Rethinking remediation: mine reclamation,environmental justice,and relations of care

ABSTRACT

To date, research on mine remediation in North America has focused primarily on technical management; relatively less is known about the historical, political and social dimensions of remediation. Remediation, as a continuation of the mining process, alters local landscapes and economies and can be both dangerous and beneficial for surrounding communities. Because remediation projects tend to focus on the technical aspects of clean-up, such projects risk overlooking the environmental injustices associated with past development and obscuring blame or responsibility from industry and government for environmental degradation. Insofar as it is understood as cleaning up or repairing environmental damage, remediation is generally seen as “doing the good” and is less amenable to political or ethical challenges based on community concerns or values. This paper argues that greater attention needs to be paid to public participation and justice concerns associated with cleaning up mine sites. Drawing from the literatures on ecological restoration, environmental justice, reconciliation, discard studies, and matters of care, we highlight critical, yet overlooked issues in the remediation of post-mining landscapes. We argue that remediation projects present a unique opportunity for the negotiation and articulation of morals, values, histories, and physical experiences associated with mine sites and we seek to re-frame remediation as an ongoing, creative process of community healing.     

What is in a name? Language,framing and environmental justice activism in California's Central Valley

According to the environmental justice (EJ) literature, one important factor in the movement's success is the development of a frame linking inequality to the disproportionate presence of environmental toxins in low-income communities of colour. This article highlights the resonance of this frame among grassroots activists and professional advocates in California's Central Valley. However, through interviews and focus groups with activists and advocates in six Central Valley communities, we found that only the latter identified their work as EJ. Grassroots activists instead identified their work as about health, community development and environmentalism. Moreover, some were unfamiliar with EJ as a concept while others denied its applicability to their work. Theoretically, our findings suggest that frame resonance needs to be delinked conceptually from movement identification; it is possible for a movement's analysis of social problems and solutions to resonate among those who do not identify with the movement itself. Pragmatically speaking, this can prevent some grassroots activists who are directly affected by environmental racism from accessing the resources and networks that the EJ movement has painstakingly built, and suggests that movement leaders may need to increase their outreach to community groups.     

Social equity in urban resilience planning

ABSTRACT

A growing number of cities are incorporating resilience into their plans and policies to respond to shocks, stresses, and uncertainties. While some scholars advocate for the potential of resilience research and practice, others argue that it promotes an inherently conservative and neoliberal agenda, prevents systemic transformations, and pays insufficient attention to power, politics, and justice. Notably, critics of the urban resilience agenda argue that policies fail to adequately address social equity issues. This study seeks to inform these debates by providing a cross-sectional analysis of how issues of equity are incorporated into urban resilience planning. We develop a tripartite framework of equity that includes distributional, recognitional, and procedural dimensions and use it to analyse the goals, priorities, and strategies of formal resilience plans created by member cities of the Rockefeller Foundation’s 100 Resilient Cities programme. Our analysis reveals considerable variation in the extent to which cities focus on equity, implying that resilience may be more nuanced than some critics suggest. There are, however, clear areas for improvement. Dominant conceptions of equity are generally tied to a distributional orientation, with less focus on the recognitional and procedural dimensions. We hope our conceptual framework and lessons learned from this study can inform more just resilience planning and provide a foundation for future research on the equity implications of resilience.     

Sustainable Development and Future Generations

This paper argues, mainly on thebasis of Rawls's savings principle,Wissenburg's restraint principle, Passmore'schains of love, and De-Shalit'stransgenerational communities, for a doubleinterpretation of sustainable development as aprinciple of intergenerational justice and afuture-oriented green ideal. This doubleinterpretation (1) embraces the restraintprinciple and the argument that no individualcan claim an unconditional right to destroyenvironmental goods as a baseline that couldjustify directive strategies for governmentintervention in non-sustainable lifestyles, and(2) suggests that people's concerns about thedeterioration of nature and the environmentarticulate future-oriented narratives ofself-identity that could fuel non-directivestrategies to develop further responsibilitiestowards nearby future generations. Sustainabledevelopment, thus, provides sound arguments torestrict people's freedom to follow their ownlifestyles, when these lifestyles transgressedthe baseline of the restraint principle.However, the individual freedom of choiceshould not be restricted for any furtherenvironmental considerations. Non-directivestrategies are thus to stimulate thedevelopment of such further responsibilitiestowards nearby future generations.     

Shaping more resilient and just food systems: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted weaknesses in global food systems, as well as opening windows of opportunity for innovation and transformation. While the nature and extent of this crisis is rare, extreme climatic events will increase in magnitude and frequency, threatening similar societal impacts. It is therefore critical to identify mechanisms for developing food systems that are resilient to such impacts. We examine impacts of the crisis on UK food systems and how these further entrenched social inequalities. We present data on the experiences and actions of producers, consumers, and community organisers. The data were collected by adapting ongoing research to include surveys, interviews and online workshops focused on the pandemic. Actors’ responses to the pandemic foreshadow how enduring change to food systems can be achieved. We identify support required to enable these transformations and argue that it is vital that these opportunities are embedded in food justice principles which promote people-centred approaches to avoid exacerbating injustices prevalent pre-crisis. Learning from these experiences therefore provides insights for how to make food systems elsewhere more resilient and just.     

Regulating the water-energy-food nexus: Interdependencies,transaction costs and procedural justice

There have been calls for an overhaul of regulatory and governance frameworks to incorporate the implications of the water-energy-food nexus. We map one small component of the regulatory space of the nexus and highlight its immense complexity. We draw on insights from the economics and socio-legal literatures to show that a decentralised approach to regulation based upon procedural justice can enable the trade-offs of the nexus to be considered and addressed. We use a nexus case study of micro hydro-electricity generation in Dartmoor National Park in England to show that when we take into account interactions between state and non-state regulation, the economic concepts of interdependencies and transaction costs, and a recognition that regulation of the nexus is a process involving decisions of procedural justice, some existing regulatory frameworks are already well-equipped to deal with the implications of nexus analysis.     

Alternative Perspectives on the Sustainability of Alaska's Commercial Fisheries

Many believe commercial fisheries in Alaska (U.S.A.) are sustainability success stories, but ongoing socioeconomic problems across the state raise questions about how this sustainability is being defined and evaluated. Problems such as food insecurity and the disenfranchisement of Alaska Natives from fishing rights are well documented, yet these concerns are obscured by marketing campaigns that convey images of flourishing fishing communities and initiatives to certify Alaska's fisheries as responsibly managed. Fisheries management mandates and approaches built on such metrics and technologies as maximum sustainable yield and systems of tradable quotas actually serve to constrain, circumscribe, and marginalize some Alaskans’ opportunities for effecting change in how the benefits of these fisheries are allocated. Beneath the narrative of sustainability, these management technologies perpetuate a cognitive ecological model of sustainability that is oriented to single‐species outcomes, that casts people as parasites, and thus assumes the necessity of trade‐offs between biological and social goals. Alternative cognitive models are available that draw metaphors from different ecological concepts such as keystone species and mutualisms. Such models, when used to inform management approaches, may improve societal outcomes in Alaska and elsewhere by promoting food security and sustainability through diversified natural resource harvest strategies that are more flexible and responsive to environmental variability and change. Perspectivas Alternativas sobre la Sustentabilidad de las Pesquerías Comerciales en Alaska     

Flood risk and inequalities between ethnic groups in the floodplains of England and Wales

Previous research has shown that many vulnerable communities experience disproportional exposure to flood risk. This paper, though, is the first to look at broad ethnic/racial group differences in the United Kingdom. It contends that differences in culture and language, especially those of new immigrants, bestow vulnerabilities on such communities, resulting in a lack of knowledge that enables people to be aware, to be prepared, or to recover expediently after a flood emergency. Using UK 2011 Census data and Environment Agency flood maps, the paper demonstrates that it is the non‐white communities in Wales that confront the most disproportionate level of flood risk: 23 per cent as compared to 11.4 per cent of their white neighbours. In contrast, the difference in flood risk between white and non‐white ethnic/racial groups in regions of England is within a range of plus or minus two per cent, except for in Yorkshire and The Humber where white populations face a much greater risk of flooding.     

Project coordinators’ views on climate adaptation costs and benefits – justice implications

ABSTRACT

As local climate adaptation activity increases, so does the number of questions about costs, benefits, financing and the role that economic considerations play in adaptation-related decision-making and policy. Through five cases, covering a range of climate risks and types of adaptation measures, this paper critically examines Swedish project coordinators’ perceptions of costs and benefits in already-implemented climate adaptation measures. Our study finds that project coordinators make use of different system boundaries – on temporal, geographical and administrative scales – in their cost/benefit evaluations, making the practice of determining adaptation costs arbitrary and hard to compare. We further demonstrate that the project coordinators interpret costs and benefits in a manner that downplays the intangible environmental and social costs and benefits arising from the adaptation measures, despite their own experience of how such measures negatively impact upon social value. The exclusion of social and environmental costs and benefits has severe implications for justice, as it can bias decisions against people and ecosystems that are affected negatively. Based on the findings, we propose three tentative social justice dilemmas in local climate adaptation planning and implementation: 1. Cost and benefit distribution across scales; 2. The identification and valuation of non-market effects; and 3. The equitable allocation of costs and benefits.