In this post, we explore environmental justice and sustainable development concepts in the current era and discuss the environmental injustice of the Flint Water Crisis (FWC).
On January 1, 2016, 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs, the goals) were officially adopted by world leaders. Since their adoption, countries have been mobilized to apply their resources in effort to address the goals. These goals fight to end all forms of poverty, inequalities, and tackle climate change (UN, 2020).
Despite the endorsement and acceptance of the goals, environmental justice struggles are growing over the globe. As Atapattu et al., (2022) discuss, the capitalistic model of the current economy is the primary cause of environmental crises, and this includes the inequalities observed in environmental injustices. Due to the varying forms of oppression that privilege a few but harm many others, it is important to discuss environmental justice and sustainable development.
Broadly speaking, environmental justice refers to the distribution of environmental benefits and burdens, and the fair treatment and involvement of all people (regardless of race, color, nationality, or income) in environmental decision making.
Many environmental justice observers point to the 1980s as the launch of the concept. At this time in North Carolina, public protests declared that the development proposal of a hazardous waste landfill was unacceptable (Mohai, 2018). The landfill, which was to accept PCB contaminated soil, was to be situated near a low-income community of mainly African American people (Dearden et al., 2020). The protest spurred an examination of where similar landfills were primarily located. Results of the investigation found that three of every four landfills were in or near minority communities. Unfortunately, these are communities that already suffer from discrimination and injustice in society and tend to be further burdened by environmental hazards and disadvantages. As a result, the field of environmental justice was developed out of concern for the impacts of environmental pollution and hazardous waste disposal sites on these communities (N.J Bennet et al., 2022).
Since the inception of the concept, many principles have evolved as defining guides for the movement (Mohai, 2018). These principles vary from the affirmation of the sacredness of mother earth to the requirement that individuals must make decisions to consume as few resources (and produce a minimal amount of waste) as possible to prioritize the health of the natural world for present and future generations (Gerhard & Jacob, 2015). As decisions prioritize the limitation of resource use and the health of the natural world, environmental justice can be linked to sustainable development.
Sustainable development has different interpretations of meaning by various parties. In one example, sustainable development refers to the idea that the future should be better, healthier, and cleaner than the present (Blewitt, 2008). While another describes sustainable development as the ability to build a strong local and inclusive economy which meets the needs of generations to come (Dearden et al, 2020). Most sustainable development visions seem to coincide with a main goal of using current resources in such a way to not jeopardize the needs of a future generation. As such, sustainable development addresses global challenges such as poverty and hunger, inequality, climate change, justice and peace, clean water and sanitation, responsible consumption and production, and others (Government of Canada, 2023, January 4).
In 2014, a decision was made to save costs in the supply of drinking water to Flint, Michigan. This decision, which changed the source of Flint’s drinking water, came at the expense of the health and well-being of the citizens of Flint. This exposed residents to elevated lead levels and the possibility of legionella bacteria in their drinking water (Pauli, 2020). As discussed by Pieper et al., (2017), the switch to the Flint River water source resulted in a progressive increase of lead concentrations in the city’s water due to the failure to implement corrosion control. Subsequently, this led to a historic outbreak of Legionnaire’s disease and left many others with persistent health problems.
Prior to the source water switch, Flint was purchasing their treated drinking water from the Detroit Water and Sewer Department (the DWSD). Believing that the water from the DWSD was too expensive, the Emergency Managers appointed by Governor Snyder subscribed to a plan which entailed the building of a new pipeline (operated by the Karegnondi Water Authority, (KWA)) from Lake Huron to Flint’s water treatment plant (WTP). This new pipeline wasn’t scheduled to come online until 2016 (Pieper et al., 2017). The decision to cut costs by switching the source water in the interim until the KWA project was operational led to Flint’s distribution system being supplied with water from the Flint River. To add to the issue, the failure to implement corrosion control allowed lead leaching from homes with lead service lines (LSLs) (Pieper et al., 2017).
The tragedy has many actors and was a massive failure of government and despite the appearance of the issue stemming from one single decision; as Mohai (2018) discusses, it is rather a collection of many poor decisions. From the politicians at state levels, members of the governor’s staff, and others, the responsibility of the crisis rests with these officials. This crisis has a lot more to be discussed than can be completed here (the Flint Water Advisory Task Force (2016) provides a timeline summary) in this paper, but it is without a doubt an example of Environmental Injustice. This representation is due to the following facts:
- Amid public denials of the water quality crisis, the State installed water purification coolers in their public offices to provide clean water to staff and visitors (Flint Water Advisory Task Force, 2016). Mohai (2018) discusses that the State provided clean water internally before the State’s official acknowledgement of the problem.
- Flint residents, with the majority being people of color and being among the most deprived in any area of the United States, were not able to enjoy the same protection from environmental hazards as provided to other communities (Mohai, 2018).
- Due to the resident’s subjugation to emergency management controls from a prior situation, they were not provided equal access or involvement in government decision making processes (Flint Water Advisory Task Force, 2016).
The concentration and overrepresentation of impoverished people and those of color in a space which suffers from contamination such as that imposed by the crisis is indicative of environmental injustice. Additionally, as the concerns of resident’s were raised due to the poor water quality and aesthetics, but which were promptly dismissed by the government during the crisis, this speaks to another pattern that arises in communities suffering from environmental injustice (Mohai, 2018., Flint Water Advisory Task Force, 2016).
Given the magnitude of the Flint Water crisis, conversations regarding environmental justice have increased in the public and official spaces (Mohai, 2018). And the role played by public officials in the crisis demonstrate a textbook case of environmental injustice. As such, the furthering of conversations regarding environmental justice and sustainability are an important aspect of future development in the current era. The implementation of the sustainable development goals and their work to end poverty, inequalities, and tackle climate change while upholding the environmental justice principles will form an important and measurable difference in the overall goal of improving the quality of life for those affected by the unfair distribution of environmental benefits and risks. Consequently, it is paramount that discussions surrounding environmental justice and sustainable development continue to occur and are not ignored. Another tragedy at the expense of the health and well-being of communities should not be allowed to reoccur.
Sources
Atapattu, A., Sumudu., Gonzalez, G., Carmen., Seck, L., Sara., (Eds.). (2022). Cambridge Handbook of Environmental Justice and Sustainable Development. Cambridge University Press.
Bennett, N. J., Alava, J. J., Ferguson, C. E., Blythe, J., Morgera, E., Boyd, D., & Côté, I. M. (2023). Environmental (in)justice in the Anthropocene Ocean. Marine Policy, 147, 105383. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOL.2022.105383
Blewitt, John., (2008). Understanding Sustainable Development. Earthscan.
Dearden, P., Mitchell, B., & O'Connell, E. (2020). Environmental Change & Challenge: A Canadian perspective. Oxford University Press.
Flint Advisory Task Force. (2016). Flint Advisory Task Force Final Report. Commissioned by Office of Governor Rick Snyder, State of Michigan, pp. 1-62. https://www.michigan.gov/documents/ snyder/FWATF_FINAL_REPORT_21March2016_517805_7. pdf
Gerhard, Reese., Jacob, Lisa. (2015). Principles of environmental justice and pro-environmental action: A two-step process model of moral anger and responsibility to act.
Government of Canada. (2023, January 4). Canada and the Sustainable Development Goals.
Retrieved February 5, 2023, from https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/agenda-2030.html
Mohai, P. (2018). Environmental Justice and the Flint Water Crisis. Michigan Sociological Review, 32, 1–41. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26528595
Pauli, J., Benjamin., (2020). The Flint Water Crisis. WIREs Water, Volume 7, Issue 3., Retrieved February 6, 2023, from https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1420
Pieper, K. J., Tang, M., & Edwards, M. A. (2017). Flint water crisis caused by interrupted corrosion control: Investigating “ground zero” home. Environmental Science & Technology, 51(4), 2007–2014. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b04034
UN. (2020). Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved February 5, 2023, from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2020/09/united-nations-releases-special-2020-broadcast-calling-for-collective-action/
Comments ()