Environmental Justice in Minneapolis and St. Paul

Environmental justice is a difficult to define and widespread topic. However, to understand what injustices to look for, and how to work towards solving them, we need a working definition.

In 1991, at the People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, 17 principles of environmental justice were laid out. This was the first time multinational and standardized ideas were adopted surrounding the topic. (Natural Resources Defense Council) They are laid out as follows [quoted].

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.  

It is important to note that the environmental justice movement is a very distinct part of activism, oftentimes separate from the mainstream, white-centered environmental movement. Environmental justice was pioneered by people of color, and for people of color. It has a strong focus on community engagement in marginalized areas, and on using location-specific approach, as opposed to all-too-common vague approaches (i.e "save the rainforest"). Also in contrast to the rest of the environmental movement, environmental justice takes into account wide-ranging social and economic factors, in addition to environmental ones. In short, the environmental justice movement seeks to use environmental remediation as a means to further equity both economically and socially.

The definition provided at the POCELS is certainly effective, and quite broad. Its principles can be applied in wide ranging places, from laws governing thousands of hectares of rural farmland, to the decommissioning of a single industrial plant in a small neighborhood. While the universal applicability of the ideals laid out in 1991 is appealing, the means to reaching those ideals still vary widely.

In understanding environmental justice in urban contexts (the focus of this project), I particularly liked a definition provided by Colleen O'Connor Toberman from Friends of the Mississippi River. Her work centers around working with partners to develop equitable land use policies along the river, as well as amplifying the voices of marginalized communities, who often have diminished access to advocacy surrounding how development shapes their neighborhoods. Her definition is this:

Environmental justice is having a clean environment for people who are usually disproportionately affected by environmental issues and other kinds of injustice. [This means] people of color, low-income folks, LGBTQ+ folks, children, and older folks- how do environmental issues affect those populations in disproportionate ways?

Now that we have a working definition, we can begin to look at the data. How does environmental inequality manifest itself in the Twin Cities, and where? Who does it effect? I've compiled data from various databases, and mapped it to help illustrate the extent of environmental inequality. By understanding the data, we can begin to understand how to most effectively pursue environmental justice.

NOTE: Some comparison maps may have sliders to compare data: you must left-click the arrows in the center and drag side-to side to look at both data sets.

You can also click on individual census tracts to see data for specific areas.

Please note that these maps are compiled, not created, by me. I am comparing them, but they come from a variety of sources found on the global and UMN ArcGIS database. Particularly, I used local maps created for the Center for Earth, Energy, and Democracy's Environmental Justice Mapping Tool. I originally discovered those maps in the database, and later discovered their project- I highly recommend you check it out: http://ceed.org/environmental-justice-mapping-tool/. I make no claim of ownership of these maps, rather am using them as a source in this informational article.

Median household income is a measure of the usual income of an area, in this case a census tract. It is the income of a household where half of the area makes a higher income, and half makes a lower income. This measure tends to correlate highly with the racial makeup of a neighborhood. Communities of color are less likely to make a higher income, due to historical and current inequitable policies that stunt their economic growth and wealth accumulation.

Minneapolis and St. Paul have long been highly segregated cities. A major driver of this was racial covenants, which were housing deeds specifically written to prevent people of color from buying housing in certain areas. An excellent resource regarding these covenants is the Mapping Prejudice project at the U of M (www.mappingprejudice.org). This intentional and explicit segregation led to long-lasting impacts, including decreased funding for public spaces, inability to get bank loans, overpolicing, and general lack of resources in areas of color.

On this map, high cost burden as defined as spending 33.6% to >39.3% of household income on rent and utilities. Low cost burden is defined as spending 29.29% to <24.9% of household income on rent and utilities. Cost burden is affected by a variety of things, but it is generally exacerbated by low household incomes and increasing housing prices, often due to gentrification.

Health outcomes are quite illustrative of environmental disparities. This is due to a number of factors, including increased environmental pollution, lack of access to parks and green space, lack of available healthcare and health insurance, and indoor air pollution.

Housing blight includes empty lots, abandoned buildings and houses, and houses in derelict or neglected shape, in addition to environmental contamination. This blight is a direct result of racial inequity that prevents communities of color from building economic wealth. It contributes to worse physical and mental health outcomes, lower quality of life, and greater cost-burden in households.

While industrial and park lands are distributed across the cities, there are still major disparities between races in terms of land use.

First of all, in less diverse areas, we see industrial areas more cleanly separated from residential areas. This could be via a highway, commercial area or any other infrastructure. It has also been shown that in richer and whiter areas, we see less industrial contamination from nearby industrial areas, which can be often be attributed to NIMBY (not in my back yard) backlash against industrial plants. NIMBY backlash generally happens in white communities, as they have the power and resources to prevent projects from happening. Communities of color don't have that level of systemic power. Industrial areas tend to be more mixed-in with communities of color, and these communities tend to have less resources to fight back against environmental hazards.

Secondly, while parkland is distributed across the city, all parks aren't created equal. This can be seen by comparing both funding and quality of parks. In largely white areas of South Minneapolis, we see that parks are significantly more connected than parks in the mainly black communities of North Minneapolis. The pedestrian and bike trails that run across the Cities are beloved- but these trails seem to skip past many areas of color. South Minneapolis, as well as St. Paul across the river have parks surrounding lakes, as well as along the river. We don't see parks along the river in North Minneapolis- the riverfront is used as an industrial area.

Energy vulnerability is the possible that a household will not be able to access adequate levels of energy to function, generally meaning electricity. This can often be due to fluctuating energy cost, inability to pay bills, poor landlord-tenant relationships, or even faulty energy connections (often due to housing blight). Electricity access is extremely important, as well as other forms of energy access, such as internet or gasoline. Not having the ability to obtain energy can lead to significantly diminished quality of life, mental health, and ability to generate income.

Low food access census tracts are defined as "Low-income census tracts where a significant number (at least 500 people) or share (at least 33 percent) of the population is greater than ½ mile from the nearest supermarket" (US Department of Agriculture).

Food access is an especially large issue as it is largely affected by corporations- companies have less incentive to build supermarkets in low income areas, when richer areas will pay more. The issue is further exacerbated by lack of affordable transportation available in low income areas.

This study compared two neighborhoods less than two miles apart in Minneapolis. It found that:

• Neighborhood A had a population density of 11 people per acre, while Neighborhood B had a population of 3 per acre.
• Neighborhood a was 75.1% or more people of color, while Neighborhood B was 10% or less
• Neighborhood A's median household income was $30184, while Neighborhood B's was $140139
• 23.1% of residents owned their homes in Neighborhood A, while 79.2-98.3% did in Neighborhood B.
• Neighborhood A had approx. 556 acres of industrial and highway land use within a 1 mile radius, while Neighborhood B had approx. 102 acres.
• Neighborhood A had a respiratory hazard index of 3.5, while Neighborhood B had one of 2.8.
• Neighborhood A had approx. 44 MPCA contaminated sites per acre, while Neighborhood B had just 8.
• Neighborhood A had 3.8% existing tree canopy, while Neighborhood B had 42.41%.
• Neighborhood A had 6.4 acres of parkland within a 9 minute walk, while Neighborhood B had 280 acres of parkland within an 8 minute walk.
• 20% of people in neighborhood A spent more than 40 minutes commuting to work, while just 5.5% did in Neighborhood B.
• Neighborhood A got $0 in municipal park capital investment, while Neighborhood B got 6-12.9 million in investment, split between two parks.

Environmental inequity is not an issue specific to the Twin Cities. It is predominant in all areas of the United States, rural or urban. Environmental justice has been studied for years now. (National Conference for Community and Justice)

• A case study of The Bronx, New York, found that individuals who live close to noxious industrial facilities and waste sites were 66% more likely to be hospitalized for asthma. Significantly, these same individuals were 13% more likely to be people of color.
• A report titled “Toxic Waste and Race at Twenty” reviewed data collected over a 20-year time period and found that more than half of the people who live within 1.86 miles of toxic waste facilities in the United States are people of color.
• A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention determined that 11.2% of African American children and 4% of Mexican-American children are poisoned by lead, compared with 2.3% of white children.
• Three out of five African Americans live in communities with uncontrolled toxic waste sites. 

Direct engagement through phone calls, letters, and office visits are extremely important. Even though it seems like you might be doing nothing, your impact is measurable.

Share your knowledge with friends, family, and anybody who will listen. The more people are know about these issues, the more people who will act. Knowledge is power.

Local engagement is most effective. Attend council meetings, seek out information about current projects or operations and their affect on communities. Do your research, then act on it.

Marginalized communities often have a lack of access that leads to their voices being diminished. Be somebody who doesn't talk over them, but amplifies what they have to say. Your job isn't really to represent affected places: it is to support.

Even if you have limited time, try to make an effort to seek out events, protests, cleanups, and festivals to attend. The voice of environmental justice is most effective as a collective, and collectives are most visible when we stand together. We have power in numbers.

This list is just a beginning, but here are some local organizations participating in environmental justice. Resources can be found on their websites, and by reaching out to activists and professionals.

•  Alliance for Metropolitan Stability 
•  Environmental Justice Advocates of Minnesota 
•  Land Stewardship Project 
•  North American Water Office 
•  Sierra Club — Minnesota North Star Chapter 
•  Women's Environmental Institute 
•  Center for Earth, Energy and Democracy