Equalizing Remediation

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Chinonso I. Anozie
{"title":"Equalizing Remediation","authors":"Chinonso I. Anozie","doi":"10.59015/wlr.bhsb5188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Environmental harm remediation occurs far less than it should in minority and low-income communities. One in six Americans live within three miles of a designated toxic waste or contaminated site, which causes a variety of health hazards. Frequently, these sites are located within minority or low-income communities. Multinational corporations and even governmental agencies sometimes intentionally or negligently exploit loopholes to escape responsibility, especially when poor or low-income communities are involved. Lead agencies that focus on remediation efforts tend to have fewer resources in poorer areas. By contrast, in affluent communities, offending companies commence remediation efforts much more quickly. Such disparate remediation efforts contravene the principle of environmental justice. Delayed or inadequate environmental remediation exacerbates harm across the country, and it disproportionately harms numerous underprivileged U.S. communities. Often, environmental justice scholars and advocates focus on equal enforcement of current environmental protection laws. I argue current environmental protection laws leave room for unequal remediation, and equalizing remediation does not lie in the strict enforcement of current environmental protection laws, particularly, when similarly situated communities are involved. This Article initiates the conversation towards equalizing remediation by highlighting failures to equalize environmental harm remediation activities. It advocates for new policies, which better ensure no community is shortchanged in such activities based on race, geographical location, or income level. It argues for various statutory amendments and distinct regulations capable of better promoting equalized remediation of environmental harms and thereby advancing environmental justice.","PeriodicalId":54350,"journal":{"name":"Wisconsin Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wisconsin Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59015/wlr.bhsb5188","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Environmental harm remediation occurs far less than it should in minority and low-income communities. One in six Americans live within three miles of a designated toxic waste or contaminated site, which causes a variety of health hazards. Frequently, these sites are located within minority or low-income communities. Multinational corporations and even governmental agencies sometimes intentionally or negligently exploit loopholes to escape responsibility, especially when poor or low-income communities are involved. Lead agencies that focus on remediation efforts tend to have fewer resources in poorer areas. By contrast, in affluent communities, offending companies commence remediation efforts much more quickly. Such disparate remediation efforts contravene the principle of environmental justice. Delayed or inadequate environmental remediation exacerbates harm across the country, and it disproportionately harms numerous underprivileged U.S. communities. Often, environmental justice scholars and advocates focus on equal enforcement of current environmental protection laws. I argue current environmental protection laws leave room for unequal remediation, and equalizing remediation does not lie in the strict enforcement of current environmental protection laws, particularly, when similarly situated communities are involved. This Article initiates the conversation towards equalizing remediation by highlighting failures to equalize environmental harm remediation activities. It advocates for new policies, which better ensure no community is shortchanged in such activities based on race, geographical location, or income level. It argues for various statutory amendments and distinct regulations capable of better promoting equalized remediation of environmental harms and thereby advancing environmental justice.
平衡修复
在少数民族和低收入社区,环境损害补救的发生远远低于应有的水平。六分之一的美国人居住在指定的有毒废物或受污染地点三英里内,这对健康造成了各种危害。这些地点通常位于少数民族或低收入社区。跨国公司甚至政府机构有时有意或无意地利用漏洞逃避责任,特别是涉及贫穷或低收入社区时。专注于整治工作的领导机构往往在贫困地区拥有较少的资源。相比之下,在富裕的社区,违规公司会更快地启动补救措施。这种分散的整治措施违背了环境正义原则。延迟或不充分的环境修复加剧了全国范围内的危害,并不成比例地损害了美国众多贫困社区。通常,环境正义学者和倡导者关注的是现行环境保护法的平等执行。我认为,现行的环境保护法律为不平等的补救留出了空间,而平等的补救并不在于现行环境保护法律的严格执行,特别是在涉及类似情况的社区时。本文通过强调在平衡环境危害补救活动方面的失败,发起了关于平衡补救的对话。它倡导新的政策,以更好地确保没有任何社区在此类活动中因种族、地理位置或收入水平而受到亏待。它主张进行各种法律修订和明确的条例,以便更好地促进对环境危害的平等补救,从而促进环境正义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Wisconsin Law Review
Wisconsin Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Wisconsin Law Review is a student-run journal of legal analysis and commentary that is used by professors, judges, practitioners, and others researching contemporary legal topics. The Wisconsin Law Review, which is published six times each year, includes professional and student articles, with content spanning local, state, national, and international topics. In addition to publishing the print journal, the Wisconsin Law Review publishes the Wisconsin Law Review Forward and sponsors an annual symposium at which leading scholars debate a significant issue in contemporary law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信