Agyeman & Evans 2004

8/13/2019 Agyeman & Evans 2004

1/11


2/11

156

Just sustainability

local and activist level, a vocabulary for politicalopportunity, mobilization and action. At the sametime, at the government level, it is a policy prin-ciple, that no public action will disproportionatelydisadvantage any particular social group. We

expand on this below, but it is important to empha-size that a fruitful discussion of environmentaljustice is crucially dependent upon recognizing thisdistinction.

Secondly, as the title of this paper indicatesand as we have argued elsewhere (Agyeman et al

.2002 2003; Agyeman and Evans 2003), in terms ofpolitics, policy and academic analysis, it is necessaryto place the discourse of environmental justicefirmly within the framework of sustainability. Thirdly,we recognize the integral connections between justiceand equity, and wider questions of governance, and

we return to this towards the end of our paper.

What is environmental justice?

Environmental justice, like sustainability, is acontested and problematized concept. Therefore,defining it is not an easy task. Like sustainability,there are many possible definitions. In the US, theCommonwealth of Massachusetts uses the followingdefinition in its Environmental Justice Policy:

Environmental justice is based on the principle that

all people have a right to be protected from environ-

mental pollution and to live in and enjoy a cleanand healthful environment. Environmental justice is the

equal protection and meaningful involvement of all

people with respect to the development, implementation

and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations

and policies and the equitable distribution of environ-

mental benefits.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts 2002, 2

This definition has both

procedural (meaningfulinvolvement of all people) and substantive (rightto live in and enjoy a clean and healthful environ-

ment) aspects. Unlike most definitions, it makesthe case that environmental justice policy shouldnot only be reactive to environmental bads, butshould also be proactive in the distribution andachievement of environmental goods (a higherquality of life, a sustainable community).

Where has the concept of, and movement for,environmental justice come from? Environmentalinjustices, it is said, started around the time ofColumbus in 1492. However, the landmark 1987United Church of Christ study Toxic wastes andrace in the United States showed that certain,predominantly communities of color are at dispro-

portionate risk from commercial toxic waste. Thisfinding was confirmed by later research (Adeola

1994; Bryant and Mohai 1992; Bullard 1990a 1990b;Mohai and Bryant 1992). It also led to the coiningof a term by Benjamin Chavis, which became therallying cry of many: environmental racism.

This, combined with the conclusion of Lavelle

and Coyle (1992) in the National Law Journal

that there is unequal protection and enforcementof environmental law by the US EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA), has ensured that there is nowa fully fledged environmental justice movementmade up of tenants associations, religious groups,civil rights groups, farm workers, professional not-for-profits, university centers and academics, andlabor unions amongst others. It occurs from Alaskato Alabama and from California to Connecticut,driven by the grassroots activism of African-American,Latino, Asian and Pacific American, Native American

and poor white communities. As such, according toPulido (1996), it is a multiracial movement whichis organizing around LULUs (locally unwanted landuses), such as waste facility siting, transfer storageand disposal facilities, and other issues such as leadcontamination, pesticides, water and air pollution,workplace safety, and transportation. More recently,issues such as sprawl and smart growth (Bullard

et al

. 2000), sustainability (Agyeman et al

. 2003)and climate justice (International Climate JusticeNetwork 2002) have become targets for the environ-mental justice critique.

Gaining inspiration from and linking with the

Civil Rights movement (Agyeman 2000), the envir-onmental justice movement appropriated . . . thepreexisting salient frames of racism and civil rights(Taylor 2000, 62). This, Taylor argues, has led tothe development of the Environmental JusticeParadigm (2000, 537) which is most clearly articu-lated through the Principles

1

and is the firstparadigm to link environment and race, class,gender, and social justice concerns in an explicitframework (2000, 542).

What is sustainability?

Around the same time as environmental justice wasdeveloping as a public policy issue, the ideas ofsustainability and sustainable development wereachieving prominence among local, nationaland international policymakers and politicians,together with policy entrepreneurs in NGOs. Sincethe 1980s, there has been a massive increase inpublished and online material dealing with sustain-ability and sustainable development. This has ledto competing and conflicting views over what theterms mean, what is to be sustained, by whom, forwhom, and what is the most desirable means of

achieving this goal. However, like Campbell, weagree that in the battle of big public ideas, sustain-


3/11

Just sustainability

157

ability has won: the task of the coming years issimply to work out the details and to narrow thegap between its theory and practice (1996, 301).A caveat to Campbells statement is in order:working out the details of sustainability is anything

but simple!Elsewhere, we have argued that

sustainability . . . cannot be simply a green, or

environmental concern, important though environ-

mental aspects of sustainability are. A truly sustainable

society is one where wider questions of social needs

and welfare, and economic opportunity are integrally

related to environmental limits imposed by supporting

ecosystems.

Agyeman et al

. 2002, 78

Sustainability is interpreted in this paper asmeaning the need to ensure a better quality of lifefor all, now and into the future, in a just andequitable manner, whilst living within the limitsof supporting ecosystems (Agyeman et al

. 2003, 5).It represents an attempt to look holistically atthe human condition, at human ecology, and tofoster joined up or connected, rather than piecemealpolicy solutions to humanitys greatest problems. AsAgyeman (forthcoming) argues, unlike the domin-ant 1987 Brundtland and 1991 International Unionfor the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) definitions,in which justice and equity are at best implicit, our

definition focuses on four main areas of concern:on quality of life

, on present and future genera-tions

, on justice and equity

in resource allocation,and on living within ecological limits

. These areasof concern move away from the dominant orienta-tion of environmental sustainability to representjust sustainability, a balanced approach includingan explicit focus on justice, equity and environmenttogether. Jacobs (1999) calls this the egalitarianconception of sustainability.

The emergence of environmental justice in Britain

There is an environmental justice paradox inBritain. This is the gap between peoples perception,and what is happening. Agyeman has argued that

to many people in the UK, environmental justice

is quite simply someone elses problem. To them,

the words environmental and justice do not sit easily

together. At best, their combination evokes a memory

of some distant news report or documentary of how

communities of colour and poor communities in the

US face a disproportionate toxic risk when compared

with white middle class communities, and at worst

the combination fails to register a signal.Agyeman 2000, 7

However, what is happening is very different. Overthe past 15 years, during which the Black Environ-ment Network (BEN), a British proto-environmentaljustice organization, has been in existence, butespecially in the last 5 years, environmental

injustice has been shown to be happening inmany different ways, from disproportionate pollutionloadings to fuel poverty, from transportation inequi-ties to lack of countryside access because ofrural racism (Agyeman 2002). The response, calls forgreater environmental justice, has become loudersuch that it is now a growing concern for manyNGOs and some politicians, such as MichaelMeacher MP, former Minister for the Environment.

Here, while not exhaustive, we briefly review justsome current initiatives in the UK in chronologicalorder.

In 1998, Gordon Walkers paper on Environmentaljustice and the politics of risk is the first of manyfrom what is now Staffordshire Universitys Instituteof Environmental and Sustainability Research (IESR).In 2003, Walker, along with Gordon Mitchell(University of Leeds), and IESR colleagues Jon Fairburnand Graham Smith published draft research on envi-ronmental quality and social deprivation in Englandand Wales. The project for the EnvironmentalAgencys Social Policy Unit is the most substantialresearch in the UK to date examining patterns ofenvironmental justice.

FoES constructed a campaign for environmentaljustice using an adaptation of Carley and Spapens(1997) notion of equal distribution of resourceconsumption between countries on a per capita basis.The campaigns launch with the slogan no less thanour right to a decent environment; no more than ourfair share of the Earths resources, coincided withthe creation in 1999 of the Scottish Parliamentin Edinburgh. It has the legislative power andthe capacity to set an agenda through guidance tolocal authorities, develop voluntary agreements,and provide direction to quangos.

The then FoES Director, Kevin Dunion, said Ishall be calling for the new Scottish Parliamentto show that it is serious about making real change.We want targets for improving energy efficiency inindustry; an energy rating for all homes within 10years; a Warm Homes Act to eradicate fuel poverty;national and local targets under the Road TrafficReduction Act; and changes to Scottish buildingregulations to improve energy performance (FoES1999). These targets, amongst others, now form apart of FoESs Environmental justice action plan(FoES 2000).

The campaign highlights two major injustices

which link the local to the global. First, that Scottishcommunities who are in the worst environments


4/11

158

Just sustainability

tend to be those with least power, because of theirpoverty, unemployment, isolation or a combinationof these. Second, that consumption of dwindlingresources by the North is much higher than wouldbe our fair share in terms of environmental space

(the share of the planet and its resources that thehuman race can sustainably take; McLaren et al

.1998, 6). This is inequitable both intra- and inter-generationally, in that it is detrimental to communi-ties in the South and to future communities.

In 1999, the report Equity and the environment:guidelines for socially just government (Boardman

et al

. 1999, 5) was released. The report, whichaccording to its cover notes could be the future ofradical politics in Britain, goes on to acknowledgethat environmental problems are a component ofsocial exclusion and an issue of social justice and

outlines a set of ten proposed principles of environ-mental justice. The report focuses on key areaswhere inequality is most stark, such as transport,housing and pollution, and develops a coherentcritique with obvious, yet politically sensitive solu-tions. The overall message from the report is loudand it is clear. If we are serious about tacklingenvironmental injustice, revenue needs to be raisedor redirected for capital investment, pricing struc-tures need to give incentives and be progressive,the market needs to be transformed to deliverchange more quickly and any remaining inequalityproblems offset through compensation (Boardman

et al

. 1999, 24). The recognition of human environmental rights has

led to an overlap of international environmental andhuman rights law, as can be seen especially in the1999 Aarhus Convention on Access to information,public participation in decision-making and accessto justice in environmental matters (see below). Itrecalls Principle l of the 1972 Stockholm Declarationon the Human Environment and Principle 10 ofthe 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment andDevelopment.

The Convention, which came into effect on 30

October 2001, is therefore unique in being the firstto ensure citizens rights in the field of the environ-ment. It implies substantive rights (right to a cleanerenvironment) and guarantees procedural rights(right to participate) to European citizens. It states, asthe objective of Article 1, that in order to contributeto the protection of the right of every person ofpresent and future generations to live in an environ-ment adequate to his or her health and well-being,each party shall guarantee the rights of access toinformation, public participation in decision makingand access to justice in environmental matters inaccordance with the provisions of this Convention

(United Nations Economic Commission for Europe1999).

The Town and Country Planning Association reportEnvironmental justice: from the margins to themainstream (Agyeman 2000, 7) sets out to firmlylink the two words environmental and justice inthe planners lexicon. It argues that environmental

justice and its sister concepts of social justice andequity should be at the heart of emerging policies forsustainability at the local, regional and national (andinternational) level and that more research andgrowing calls for environmental justice are likely tomove it rapidly, from the margins to the mainstreamof UK policy (Agyeman 2000, 7).

In Friends of the Earth England, Wales and NorthernIrelands (FoE) Pollution and poverty breakingthe link (FoE 2001), FoE took pollution data fromthe Environment Agency, which covered a host ofchemicals emitted to the air, water and landscape by

large factories. They compared the factory locationsand their emissions with the Governments Index ofMultiple Deprivation. This index ranks all 8414 localauthority wards in England into several categoriessuch as health, education, income, employment,housing and access to services. Their researchreveals that poor communities are disproportion-ately burdened by factory pollution. In 1999, 11 400tonnes of carcinogenic chemicals were released intothe air in England, of which:

o 66% of carcinogen emissions are in the mostdeprived 10% of wards;

o 82% of carcinogen emissions are in the mostdeprived 20% of wards;o only 8% of carcinogen emissions are in the least

deprived 50% of wards.

An indication that environmental justice issues arereaching the policy mainstream is the Economic andSocial Research Councils (ESRC) Global Environ-mental Change Programmes report Environmentaljustice: rights and means to a healthy environment(ESRC 2001). In a plea for joined up thinking, thereport argues that by seeing social justice issuesthrough the environmental lens, and vice versa by

analysing environmental issues more clearly interms of social justice, new and more effective waysfor dealing with each can be developed than if, asis usually the case at present, each is dealt withseparately (ESRC 2001, 1).

FoEs report Environmental justice: mapping trans-port and social exclusion in Bradford (FoE 2001b, 4)shows that negative traffic impacts are concentratedin more deprived areas and that it is possible topinpoint areas with multiple problems in access toservices, by matching data sets such as on car own-ership, poor public transport services, deprivationand traffic volumes. It concludes that local author-

ities should map and tackle social exclusion issuesin their Local Transport Plans (LTPs) (FoE 2001, 4).


5/11

Just sustainability

159

In the Rowntree Foundation report, Rainforests area long way from here: the environmental concernsof disadvantaged groups (Burningham and Thrush2001), focus groups were held in Glasgow, London,North Wales and the Peak District, and interviews

were held with key people nationally to discover theenvironmental concerns of the disadvantaged. Aconclusion, with a caveat, was that placing localenvironmental issues within a broader justice andequality agenda has helped mobilise disadvantagedcommunities in the US. Whilst the UK situationdiffers in important respects, the extent of residentslocal pride may provide a fertile basis for campaignsto protect and improve the quality of neglectedlocalities. There is a danger, however, that thelanguage of environmental justice, which linkspoor people and poor environments, might not

only reinforce a negative image in some localitiesbut may ignore the distinctive problems faced bypoor people living in good/desirable/beautiful ruralenvironments (Burningham and Thrush 2001, 4).

The Sustainable Development Commission (SDC),the national body set up by the government toreview UK sustainable development strategy, toidentify policy gaps and to make recommendationsto the Prime Minister and the First Ministers forScotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, has a posi-tion on environmental justice. In Vision for sustain-able regeneration: environment and poverty themissing link (SDC 2000), the SDC notes that

Environmental justice adds the final piece in thejigsaw of sustainable regeneration and is growingin importance through political recognition andcommitment (2002, 4).

In the Rowntree-funded report Environmentaljustice links and lessons (Adebowale 2003), the aimis first, to provide a review of research done to dateon environmental justice and their [sic] link to socialinclusion and environmental concerns. Second,to examine the role of, environmental justice inimproving the inclusion of disadvantaged groups inthe delivery of environmental decision making

(2003, 3). Following the 2003 report Modernizing environ-mental justice: regulation and the role of an environ-mental tribunal by the Centre for Law and theEnvironment (McRory 2003), UCL Laws was devel-oped as a result of a recommendation by the RoyalCommission on Environmental Pollution. The reportargued that a specialist system for environmentaltribunals should be set up to both consolidateand rationalize the current range of environmentalappeal mechanisms as these are currently distributedamongst many different courts and other bodies. Theneed for this is all the more urgent given the chang-

ing nature of the role of environmental regulatoryappeals. Importantly, the Aarhus Convention ele-

vates the concept of more active environmentalcitizenship, and introduces environmental justicelaw to a European audience. This includes the rightof members of the public and NGOs to legal reviewmechanisms that are, at the same time, fair, equitable,

timely and not prohibitively expensive. The pro-posed Environmental Tribunal is likely to be a betterbasis for meeting the visions of Aarhus than arecurrent procedures.

Capacity, a new NGO, works as a catalyst for socialjustice and sustainable development. Its mission isto build alliances and networks to empower margin-alized people who suffer the indignities of social,environmental and economic deprivation. Mostsignificantly, however, Capacity is the Founder ofthe UK Environmental Justice Network. It supportsthe Network by running seminars and workshops

on environmental justice with Network members.Membership of the network comprises communitygroups, NGOs, business and public bodies.

Clearly, as these initiatives show, environmentaljustice is moving from the margins to the main-stream in British NGO and policy circles. Given itsrelative recency as a public policy issue in the UK,its reach into governmental policy, law (nationaland European), foundations such as Rowntree,funding bodies such as the ESRC and the worldof NGOs, we can predict that its influence will growstill further, especially if mediated by its links with

sustainability. This was predicted by US geographerCutter, who stated that the issue of environmentaljustice in other regions will intensify in the years tocome as nations implement international accordsfor sustainable development (1995, 111).

Just sustainability

In this section of the paper, we reflect on thelinkages which may be made between environ-mental justice and sustainability. We call this nexusjust sustainability and in doing so we draw exten-

sively upon our recently published work in this field(Agyeman et al

. 2003; Agyeman forthcoming). AsFaber has pointed out, the struggle for environ-mental justice is not just about distributing risksequally but about preventing them from beingproduced in the first place (1998, 14). Faberspoint raises two issues. Firstly, it is a refutation ofDobsons (1998 2003) idea that the environmentaljustice movement is not about sustainability becauseit wants to share risk equally, not get rid of therisk altogether. Secondly, it is also a reflectionupon environmental justice as political opportunity,mobilisation and action, but it is equally valid in

the context of environmental justice as a policyprinciple.


6/11

160

Just sustainability

Looking more broadly, there are two key elementshere. Firstly, environmental problems are vesteddisproportionately upon the poor. FoEs Pollutionand poverty breaking the link (FoE 2001a) showshow end of pipe industrial pollution in the UK bears

down predominantly upon low-income communities,compounding the environmental exclusion whichcan emerge as those same people may be excludedfrom good transportation links or shops selling freshproduce, whilst their children may be subjected tomore atmospheric pollution from motor vehiclesthan other children. All this is compounded by thefact that, globally and nationally, the poor are notthe major polluters. On the contrary, most environ-mental pollution and degradation is caused by theactions of the more affluent. The emergence ofthe environmental justice movement in the United

States over the last two decades was in large part aresponse to these distributional inequities.Although environmental justice in the US was

initially a form of community outrage a backlashagainst LULUs such as toxic waste dumping or theconstruction of a polluting industrial facility increasingly in the UK, this has been mediated byan awareness of its wider sustainability implicationsamongst NGOs, and as such is not so much thedirect focus of community anger (yet?), but is anemergent policy principle. For example, in the UK,Boardman et al

. (1999), FoE, FoES and, to a lesserextent, the SDC have clearly and explicitly placed

environmental justice within the framework ofsustainability.

This is not so in the US, where both movementseye each other cautiously. In a study of sustainabil-ity projects in the largest US cities, Warner (2002)found that few cities even acknowledged environ-mental justice as an aspect of sustainability. Fortyweb sites were identified dealing with 33 cities. Ofthese, only five sites presented environmental justiceas a substantive concern (San Francisco, Seattle,Cleveland, Albuquerque and Austin), and there wassignificant variation in the way that environmental

justice was built into sustainability in these cases.Similarly, the Environmental Law Institute (1999)analyzed 579 applications to the EPAs 1996 Sus-tainable Development Challenge Grant Program.Less than 5% of applications had equity as a goal.

However, as Agyeman argues:

despite the historically and geographically different

origins of these two concepts, with their attendant

paradigms, namely the

Environmental Justice Paradigm

(EJP) of Taylor (2000), and the

New Environmental

Paradigm

(NEP) of Catton and Dunlap (1978) and

their supporting social movements, there exists an area

of theoretical, conceptual and practical compatibilitybetween them. This area represents a rich and critical

nexus where proponents of each movement are

engaging in

cooperative endeavors

(Schlosberg 1999)

around common issues such as toxics use reduction.

This was the case in 2001, when the Deep South

Center for Environmental Justice and University of

Massachusetts Lowells Center for Sustainable Pro-duction held a two day training workshop to explore

common issues.

Agyeman forthcoming

Increasingly, environmental justice campaignsglobally are being reformulated to encompasssustainability (Earth Council 2000), and vice versa(Heinrich Boll Foundation 2002), recognizing thatit is insufficient to simply reject environmentalbads. Instead, such campaigns, following Faber,increasingly argue not here, not anywhere. From

an initial perspective of injustice, proponents ofenvironmental justice as a vocabulary for politicalopportunity, mobilisation and action in the UK,are increasingly adopting the perspective of justsustainability. This in part recognizes the differenthistorical experience of injustice in Britain, but alsorecognizes the proactivity of organizations suchas FoE and FoES in developing a discourse to fitBritish contemporary political realities.

The second element concerns sustainability.Goldman, in a visionary statement regarding the UScontext, suggested that sustainable developmentmay well be seen as the next phase of the environ-

mental justice movement (1993, 27). Interestingly,whereas the environmental justice movements (weuse the term movements cautiously) outside theUS have begun to move towards sustainability, thesustainability discourse itself is increasingly movingaway from its roots in environmental sustainability,or what Jacobs (1999) calls the non-egalitarianconception, towards a just sustainability: an equalconcern with equity, justice and, ultimately, govern-ance on the one hand, and environment on theother (Agyeman forthcoming).

Supporting this shift, we fully endorse four key

points on this matter. First, Polese and Stren arguesimply that, to be environmentally sustainable,cities must also be socially sustainable (2000, 15).Second, Middleton and OKeefe state that unlessanalyses of development [local, national, orinternational] . . . begin not with the symptoms,environmental or economic instability, but with thecause, social injustice, then no development canbe sustainable (2001, 16). Third, Hempel arguesthat the emerging sustainability ethic may be moreinteresting for what it implies about politics thanfor what it promises about ecology (1999, 43).Finally, Adger notes I would argue that inequality

in its economic, environmental, and geographicalmanifestations is among the most significant


7/11

Just sustainability

161

barriers to sustainable development. It is a barrierbecause of its interaction with individuals lifestylesand because it prevents socially acceptableimplementation of collective planning for sustain-ability (2002, 1716).

This move from an environmentally focusedsustainability to one equally embracing social(and economic) dimensions can be understood asresulting from both bottom-up and top-downpressures. In the UK, the Local Agenda 21

2

initia-tive has been instrumental in emphasizing the needto develop local citizen participation, the processesof community capacity building, more responsivegovernance, and greater empowerment of citizens.Whilst much of this may be regarded as rhetoric,there is evidence to suggest that Local Agenda 21has engendered new ways of working at the local

level in many parts of Britain and Europe (Evansand Theobald 2003a 2003b). This local, bottom-upinfluence has been complemented by a series oftop-down initiatives from the European Union (EU),which together are creating a policy architecturesupportive of just sustainability: both involveenvironmental sustainability and wider questions ofjustice, equity and governance.

Just sustainability in the EU

During the last decade, the EU has approved arange of initiatives that together constitute a policy

framework which it wishes to see adopted by allmember states. The EU has adopted a Strategy forSustainable Development that seeks to embed theprinciple of sustainability into all areas of policydevelopment and implementation.

All policies must have sustainable development as

their core concern. In particular, forthcoming reviews

of Common Policies must look at how they can con-

tribute more positively to sustainable development.

Commission of the European Commission 2002, 12

Sustainable development is clearly defined by theEU as being more than environmental sustainability,important though that is. The Presidency Conclusionsof the Gothenburg Summit stated

The Unions Sustainable Development Strategy is based

on the principle that the economic, social and environ-

mental effects of all policies should be examined in a

co-ordinated way and taken into account in decision

making.

This commitment to a broadly based sustainabledevelopment is closely linked to an emerging

European policy on governance as presented inEuropean governance a White Paper (Commission

of the European Commission 2001). In this WhitePaper, the modernization of European governanceis seen as a necessary precondition for Europeanintegration through a process of decentralization,combating the impact of globalization, and a

restoration of faith in democracy through widerinvolvement in decision making. The WhitePaper identifies five principles which underpin goodgovernance openness, participation, accountability,effectiveness and coherence which should applyto all levels of government from local to global.The White Paper recognizes that the creation of theEU and the challenges of policy in a globalizedworld necessitate new ways of working that are notpossible within a traditional framework of top-downgovernment.

It remains to be seen how the proposals con-

tained in the White Paper will develop and beimplemented. By implication, the proposals demanda degree of power transference both between levelsof government (through the principles of propor-tionality and subsidiarity), and from government tocivil society interest organizations. Such transfers ofpower, responsibility and influence have historicallymet with opposition from the current holders.

The emphasis on improving democratic mecha-nisms for decision making is linked to calls forhuman equity and environmental justice, moreeffective environmental governance, and greaterenvironmental democracy. Although there is often

a blurring of these concepts, the underpinningrationale is clear and may be briefly summarizedas follows:

Equity: moves towards greater sustainability imply aseries of difficult decisions which will need to befaced, and the consequences of not taking thesedecisions (for example, about resource use, con-sumption and pollution) will seriously compromisethe quality of life of both current and future genera-tions. Those societies which exhibit a more equalincome distribution, greater civil liberties and polit-

ical rights, and higher literacy levels tend to havehigher environmental quality (Torras and Boyce1998). The sharing of common futures and fates (andthe difficult decisions involved in this) is more likelywhen there is a higher level of social, economic andpolitical equality. This principle applies both withinand between nations.

Justice: environmental problems bear down dispro-portionately upon the poor, although it is the richnations and the prosperous within those nationswho are the greatest consumers and consequentlypolluters. The Principles of Environmental Justice(National People of Color Environmental Leadership

Conference 1991; Boardman et al

. 1999) demandthat environmental decision making does not


8/11

162

Just sustainability

disproportionately disadvantage any particular socialgroup, society or nation.

Governance: the changes implied in a movetowards more sustainable societies are so immensethat they cannot be imposed by governments alone.

This central fact was a major impetus behind theagreement to Local Agenda 21 at the 1992 EarthSummit, which recognized that change of themagnitude envisaged by Agenda 21 can onlybe achieved by mobilizing the energy, creativity,knowledge and support of local communities,stakeholders, interest organizations and citizensworldwide. More open, deliberative processes,which facilitate the participation of civil societyin taking decisions, will be required to secure thisinvolvement.

Democracy: the right to information, to freedom of

speech, association and dissent, to meaningfulparticipation in decision making these and otherrights underpin most conceptions of modern liberaldemocracy. Democracy is vital for sustainability inthat it facilitates involvement, but through this it alsonurtures understanding and education. Moreover, toencourage the involvement of citizens is to developownership and to combat the alienation and civicdisengagement which will undermine the drivetoward more just and sustainable societies.

In short, good governance is essential for justsustainability. The purposeful involvement of

citizens and stakeholders must be nurtured andsupported. However, it should also be recognizedthat governance cannot be accepted as an un-questioned good. If more governance simplymeans that those who are already well representedin the processes of public decision making havegreater and more effective access, then the movetowards better governance will have failed. Thetask is to ensure that all voices have a say, andspecifically that the underrepresented women,the young, the elderly and members of black andethnic minority groups, for instance are encour-

aged to develop a higher profile in the policyprocess. The final component of this emergingEuropean policy architecture is related to environ-mental rights and citizen participation and iscovered by the Aarhus Convention (detailed above).

These three elements of European policy, relatingto sustainable development, to governance and toenvironmental rights, collectively provide a Europe-wide policy framework for just sustainabilitywhich, it is anticipated, will eventually determineand condition the policies and practices of Europeannational governments. As might be expected, theactual implementation of these policies across

Europe is patchy, and until the European Commis-sion constructs and applies Directives with which

national governments have to comply, progressis likely to be slow. However, some changes innational government policies are gradually occurring,for example in the UK.

Just sustainability in Britain

The governments Sustainable Development Unitlocated in the UK Department for EnvironmentFood and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has established anEnvironmental Democracy Unit whose remit is tofacilitate ratification of the Aarhus Convention.Although this might be interpreted as a governmen-tal commitment to the principles of environmentaljustice and citizen participation in decision making,perhaps a more accurate assessment would be tosee the Units remit as more procedural, concerned

with civil and political procedures, than substan-tive, concerned with outcomes adherence to theletter rather than the intention and spirit of theConvention.

The UK Sustainable Development Strategy (1999),which is currently under review, is based upon theguiding principle of putting people at the centre.Although the Strategy has an environmental focus,it also has the declared objective of combattingpoverty and social exclusion. This objective specif-ically refers to the processes of public participation,access to justice and human rights, the latterreflecting the requirements of the UK Human Rights

Act of 1998. The SDC has been more proactive inits promotion of questions of social inclusion andenvironmental justice (SDC 2002).

However, the general picture in the UK withrespect to questions of sustainable development,environmental justice and governance is one ofstrong policy guidance from Europe, declaredsupport at the national level, but comparativelylittle activity at the regional and local levels. Inthe case of environmental justice, there is littleevidence to suggest that there is the bottom-upcommunity support, or a movement typical of the

US (Agyeman 2000).

Conclusions

For some in the US environmental justice move-ment, the sustainability movement is merely arenaming of the old environmental movement,which did not hire minority staff, nor take up door-step or environmental justice issues, preferringinstead, wilderness, resource and green issues. Andin many respects it is. Other than organizationssuch as Redefining Progress

3

, it has an environmentalsustainability orientation, which as Taylor argues

has a social justice component that is very weakor non-existent (2000, 542). So, in the US, the two


9/11

Just sustainability

163

discourses and traditions of environmental justiceand sustainability have developed in parallel, andalthough they have touched, there has been insuffi-cient interpenetration of values, framings, ideasand understandings.

There are encouraging signs, however, in the US,the UK and globally that a constructive dialogue or what Schlosberg (1999) calls cooperativeendeavors is emerging between the environmentaljustice and sustainability movements, and it is ourcontention that this is both essential and longoverdue. In the main, this dialogue is restricted toprogressive NGOs, academics and local communityorganizations worldwide who espouse the justsustainability as opposed to environmental sustain-ability orientation. Their focus on justice and equity(although, perhaps not the direct experience of

racial/low-income and environmental injustices)allows them to develop common ground withenvironmental justice organizations.

What is now needed is for governments at thelocal, regional, national and international levels tolearn from these environmental justice and progres-sive, or just sustainability-based organizations andto seek to embed the central principles and practicalapproaches of just sustainability into sustainabledevelopment policy. Whilst many, if not most,governments at all levels have adopted some kind ofcommitment to sustainable development, few, if any,recognize the importance of placing this within a

context of social justice, equity and human rights. Theneed to ensure that public policy environmentalor otherwise does not disproportionately disadvan-tage any particular social group, and affordsopportunity for all, must be a precondition for themove toward just and sustainable societies.

Notes

1 The Principles of Environmental Justice as developed by the

First National People of Color Environmental Leadership

Conference in October 1991.

2 Local Agenda 21 was renamed Local Action 21 at the

World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg

in September 2002.

3 Currently headed by Michael Gelobter, a prominent environ-

mental justice leader.

References

Adebowale M

2003 Environmental justice links and lessons

Rowntree Foundation, York

Adeola F

1994 Environmental hazards, health and racial

inequity in hazardous waste distribution Environment and

Behavior

26 99126

Adger N

2002 Inequality, environment and planning Environmentand Planning A

34 171619

Agyeman J

2000 Environmental justice: from the margins to

the mainstream?

Town and Country Planning Association

Tomorrow Series, London

Agyeman J

2002 Constructing environmental (in)justice:

transatlantic tales Environmental Politics

11 3153

Agyeman J

(forthcoming) From the bible belt to the beltway:environmental justice and the rise of the just sustainability

paradigm

New York University Press, New York

Agyeman J, Bullard R and Evans B

2002 Exploring the nexus:

bringing together sustainability, environmental justice and

equity Space and Polity

6 7790

Agyeman J, Bullard R and Evans B

2003 Just sustainabilities:

development in an unequal world

Earthscan/MIT Press,

London

Agyeman J and Evans T

2003 Towards just sustainability in

urban communities: building equity rights with sustainable

solutions Annals of American Academy of Political and

Social Science

590 3553

Boardman B, Bullock S and McLaren D

1999 Equity and the

environment: guidelines for socially just government

Catalyst/

Friends of the Earth, London

Bryant B and Mohai P

eds 1992 Race and the incidence of

environmental hazards

Westview Press, Boulder, CO

Bullard R

1990a Dumping in Dixie

Westview Press, Boulder, CO

Bullard R

1990b Ecological inequalities and the new south:

black communities under siege The Journal of Ethnic Studies

17 10115

Bullard R, Johnson G and Torres A

2000 Sprawl city: race,

politics, and planning in Atlanta

Island Press, Washington DC

Burningham K and Thrush D

2001 Rainforests are a long way

from here: the environmental concerns of disadvantagedgroups

Rowntree Foundation, York

Campbell S

1996 Green cities, growing cities, just cities. Urban

planning and the contradictions of sustainable development

Journal of the American Planning Association

62 296312

Carley M and Spapens P

1997 Sharing our world

Earthscan,

London

Catton W and Dunlap R

1978 Environmental sociology: a new

paradigm The American Sociologist

13 419

Commonwealth of Massachusetts

2002 Environmental justice

policy

State House, Boston, MA

Commission of the European Commission

2001 European

governance a White Paper

European Commission, Brussels

Commission of the European Commission

2002 A European

Union strategy for sustainable development

European

Commission, Luxembourg

Cutter S 1995 Race, class and environmental justice Progress

in Geography19 11122

Dobson A 1998 Justice and the environmentOxford University

Press, Oxford

Dobson A 2003 Social justice and environmental sustainability:

neer the twain shall meet? in Agyeman J, Bullard R and

Evans B Just sustainabilities: development in an unequal

worldEarthscan/MIT Press, London

Earth Council2000 The Earth CharterThe Earth Council, Costa

RicaEconomic and Social Research Council 2001 Environmental


10/11

164 Just sustainability

justice: rights and means to a healthy environment ESRC,

London

Environmental Law Institute1999 Sustainability in practiceELI,

Washington DC

Evans B and Theobald K 2003a Local Agenda 21 and the shift

to soft governance in Buckingham S and Theobald KLocalenvironmental sustainabilityWoodhead Publishing, Cambridge

Evans B and Theobald K 2003b LASALA: evaluating Local

Agenda 21 in Europe Journal of Environmental Planning and

Management46 78194

Faber D ed 1998 The struggle for ecological democracy:

environmental justice movements in the United States The

Guilford Press, New York

Friends of the Earth (FoE) 2001a Pollution and poverty

breaking the linkFriends of the Earth, London

Friends of the Earth (FoE)2001b Environmental justice: map-

ping transport and social exclusion in BradfordFriends of the

Earth, London

Friends of the Earth Scotland (FoES) 1999 FoE issue challenge

to Scottish Parliament Press release 23 January Friends

of the Earth Scotland, Edinburgh (http://www.gn.apc.org/

www.foe-scotland.org.uk/media-releases/99-01-23-seracon-

ference.html) Accessed 2 February 2004

Friends of the Earth Scotland (FoES) 2000 The campaign for

environmental justiceFriends of the Earth Scotland, Edinburgh

Goldman B 1993 Not just prosperity. Achieving sustainability

with environmental justice National Wildlife Federation,

Washington DC

Heinrich Boll Foundation 2002 Sustainability and justice: a

political northsouth dialogue Heinrich Boll Foundation,

BerlinHempel L C 1999 Conceptual and analytical challenges in

building sustainable communities in Mazmanian D A and

Kraft M E eds Towards sustainable communities: transition

and transformations in environmental policy MIT Press,

Cambridge, MA 4374

International Climate Justice Network 2002 Press release 29

August, Johannesburg

Jacobs M 1999 Sustainable development as a contested

concept in Dobson A ed Fairness and futurity. Essays on

environmental sustainability and social justice Oxford

University Press, Oxford 32

Lavelle M and Coyle M eds 1992 Unequal protection: theracial divide in environmental law National Law Journal 15

(Special Supplement) 524

McLaren D, Bullock S and Yousuf N 1998 Tomorrows world.

Britains share in a sustainable futureEarthscan, London

McRory R2003 Modernising environmental justice: regulation

and role of an environmental tribunalCentre for Law and the

Environment UCL, London

Middleton N and OKeefe P 2001 Redefining sustainabledevelopmentPluto Press, London

Mohai P and Bryant B 1992 Environmental injustice: weighing

race and class as factors in the distribution of environmental

hazards University of Colorado Law ReviewNo 63 92132

National People of Color 1991 Principles of Environmental

Justice ratified at the First People of Color Environmental

Leadership Summit, Washington DC October

Polese M and Stren R2000 The new sociocultural dynamics of

cities in Polese M and Stren R eds The social sustainability

of cities: diversity and the management of change University

of Toronto Press, Toronto

Pulido L L 1996 Environmentalism and economic justice: two

Chicano struggles in the southwest University of Arizona

Press, Tucson

Schlosberg D1999 Environmental justice and the new pluralism:

the challenge of difference for environmentalism Oxford

University Press, Oxford

Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) 2002 Vision for

sustainable regeneration: environment and poverty the

missing linkSDC, London

Taylor D 2000 The rise of the environmental justice paradigm

American Behavioural Scientist43 50880

Torras M and Boyce J1998 Income, inequality and pollution: a

reassessment of the environmental Kuznets curve Ecological

Economics25 14760United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice 1987

Toxic wastes and race in the United StatesUnited Church of

Christ Commission for Racial Justice, New York

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe 1999

Convention on access to information, public participation

in decision making and access to justice in environmental

mattersUNECE, Geneva

Walker G P1998 Environmental justice and the politics of risk

Town and Country Planning67 3589

Walker G, Fairburn J, Smith G and Mitchell G2003 Environ-

mental quality and social deprivation R&D Technical Report

E2-067/1/TR Environment Agency, LondonWarner K 2002 Linking local sustainability initiatives with

environmental justice Local Environment7 3547


11/11

Documents

Agyeman & Evans 2004