Using data from the autonomous shuttle transit pilot along Texas Southern University (TSU) “Tiger Walk,” this study examines the intersection of environmental justice (EJ) and autonomous mobility. It investigates how driverless shuttles affect the walking and biking of transit-dependent populations on a historically Black college and university campus. The pilot serves as an exploratory case study of TSU students, faculty, and staff and evaluates connectivity with three designated bus stops along the campus corridor. This research asks: Do driverless shuttles provide another mode of transportation for a transit-dependent population? A mixed-method approach was employed, combining qualitative and quantitative analyses. In 2021, 300 participants from political science, administrative justice, and psychology courses were surveyed to assess transportation equity. A linear regression model was developed with autonomous shuttle ride time as the dependent variable and socioeconomic factors—including time interval, transport mode, campus vehicle usage, and stop distance as independent variables. Findings show a statistically significant relationship at the 95% confidence level for Black participants, individuals with disabilities, and the integration of TSU autonomous shuttles with metro bus services. Results indicate a negative correlation between driverless shuttle time intervals and metro bus connectivity, suggesting that transit-dependent respondents must walk farther from the TSU “Tiger Walk” to reach Third Ward connections. These findings support the EJ claim that minority and low-income transit-dependent populations often live closer to bus stops while remaining spatially isolated from high-capacity light rail services.
Climate change is increasingly recognized not only as an environmental issue but also as a global crisis with significant social and political dimensions. The impacts of climate change are not distributed equally across societies and social groups; rather, they interact with existing social, economic, and gender-based inequalities, creating different forms of vulnerability. In this context, the concept of climate justice emphasizes that the causes, consequences, and policy responses to climate change should be evaluated within a framework of equity and responsibility. This study aims to examine the impact of climate policies on social inequalities from a feminist climate justice perspective. The study analyzes the relationships between climate governance, gender relations, and structural inequalities through a review of the existing literature. The analysis suggests that climate policies that fail to adequately consider gender dimensions may reproduce existing inequalities, while gender-responsive and inclusive approaches have the potential to strengthen both the effectiveness and the justice dimension of climate policies. The study argues that addressing climate change requires policies that prioritize not only environmental sustainability but also social justice, and that feminist climate justice perspectives can contribute to the development of more inclusive and equitable climate policies.
Background: This article reports on a survey of residents in two northern, rural counties in Michigan’s Western Upper Peninsula. The survey was part of a larger community-engaged research project supporting procedural, distributional, and recognition justice, and it was designed to explore reported experiences of energy burdens, energy service access needs, and public health concerns. Methods: A total of 176 residents were surveyed in two neighboring counties, one of which hosts a bioenergy facility associated with local concerns regarding air pollution and health impacts. Data were analyzed using nonparametric statistical methods. Results: A large proportion of the respondents (almost 25% across the full sample) reported experiencing severe energy burdens, which is particularly concerning given the sample’s overrepresentation of higher-income households relative to county populations. Respondents also reported clear energy service needs. Residents in the county hosting the bioenergy facility reported higher energy burdens, greater perceived impacts from air pollution, and were more likely to identify industrial sources and power plants as causes of local air pollution. Higher-income residents in that county were also more likely to report the combination of air pollution concern, perceived health impacts, and related symptoms. Discussion: Findings highlight dynamics of vulnerability and privilege that may represent unique features of rural community residents’ experiences of energy injustice. Notably, higher-income residents near the bioenergy facility were more likely to recognize and report air pollution health impacts than lower-income residents, a pattern that warrants further attention in energy social science and environmental justice research. Conclusions: Findings suggest an opportunity for future inquiry into the perceptual dimensions of privilege and vulnerability in rural communities hosting energy infrastructure, where material and environmental burdens as well as perception and awareness may not be equitably distributed.
Redlining has had lingering effects on marginalized communities for nearly a century. In the 1930s, the federal government conducted widespread neighborhood appraisals of investment risk. These assessments explicitly factored in residents’ race and ethnicity, codifying existing racial prejudices into law, resulting in negative health implications. In this commentary, we conduct a case study examining the impacts of redlining, with a specific focus on related infrastructure challenges and their influence on lung cancer risk. Although tobacco-related lung cancer mortality in the United States has declined substantially, the incidence of lung cancer among nonsmokers has continued to rise. We argue that redlining functions as a primary social determinant of lung cancer through three major pathways: highway routing, proximity to toxic sites, and tobacco outlet density. Our study centers on Baltimore, one of the first cities to implement restrictive residential laws limiting Black Americans from living in certain neighborhoods. By examining Baltimore, this study offers fresh insights into how the legacy of redlining contributes to long-term environmental and infrastructural inequities. This framework can be applied to newer urban areas, such as cities in California, where formerly redlined neighborhoods experience similar harmful urban development patterns. In California, these communities likewise face disproportionate exposure to the same structural conditions that contributed to elevated lung cancer risk in Baltimore residents. These findings highlight the interconnectedness of health, race, and the built environment, revealing that redlining emerges as a pivotal factor in predicting lung cancer risk in major metropolitan cities affected by redlining.
Problem Statement: Community–university partnerships are often regarded as promising strategies for addressing environmental injustices. Yet, community partners often bear substantial emotional labor as they confront bias and knowledge hierarchies, navigate unfamiliar academic norms, and manage administrative hurdles. As this labor can reproduce epistemic, social, and environmental inequities rather than transform them, attending to how these partnerships generate emotional work for community partners is essential to foster healing relationships. Theoretical Framing: Drawing from feminist theories of knowledge production and procedural justice as a principle of environmental justice, we highlight the significance of emotions and marginalized standpoints that emerge from histories of abuse and discrimination. We use the concept of emotion work to illuminate this type of labor and analyze the complex asymmetrical power dynamics inherent in these types of partnerships. Case Study Design: We focus on the Environmental Justice (EJ) Leaders Program, which has engaged 24 fellows from diverse organizations over 4 years in 9-month knowledge exchanges with the University of California, Davis researchers. The authors, who include program managers and one EJ Leader from each of the four cohorts, bring different positionalities that inform their analyses. They reflect on their respective experiences within the program and the emotion work each performed as the program evolved. Case Study Results: Program managers and researchers can lessen the emotional labor of community partners by fostering their own emotional wisdom. By listening to community partners’ concerns and moving through conflict with honesty and vulnerability, program managers and researchers can challenge knowledge hierarchies and foster greater inclusivity and respect for their community partners’ experiences and contributions. Conclusion: We advocate for university partners to develop a deeper appreciation of the unequal emotion work required to foster these relationships. We raise the importance of centering community partners’ subjective experiences to create more equitable knowledge production practices capable of addressing environmental injustices.
