics of Racialization. In Racism, the City, and theState, ed. M. Cross and M. Keith, pp. 128Ð43.New York: Routledge.Soja, E. 1996. Los Angeles, 1965Ð1992: From Crisis-Generated Restructuring to Restructured-Gen-erated Crisis. In The City, ed. A. Scott and E.Soja, pp. 426Ð62. Berkeley: University of Cali-fornia Press.ÑÑÑ. 1989. Postmodern Geographies. New York:Verso.Szasz, A., and Meuser, M. 1997. Environmental In-equalities: Literature Review and Proposals forNew Directions in Research and Theory. Cur-rent Sociology 45(3): 99Ð120.ÑÑÑ; ÑÑÑ; Aronson, H.; and Fukarai, H. 1993.The Demographics of Proximity to Toxic Re-
40Pulidoleases: The Case of Los Angeles County. PaperPresented at the Meetings of the American So-ciological Association, Miami.United Church of Christ, Commission for Racial Jus-tice. 1987. Toxic Wastes and Race in the UnitedStates. New York: United Church of Christ.U.S. Division of Research and Statistics. 1939. Fed-eral Home Loan Bank Board. Residential Secu-rity Map. Sections 1Ð4. Record Group 95, Box101. National Archives and Records Adminis-tration, College Park, MD.U.S. General Accounting OfÞce. 1995. Hazardousand Nonhazardous Waste: Demographics of PeopleLiving Near Waste Facilities. GAO/RCCDÑ95Ñ84.ÑÑÑ. 1984. Siting of Hazardous Waste LandÞlls andtheir Correlation with Racial and Economic Statusof Surrounding Communities. Washington: Gen-eral Accounting OfÞce.Walker, R. 1981. A Theory of Suburbanization: Cap-italism and the Construction of Urban Space inthe United States. In Urbanization and UrbanPlanning in Capitalist Society, ed. M. Dear and A.Scott, pp. 383Ð429. New York: Methuen.Warren, W. 1986Ð1987. Maps: A Spatial Approachto Japanese American Communities in Los An-geles. Amerasia 13:137Ð51.Washington v. Davis. 1976. 426 U.S. 229, 96 S. Ct.2040.Weeks, P. 1963. 700 March for Integration in Tor-rance Tract. Los Angeles Times, June 30: 1, 12.Woods, C. 1998. Arrested Development: Regional Plan-ning in the Mississippi Delta. New York: Verso.Yandle, T., and Burton, D. 1996. Reexamining Envi-ronmental Justice: A Statistical Analysis of His-torical Waste LandÞll Siting Patterns in Metro-politan Texas. Social Science Quarterly 77:477Ð92.Zimmerman, R. 1994. Issues of ClassiÞcation in Envi-ronmental Equity: How We Manage Is How WeMeasure. Fordham Urban Law Journal 21(3):633Ð69.ÑÑÑ. 1993. Social Equity and EnvironmentalRisk. Risk Analysis 13:649Ð66.Zoning Map Company. 1930. The Los Angeles ZoningAtlas. California Historical Society, LA AreaChamber of Commerce Collection, Box 66,Special Collections, University of SouthernCalifornia.Correspondence: Department of Geography, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0255,email lpulido@usc.edu.
REVIEWSUMMARY◥URBANECOLOGYTheecologicalandevolutionaryconsequencesofsystemicracisminurbanenvironmentsChristopherJ.Schell*,KarenDyson,TracyL.Fuentes,SimoneDesRoches,NyeemaC.Harris,DanicaSterudMiller,CleoA.Woelfle-Erskine,MaxR.LambertBACKGROUND:Humanactivityanddecisionsdrivealllifeincities.Worldwide,citiesarecharacterizedbyextensiveanthropogenictrans-formationofthelandscape,modificationofbiogeochemicalprocesses,andalterationofbiologicalcommunities.Underlyingallofthesecharacteristicsofurbanecosystemsisanextra-ordinaryvariabilityinhumanagency,culture,power,andidentity.Thoughourunderstand-ingofcitiesasecologicalsystemswithdistinctivecommunityassemblagesandlandscapefeatureshasbroadenedcon-siderably,researchersstillrarelyconsiderthefullrangeofsocialdriversthataffectlandscapeheterogeneity.Oneofthemostcharacteristicattributesofcitiesissocialinequality—specificallytheunevendistri-butionofresourcesandwealthprimarilyunderpinnedbystructuralracismandclassism.Becausestructuralinequalitiesformthefoundationofcityinfrastructure,urbandevelopment,governance,manage-ment,andlandscapeheterogeneity,in-equalityamonghumansdefinestheecologicalsettingandevolutionarytra-jectoriesforallurbanorganisms.Morebroadly,systematicinequitieshavepro-foundimpactsonglobalbiologicalchangeandbiodiversityloss.Manyemergentso-cialinequitypatternsareprincipallydrivenbysystemicracismandwhitesupremacy.Hence,centeringracialandeconomicjus-ticeinurbanbiologicalresearchandcon-servationisimperative.Here,weshowhowsocialinequalitiesshapeecologicalandevolutionaryprocessesinU.S.citiesandhighlighttheneedforresearchthatintegratesjusticeperspectiveswitheco-logicalandevolutionarydynamics.ADVANCES:Althougharichliteraturedem-onstrateshowhistoricalandcontemporaryinequitiesemergeandpersistinhumansystems,atransdisciplinaryperspectivethatin-tegratessocialandculturalprocessesintoanurbaneco-evolutionaryframeworkremainsunexplored.Intoday’sworld,humansoftenshapetheecologicalconditionsthatdrivepat-ternsofspeciesdistributionandevolution.Dis-tinctiveurbanlandscapefeatures—includingreducedhabitatpatchsize,novelplantcom-munities,andincreaseddistanceamongsim-ilarpatches—affectkeyecologicalprocessessuchaspopulationdynamics,speciesinter-actions,andfoodwebstructure.Recentre-searchemphasizesthatsocioeconomicanddemographicfactorspredictwithin-cityvar-iationindiverseenvironmentalconditions.Humansdirectlycontrolurbanplant,animal,andmicrobecommunities.Further,decisionsabouturbanresourcemanagementareoftendictatedbyasubsetofindividualsandinsti-tutionswithsocialoreconomiccapital.Thesedecisionscanbiasthedistributionofsocietalbenefitsderivedfromnature.Dominantso-cialgroupsalsoenactandenforcepoliciesandsocietalnormsthatexacerbatesocialanden-vironmentalinequities.Wealthierandpredom-inantlywhiteneighborhoodsgenerallyhavemoregreenspace,moretrees,andgreaterplantdiversitythanlessaffluentneighborhoods.Inaddition,synergiesamongpollution(e.g.,light,noise,chemical),resourcedistribution,subsi-dizedpredators,andnon-nativespeciespresentnovelchallengestoorganisms,whichmustrespondbymovingelsewhere,acclimatizing,adapting,orfacinglocalextirpation.Thesestressorsareoftenstratifiedaccordingtoracialand/orethnicbackgroundsandwealth.Further,intraspecificvariationinphenotypicandgenotypictraitsofurbanspeciesmayreflecthuman-induceddisturbances.Theserelationshipshighlightthepotentialforbothadaptiveandneutralevolutionaryprocessesinurbansubpopulationstovaryacrossneigh-borhoodswithincities.OUTLOOK:Stratificationofwealthandpropertyownershipshapesthedistributionandman-agementofurbanspaces,thusconstructingtheurbanecosystem.Systemicracismandclassismdriveurbanwealthstratifica-tion,emphasizingtheneedtoaddressinequality-drivenenvironmentalhetero-geneityinurbanecologicalandevolu-tionarystudies.Residentialsegregationandcolonialannexation(aswellasgen-trificationanddisplacement)generatepredictableecologicalpatternsinvegeta-tion,airandwaterquality,microclimate,soils,andthebuiltenvironmentthroughtherapidinfluxofresourcestospecificareas.Accountingforsuchprocesseswillallowmoreaccurateestimationoftheeffectofhumansonurbanorganisms.Deconstructingthecomplexandnuancedattributesofsocialinequalityinaffect-ingbiologicalphenomenacanalsoin-formmoreequitableandsustainableurbanplanningsolutionsthatimple-mentanti-racistandjustice-centeredactions.Racialoppressionandeconomicinjusticearejeopardizingurbanandglobalecosystemhealthandfunction.Structuralracismandclassismarefur-therlayeredwithotherinequalities,thusnecessitatinganintersectionalapproachtourbanecology.Deeperintegrationacrossthenaturalandsocialsciencesisthereforeanurgentpriorityforad-vancingourunderstandingofurbanecosystemsanddevelopingappliedsol-utionsthatpromoteenvironmentaljus-tice,equity,andsustainability.▪RESEARCHSchelletal.,Science369,1446(2020)18September20201of1Thelistofauthoraffiliationsisavailableinthefullarticleonline.*Correspondingauthor.Email:cjschell@uw.eduCitethisarticleasC.J.Schelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020).DOI:10.1126/science.aay4497READTHEFULLARTICLEAThttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay4497ResourcedistributionLandscapeheterogeneityBiological communitydiversityResidentialsegregationResidentialsegregationandsystemicracismhavesubstan-tialimpactsonecologicalandevolutionarydynamicsincities.Government-sponsoredpoliciesstratifyneighborhoodsonthebasisofraceandclass(e.g.,through“redlining”intheUnitedStates,representedherebytheredcircle),whichresultsinrestrictedaccesstosocialservicesandenvironmentalamenitiesforracialand/orethnicminoritiesandlow-incomecommunities(redarrows).Habitatquantityandqualitytendtobegreaterinwealthierandpredominantlywhiteneighborhoods(greenarrows),whichleadstovariationsinecologicalandevolutionaryprocesses,underscoringtheinfluenceofsystemicracismandinequalityindrivingurbanlandscapecharacteristics.
REVIEW◥URBANECOLOGYTheecologicalandevolutionaryconsequencesofsystemicracisminurbanenvironmentsChristopherJ.Schell1*,KarenDyson2,3,TracyL.Fuentes2,SimoneDesRoches2,4,NyeemaC.Harris5,DanicaSterudMiller1,CleoA.Woelfle-Erskine6,MaxR.Lambert7Urbanareasaredynamicecologicalsystemsdefinedbyinterdependentbiological,physical,andsocialcomponents.Theemergentstructureandheterogeneityofurbanlandscapesdrivesbioticoutcomesintheseareas,andsuchspatialpatternsareoftenattributedtotheunequalstratificationofwealthandpowerinhumansocieties.Despitethesepatterns,fewstudieshaveeffectivelyconsideredstructuralinequalitiesasdriversofecologicalandevolutionaryoutcomesandhaveinsteadfocusedonindicatorvariablessuchasneighborhoodwealth.Inthisanalysis,weexplicitlyintegrateecology,evolution,andsocialprocessestoemphasizetherelationshipsthatbindsocialinequities—specificallyracism—andbiologicalchangeinurbanizedlandscapes.Wedrawonexistingresearchtolinkracistpractices,includingresidentialsegregation,totheheterogeneouspatternsoffloraandfaunaobservedbyurbanecologists.Inthefuture,urbanecologyandevolutionresearchersmustconsiderhowsystemsofracialoppressionaffecttheenvironmentalfactorsthatdrivebiologicalchangeincities.Conceptualintegrationofthesocialandecologicalscienceshasamassedconsiderablescholarshipinurbanecologyoverthepastfewdecades,providingasolidfoundationforincorporatingenvironmentaljusticescholarshipintourbanecologicalandevolutionaryresearch.Suchanundertakingisnecessarytodeconstructurbanization’sbiophysicalpatternsandprocesses,informequitableandanti-racistinitiativespromotingjusticeinurbanconservation,andstrengthencommunityresiliencetoglobalenvironmentalchange.Urbanecosystemsencompasscomplexfeedbacksbetweenhumanactivity,builtandplantedinfrastructure,andnaturallandscapesthatdrivespecificbiologicalprocesses(1–3).Interactionsbetweenso-cialandnaturalsystemsproducedistinctivebiogeochemicalandbiophysicalsignatures(4,5)thatalterthedemography,lifehistories,diversity,behaviors,anddistributionsofnon-humanspecies(6,7).Resultantenvironmentalconditions(e.g.,urbanheatislandeffects,foodsubsidies,andpollution)candrivephenotypicshifts,emigration,orextinctionwithinandacrossanimalandplantpopulations(8,9).Citieshave,accordingly,becomefociforre-searchonbiologicalresponsestonovel,rapidlychangingenvironments(8–13).Recenturbanecosystemsresearchcaninformsustainablesolutionsthatpromotebiodiversity,humanwell-being,andurbanresilienceinthefaceofglobalenvironmentalchange(3,14–16).How-ever,leveragingurbanecosystemsasconduitsofsustainability,conservation,andinnova-tion,requiresacomprehensiveunderstandingoftheunderlyingcomponents,hierarchicalstructures,andkeydriversofurbanfunctions(Fig.1)(3,7,16,17).Sinceitsinception,thefieldofurbanecol-ogyhasframedcitiesasquintessentialsocio-ecologicalsystems(i.e.,complexadaptivesystemsorcoupledhumanandnaturalsystems)wheresocialprocessesalterecologicalpropertiesthatreciprocallyinfluencehumansocieties(18–20).Theseformativeurbanecologymodelsplacedhumandecisionsandinstitutionsatthecoreofurbanecosystems,emphasizingtheneedtoquantifyspatialandtemporalfeedbackswithincities(17,21).Forexample,theNationalScienceFoundation’surbanLong-TermEcologicalRe-search(LTER)programsinPhoenix,Arizona,andBaltimore,Maryland,UnitedStates(i.e.,theCentralArizona–PhoenixLTERprogramandtheBaltimoreEcosystemStudy,respec-tively)haveestablishedlinksbetweensocialandecologicalsystemsbyoverlayinghabitatpatchtypeswithdemographicinformationsuchasneighborhoodwealth,housingdensity,andimpervioussurfacecover(2,3,10,16).Socioeconomicstatushasbeenastandardmetricformanysocio-ecologicalstudies,asitcombinessocialfactorssuchasculture,race,occupation,education,andsocietalpowerintoacomplexaggregatedmeasure(22,23).Manysocialvariablesthatcontributetosocioeconomicstatusandrelatedenvironmentalvariabilityaretheresultofhistoricalgovernmentandsocietalactions(24,25).Recentstudieshavebeguntoaddressthevariedcontributionsofseveralsocialfactors(e.g.,race,sex,andage)toecologicalheterogeneityincities(25–28).However,socialinequalityremainsinsufficientlystudiedasakeydriverofecologicalandevolutionarychangeincities(Fig.1)(15,21,24).Socialinequalityistheunequaldistributionorallocationofwealthandresourcestospecificsocio-culturalgroups.Suchimbalancescontributetosubstantialin-justices(i.e.,socialinequities;Fig.1)thatpriv-ilegecertainindividualsoverothers(29–31).Inequalityandinequitydisproportionatelyaf-fectwhichindividualsownandaccessland,functionallyrestrictingthepeoplewhobecometheprimarydriversofurbanecosystemstruc-tureandfunction(32,33).Urbansocialinequalitystemsfromhistor-icalandcontemporarypowerimbalancesandproducesdeleteriouseffectsthatareoftenintersectional,involvingrace,economicclass,gender,language,sexuality,nationality,ability,religion,andage(34).Variousecologicalattri-butesincitiesareprincipallygovernedbythespatialandtemporalscaleofsocialinequities(23).Forinstance,theunevendistributionofurbanheatislands(35–39),vegetationandtreecanopycover(27,28,40,41),environmentalhazardsandpollutants(42–46),andaccesstohealthywaterways(47,48),aswellastherel-ativeproportionofnativetointroducedspe-cies(49,50),arestronglydictatedbystructuralracismandclassism(Fig.1)(21,31,32,51).Concurrently,theenvironmentaljusticeliter-aturehaslongarticulatedtheeconomic,health,andenvironmentalimplicationsofstructuralracismincities(52–55).Integratingthecon-tributionsofsocialinequitiestourbanenviron-mentalstructureisthereforecrucialforinformingourunderstandingofbiologicalprocessesincities(33,55,56).Hereweprovideatransdisciplinarysynthe-sisonhowsocialinequities—andspecificallysystemicracism—serveasprincipaldriversofecologicalandevolutionaryprocessesbyshapinglandscapeheterogeneity(Fig.1).Wedrawonthesocialandpoliticalsciencestospecificallystresshowunderstandingsystemicracismandracialoppression,rootedinsettlercolonialismandwhitesupremacy,isessentialforadvancingresearchinurbanecologyandevolutionarybiology.First,wereviewthesocio-ecologicaleffectsofwealthdisparitiesincities.Wethendescribehowsystemicracismdrivesinequitablepatternsinwealth,health,andenvironmentalheterogeneity,notingthatintersectionalitywithotheridentities(e.g.,gender,sexualorientation,andindigeneity)mayhaveadditiveimpactsonurbanstructure(29,34,57).Weproposehypotheseslinkingsystemicracismtourbanecologicalandevolutionarypatternsandpro-cesses.WeclosebyillustratinghowcenteringRESEARCHSchelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September20201of111SchoolofInterdisciplinaryArtsandSciences,UniversityofWashington,Tacoma,WA98402,USA.2CollegeofBuiltEnvironments,UniversityofWashington,Seattle,WA98195,USA.3Dendrolytics,Seattle,WA98195,USA.4SchoolofAquaticandFisheriesSciences,UniversityofWashington,Seattle,WA98195,USA.5AppliedWildlifeEcologyLab,DepartmentofEcologyandEvolutionaryBiology,UniversityofMichigan,AnnArbor,MI48109,USA.6SchoolofMarineandEnvironmentalAffairs,CollegeoftheEnvironment,UniversityofWashington,Seattle,WA98195,USA.7DepartmentofEnvironmentalScience,Policy,andManagement,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley,CA94720,USA.*Correspondingauthor.Email:cjschell@uw.edu
Schelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September20202of11Inequality: Unequal distribution of wealth and resources across social groups.Inequity: Unjust allocation of resources driven by power dynamics discrimination, stereotypes, and systemic biases.Racism: Stereotypical norms that disadvantage communities of color (typically Black, Asian, Latinx, and Indigenous groups), including the interdependent forces of “prejudice plus power” that dictate how racial inequalities persist even after elimination of racist actors or policies. CStructural racism& classismClassism: Discriminatory actions based on wealth, income, or social class, usually directed at barring people from working class middle or upper classes.Intersectionality: The intersection, interaction, and compounding of marginalized identities, causing individuals and communities at such intersections to experience greater social inequities.Impervious surface coverEnvironmental pollutantsGreen space & tree coverUrban heat islandsResource distributionLandscape heterogeneityEcological & evolutionarypatterns & processesAEmploymentrightsImmigrationpolicyResidentalsegregationResourceallocationPoliticalrepresentationLaw enforcementSystemic biasesUrbanconservationEqual access to environmental services and protection from disservices in all places where people live, work, learn, and play.Environmental justiceFair and equitable (re)distributionof power, opportunities, resources, and wealthBSocial justiceCivilrightsDisease dynamicsFig.1.Structuralracismandclassismunderpinlandscapeheterogeneityincities.(A)Consciousandunconscioussystemicbiasesandstereotypescontributetoshapinginstitutionalpoliciesthatdriveandexacerbateracistandclassiststructuresinurbansystems(e.g.,lawenforcement,residentialsegregation,andgentrification).Theemergentpropertiesofthesestructuralinequalitieshavesubstantialimpactsonmultipleattributesacrosstheurbanlandscape,includingimpervioussurfacecover,urbanheatislands,greenspaceandtreecover,environmentalpollutants,resourcedistribution,anddiseasedynamics.Thesephysicalandbiologicalcharacter-isticshaveknownimpactsontheecologicalpatternsandevolutionaryprocessesofurbanorganisms.(B)Incorporatingenvironmentaljusticeprinciplesandcivilrightsintoecologicalandevolutionaryapplicationsisanurgentpriorityforpositivelyaffectingthelong-termsuccessofurbanconservationandsustainability.(C)Definitionsofkeytermsforunderstand-ingtheinterconnectednessofracism,classism,andintersectionalityasrelatedtosysteminequality.RESEARCH|REVIEW
environmentaljusticeandanti-racistactivisminbiologicalresearchisapriorityforurbanconservation(55,56).AlthoughwepredominantlyfocusonworkfromNorthAmerica,theglobalubiquityofsocialinequalityandsystemicracismacrosscitiessuggeststhatoursynthesisisbroadlyapplicable(58–60).Addressingsystemicandstructuralracisminbothcitiesandthesci-entificcommunityisnecessarytocompre-hensivelyunderstandurbanecologicalandevolutionarydynamics,conservebiodiversity,improvehumanhealthandwell-being,andpromotejusticeinnatureandsociety.Socio-ecologicaleffectsofwealthHouseholdandneighborhoodwealtharecur-rentlythemostcommonsocialvariablesthatecologistsusetodescribewithin-citybiodi-versitypatterns,especiallyinresidentialneigh-borhoods(26,61–64).Wealth—specificallymedianhouseholdincome—hasrepeatedlyemergedasakeyexplanatoryvariableforpredictingurbanecologicalpatterns.Oneofthemostwell-knownandrobusthypotheseslinkinghouseholdincomeandecology—theluxuryeffect—suggeststhaturbanbiodiversity,andplantdiversityinparticular,ispositivelycorrelatedwithneighborhoodwealth(61,63).Thewealth–biodiversitycovarianceispred-icatedonafundamentaltenetofurbaneco-systems:Humansmanageurbanareasand,astheultimateecosystemengineers,cangreatlyaugmentorremoveresourcelimitationsthatfavorgrowthandabundanceofsomespeciesoverothers(32,61).Asaresult,householdswithgreaterdiscretionaryincomeandcapital,highereducationlevels,andreducedpressureforessentialneedsexertstrongerinfluenceonplantassemblages,establishingaresidentialecologicalmosaicbasedonsocioeconomics(32,50,62,65).Theluxuryeffectisparticularlypronouncedinaridecoregionsandbiomesandintensifieswithincreasingurbanization,vegetationloss,andwealthgaps(21,35).InitialsupportfortheluxuryeffectcamefromPhoenix,Arizona,withobservedpositivecorrelationsbetweenhouse-holdincomeandwoodyperennialdiversity(61).Studiesinvestigatingtheluxuryeffectgloballyhaveimplicatedwealthasastrongcorrelateoffaunalandfloraldiversity(26,63),relativevegetationcover(27,40),speciesabun-dances(49),andthedistributionofabioticattributes[suchasurbanheatislands(35,66)andenvironmentalhazards(44)]incities.Re-centmeta-analyseshavesupportedthewealth–biodiversityphenomenonyetemphasizedthatthecausalsocialandpoliticalmechanismsbe-hindthesepatternsareseldomexplored(26,64).VegetationcoverandbiodiversityAffluenturbanresidentialneighborhoodsgen-erallyhavegreatervegetationcover,canopycover,andplantdiversitythantheirlesswealthycounterparts(27,63,67).Publicurbanforests,recreationalparks,andprivategreenspacesalsotendtobelargerandmoreestablishedwitholdertreesandvegetationthatprovidegreaternichespacetosupportbiodiversityatothertrophiclevels(49,68,69).Forinstance,strongpositivecorrelationsexistbetweenurbantreecoverandhouseholdincomeforsevenmajorU.S.metropolitanregions(40).GeneralvegetationcoverinLosAngeles,California(27),andthedistributionofurbanforeststhrough-outCookCounty,Illinois(41),arealsoposi-tivelyaffectedbyincreasingwealth,aswellasseveralothersocioeconomicfactors(e.g.,racialcomposition,education,andhomeownership).Inaddition,recentworksuggeststhatinter-activeeffectsbetweenhousingageandincomepredicttreebiodiversity,withmoreestablishedhomesinhigh-incomeneighborhoodsexhibit-inggreaterdiversity(27).Lawnsareanunusualcase:Wealthierresidentsintensivelymanagetheirlawnstobeverygreen(70)andhavefewtonospeciesotherthanturfgrasses(71).Asaresult,somestudieshavefoundneutralorneg-ativewealth–plantbiodiversityrelationshipsintheseareas(72,73).Luxuryeffectscustomarilyscalefromthehouseholdtotheneighborhoodlevel.Arecentstudyfoundthatyardsinwealthierneighbor-hoodsconsistentlyhadgreaterabundancesanddiversityoffloweringplants,trees,andnon-nativespecies(65).Similarly,individualhomeownerswithlandscapingprioritiespri-marilydrivenbycost(i.e.,theneedforcheaperplants)havelawnswithhigherrelativepropor-tionsofnon-nativeplantspecieswithlowerfunctionaldiversity(50).Theserecentstudiesillustratehowsocioeconomicsdrivevariationamongindividualsandthereforeinfluencechoicesatthehouseholdlevel,whichcanscaleuptoaffectneighborhoodbiodiversity.Thesewealth-drivenimpactsonpatternsofprimaryproducersmayhavesubstantialeffectsonmetacommunitycompositionanddynam-ics.Luxuryeffectsoftenscalefromtheresiden-tialtothecity-widelevel,providingcross-cityevidencethatwealthierU.S.citieshavebetter-resourcedurbanparksystems(74).Whethersuchtrendsinvegetativestructurearecon-sistentacrosscities,orevenacrossbiomes,remainsunexplored.ImpactsonanimalcommunitiesLuxuryeffectsextendbeyondprimarypro-ducers,withrecentstudiessuggestingthatcolonization,speciesrichness,andabundanceofbirdsarerelatedtoneighborhoodwealth(49,75–77).Mostpriorstudieshaveaddressedtheserelationshipsinbirdsinmultiplecitiesacrosstheglobe.Forinstance,birdcommunityrichnesspositivelycorrelateswithmedianhouseholdincomeacrossmultipleurbancen-tersinSouthAfrica(49).However,negativeincome–richnessrelationshipsinhighlyur-banizedlandscapesimplythathighlybuiltyetexpensivedowntowncenterscandeterorpreventsuccessfulcolonizationandpersist-ence(49).OtherstudiesinPhoenix,Arizona,similarlyfoundthatbirddiversitywasgreatestinparksandresidentialyardsinhigh-incomeneighborhoods,apatternprimarilyexplainedbyanincreasedrelativeabundanceofnativedesertspeciesandproximitytoundevelopeddesertlandscapes(75,76).Further,recentevi-dencefrom45,000observationsof160passer-inespeciesfoundacrossU.S.citiesshowsthatincreasinghouseholdincomepredictsgreaterabundancesofmigratoryspecies,aswellasgreaterabundancesofsmaller,shorter-livedbirds(77).Theseresultsaresomeofthefirstempiricalexampleslinkingtheluxuryeffecttoevolutionaryecology.Fewstudieshaveaddressedtheluxuryef-fectinotheranimaltaxa,thoughevidenceim-pliesthattheseeffectspersistacrossmultipleclades.Evidenceforcoyotes(Canislatrans)andraccoons(Procyonlotor)throughoutChicago,Illinois,UnitedStates,suggeststhatcarnivoresaremorelikelytocolonizeandpersistinwealthierneighborhoods(68).Householdin-comeisalsoastrongpredictoroflizardspe-ciesrichnessinPhoenix,Arizona,withotherfactorssuchastrafficdensityandsurfacetem-peratureshavingweakeffects(78).Evidencefromarthropodresearchsuggeststhatrichnessinhigh-incomeneighborhoodsacrossNorthCarolinaisgreaterregardlessofvegetationcoveratthepropertylevel(69).Wealth–animalrichnesstrendscanalsoex-tendbeyondcitylimits.Redbat(Lasiurusborealis)andeveningbat(Nycticeiushumeralis)activityispositivelycorrelatedtohouseholdincome,regardlessoflandcovermetrics(79).Activitypatternsofhoarybats(Lasiuruscinereus),however,decreasewithincreasingneighborhoodincome,whichsuggeststhatluxuryeffectsaremoresalientforsomespe-ciesthanothers(79).UrbanheatislandsandairpollutionHeatisunevenlydistributedwithincities:Temperaturesaretypicallygreaterinlower-incomeneighborhoodsthaninhigher-incomeareas(35,36).Low-incomeneighborhoodshavereducedtreeandvegetationcoverandincreasedimpervioussurfacecover,whichcontributetohighersurfacetemperaturesinPhoenix,Arizona(35,66);Baltimore,Maryland(36);andothercitiesworldwide(38,39,80).Giventhecoolingcapacityoftrees,apparentluxuryeffectsontreeandvegetationcovercansubstantiallyimpedeenvironmentalcoolinginlow-incomeneighborhoods,makingresidentsparticularlyvulnerabletoheat-relatedillnesses(36,81).Suchwealth–tree–heataxeshaveemergedinothercountriesaswell,includingCanada(82),Brazil(83),andSouthAfricaSchelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September20203of11RESEARCH|REVIEW
(84,85).Heterogeneityinthedistributionofurbanheatislands,andassociatedhealthoutcomes,isthusadirectconsequenceoftheluxuryeffect(24,35).Otherenvironmentaldisamenities,espe-ciallypollutants,alsoreflecttheluxuryeffect.Airpollutionsourcesareoftencolocatednearlow-incomeneighborhoods;consequently,low-incomeresidentsfrequentlyhavehigherriskofexposuretoandvulnerabilitiesassociatedwithairpollutants.Forinstance,low-incomeresi-dentsthroughoutNorthCarolina(44)andmultiplecitiesintheNortheasternUnitedStates(86)experiencegreaterexposuretoatmosphericparticulatematter.Low-incomeresidentsalsoexperiencegreaterambientnitrogendioxideconcentrationsinMontreal,Canada,thoughsomehigh-incomeareasinthedowntownregionsimilarlyexperiencein-creasedambientconcentrationsofthispollu-tant(87).Further,meta-analysisofdatafromtheAmericanHousingSurveysuggeststhatlow-incomehouseholdshaveelevatedindoorconcentrationsofnitrogendioxideandpartic-ulatematter(42).Researchonheatislandsandpollutionsup-portstheideathatinequalityinneighborhoodwealthleadstoadiversityofenvironmentalhazardsandthatthesehazardscompoundtocreatedistinctive,challengingenvironmentalpatches.LimitationsoftheluxuryeffectTheluxuryeffectisfarfromuniversalacrosssystemsandtaxa,andtheunderlyingpro-cessesandcausalmechanismsthatcontrib-utetoemergentwealth–ecologyrelationshipsareseldomaddressed(21,40).Inameta-analysisofassociationsbetweenwealthandbiodiversity,thedirectionalrelationship(posi-tive,negative,ornorelationship)betweenbiodiversityandwealthvariesmarkedlyac-cordingtodifferencesinsocialconditions,whichincludeculturalnorms,individualandcommunitypreferences,andmunicipalpolicies(26).Apairofsimilarmeta-analysesconcludedthatrelationshipsbetweenincomeinequalityandurbanforestcoverarenotalwaysnote-worthy,withneighborhoodracialcompositionexplainingdivergentconditionsinvegetationcover(64,88).Thehistoryofurbandevelopment,individual-levelchoices,andsocietalnormsalsodistortspotentialrelationshipsbetweenwealthandbiodiversity.Forinstance,insomecities,wealthierneighborhoodsmayhaveahigherrelativeproportionofhigh-risestructuresandbuiltdowntownareasthatseverelylimittheamountofvegetatedcover,reducingfunctionalhabitatspaceandbiodiversity(26).Wealthierneigh-borhoodsmayalsoenactpoliciesthatreducevegetationdiversityandmandatetheprolifer-ationofmonoculturelawnsthatyieldconsid-erableenvironmentalhomogeneityandservetosimilarlyreducebiodiversity(26).Moreover,refinedanalyticalapproachesmayhelptodis-entanglethecontributionsofwealth,culture,andothersocioeconomicfactorstoecology.Forexample,evidenceinNewYorkCitysuggeststhatresidentialcanopycoverisbestexplainedasasignalofsocialstatus(the“ecology-of-prestigehypothesis”)(32).Hence,thecon-vergenceamongpolicy,individualchoices,andsocioeconomicvariablesmaybeabetterpredictorofurbanecologicalvariancethanwealthalone(32).Indeed,recentworkassess-ingtheplantdiversityofresidentialyardssupportsthisconclusion,suggestingthatindividualhomeowners’landscapingprior-itieslargelydictateprivatelawncommunitycomposition(50).Luxuryeffectshavebeenexploredprimarilyinterrestrialsystems,withlessworkinaquatichabitats.Lackofevidenceforaquaticluxuryeffectsinurbanponds,lakes,andriversmaybeduetootherabioticfactorsregulatingwaterwayhealththatdonotnecessarilycor-relatewithwealthdisparities(63).Smallpondsorlakesarealsoseldompresentinlowersocioeconomicareas,functionallyeliminatingpotentialstudiesonaquaticluxuryeffects.Moreover,riverfrontorcoastalenvironmentshaveincreasinglybecomehotspotsforthewealthy,excludinglower-incomecommunitiesandtherebycompoundingostensibleluxuryeffects.Urbanriversandstreamsrunthroughandinterconnecthigh-andlow-incomeareas,sodownstreamhabitatsmaysufferconsequencesofupstreampollutionanderosion.Characteristically,theluxuryeffecthasalsoresidedatthecommunityandecosystemlevel,withfewstudiesinvestigatinghowwealthhet-erogeneityaffectsorganismalandpopulationecology(68,79).Priorstudiesalsopredom-inantlyaddresspatternsbutseldomarticu-latetheunderlyingsociopoliticalprocessesthatcontributetowealth–ecologyrelation-ships.Integratingthestudyofsystemicracismandthatofenvironmentaljusticeshouldemergeasthenextdevelopmentinsocio-ecologicalscholarship.Beyondwealth:Structuralracism,ecology,andevolutionInmultiplecases,neighborhoodracialcom-positioncanbeastrongerpredictorofurbansocio-ecologicalpatternsthanwealth(25,37,88).Forexample,exposuretoparticulatematterincitiessuchasLosAngeles(43),Phoenix(46),andothercitiesthroughoutNorthCarolina(44)isincreasedforracialandethnicminoritygroups,especiallyBlack,Latinx(i.e.,apersonofLatinAmericanorigin),andNativeAmericanpopulations(43,45).Thegeographicdistribu-tionofurbanheatislandsandtreecanopycoverincitiesisalsostratifiedbyrace:MultiplestudieshaverepeatedlydemonstratedthatlandsurfacetemperaturesaremagnifiedforraciallyminoritizedgroupsinmanyU.S.cities(36,37,39),withcertainracialgroupsmorevulnerablethanothers(37,38).Differ-entialpollutantexposureextendstoaquaticsystems.Forexample,decadesofneglectedpollutionintheFlintRiverledtoanecologicaldisasterforthestreambiotaandamassiveongoinghumanitariancrisisinthepredom-inantlyBlackcommunityofFlint,Michigan(47,48).PressurestosavemoneymotivatedthelocalgovernmenttoswitchFlint’ssourceofdrinkingwaterfromLakeHurontothepollutedriver(89).Thecalamityofthepol-lutedFlintdrinkingwaterisjustoneexampleofalargerpatternofminoritizedcommun-itiesbearingthebruntofecosystemdisamen-ities(48).Recentstudieshavebeguntorevealsomeoftheunderlyingstructuralconstructs—especiallyracism—thatcontributetourbanheterogeneitybeyondhouseholdincome(28,37,88).How-ever,determiningthetrueinfluencethatsys-temicandstructuralracismexertsonecologicaldynamicsremainsanovelareaofinvestigation(28).Studiesontheresultantevolutionaryout-comesarealsorare(90).Knowingtherelativecontributionofstructuralracismtowealthdis-paritiesinformsourunderstandingofcomplextemporaldynamicsincities,whichisnotpos-sibleinapproacheslackinghistoricalcontext(21,24).Inaddition,accountingforstructuralracisminbiologicalmodelsshouldimprovetheirpredictivevalue,therebyallowingustomoreaccuratelyestimatetheeffectofurban-izationonevolutionaryandecologicalchange.Frameworksthatconsidersystemicandstruc-turalracismasprincipaldriversofurbanformadvanceourabilitytopredicthowandwhichspeciesmayacclimatizeandevolveforlifeincities(Figs.2and3).ResidentialsegregationandredliningGlobally,residentialsegregation—characterizedbyaphysicalseparationofgroupswithincitiesandfurthercompoundedbytheconcentrationofgovernmentandecosystembenefits(30)—isanespeciallypotentformofsocialstratification.Residentialsegregationshapesecologicalcondi-tionsalongmultipleenvironmentalaxesthatcannotbeneatlycharacterizedbyvariablessuchaswealthorimpervioussurfacecover(91).Thisisparticularlyimportantbecausesocialgeog-raphiesvaryfordifferentracial,ethnic,andculturalgroupsdependingonthehistoricalformsofdiscriminationexperiencedbyeachminoritizedgroup(31).TheimpactofstructuralracismonBlackgeographiesintheUnitedStateshasbeenparticularlywelldocumented,withsubstantiallegacyeffectsonurbaneco-logicalpatterns(21,24,27,92).PerhapsoneofthemostnotoriousexamplesofstructuralracismistheU.S.-sanctionedpolicyof“redlining”enactedbetween1933and1968.ThispracticesegregatedurbanSchelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September20204of11RESEARCH|REVIEW
residentialneighborhoodsprincipallybyraceandwasusedtoformallysuppresscapitalwealthgainsofBlackAmericans(30).Red-liningpolicygradedneighborhoodsfrommostdesirable(“a”;outlinedingreeninFig.2)tohazardous(“d”;outlinedinredinFig.2)accordingtotheirperceivedamenitiesanddisamenities,includingfinancialriskiness,environmentalquality,proximitytoindus-trialfacilities,andracialcomposition(30).BlackAmericanswererefusedhousingloansandwalk-throughsinneighborhoodsdeemed“a”or“b”qualityandwererelegatedto“c”and“d”areas,whichreceivedlessgovernmentalsupport.Today,theecologicaleffectsofredliningpersist.Redlined“d”neighborhoodshave,onaverage,21%lesstreecanopythan“a”neigh-borhoods.Further,“a”-gradedareasarefre-quentlymoreuniformlygreen,haveoldertreecanopy,andareclosertoenvironmentalamenitiesthanredlined“d”neighborhoods(Fig.2).Althoughredliningisnolongeranactivepolicy,studieshaveshownthatitslegacyremainsakeydriverofcontemporaryurbanlandscapesacrossatleast37citiesintheUnitedStates(24,28,92).EcologicaleffectsofstructuralracismRedliningmaygreatlycontributetotheasymmetricdistributionofhabitatthatstruc-turesbottom-upprocessesinfluencingbio-diversity(28,35).Reductionsintreeandvegetationcovernecessarilydiminishnichediversityandquality(63,93),whichfrequentlycoincideswithreducedspeciesrichnessofbirds,mammals,andarthropods(94–97).Byconcen-tratingBlackAmericansandotherminoritizedcommunitiesinurbancenters,redliningoftenreducedtheproximityofsegregatedareastoundevelopedlandscapebeyondtheurbanboundary(Fig.2A),andpatternsofsegrega-tionmighthavesubsequentlycreatedvariablypermeableurbanmatrices(Fig.2B).Therefore,wemayhypothesizethatemergentpatternsofspeciescolonizationandextinctionvarycon-siderablywithinandamongcitiesasafunctionofheterogeneoustemporalandspatiallegaciesofracialsegregation.Acriticalquestioniswhethertheseverityandageofresidentialsegregationaffectthenumberofspeciesco-occurringatalocalizedsite(alphadiversity),areductionincommunitycompositionacrosssitesoverspaceandtime(betadiversity),orcity-wideregionalbiodiversity(Fig.3andTable1).Archivedredlinedmapsmayprovevaluableforpredictingthespatialdistributionofnichesacrosscities(Fig.2).Becauseredliningpre-dictstheage,abundance,anddistributionofurbantreecanopyinmanycities,itislikelythatsuchmapsmayalsoprovidesubstantialresolutiontothegeographiclocationsofpo-tentialsinkhabitatsandecologicaltrapsinSchelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September20205of11Fig.2.ThepracticeofredliningintheUnitedStatesfunctionallysegregatedneighborhoodsbyraceandclass.Thehighest-ratedneighborhoods(graded“a”andoutlinedingreen)werewealthierandpredominantlywhite.Thelowest-ratedneighborhoods(graded“d”andoutlinedinred)werepoorerandpredominantlyBlack.Demographicsofintermediate-rankedneighborhoods(graded“b”and“c”andoutlinedinblueandorange,respectively)werebetweenthoseof“a”and“d”areas.Segregationpracticessuchasredliningleavelastingmarksonurbanlandscapes.(A)Redlinedneighborhoodsstillhavesubstantiallylessgreenspace(e.g.,trees,parks,andlawns)thanhigher-gradedneighborhoods.Althoughthispatternisconsistentacrosscities,thereismarkedvariationamongneighborhoodsandbetweencities,asseeninthecomparisonofBirmingham,Alabama,andBaltimore,Maryland.Otherenvironmentalamenities,suchasurbanwaterbodiesinMinneapolis,Minnesota,arealsosegregated.(B)Historicallygreenlinedorredlinedneighborhoodsarepositioneddifferentlyrelativetocontemporaryurbanboundariesandaccesstonaturalareasoutsidetheurbanlandscape.InMinneapolis,Minnesota,andBaltimore,Maryland,redlinedneighborhoodsareconcentratedinthecitycenter,farfromtheurbanperiphery.Thesecitieshavealsogrownoverthepast50years,meaningthathumanandnonhumanresidentsofredlinedneighborhoodsmusttravelfarthertogetoutofthecity.Bycontrast,thecityextentofBirmingham,Alabama,hasgrownminimally,andredlinedareasarenearforestedlands.Notethatinthebackgroundmaps,whiterepresentsroads,palegrayrepresentsexurbanland,grayrepresentsurbanland,anddarkgrayrepresentswater.RedliningdataarefromtheMappingInequalitycollaborativeproject(https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/).NDVI,normalizeddifferencevegetationindex.RESEARCH|REVIEW
bothterrestrialandaquaticenvironments(98).Thoughseveralstudieshaveaddressedtheemergenceofsourceandsinkhabitats(99–102),nonehaveexplicitlyconsideredwhetherheterogeneityinpollutants,heat,andotherdisturbancesshapetheirgeographicdistribution(Fig.1A).Thelegacyeffectsofresidentialsegregationcouldpredictthelocal-ityandsizeofpotentialecologicalsinksandtraps,therebyhelpingtoidentifyandpredictgeographicregionswithcompoundinganthro-pogenicdisturbancesthatrequiremoresus-tainedstewardship(Table1).Recentstudiesemphasizethatthespatialarrangementofvegetationcovercandriveevolutionarychange(103),fundamentallylinkingsegregation-drivenpatternsofveg-etationcovertoevolutionarytrajectoriesofurbanpopulations.Impervioussurfaceisfre-quentlyassociatedwithreducedmovementoforganismsacrosslandscapesandthereforelowergeneflow,moresubdividedpopulations,andlowergeneticdiversity(104–106).Urbantreecovercanamelioratetheseeffects;forexample,treecoverfacilitatesgeneflowinnativewhite-footedmiceinNewYork(107,108).In-creasedlandcoverandhabitatconnectivity,however,mayalsoboosttransmissionofzoo-noticdisease(e.g.,Lymedisease),andadapt-ivemanagementsolutionstocontroldiseasespreadmayproduceadditionalevolutionaryfeedbacks(51,109).Hypothesesthataddresstherelativecontributionsofracialsegrega-tionandwealthdisparitiestotreecovercanelucidatethesocioeconomicattributethatmostaccuratelypredictspopulationgeneticstructureandconnectivity(Table1).EvolutionaryimpactsofstructuralracismThecompoundedimpactsofheightenededgeeffects,smallerpatchsizes,reducednichedi-versity,andindividualhumanbehaviorsmaypredictincreasedgeneticdriftinraciallyminoritizedneighborhoods(Fig.3).Urbande-velopmentandhabitatfragmentationaregenerallyexpectedtoincreasedriftandreducegeneticdiversity(107,110),andurbangreenspacesinminoritizedcommunitiesarecus-tomarilyfragmented(55).Habitatpatchesmayalsoexperiencesubstantiallyreducedgeneflowifadjacenthabitatsarenotproximal(i.e.,iso-lationbydistance)orhavebarriersthatpro-hibitsuccessfulimmigrationintoadesiredhabitat(i.e.,isolationbyresistance)(107).Re-ducedtreecanopycoversignificantlyreducesgeneflowforsomespecies(108),andcanopycoverissignificantlydiminishedinraciallysegregatedneighborhoods(40).Asaresult,geneflowofnativespeciesmaybedetrimen-tallyaffected,whereassomepestspeciesmaythriveinpreviouslyredlinedneighborhoods(69,90).Further,highwaysandimpervioussurfacesareformidableurbanbarriersforavarietyoftaxa(106,111,112),andthesebuiltstructurestendtobemoreprevalentinra-ciallyminoritizedneighborhoods(37).Howotheraspectsofurbanhabitats(e.g.,vacantlots,foodavailabilityfrompetsorwaste,andhomelessencampments)varyasafunctionofvariousformsofstructuralracismand,con-sequently,affectgeneflowindifferenttaxaremainsanareaworthyofexploration.Redliningandsimilardiscriminatorypoli-cies(e.g.,JimCrowlaws)thatincreasedBlackAmericans’proximitytopollutingindustries(45,92,113)andheightenedexposuretoin-tensifiedurbanheateffects(36,39)mayhavecompoundedtocreatestrongselectivepres-suresthatdriveadaptiveandmaladaptiveevolution(Fig.3B).Increasedpollutantexpo-surecanincreasetherateofheritablemutationsinmice(114)andselectionfortoxicity-mediatinggenesandconnectedsignalingpathwaysinkillifish(Fundulusheteroclitus)(115),respectively.Recentstudiesalsoprovideevidenceofrapidlyevolvedthermaltoleranceinurbanwaterfleas(Daphniamagna)(116,117),ants(Temnothoraxcurvispinosus)(118),anddamselflies(Coenagrionpuella)(119).Toourknowledge,nostudieshaveexplicitlyexploredSchelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September20206of11Trait valueFrequencySpecies richnessTrait valueFrequencyCity 1City 2abdcAffluenceDistrictsabdcSpecies richnessabdcABCDFig.3.Conceptualdiagramillustratinghowbetween-citydifferencesinsegregationmayproducedisparateecologicalandevolutionaryoutcomes.(A)Inhypotheticalcity1,greenspaceismoreevenlydistributedandcontinuousfromgreen-toredlineddistricts(Fig.2)relativetocity2.(B)Between-citydifferencesinconnectivitymayresultindifferentselectivegradientsthatcontributetovaryingdistributionsofgeneticorphenotypictraitvaluesofspeciesfoundacrossdistricts(“a”through“d”).(C)Bothcitieshavenear-identicalspeciesdiversityandcompositionin“a”districts,andspeciesdiversityandcompositiondeclinefrom“a”to“d”neighborhoods.However,withineachjurisdiction,city2hassubstantiallylessspeciesdiversityin“b,”“c,”and“d”districtsrelativetocity1,potentiallyasaresultofdifferencesinhabitatdistributions.(D)Foodwebsmaybemorediverseandinterconnectedacrossdistrictsincity1(left)butaremoresimplifiedacrossdistrictsincity2(right),owingtotherelativedifferencesinstructuralandfunctionalhabitatconnectivity.RESEARCH|REVIEW
howeitherneutraloradaptiveevolutionaryprocessesoperateasafunctionofheterogene-itythatstemsfromstructuralracism.Thelackofeffectiveintervention,watersanitation,medicalaccessandresources,andtrashmanagementprogramsduetostruc-turalracismmayalsoshapemutationratesandemergingdiseasedynamics(90,120).Raciallyminoritizedandlow-incomecom-munitieswitnessincreasedproximitytopestspeciesknowntoharborzoonoticdis-eases(90,121,122).Forinstance,brownrat(Rattusnorvegicus)abundancesnegativelycorrelatewithsocioeconomicstatus,suchthatlow-incomeneighborhoodsreportmorefrequentratsightingsacrosscitiesglobally(123–127).Raciallydiverseneighborhoodscon-sistentlyreceiveinadequatesanitationservicesthatarecompoundedwithaginginfrastructureandovergrownvegetation,allfactorsthatat-tractbrownratsandothernon-nativerodentpests(125,128).Inconsistentadministrationofover-the-counterrodenticidesmayleadtovar-iouslevelsofimmuneresistanceinlocalratpopulations(129),furtherexacerbatinghealthanddiseaserisksformarginalizedcommunities(130).Societalneglectunderpinnedbysystemicracismmaythereforepromotetheevolutionofrodenticideimmunitythatheightenszoonoticdiseaserisksinmarginalizedcommunities(51).Infectionandmortalityratesfromcorona-virusdisease2019(COVID-19),causedbysevereacuterespiratorysyndromecoronavirus2(SARS-CoV-2),aredisproportionatelyhighforLatinx,Indigenous,andBlackcommunitiesrelativetootherracialgroupsintheUnitedStates(91,113,131–135).Overdecadesofgovern-mentpolicyandeconomicdevelopment,citieshavedisproportionatelysituatedenvironmentalhazards(e.g.,petrochemicalindustries,wastefacilities,andmajorroadways)nearpredom-inantlyBlackandIndigenouscommunities(43,46).Suchformsofenvironmentalracismhavesubstantiallycompromisedneighborhoodairqualityandrespiratoryhealthofminori-tizedcommunities(43,87).RecentevidencelinkingairpollutionexposurewithCOVID-19mortalityrisk(134,136)thusindicatesdirectconnectionsamongenvironmentalracism,airquality,anddisproportionatedeathratesforBlackandIndigenouscommunities.Thisepi-demiologicalphenomenonisfurthercom-poundedbyreducedaccesstoadequatehealthcare,heightenedrisksofconcomitanthealthcomorbidities(e.g.,cardiovasculardisease,hypertension,anddiabetes),andincreasedhousingdensity(133).Communitieswithhigherhumandensitiescanexperienceincreasedviralmutationrates,whichsubsequentlyincreasethelikelihoodofviralhostjumping(120).Analarm-ingbutplausibleandinsufficientlystudied(137)hypothesisisthatmutationratesinpathogenssuchasSARS-CoV-2aregreatestinraciallyminoritizedandlow-incomecommunities,creatingapernicioussocio-evolutionaryloopbetweenincreasingvirulenceandtheunevendistributionofsocialandhealthinequitiesinthesecommunities.IntersectingformsofinequalityUnderstandingthemechanismsthatshapeurbaninequalityand,thus,urbaneco-evolutionarypatternsandprocessesrequiresincorporatingintersectionaltheoriesofinequalityandevaluat-ingaccessibilitytodifferentspaces(34,138,139).Theterm“intersectionality”emphasizesthatvariousmarginalizedidentitiesofanindividualorcommunitymorebroadlyintersect,com-pound,andinteract,ultimatelyaffectingthemagnitudeandseverityofexperiencedsocialSchelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September20207of11Table 1. Key questions integrating systemic racism, ecology, and evolution. A proposed list of potential research questions that integrate social heterogeneity, ecology, and evolution in urban systems. These questions could inform practitioners, planning professionals, and elected officials as to how such processes in cities can be leveraged for positive social change. Colored dots denote the primary research focus of each question (blue, ecological; gold, evolutionary).Key questionsResearch focus1. How does biodiversity vary with the degree of residential segregation within a city?2. Do socioeconomic and racial stratification predict the locality of ecological traps and source-sink dynamics within cities?3. How does the severity of economic and racial segregation influence connectivity, dispersal, gene flow, and genetic isolation?4. Does equitable urban greening increase the probability of rescue effects of native species and ecological specialists?5. Do cities with increasing homelessness rates have reduced species occupancy rates?6. Is functional or structural connectivity reduced in cities with more pronounced economic or racial segregation?7. Are rates of local adaptation or maladaptation higher for urban organisms in redlined neighborhoods?8. How have urban renewal and associated displacement affected habitat fragmentation and ecological disturbances?9. Do carbon sequestration and soil microbial density differ as a function of neighborhood segregation?10. Does selection for non-dispersing seeds in plants vary with socioeconomic and demographic predictors?11. Do numerical responses in predator-prey or pollinator-plant dynamics vary across redlining categories?12. Is natural selection along multiple ecological conditions strongest in redlined or low-income neighborhoods?13. How do sublethal effects (e.g., life-history traits, physiology) vary as a function of pollution proximity and segregation in cities?14. Are rates of zoonotic disease transmission accelerated or dampened by residential segregation and/or urban renewal?15. Can improvements to public transportation infrastructure and greenways improve habitat connectivity?16. Do anti-displacement policies affect ecological stability and integrity over time?17. Are cities with smaller economic inequality indices (e.g., the Gini coefficient) more biodiverse relative to others?18. Does remediating pollution (air, soil, water) in marginalized neighborhoods enhance biodiversity and organismal abundances?RESEARCH|REVIEW
inequities(Fig.1)(57).Forexample,discrim-inationexperiencedbyaqueerBlackwomanintheUnitedStatesmaybeintensifiedrela-tivetothatfacedbyindividualswithsimilarracial,gender,andsexualorientationidentitiesalone.Translatingtheconceptofintersection-alityontotheurbanlandscapecanprovideamoreholisticunderstandingofthepatternsandprocessesthatshapeurbanecosystems.Forinstance,wemayhypothesizethatchar-acteristicdifferencesbetweenIndigenousecologicalpracticesandthoseofforestlandmanagersmaycontributetovarianceinnativespeciesrichnessandcommunitycomplexity(140,141).Similarly,wemaypredictthatgenderdifferencesasrelatedtolandcultiva-tionandhomeownershipshapeplantspeciesassemblagesandspeciesturnoverrates.Fur-ther,vegetationremovalandincreasednight-timelightingtodeterLGBTQIA+(lesbian,gay,bisexual,transgender,queer,intersex,asexual,andother)communities(95)mayhavesubse-quenteffectsondisturbanceregimesandlocalbiodiversitythatreducehabitatvalueformul-tiplespecies.Thoughsuchempiricallinksarecurrentlyspeculativeandnotwellestablished,integrationofvariousinequitiesincitiesmayprovideadditionalresolutiontounderstandinghowsocialdriversaffecturbanecologyandevo-lution.Althoughourfocushasbeenonracismandclassism,werecognizetheneedforandencourageintersectionalapproachesinurbanecology.CenteringjusticeinurbanecologyandconservationTheoriginsofenvironmentalismintheUnitedStateswereheavilyinfluencedbywhitemenwhoexpressedracistperspectivesintheireffortstoprotectnature.Writingsbyearlyenviron-mentalistssuchasAldoLeopold,JohnMuir,MadisonGrant,GiffordPinchot,andTheodoreRooseveltarguedthatnatureismostpristinewithouthumaninfluencebutshouldbere-servedforwhitemenasaresourceforpersonalimprovement(142–144).TheseearlyargumentsgreatlycontributedtotheexclusionofBlack,Indigenous,andnon-whiteimmigrantcommu-nitiesfromoutdoorspacesandenvironmentalnarratives(145),despitethesecommunitiesshoulderingthebruntofenvironmentalandclimatecrisesandleadingeffectivemove-mentsforenvironmentalandclimatejustice(53,146,147).White-ledenvironmentalandclimatemovementshavelongmarginalizedissuesofracialjusticewhencraftingpolicyandlegislation(148).Inaddition,suchmove-mentshavetraditionallyconsideredstructuralviolencetobeunrelatedtoenvironmentalissues,yetstate-sanctionedpolicebrutality(149,150),environmentaldegradation(113),andtheclimatecrisis(53,147)allreinforcepatternsofracialsegregationandcriminal-izationofminoritizedpeopleinurbanpublicspaces(151,152).Black,Indigenous,Latinx,andimmigrantcommunitiespossessculturalknowledge,on-goinglandandwaterrelations,andeffectivepracticesforcommunityandecologicalrevi-talization,honedthroughgenerationsofstrug-glewithandfortheland(140,141).Systemicracisminenvironmentalpolicyexcludescom-munitiesfromecoculturalrelationswithurbanecosystems,urbanplanningprocesses,andurbanecologicalrestoration(153,154).Asaresult,thesecommunitiesfindthattheirlong-standingandeffectivepracticesofmanagingandadvocatingforlands,waters,andspeciesarelimited.Whenjudges,electedofficials,planners,scientists,andotherswhoholdpowerinenvironmentalgovernanceworkinsolidaritywithfrontlinecommunities,urbanorganisms,ecosystems,andhumancommun-itiesmovetowardregeneration(155–157).Racistresearchandconservationapproachesmustbechallengedandredesignedtoincludejustice,equity,andinclusion(24,157–159).Todoso,ecologists,biologists,andenvironmen-talistsmustreimaginewhatisconsideredanecologicalorconservationissue.Increasingeco-nomicopportunities,bolsteringpublictrans-portationinfrastructure,investinginaffordablehousingandhealthcare,andstrengtheningvotingrightsandaccessareissuesrarelycon-sideredbymainstreamenvironmentalorgan-izations.Yetsuchsocietalinitiativesreducecarbonemissions,dampenenvironmentalhaz-ards,enhancepublichealth,andexpandeco-nomicmobilityofmarginalizedcommunities.Moreover,reallocatingmunicipalfundstoini-tiativesthataimtoimprovehomeownershipforminoritizedcommunitiesreducesdisplace-mentandpromoteslocalstewardship,whichinturnaffectsoverallpublicandenviron-mentalhealth.Suchparadigmshiftswillbeessential,asaccumulatingevidencesuggeststhatincomeinequalitypredictsbiodiversityloss(63,160).Centeringracialandenviron-mentaljusticethatdrivesequitablepolicychangesisthusinextricablylinkedtourbanconservationandecologicalrestorationini-tiatives(157,159).Improvinggreeninfrastructureandgreen-spaceaccess,pairedwithpoliciesthatshieldagainstdisplacement,cangreatlyenhancecom-munityhealthandwealth(54,161).Exposureandaccesstoqualitynaturalspaceincitiesimprovephysicalandmentalhealth(162)andbufferagainsthealthcomorbiditiesexperiencedbyminoritizedgroups(31,92,161).Justice-centeredapplicationsofecologicalandevolu-tionarytoolscanfurtherspotlightconvergencesamongsocialinequitiesandenvironmentaldisamenities(e.g.,ecologicalmodelingofhab-itatsinksandsources)toidentifyareasofhighconservationandrestorationneed.Equitablerestorationofurbanhabitatpatchesandin-frastructurenecessarilyimproveslandscapeconnectivityandrefugiatosupportsuccessfulcolonizationofnativespecies,guardsagainstlocalextinctions,andincreasesurbanbiodi-versity(159).Hence,equity-basedecologicalrestorationwillbenefitbothhumanandnon-humancommunities(163,164),butonlyifthefoundationofsuchinitiativesarerootedinanti-racistpractices(156,165).Themaintenanceofsocietalintegrityshould,inturn,leadtocapitalgainsforminoritizedcommunitiesthattranslatetoecologicalstabilitythatpositivelyaffectsspeciesdiversityincities.Asurbanecologistsandevolutionarybiol-ogists,wehavearesponsibilitytoimplementanti-raciststrategiesthatevaluatesystemsofoppressioninhowweperformourscience.Thisnecessarilymeanseradicatingeffortsthatperpetuateinequitiestoknowledgeaccess,ne-glectlocalcommunityparticipation,orexploitcommunitylaborinthepursuitofacademicknowledge(i.e.,thepracticesofcolonialand“parachute”science).Concurrently,increasingrepresentationofindividualsofdiverseiden-titiesisinherentlyjustandenhancesourscholarship(166,167).Bydirectlyincludingadiversityofscholarsandincorporatinganunderstandingofsystemicracismandinequality,wecanmoreholisticallystudyurbanecosystems.Wewillnotbeabletosuccessfullyassesshowracismandclassismshapeurbanecosystems,noraddresstheirconsequences,withoutatrulydi-verseandinclusivescientificcommunity.OutlookThedecisionswemakenowwilldictateourenvironmentalrealityforcenturiestocome,asillustratedbymodernpoliciessuchastheGreenNewDealproposal(168)andtheParisAgreement(169).Suchendeavorsaretimelyaswefaceaglobalpandemicthatisbothaf-fectedbyandexacerbatesthelatentstruc-turalinequitiesunderpinningmoderncities,directlythreateningenvironmentalhealthandbiodiversityconservation(170,171).Concur-rently,ourcontemporaryfightforcivilrightsinthewakeofunjustmurdersandcontinuedracialoppressionofBlackandIndigenouscommunitiesstressestheneedtoquestionandabolishsystemicracism.Theinsidiouswhitesupremaciststructuresthatperpetuateracismthroughoutsocietycompromisebothpublicandenvironmentalhealth,solidifyingtheneedtoradicallydismantlesystemsofracialandeconomicoppression.Consequently,ourcapacitytounderstandurbanecosystemsandnonhumanorganismsnecessitatesamorethoroughintegrationofthenaturalandsocialparametersofourcities.Wecannotgeneralizehumanbehaviorinur-banecosystemswithoutdealingwithsystemicracismandotherinequities.Further,incor-poratingenvironmentaljusticeprinciplesintohowweperformandinterpreturbanecologyandevolutionresearchwillbeessential,withrestorativeandenvironmentaljusticeservingSchelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September20208of11RESEARCH|REVIEW
asthefoundationforeffectiveecologicalre-storationandconservation(158,159,163).Doingsoisbothourcivicresponsibilityandconservationimperativeforadvancingurbanresiliencyinthefaceofunrelentingglobalenvironmentalchange(172).REFERENCESANDNOTES1.M.Alberti,Eco-evolutionarydynamicsinanurbanizingplanet.TrendsEcol.Evol.30,114–126(2015).doi:10.1016/j.tree.2014.11.007;pmid:254989642.S.Pickettetal.,Aconceptualframeworkforthestudyofhumanecosystemsinurbanareas.UrbanEcosyst.1,185–199(1997).doi:10.1023/A:10185317128893.N.B.Grimmetal.,Globalchangeandtheecologyofcities.Science319,756–760(2008).doi:10.1126/science.1150195;pmid:182589024.D.E.Patakietal.,Couplingbiogeochemicalcyclesinurbanenvironments:Ecosystemservices,greensolutions,andmisconceptions.Front.Ecol.Environ.9,27–36(2011).doi:10.1890/0902205.J.P.Kaye,P.M.Groffman,N.B.Grimm,L.A.Baker,R.V.Pouyat,Adistincturbanbiogeochemistry?TrendsEcol.Evol.21,192–199(2006).doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.12.006;pmid:167010856.S.H.Faeth,C.Bang,S.Saari,Urbanbiodiversity:Patternsandmechanisms.Ann.N.Y.Acad.Sci.1223,69–81(2011).doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05925.x;pmid:214499667.S.T.A.Pickett,M.L.Cadenasso,D.L.Childers,M.J.Mcdonnell,W.Zhou,Evolutionandfutureofurbanecologicalscience:Ecologyin,of,andforthecity.Ecosyst.HealthSustain.2,e01229(2016).doi:10.1002/ehs2.12298.C.M.Donihue,M.R.Lambert,Adaptiveevolutioninurbanecosystems.Ambio44,194–203(2015).doi:10.1007/s13280-014-0547-2;pmid:250566159.J.Q.Ouyangetal.,ANewFrameworkforUrbanEcology:AnIntegrationofProximateandUltimateResponsestoAnthropogenicChange.Integr.Comp.Biol.58,915–928(2018).doi:10.1093/icb/icy110;pmid:3037610610.D.E.Pataki,Grandchallengesinurbanecology.Front.Ecol.Evol.3,57(2015).doi:10.3389/fevo.2015.0005711.L.R.Rivkinetal.,Aroadmapforurbanevolutionaryecology.Evol.Appl.12,384–398(2018).doi:10.1111/eva.12734;pmid:3082836212.M.T.J.Johnson,J.Munshi-South,Evolutionoflifeinurbanenvironments.Science358,eaam8327(2017).doi:10.1126/science.aam8327;pmid:2909752013.E.C.Lahr,R.R.Dunn,S.D.Frank,Gettingaheadofthecurve:Citiesassurrogatesforglobalchange.Proc.R.Soc.B285,20180643(2018).doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.0643;pmid:3005183014.D.L.Childersetal.,Anecologyforcities:Atransformationalnexusofdesignandecologytoadvanceclimatechangeresilienceandurbansustainability.Sustainability7,3774–3791(2015).doi:10.3390/su704377415.T.McPhearsonetal.,AdvancingUrbanEcologytowardaScienceofCities.Bioscience66,198–212(2016).doi:10.1093/biosci/biw00216.C.L.Redman,J.M.Grove,L.H.Kuby,IntegratingsocialscienceintotheLong-TermEcologicalResearch(LTER)Network:Socialdimensionsofecologicalchangeandecologicaldimensionsofsocialchange.Ecosystems7,161–171(2004).doi:10.1007/s10021-003-0215-z17.C.J.Tanneretal.,Urbanecology:Advancingscienceandsociety.Front.Ecol.Environ.12,574–581(2014).doi:10.1890/14001918.J.Liuetal.,Complexityofcoupledhumanandnaturalsystems.Science317,1513–1516(2007).doi:10.1126/science.1144004;pmid:1787243619.W.C.Zipperer,W.F.Morse,C.J.Gaither,“Linkingsocialandecologicalsystems”inUrbanEcology,J.Niemela,Ed.(OxfordUniv.Press,2011),pp.298–308;www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/39210.20.N.R.Dorey,M.A.R.Udell,C.D.L.Wynne,Whendodomesticdogs,Canisfamiliaris,starttounderstandhumanpointing?Theroleofontogenyinthedevelopmentofinterspeciescommunication.Anim.Behav.79,37–41(2010).doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.09.03221.L.A.Romanetal.,Humanandbiophysicallegaciesshapecontemporaryurbanforests:Aliteraturesynthesis.UrbanFor.UrbanGreen.31,157–168(2018).doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2018.03.00422.K.E.Pickett,M.Pearl,Multilevelanalysesofneighbourhoodsocioeconomiccontextandhealthoutcomes:Acriticalreview.J.Epidemiol.CommunityHealth55,111–122(2001).doi:10.1136/jech.55.2.111;pmid:1115425023.S.T.A.Pickettetal.,Dynamicheterogeneity:Aframeworktopromoteecologicalintegrationandhypothesisgenerationinurbansystems.UrbanEcosyst.20,1–14(2017).doi:10.1007/s11252-016-0574-924.J.M.Groveetal.,TheLegacyEffect:UnderstandingHowSegregationandEnvironmentalInjusticeUnfoldoverTimeinBaltimore.Ann.Am.Assoc.Geogr.108,524–537(2018).doi:10.1080/24694452.2017.136558525.D.H.Locke,G.Baine,Thegood,thebad,andtheinterested:Howhistoricaldemographicsexplainpresent-daytreecanopy,vacantlotandtreerequestspatialvariabilityinNewHaven,CT.UrbanEcosyst.18,391–409(2015).doi:10.1007/s11252-014-0409-526.E.R.Kurasetal.,Urbansocioeconomicinequalityandbiodiversityoftenconverge,butnotalways:Aglobalmeta-analysis.Landsc.UrbanPlan.198,103799(2020).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.10379927.L.W.Clarke,G.D.Jenerette,A.Davila,TheluxuryofvegetationandthelegacyoftreebiodiversityinLosAngeles,CA.Landsc.UrbanPlan.116,48–59(2013).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.04.00628.D.Locke,B.Hall,J.M.Grove,S.T.Pickett,L.A.Ogden,C.Aoki,C.G.Boone,J.P.M.O’Neil-Dunne,Residentialhousingsegregationandurbantreecanopyin37USCities.SocArXiv(6January2020);https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/97zcs.29.P.Spencer,P.E.Perkins,J.D.Erickson,Re-establishingJusticeasaPillarofEcologicalEconomicsThroughFeministPerspectives.Ecol.Econ.152,191–198(2018).doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.05.02230.A.Mills,TheColorofLaw:AForgottenHistoryofHowOurGovernmentSegregatedAmerica.BerkeleyPlan.J.29,159–163(2018).doi:10.5070/BP32913844031.Z.D.Baileyetal.,StructuralracismandhealthinequitiesintheUSA:Evidenceandinterventions.Lancet389,1453–1463(2017).doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30569-X;pmid:2840282732.J.M.Grove,D.H.Locke,J.P.M.O’Neil-Dunne,AnecologyofprestigeinNewYorkCity:Examiningtherelationshipsamongpopulationdensity,socio-economicstatus,groupidentity,andresidentialcanopycover.Environ.Manage.54,402–419(2014).doi:10.1007/s00267-014-0310-2;pmid:2503475133.P.S.Warren,S.Harlan,C.Boone,S.B.Lerman,E.Shochat,A.P.Kinzig,“Urbanecologyandhumansocialorganisation”inUrbanEcology,K.J.Gaston,Ed.(CambridgeUniv.Press,2013),pp.172–201.34.G.Winker,N.Degele,Intersectionalityasmulti-levelanalysis:Dealingwithsocialinequality.Eur.J.WomensStud.18,51–66(2011).doi:10.1177/135050681038608435.G.D.Jenerette,S.L.Harlan,W.L.Stefanov,C.A.Martin,Ecosystemservicesandurbanheatriskscapemoderation:Water,greenspaces,andsocialinequalityinPhoenix,USA.Ecol.Appl.21,2637–2651(2011).doi:10.1890/10-1493.1;pmid:2207364936.G.Huang,M.L.Cadenasso,People,landscape,andurbanheatisland:Dynamicsamongneighborhoodsocialconditions,landcoverandsurfacetemperatures.Landsc.Ecol.31,2507–2515(2016).doi:10.1007/s10980-016-0437-z37.B.M.Jesdale,R.Morello-Frosch,L.Cushing,Theracial/ethnicdistributionofheatrisk-relatedlandcoverinrelationtoresidentialsegregation.Environ.HealthPerspect.121,811–817(2013).doi:10.1289/ehp.1205919;pmid:2369484638.B.C.Mitchell,J.Chakraborty,Exploringtherelationshipbetweenresidentialsegregationandthermalinequityin20U.S.cities.LocalEnviron.23,796–813(2018).doi:10.1080/13549839.2018.147486139.B.C.Mitchell,J.Chakraborty,Landscapesofthermalinequity:DisproportionateexposuretourbanheatinthethreelargestUScities.Environ.Res.Lett.10,115005(2015).doi:10.1088/1748-9326/10/11/11500540.K.Schwarzetal.,Treesgrowonmoney:Urbantreecanopycoverandenvironmentaljustice.PLOSONE10,e0122051(2015).doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0122051;pmid:2583030341.C.Fan,M.Johnston,L.Darling,L.Scott,F.H.Liao,Landuseandsocio-economicdeterminantsofurbanforeststructureanddiversity.Landsc.UrbanPlan.181,10–21(2019).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.09.01242.G.Adamkiewiczetal.,Movingenvironmentaljusticeindoors:Understandingstructuralinfluencesonresidentialexposurepatternsinlow-incomecommunities.Am.J.PublicHealth101,S238–S245(2011).doi:10.2105/AJPH.2011.300119;pmid:2183611243.C.W.Tessumetal.,Inequityinconsumptionofgoodsandservicesaddstoracial-ethnicdisparitiesinairpollutionexposure.Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci.U.S.A.116,6001–6006(2019).doi:10.1073/pnas.1818859116;pmid:3085831944.S.C.Gray,S.E.Edwards,M.L.Miranda,Race,socioeconomicstatus,andairpollutionexposureinNorthCarolina.Environ.Res.126,152–158(2013).doi:10.1016/j.envres.2013.06.005;pmid:2385014445.M.A.Bravo,R.Anthopolos,M.L.Bell,M.L.Miranda,RacialisolationandexposuretoairborneparticulatematterandozoneinunderstudiedUSpopulations:Environmentaljusticeapplicationsofdownscalednumericalmodeloutput.Environ.Int.92-93,247–255(2016).doi:10.1016/j.envint.2016.04.008;pmid:2711591546.R.Pope,J.Wu,C.Boone,Spatialpatternsofairpollutantsandsocialgroups:AdistributiveenvironmentaljusticestudyinthephoenixmetropolitanregionofUSA.Environ.Manage.58,753–766(2016).doi:10.1007/s00267-016-0741-z;pmid:2763167447.L.A.Schaider,L.Swetschinski,C.Campbell,R.A.Rudel,Environmentaljusticeanddrinkingwaterquality:AretheresocioeconomicdisparitiesinnitratelevelsinU.S.drinkingwater?Environ.Health18,3(2019).doi:10.1186/s12940-018-0442-6;pmid:3065110848.M.A.S.Laidlawetal.,Children’sbloodleadseasonalityinflint,Michigan(USA),andsoil-sourcedleadhazardrisks.Int.J.Environ.Res.PublicHealth13,358(2016).doi:10.3390/ijerph13040358;pmid:2702357849.D.E.Chamberlain,D.A.W.Henry,C.Reynolds,E.Caprio,A.Amar,Therelationshipbetweenwealthandbiodiversity:AtestoftheLuxuryEffectonbirdspeciesrichnessinthedevelopingworld.GlobalChangeBiol.25,3045–3055(2019).doi:10.1111/gcb.14682;pmid:3107750250.J.PadullésCubinoetal.,Linkingyardplantdiversitytohomeowners’landscapingprioritiesacrosstheU.S.Landsc.UrbanPlan.196,103730(2020).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.10373051.S.DesRochesetal.,Socio‐Eco‐EvolutionaryDynamicsinCities.Evol.Appl.,10.1111/eva.13065(2020).doi:10.1111/eva.1306552.D.M.Konisky,C.Reenock,RegulatoryEnforcement,Riskscapes,andEnvironmentalJustice.PolicyStud.J.46,7–36(2018).doi:10.1111/psj.1220353.D.Schlosberg,L.B.Collins,Fromenvironmentaltoclimatejustice:Climatechangeandthediscourseofenvironmentaljustice.WIREsClim.Change5,359–374(2014).doi:10.1002/wcc.27554.J.R.Wolch,J.Byrne,J.P.Newell,Urbangreenspace,publichealth,andenvironmentaljustice:Thechallengeofmakingcities“justgreenenough.”.Landsc.UrbanPlan.125,234–244(2014).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.01755.V.Jennings,M.F.Floyd,D.Shanahan,C.Coutts,A.Sinykin,Emergingissuesinurbanecology:Implicationsforresearch,socialjustice,humanhealth,andwell-being.Popul.Environ.39,69–86(2017).doi:10.1007/s11111-017-0276-056.S.T.A.Pickett,C.G.Boone,M.L.Cadenasso,“Ecologyandenvironmentaljustice:Understandingdisturbanceusingecologicaltheory”inUrbanizationandSustainability:LinkingUrbanEcology,EnvironmentalJusticeandGlobalEnvironmentalChange,C.G.Boone,M.Fragkias,Eds.(Springer,2013),pp.27–47;https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5666-3_3.57.K.Crenshaw,MappingtheMargins:Intersectionality,IdentityPolitics,andViolenceagainstWomenofColor.StanfordLawRev.43,1241(1991).doi:10.2307/122903958.L.Michael,“Anti-Blackracism:Afrophobia,exclusionandglobalracisms”inCriticalPerspectivesonHateCrime,A.Haynes,J.Schweppe,S.Taylor,Eds.(PalgraveMacmillan,2017),pp.275–299;https://link.springer.com/10.1057/978-1-137-52667-0_15.59.G.Beckles-Raymond,ImplicitBias,(Global)WhiteIgnorance,andBadFaith:TheProblemofWhitenessandAnti-blackRacism.J.Appl.Philos.37,169–189(2020).doi:10.1111/japp.1238560.A.Bledsoe,W.J.Wright,Theanti-Blacknessofglobalcapital.Environ.Plann.D37,8–26(2019).doi:10.1177/026377581880510261.D.Hopeetal.,Socioeconomicsdriveurbanplantdiversity.Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci.U.S.A.100,8788–8792(2003).doi:10.1073/pnas.1537557100;pmid:12847293Schelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September20209of11RESEARCH|REVIEW
62.J.S.Walker,N.B.Grimm,J.M.Briggs,C.Gries,L.Dugan,EffectsofurbanizationonplantspeciesdiversityincentralArizona.Front.Ecol.Environ.7,465–470(2009).doi:10.1890/08008463.M.Leong,R.R.Dunn,M.D.Trautwein,Biodiversityandsocioeconomicsinthecity:Areviewoftheluxuryeffect.Biol.Lett.14,20180082(2018).doi:10.1098/rsbl.2018.0082;pmid:2974326664.E.Gerrish,S.L.Watkins,Therelationshipbetweenurbanforestsandincome:Ameta-analysis.Landsc.UrbanPlan.170,293–308(2018).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.09.005;pmid:2924984465.M.Avolio,A.Blanchette,N.F.Sonti,D.H.Locke,TimeIsNotMoney:IncomeIsMoreImportantThanLifestageforExplainingPatternsofResidentialYardPlantCommunityStructureandDiversityinBaltimore.Front.Ecol.Evol.8,85(2020).doi:10.3389/fevo.2020.0008566.A.Buyantuyev,J.Wu,Urbanheatislandsandlandscapeheterogeneity:Linkingspatiotemporalvariationsinsurfacetemperaturestoland-coverandsocioeconomicpatterns.Landsc.Ecol.25,17–33(2010).doi:10.1007/s10980-009-9402-467.A.Rigolon,Acomplexlandscapeofinequityinaccesstourbanparks:Aliteraturereview.Landsc.UrbanPlan.153,160–169(2016).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.01768.S.B.Magle,E.W.Lehrer,M.Fidino,Urbanmesopredatordistribution:Examiningtherelativeeffectsoflandscapeandsocioeconomicfactors.Anim.Conserv.19,163–175(2016).doi:10.1111/acv.1223169.M.Leong,M.A.Bertone,K.M.Bayless,R.R.Dunn,M.D.Trautwein,Exoskeletonsandeconomics:Indoorarthropoddiversityincreasesinaffluentneighbourhoods.Biol.Lett.12,20160322(2016).doi:10.1098/rsbl.2016.0322;pmid:2748464470.W.Zhou,A.Troy,J.MorganGrove,J.C.Jenkins,Canmoneybuygreen?demographicandsocioeconomicpredictorsoflawn-careexpendituresandlawngreennessinurbanresidentialareas.Soc.Nat.Resour.22,744–760(2009).doi:10.1080/0894192080207433071.M.M.Wheeleretal.,Continental-scalehomogenizationofresidentiallawnplantcommunities.Landsc.UrbanPlan.165,54–63(2017).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.05.00472.J.M.Groveetal.,DataandmethodscomparingsocialstructureandvegetationstructureofurbanneighborhoodsinBaltimore,Maryland.Soc.Nat.Resour.19,117–136(2006).doi:10.1080/0894192050039450173.K.A.Endsley,D.G.Brown,E.Bruch,HousingMarketActivityisAssociatedwithDisparitiesinUrbanandMetropolitanVegetation.Ecosystems21,1593–1607(2018).doi:10.1007/s10021-018-0242-474.A.Rigolon,M.Browning,V.Jennings,Inequitiesinthequalityofurbanparksystems:AnenvironmentaljusticeinvestigationofcitiesintheUnitedStates.Landsc.UrbanPlan.178,156–169(2018).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.05.02675.A.P.Kinzig,P.Warren,C.Martin,D.Hope,M.Katti,Theeffectsofhumansocioeconomicstatusandculturalcharacteristicsonurbanpatternsofbiodiversity.Ecol.Soc.10,23(2005).doi:10.5751/ES-01264-10012376.S.B.Lerman,P.S.Warren,Theconservationvalueofresidentialyards:Linkingbirdsandpeople.Ecol.Appl.21,1327–1339(2011).doi:10.1890/10-0423.1;pmid:2177443377.R.P.Kinnunen,K.Fraser,C.Schmidt,C.J.Garroway,Socioeconomicvariationacrossmultiplecitiespredictsavianlife-historystrategies.bioRxiv058537[Preprint].25April2020.doi:10.1101/2020.04.23.05853778.J.W.Ackley,J.Wu,M.J.AngillettaJr.,S.W.Myint,B.Sullivan,Richlizards:Howaffluenceandlandcoverinfluencethediversityandabundanceofdesertreptilespersistinginanurbanlandscape.Biol.Conserv.182,87–92(2015).doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.00979.H.Li,K.A.ParkerJr..,M.C.Kalcounis-Rueppell,Theluxuryeffectbeyondcities:Batsrespondtosocioeconomicvariationacrosslandscapes.BMCEcol.19,46(2019).doi:10.1186/s12898-019-0262-8;pmid:3167600880.T.T.H.Pham,P.Apparicio,S.Landry,A.M.Séguin,M.Gagnon,PredictorsofthedistributionofstreetandbackyardvegetationinMontreal,Canada.UrbanFor.UrbanGreen.12,18–27(2013).doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2012.09.00281.C.Wang,Z.H.Wang,C.Wang,S.W.Myint,EnvironmentalcoolingprovidedbyurbantreesunderextremeheatandcoldwavesinU.S.cities.RemoteSens.Environ.227,28–43(2019).doi:10.1016/j.rse.2019.03.02482.P.J.Villeneuveetal.,AcohortstudyrelatingurbangreenspacewithmortalityinOntario,Canada.Environ.Res.115,51–58(2012).doi:10.1016/j.envres.2012.03.003;pmid:2248343783.S.Hetrick,R.R.Chowdhury,E.Brondizio,E.Moran,SpatiotemporalpatternsandsocioeconomiccontextsofvegetativecoverinAltamiraCity,Brazil.Land2,774–796(2013).doi:10.3390/land204077484.S.S.Cilliers,S.J.Siebert,Urbanecologyincapetown:SouthAfricancomparisonsandreflections.Ecol.Soc.17,33(2012).doi:10.5751/ES-05146-17033385.M.R.McHale,D.N.Bunn,S.T.A.Pickett,W.Twine,Urbanecologyinadevelopingworld:WhyadvancedsocioecologicaltheoryneedsAfrica.Front.Ecol.Environ.11,556–564(2013).doi:10.1890/120157;pmid:2489184386.P.J.Brochuetal.,ParticulateairpollutionandsocioeconomicpositioninruralandurbanareasoftheNortheasternUnitedStates.Am.J.PublicHealth101,S224–S230(2011).doi:10.2105/AJPH.2011.300232;pmid:2183611487.D.L.Crouse,N.A.Ross,M.S.Goldberg,DoubleburdenofdeprivationandhighconcentrationsofambientairpollutionattheneighbourhoodscaleinMontreal,Canada.Soc.Sci.Med.69,971–981(2009).doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.07.010;pmid:1965660388.S.L.Watkins,E.Gerrish,Therelationshipbetweenurbanforestsandrace:Ameta-analysis.J.Environ.Manage.209,152–168(2018).doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.12.021;pmid:2928984389.D.C.Bellinger,LeadcontaminationinFlint-Anabjectfailuretoprotectpublichealth.N.Engl.J.Med.374,1101–1103(2016).doi:10.1056/NEJMp1601013;pmid:2686311490.G.Katz,P.T.Leisnham,S.L.LaDeau,AedesalbopictusBodySizeDiffersAcrossNeighborhoodsWithVaryingInfrastructuralAbandonment.J.Med.Entomol.57,615–619(2020).pmid:3158409891.S.E.L.Wakefield,J.Baxter,Linkinghealthinequalityandenvironmentaljustice:Articulatingaprecautionaryframeworkforresearchandaction.Environ.Justice3,95–102(2010).doi:10.1089/env.2009.004492.A.Nardoneetal.,Associationsbetweenhistoricalresidentialredliningandcurrentage-adjustedratesofemergencydepartmentvisitsduetoasthmaacrosseightcitiesinCalifornia:Anecologicalstudy.LancetPlanet.Health4,e24–e31(2020).doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30241-4;pmid:3199995193.P.G.Angoldetal.,Biodiversityinurbanhabitatpatches.Sci.TotalEnviron.360,196–204(2006).doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.08.035;pmid:1629744094.F.Morellietal.,EvidenceofevolutionaryhomogenizationofbirdcommunitiesinurbanenvironmentsacrossEurope.Glob.Ecol.Biogeogr.25,1284–1293(2016).doi:10.1111/geb.1248695.J.Beninde,M.Veith,A.Hochkirch,Biodiversityincitiesneedsspace:Ameta-analysisoffactorsdeterminingintra-urbanbiodiversityvariation.Ecol.Lett.18,581–592(2015).doi:10.1111/ele.12427;pmid:2586580596.D.L.Narango,D.W.Tallamy,P.P.Marra,Nonnativeplantsreducepopulationgrowthofaninsectivorousbird.Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci.U.S.A.115,11549–11554(2018).doi:10.1073/pnas.1809259115;pmid:3034879297.T.Gallo,M.Fidino,E.W.Lehrer,S.B.Magle,Mammaldiversityandmetacommunitydynamicsinurbangreenspaces:Implicationsforurbanwildlifeconservation.Ecol.Appl.27,2330–2341(2017).doi:10.1002/eap.1611;pmid:2883397898.R.Hale,R.Coleman,V.Pettigrove,S.E.Swearer,Identifying,preventingandmitigatingecologicaltrapstoimprovethemanagementofurbanaquaticecosystems.J.Appl.Ecol.52,928–939(2015).doi:10.1111/1365-2664.1245899.C.A.Morrisseyetal.,Eurasiandippereggsindicateelevatedorganohalogenatedcontaminantsinurbanrivers.Environ.Sci.Technol.47,8931–8939(2013).doi:10.1021/es402124z;pmid:23819781100.R.Dipetal.,Comparisonofheavymetalconcentrationsintissuesofredfoxesfromadjacenturban,suburban,andruralareas.Arch.Environ.Contam.Toxicol.40,551–556(2001).doi:10.1007/s002440010209;pmid:11525499101.C.Isaksson,Urbanization,oxidativestressandinflammation:Aquestionofevolving,acclimatizingorcopingwithurbanenvironmentalstress.Funct.Ecol.29,913–923(2015).doi:10.1111/1365-2435.12477102.A.Herrera-Dueñas,J.Pineda,M.T.Antonio,J.I.Aguirre,OxidativestressofHouseSparrowasbioindicatorofurbanpollution.Ecol.Indic.42,6–9(2014).doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.014103.M.Albertietal.,Globalurbansignaturesofphenotypicchangeinanimalandplantpopulations.Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci.U.S.A.114,8951–8956(2017).doi:10.1073/pnas.1606034114;pmid:28049817104.C.P.Kozakiewiczetal.,Urbanizationreducesgeneticconnectivityinbobcats(Lynxrufus)atbothintra-andinterpopulationspatialscales.Mol.Ecol.28,5068–5085(2019).doi:10.1111/mec.15274;pmid:31613411105.D.R.Trumboetal.,Urbanizationimpactsapexpredatorgeneflowbutnotgeneticdiversityacrossanurban-ruraldivide.Mol.Ecol.28,4926–4940(2019).doi:10.1111/mec.15261;pmid:31587398106.S.Jha,C.Kremen,Urbanlanduselimitsregionalbumblebeegeneflow.Mol.Ecol.22,2483–2495(2013).doi:10.1111/mec.12275;pmid:23495763107.J.Munshi-South,C.P.Zolnik,S.E.Harris,PopulationgenomicsoftheAnthropocene:Urbanizationisnegativelyassociatedwithgenome-widevariationinwhite-footedmousepopulations.Evol.Appl.9,546–564(2016).doi:10.1111/eva.12357;pmid:27099621108.J.Munshi-South,Urbanlandscapegenetics:Canopycoverpredictsgeneflowbetweenwhite-footedmouse(Peromyscusleucopus)populationsinNewYorkCity.Mol.Ecol.21,1360–1378(2012).doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05476.x;pmid:22320856109.M.C.VanAcker,E.A.H.Little,G.Molaei,W.I.Bajwa,M.A.Diuk-Wasser,EnhancementofRiskforLymeDiseasebyLandscapeConnectivity,NewYork,NewYork,USA.Emerg.Infect.Dis.25,1136–1143(2019).doi:10.3201/eid2506.181741;pmid:31107213110.L.S.Miles,L.R.Rivkin,M.T.J.Johnson,J.Munshi-South,B.C.Verrelli,Geneflowandgeneticdriftinurbanenvironments.Mol.Ecol.28,4138–4151(2019).doi:10.1111/mec.15221;pmid:31482608111.S.LaPoint,N.Balkenhol,J.Hale,J.Sadler,R.vanderRee,Ecologicalconnectivityresearchinurbanareas.Funct.Ecol.29,868–878(2015).doi:10.1111/1365-2435.12489112.S.P.D.Rileyetal.,AsouthernCaliforniafreewayisaphysicalandsocialbarriertogeneflowincarnivores.Mol.Ecol.15,1733–1741(2006).doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.02907.x;pmid:16689893113.D.E.Kramar,A.Anderson,H.Hilfer,K.Branden,J.J.Gutrich,ASpatiallyInformedAnalysisofEnvironmentalJustice:AnalyzingtheEffectsofGerrymanderingandtheProximityofMinorityPopulationstoU.S.SuperfundSites.Environ.Justice11,29–39(2018).doi:10.1089/env.2017.0031114.C.M.Somers,B.E.McCarry,F.Malek,J.S.Quinn,Reductionofparticulateairpollutionlowerstheriskofheritablemutationsinmice.Science304,1008–1010(2004).doi:10.1126/science.1095815;pmid:15143280115.N.M.Reidetal.,Thegenomiclandscapeofrapidrepeatedevolutionaryadaptationtotoxicpollutioninwildfish.Science354,1305–1308(2016).doi:10.1126/science.aah4993;pmid:27940876116.K.I.Bransetal.,Theheatison:Geneticadaptationtourbanizationmediatedbythermaltoleranceandbodysize.GlobalChangeBiol.23,5218–5227(2017).doi:10.1111/gcb.13784;pmid:28614592117.K.I.Brans,L.DeMeester,Citylifeonfastlanes:UrbanizationinducesanevolutionaryshifttowardsafasterlifestyleinthewaterfleaDaphnia.Funct.Ecol.32,2225–2240(2018).doi:10.1111/1365-2435.13184118.S.E.Diamond,L.D.Chick,A.Perez,S.A.Strickler,R.A.Martin,Evolutionofthermaltoleranceanditsfitnessconsequences:Parallelandnon-parallelresponsestourbanheatislandsacrossthreecities.Proc.R.Soc.B285,20180036(2018).doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.0036;pmid:30051828119.N.Tüzün,L.OpdeBeeck,K.I.Brans,L.Janssens,R.Stoks,Microgeographicdifferentiationinthermalperformancecurvesbetweenruralandurbanpopulationsofanaquaticinsect.Evol.Appl.10,1067–1075(2017).doi:10.1111/eva.12512;pmid:29151861120.J.M.Hassell,M.Begon,M.J.Ward,E.M.Fèvre,UrbanizationandDiseaseEmergence:DynamicsattheWildlife-Livestock-HumanInterface.TrendsEcol.Evol.32,55–67(2017).doi:10.1016/j.tree.2016.09.012;pmid:28029378121.R.K.Plowrightetal.,Urbanhabituation,ecologicalconnectivityandepidemicdampening:TheemergenceofHendravirusfromflyingfoxes(Pteropusspp.).Proc.R.Soc.B278,3703–3712(2011).doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0522;pmid:21561971Schelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September202010of11RESEARCH|REVIEW
122.C.G.Himsworth,K.L.Parsons,C.Jardine,D.M.Patrick,Rats,cities,people,andpathogens:Asystematicreviewandnarrativesynthesisofliteratureregardingtheecologyofrat-associatedzoonosesinurbancenters.VectorBorneZoonoticDis.13,349–359(2013).doi:10.1089/vbz.2012.1195;pmid:23590323123.A.C.Petersonetal.,Rodentassemblagestructurereflectssocioecologicalmosaicsofcounter-urbanizationacrosspost-HurricaneKatrinaNewOrleans.Landsc.UrbanPlan.195,103710(2020).doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.103710124.K.A.Byers,M.J.Lee,D.M.Patrick,C.G.Himsworth,Ratsabouttown:Asystematicreviewofratmovementinurbanecosystems.Front.Ecol.Evol.7,13(2019).doi:10.3389/fevo.2019.00013125.M.G.Walsh,RatsightingsinNewYorkCityareassociatedwithneighborhoodsociodemographics,housingcharacteristics,andproximitytoopenpublicspace.PeerJ2,e533(2014).doi:10.7717/peerj.533;pmid:25237595126.M.H.Murrayetal.,Citysanitationandsocioeconomicspredictratzoonoticinfectionacrossdiverseneighbourhoods.ZoonosesPublicHealth10.1111/zph.12748(2020).doi:10.1111/zph.12748;pmid:32583624127.M.H.Murrayetal.,Publiccomplaintsreflectratrelativeabundanceacrossdiverseurbanneighborhoods.Front.Ecol.Evol.6,189(2018).doi:10.3389/fevo.2018.00189128.J.L.Richardsonetal.,Usingfine-scalespatialgeneticsofNorwayratstoimprovecontroleffortsandreduceleptospirosisriskinurbanslumenvironments.Evol.Appl.10,323–337(2017).doi:10.1111/eva.12449;pmid:28352293129.A.Desvars-Larriveetal.,Populationgenetics,communityofparasites,andresistancetorodenticidesinanurbanbrownrat(Rattusnorvegicus)population.PLOSONE12,e0184015(2017).doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0184015;pmid:28886097130.K.A.Byers,S.M.Cox,R.Lam,C.G.Himsworth,“They’realwaysthere”:Residentexperiencesoflivingwithratsinadisadvantagedurbanneighbourhood.BMCPublicHealth19,853(2019).doi:10.1186/s12889-019-7202-6;pmid:31262276131.A.vanDorn,R.E.Cooney,M.L.Sabin,COVID-19exacerbatinginequalitiesintheUS.Lancet395,1243–1244(2020).doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30893-X;pmid:32305087132.F.Ahmed,N.Ahmed,C.Pissarides,J.Stiglitz,WhyinequalitycouldspreadCOVID-19.LancetPublicHealth5,e240(2020).doi:10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30085-2;pmid:32247329133.C.W.Yancy,COVID-19andAfricanAmericans.JAMA323,1891–1892(2020).doi:10.1001/jama.2020.6548134.K.Terrell,W.James,AirPollutionandCOVID-19:ADoubleWhammyforAfricanAmericanandImpoverishedCommunitiesinCancerAlley.Environ.LawClin.,1–26(2020);https://law.tulane.edu/sites/law.tulane.edu/files/Files/Terrell%20-%20COVID-19%20-%20PM%202.5%20Louisiana%202020-5-14%20WEB%20VERSION.pdf.135.R.A.OppelJr.,R.Gebeloff,K.K.R.Lai,W.Wright,M.Smith,“TheFullestLookYetattheRacialInequityofCoronavirus,”NewYorkTimes(5July2020);www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/05/us/coronavirus-latinos-african-americans-cdc-data.html.136.X.Wu,R.C.Nethery,B.M.Sabath,D.Braun,F.Dominici,ExposuretoairpollutionandCOVID-19mortalityintheUnitedStates:Anationwidecross-sectionalstudy.medRxiv20054502[Preprint].27April2020.http://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054502.137.S.M.Volketal.,Genome-scalephylogeneticanalysesofchikungunyavirusrevealindependentemergencesofrecentepidemicsandvariousevolutionaryrates.J.Virol.84,6497–6504(2010).doi:10.1128/JVI.01603-09;pmid:20410280138.M.Gandy,Queerecology:Nature,sexuality,andheterotopicalliances.Environ.Plann.D30,727–747(2012).doi:10.1068/d10511139.D.J.Patrick,Thematterofdisplacement:AqueerurbanecologyofNewYorkCity’sHighLine.Soc.Cult.Geogr.15,920–941(2014).doi:10.1080/14649365.2013.851263140.D.L.Hankins,TheeffectsofindigenousprescribedfireonriparianvegetationincentralCalifornia.Ecol.Process.2,24(2013).doi:10.1186/2192-1709-2-24141.D.M.Waller,N.J.Reo,Firststewards:EcologicaloutcomesofforestandwildlifestewardshipbyindigenouspeoplesofWisconsin,USA.Ecol.Soc.23,45(2018).doi:10.5751/ES-09865-230145142.D.E.Taylor,“Race,class,gender,andAmericanenvironmentalism”(GeneralTech.Rep.PNW-GTR-534,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,ForestService,2002);www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr534.pdf.143.J.Purdy,“Environmentalism’sRacistHistory,”NewYorker(13August2015);www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/environmentalisms-racist-history.144.J.B.Noisecat,“TheEnvironmentalMovementNeedstoReckonwithItsRacistHistory,”ViceNews(13September2019);www.vice.com/en_us/article/bjwvn8/the-environmental-movement-needs-to-reckon-with-its-racist-history.145.A.Agrawal,K.Redford,Conservationanddisplacement:Anoverview.Conserv.Soc.7,1–10(2009).doi:10.4103/0972-4923.54790146.S.M.Wilson,R.Richard,L.Joseph,E.Williams,Climatechange,environmentaljustice,andvulnerability:Anexploratoryspatialanalysis.Environ.Justice3,13–19(2010).doi:10.1089/env.2009.0035147.L.Shietal.,Roadmaptowardsjusticeinurbanclimateadaptationresearch.Nat.Clim.Change6,131–137(2016).doi:10.1038/nclimate2841148.A.R.Pearson,J.P.Schuldt,Facingthediversitycrisisinclimatescience.Nat.Clim.Change4,1039–1042(2014).doi:10.1038/nclimate2415149.F.Edwards,H.Lee,M.Esposito,RiskofbeingkilledbypoliceuseofforceintheUnitedStatesbyage,race-ethnicity,andsex.Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci.U.S.A.116,16793–16798(2019).doi:10.1073/pnas.1821204116;pmid:31383756150.J.Bor,A.S.Venkataramani,D.R.Williams,A.C.Tsai,PolicekillingsandtheirspillovereffectsonthementalhealthofblackAmericans:Apopulation-based,quasi-experimentalstudy.Lancet392,302–310(2018).doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31130-9;pmid:29937193151.C.Finney,BlackFaces,WhiteSpaces:ReimaginingtheRelationshipofAfricanAmericanstotheGreatOutdoors(Univ.ofNorthCarolinaPress,2014).152.W.J.Wright,AsAbove,SoBelow:Anti-BlackViolenceasEnvironmentalRacism.Antipode10.1111/anti.12425(2018).doi:10.1111/anti.12425153.R.D.Hardy,R.A.Milligan,N.Heynen,Racialcoastalformation:Theenvironmentalinjusticeofcolorblindadaptationplanningforsea-levelrise.Geoforum87,62–72(2017).doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.10.005154.S.Meerow,P.Pajouhesh,T.R.Miller,Socialequityinurbanresilienceplanning.LocalEnviron.24,793–808(2019).doi:10.1080/13549839.2019.1645103155.Ö.Bodin,Collaborativeenvironmentalgovernance:Achievingcollectiveactioninsocial-ecologicalsystems.Science357,eaan1114(2017).doi:10.1126/science.aan1114;pmid:28818915156.D.Haaseetal.,Greeningcities–Tobesociallyinclusive?Abouttheallegedparadoxofsocietyandecologyincities.HabitatInt.64,41–48(2017).doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.04.005157.J.R.Montambaultetal.,Socialequityandurbannatureconservation.Conserv.Lett.11,e12423(2018).doi:10.1111/conl.12423158.A.Martin,S.Mcguire,S.Sullivan,Globalenvironmentaljusticeandbiodiversityconservation.Geogr.J.179,122–131(2013).doi:10.1111/geoj.12018159.G.Graddy-Lovelace,BeyondBiodiversityConservation:WhyPolicyNeedsSocialTheory,SocialTheoryNeedsJustice,andJusticeNeedsPolicy.Glob.Environ.Polit.17,144–151(2017).doi:10.1162/GLEP_a_00405160.G.M.Mikkelson,A.Gonzalez,G.D.Peterson,Economicinequalitypredictsbiodiversityloss.PLOSONE2,e444(2007).doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000444;pmid:17505535161.M.C.Kondoetal.,HealthimpactassessmentofPhiladelphia’s2025treecanopycovergoals.LancetPlanet.Health4,e149–e157(2020).doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30058-9;pmid:32353295162.G.N.Bratmanetal.,Natureandmentalhealth:Anecosystemserviceperspective.Sci.Adv.5,eaax0903(2019).doi:10.1126/sciadv.aax0903;pmid:31355340163.T.Sikor,A.Martin,J.Fisher,J.He,TowardanEmpiricalAnalysisofJusticeinEcosystemGovernance.Conserv.Lett.7,524–532(2014).doi:10.1111/conl.12142164.G.Reese,L.Jacob,Principlesofenvironmentaljusticeandpro-environmentalaction:Atwo-stepprocessmodelofmoralangerandresponsibilitytoact.Environ.Sci.Policy51,88–94(2015).doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2015.03.011165.I.Anguelovski,FromToxicSitestoParksas(Green)LULUs?NewChallengesofInequity,Privilege,Gentrification,andExclusionforUrbanEnvironmentalJustice.J.Plann.Lit.31,23–36(2016).doi:10.1177/0885412215610491166.T.A.Hoppeetal.,TopicchoicecontributestothelowerrateofNIHawardstoAfrican-American/blackscientists.Sci.Adv.5,eaaw7238(2019).doi:10.1126/sciadv.aaw7238;pmid:31633016167.B.Hofstraetal.,Thediversity–innovationparadoxinscience.Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci.U.S.A.117,9284–9291(2020).doi:10.1073/pnas.1915378117;pmid:32291335168.E.B.Barbier,HowtomakethenextGreenNewDealwork.Nature565,6(2019).doi:10.1038/d41586-018-07845-5;pmid:30602752169.P.B.Holdenetal.,Climate-carboncycleuncertaintiesandtheParisAgreement.Nat.Clim.Change8,609–613(2018).doi:10.1038/s41558-018-0197-7170.R.T.Corlettetal.,Impactsofthecoronaviruspandemiconbiodiversityconservation.Biol.Conserv.246,108571(2020).doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108571;pmid:32292203171.D.Neupane,HowconservationwillbeimpactedintheCOVID-19pandemic.Wildl.Biol.2020,19–21(2020).doi:10.2981/wlb.00727172.X.Liuetal.,High-spatiotemporal-resolutionmappingofglobalurbanchangefrom1985to2015.Nat.Sustain.3,564–570(2020).doi:10.1038/s41893-020-0521-xACKNOWLEDGMENTSWethankM.AlbertiandothercoremembersoftheUrbanEco-EvoRCNfortransdisciplinaryinsight.Wealsothankthefouranonymousreviewers,whogreatlyimprovedthequalityofthismanuscript.Severalconceptsinthismanuscriptalsoemergedfromthe2019InternationalUrbanWildlifeConference(IUWC)inPortland,Oregon,andwethankT.Gallo,M.Fidino,D.Ferris,S.Hall,N.Grimm,L.Bliss-Ketchum,M.Murray,S.Magle,L.Lehrer,C.Kay,andotherassociatedmembersoftheCentralArizona–Phoenix(CAP)LTERandUrbanWildlifeInformationNetwork(UWIN)forformativeconversationsinadvancingournarrative.SpecialthankstoB.SterudandthePuyallupTribeofIndians.Funding:S.D.R.,C.J.S.,C.A.W.-E.andD.S.M.werefundedbytheUniversityofWashington.M.R.L.wasfundedbytheUniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley,andtheDavidH.SmithFellowsprogram.S.D.R.andM.R.L.werealsosupportedbytheNSF-fundedUrbanEco-EvoRCN.Competinginterests:Theauthorshavenocompetingintereststodeclare.10.1126/science.aay4497Schelletal.,Science369,eaay4497(2020)18September202011of11RESEARCH|REVIEW
Use of this article is subject to the Terms of serviceScience (ISSN 1095-9203) is published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 1200 New York Avenue NW,Washington, DC 20005. The title Science is a registered trademark of AAAS.Copyright © 2020 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claimto original U.S. Government WorksThe ecological and evolutionary consequences of systemic racism in urbanenvironmentsChristopher J. SchellKaren DysonTracy L. FuentesSimone Des RochesNyeema C. HarrisDanica Sterud MillerCleo A.Woelfle-ErskineMax R. LambertScience, 369 (6510), eaay4497. • DOI: 10.1126/science.aay4497Imprints of racismCities create challenging environments for many nonhuman species, and the presence of nonhumans in citiesinfluences the health and well-being of the humans with which they share the environment. Distinct urban conditionsare created by landscape modification, but the history of this transformation is not equal across urban environments.Schell et al. review how systematic racist practices such as residential segregation, enacted in part through redlining,have led to an unequal distribution of “nature” within cities. These inequities continue to play out in both the ecologicalprocesses of cities and the welfare of their residents.Science, this issue p. eaay4497View the article onlinehttps://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aay4497Permissionshttps://www.science.org/help/reprints-and-permissions

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *