0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views2 pages

Chapter Nine

The document proposes two solutions to promote environmental justice in the U.S.: the establishment of community-led environmental review boards and a progressive carbon tax with a dividend system. The review boards would empower local communities, particularly those affected by environmental discrimination, to influence decisions on industrial projects and policies. The carbon tax would impose higher rates on larger emitters while redistributing funds to support low-income households, addressing both environmental issues and social inequalities.

Uploaded by

Dennis Muthiani
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views2 pages

Chapter Nine

The document proposes two solutions to promote environmental justice in the U.S.: the establishment of community-led environmental review boards and a progressive carbon tax with a dividend system. The review boards would empower local communities, particularly those affected by environmental discrimination, to influence decisions on industrial projects and policies. The carbon tax would impose higher rates on larger emitters while redistributing funds to support low-income households, addressing both environmental issues and social inequalities.

Uploaded by

Dennis Muthiani
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Environmental Justice in the U.S.

Two innovative solutions that governments could implement to promote environmental

justice in the U.S. are the creation of community-led environmental review boards and the

implementation of a progressive carbon tax with a dividend system. First, federal and state

governments could create bottom-up organizations for environmental assessment of the former

victims of environmental discrimination. Such boards would consist of local people,

environmentalists, and members of the vulnerable groups in the society. They could also be

empowered to approve or give opinion on affectations of industrial projects, urbanization and

environmental policies that may affect their societies. In this, there is consideration of issues

related to achromatopsia as well as environmental racism.

It’s achromatopsic because while it does not single out any race it seeks to provide an

empowering provision of the services to the local community color blind it is not race blind. It

also speaks to environmental racism by guaranteeing that people of color, who have been

previously disproportionately exposed to hazardous environmental conditions receive a solid

influence concerning decisions affecting their environment and subsequent physical wellbeing.

The review boards would be in a position of explaining, changing or even halting projects

that are likely to adversely affect the local environment or worsen the case of environmental

injustices. They would also take a point of carrying out a routine environmental health check of

their environment s and proposing measures to be taken in case the environment proved

unhealthy for habitation. This solution should be embraced because it levels the power dynamics

that have resulted in the systematic establishment of sacrifice zones in vulnerable societies.
Secondly, taxation can be used whereby the federal government places a progressive

carbon tax with the funds to be shared among the populace as a dividend. Therefore, the tax on

emissions would be set with the higher tariff for bigger emitters of carbon. This amount would be

collected in form of a tax, and the collected amount would then be shared with the citizens in a

form of dividend pay, where the needy or rather the less fortunate would part of larger share.

This solution is not only correct for achromatopsic people but also for environmentally racist

people. It’s achromatopsic in that it impacts all carbon emitters without regard for their addresses

or the racial and ethnic composition of the neighborhoods in which they reside However, it also

solves environmental racism by offering more incentives for people below the poverty line in

general, meaning that people of color who live in the areas with high pollution rates get more

benefits.

Due to the nature of the tax, progressive in terms of emissions, the large emitters,

commonly found in or around vulnerable populations, would need to decrease their emissions

more rapidly. However, the dividend system would offer some funding to ensure that as the poor

households switch to a clean energy cause by the carbon tax, they do not experience a high cost

of energy. This approach also content with combating the effects of carbon emission on the

environment but as well as dealing with the social inequalities that are commonly associated with

environmental injustice. In this way, the proposed solutions are seen to tackle both the

achromatopsic and environmental racist aspects of environmental injustice, which is a socially

desirable goal for the United States.

You might also like