Exclusion of race in federal climate justice screening tool could worsen disparities, analysis says

A screening tool the federal government is using to decide which neighborhoods have a disproportionate amount of pollution and risk of damage from climate change could worsen air pollution exposure disparities along racial lines, according to a new analysis. Researchers from several universities around the United States who modeled the potential effects of the use of the tool in guiding federal investment told The Associated Press it’s because race was excluded as a part of the equation that decides which communities are the most in need. The analysis they did, which was published in Science on Thursday, brings important context to a debate between the federal government and the environmental and climate justice community over how to improve decades-old environmental and climate disparities. Marshall and other researchers used the tool to model three 20-year scenarios: one where no action is taken to reduce emissions, one where emissions are aggressively reduced and one where emissions are very aggressively reduced. They found that while the tool is useful in eliminating disparities in air pollution exposure for low-income people and communities designated as disadvantaged, disparities along race and ethnicity lines weren’t improved and in some communities it was worsened. ‘The use of race in land-use planning is part of what got us here,’ said Julian Marshall, a study co-author and professor of environmental engineering at the University of Washington , referring to city planning processes that determine where infrastructure like highways and factories is built. ‘So the result we’re seeing is if you don’t include race in the solution it’s a lot harder to solve the problem.’ A cornerstone of the Biden administration’s historic efforts to reduce pollution and mitigate climate change is to ensure that 40% of benefits from their environmental and climate policies go to disadvantaged communities. It’s called the Justice40 Initiative. In order to invest in communities that need the most help, the administration created the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool and opened it for public use in February 2022. The mapping tool uses a myriad of factors, like income, flood risk, air pollution exposure, asthma rates, to determine whether or not a census tract is disadvantaged. But the administration left out the use of race and ethnicity data when they developed the tool, a move that was harshly criticized by environmental and climate justice advocates at the time. When it was released, officials with the Council on Environmental Quality said race was excluded from the tool to make sure that it could survive legal challenges, but claimed they’d still be able prioritize communities of color with a race-neutral formula. That’s not possible, though, according to environmental justice scholars and advocates who were not involved in the analysis of the tool. ‘The finding that air pollution exposure disparities may not improve and may even worsen if the CEJST is used to distribute Justice40 funds is alarming but not surprising,’ said David Pellow, a professor of environmental studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara, who wasn’t part of the analysis, in an email. ‘We have known for four decades that race/ethnicity is the single most important factor determining the distribution of environmental risk in the U.S., so ignoring or wishing away that fact is only going to exacerbate the problem.’ Pellow was referring to the deep body of scientific research showing that race is the greatest determinant of who experiences environmental harm. Robert Bullard, a member of the White House Environmental Justice Council and professor of urban planning and environmental policy at Texas Southern University, said the screening tool is a ‘work in progress’ that needs to be refined to get more accurate and precise measures of environmental and climate burdens. The researchers who conducted the analysis recommended that race and ethnicity be included developing federal initiatives, regulations and decision-making tools that are meant to correct environmental injustices. ‘When you when you don’t include race in the CJEST and use income or poverty as a proxy for disadvantage,” Bullard said, ‘you will leave out populations that are impacted by environmental inequality.’ ___ Follow Drew Costley on Twitter: @drewcostley. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.