Best in show? Climate and environmental justice policy in california

Environmental Justice

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 179-184

  Sze, Julie ^a   Gambirazzio, Gerardo ^b   Karner, Alex ^c   Rowan, Dana ^d   London, Jonathan ^e   Niemeier, Deb ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b DARTMOUTH COLLEGE   (United States)

^c University of California   (United States)

^d Graduate Group in Ecology   (United States)

^e Dept of Human and Community Development ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE; ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; POLICY MAKING; PUBLIC HEALTH;

CALIFORNIA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 73849147119     PISSN: 19394071     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/env.2009.0028     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. The federal government's decision to not participate in the Kyoto Treaty worried many in California. For an overview of California's engagement in climate policy, see W.M. Hanemann, "How California Came to Pass AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006." 2007. CUDARE Working Papers 1040, escholarship repositories, UC Berkeley. (last accessed on March 18, 2009).
2. California Air Resources Board. AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan Document. (last accessed on March 18, 2009).
3. Many of the participants we interviewed remain actively involved in climate policy. To address the sensitive issues we explore in the article, our interviewees were promised anonymity. Although we do not include people's names, we do include the organization type (i.e., mainstream environmental or environmental justice) and the organization name where that information is public knowledge (for example in the annual reports of an organization).
4. These include elected members of the legislature and their staff, regulators and staff members at environmental organizations and environmental justice organizations. Our analysis is filtered through our own multidisciplinary lenses drawn from community development, engineering, ecology, geography, and the environmental humanities.
5. In addition to the drafting of the AB 32 legislation discussed here, we are also exploring the structure of AB 32 implementation by surveying and conducting further interviews with additional actors in the process. These surveys are in progress and their results are not discussed here.
6. Hanemann, 2007;
7. Michael Hanemann, "California's New Greenhouse Gas Laws," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 2 (2008): 114-129.
8. "Bridging a Chasm," Solutions (Vol. 37, No. 5 November-December 2006): Environmental Defense Fund Newsletter, (last accessed on March 17, 2009).
9. Interview with author, February 19, 2009, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author).
10. Interview with author, February 19, 2009, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author).
11. "First in nation, California caps global warming pollution," Solutions (Vol. 37, No. 5 November-December 2006): Environmental Defense newsletter retrievable at (last accessed on March 17, 2009).
12. Interview with the author, January 6, 2009, Sacramento, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author).
13. California Latino Legislative Clean Air Summit: The Right to Breathe Clean Air? Held on November 30, 2007. California Latino Caucus. (last accessed on March 17, 2009).
14. "Getting to Yes," Solutions (Vol. 37, No. 5 November-December 2006): Environmental Defense newsletter retrievable at (last accessed on March 17, 2009).
15. The mainstream environmental groups are arguably more invested in neoliberal discourse than environmental justice groups, and there also significant differences between the mainstream environmental groups. One interviewee suggested that EDF was more invested in market mechanisms than NRDC. Interview with author, February 19, 2009, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author). See also Nik Heynen, James McCarthy, Scott Prudham, and Paul Robbins (eds). Neoliberal Environments False Promises and Unnatural Consequences (Routledge, 2007).
16. Hanemann, 2007: 18.
17. Jonathan K. London, Julie Sze, and Raoul S. Lievanos, "Problems, Promise, Progress, and Perils: Critical Reflections on Environmental Justice Policy Implementation in California," UCLA Journal of Environmental Policy (2008) 26: 255-289.
18. The Alliance is comprised of the following organizations: Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN), Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice (CCAEJ), Communities for a Better Environment (CBE), Environmental Health Coalition (EHC), PODER-People Organized to Demand Economic and Environmental Rights. California Environmental Justice Working Group. (last accessed on March 17, 2009).
19. A number of our interviewees confirmed that these groups are California Communities Against Toxics and Environmental Rights Alliance. See their organization web sites at and (last accessed on March 17, 2009).
20. Telephone Interview with author, March 7, 2009, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author).
21. The other committee mentioned in AB 32, the Economic and Technology Advancement Advisory Committee (ETAAC), had their mandated in the legislation itself, in Section 38591(d). (last accessed on March 18, 2009).
22. The Market Advisory Committee (MAC) was prescribed in the executive order S-20-06: "The Secretary for Environmental Protection shall create a Market Advisory Committee of national and international experts to make recommendations to the State Air Resources Board on or before June 30, 2007, on the design of a market-based compliance program." The mandate of the committee is to "create market-based compliance mechanisms for reducing greenhouse gases." Market Advisory Committee. (last accessed on March 18, 2009).
23. Interview with author, November 20, 2008, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author).
24. Telephone Interview with author, March 13, 2009, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author).
25. Hanemann, 2007: 18.
26. Hanemann, 2008: 114-129.
27. This sentiment was confirmed by interviews with members of environmental and environmental justice groups. Interview with author, February 19, 2009, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author). Interview with the author, January 6, 2009, Sacramento, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author). Telephone Interview with author, March 13, 2009, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author).
28. Telephone Interview with author, March 7, 2009, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author).
29. Telephone Interview with author, March 7, 2009, Davis, CA (tape recorder and handwritten notes in possession of the author).
30. Ronald Sandler and Phaedra Pezullo (eds). Environmental Justice and Environmentalism: The Social Justice Challenge to the Environmental Movements (The MIT Press, 2007).
31. One interest convergence might have been the Community Empowerment Amendment language, which environmental justice groups did not work on explicitly but which has the potential to address gains and direct resources from future revenue streams in an innovative way, although in practice, there was not as much attention from environmental justice groups in this topic. Global Green developed this language, based on its years of working on projects greening building in low-income communities (post-Katrina New Orleans), and greening schools and public housing in primarily racial minority communities. Global Green USA 2007 Annual Report, page 10. (last accessed on March 17, 2009).
32. This finding has parallels in the field of children's health. In 1997, Executive Order (EO) 13045 was signed by President Clinton. The EO directed federal agencies to ensure that "policies, programs, activities and standards" assessed the potential, among others, for disproportionate health risks. Devon Payne-Sturges and Debra Kemp, "Ten Years of Addressing Children's Health Through Regulatory Policy at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency," Environmental Health Perspectives 116 (December 2008): 1720-1724.