Distributive environmental justice requires equal treatment across race, class, and education.

Evidence

As Shrader- Frechette notes (2002: 24–5), distributive justice ‘requires a fair or equitable distribution of society’s technological and environmental risks and impacts. It refers to the morally proper apportionment of benefits and burdens … ’. Presumably, she continues, distributive equity requires that ‘all things being equal, rich and poor, colored and white, educated and non-educated, be treated equally in the distributions of society’s environmental benefits and burdens’. — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice, 211

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Provides a working definition of distributive justice as the fair apportionment of environmental benefits and burdens, to be applied against Soundscape and Legal Systems readings.
  • XREF: This formal distributive-equity definition is the yardstick to run across noise-regulation and EJ-litigation cases in the parallel courses — which failures are distributive vs. procedural vs. recognition. — connects to: Navajo uranium miners faced disproportionate contamination and disease burdens — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice:…, 213; Recruiting people of color would infuse egalitarian principles into mainstream environmental science — Robert D. Bullard, Dumping in Dixie: Race, Class, and…, 929; Environmental visibility and remediation access are distributed unequally by race, class, and globalization — Rob Nixon, Slow Violence and the Environmentalism…, 175 (+6 more)
  • ADDENDUM: Directly extends the earlier extracted claims that distribution dominates EJ discourse — this pins the canonical definition that dominates it.

Broader Connections