On Wednesday, the EPA put out a press release announcing $1 million in grants for "improving the environment in low-income communities.' A noble cause indeed. Unfortunately, such environmental justice programs and economically efficient environmental policies are often in conflict.
First, we need to define environmental justice. According to the EPA:
Environmental Justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.
The problem with environmental justice as a policy goal is that it often fails to take into account the willingness of certain groups to substitute environmental goods and services for non-environmental goods and services. For example, if low-income workers are willing to live near a landfill if the landfill provides jobs, then that is not environmental injustice. It is economic efficiency. The relevant question is whether the workers are given the choice.
I'm not saying environmental injustice isn't a problem. It is. But correlation between pollution levels and income and race is not in itself evidence of injustice--as is often claimed. Why is it that factories are often located in low-income communities? Is it because factories want to exploit the environment in these areas or is it because residents in these areas are willing to accept a degraded environment to get the other amenities the factories provide--like jobs?
Environmental injustice occurs when a group, community, whatever, is involuntarily exposed to costs for which they receive no benefit and have no means for redress. In other words, environmental injustice occurs when market based decisions fail to incorporate all of the costs to all affected parties. But this is the classic definition of an externality--failure of the market to fully capture the costs and benefits of a transaction. Environmental injustice can be reduced by correcting the inherent market failure and allowing individuals to make their own decisions regardless of income, race or national origin.
Now if you want to argue that the fully corrected market outcome is unfair--then I'll tell you what I tell my 10 year old when she claims I'm not fair. Sometimes life's not fair--deal with it.
