environmental justice

Search Results

Browse All Documents

Assessing Water Affordability
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Assessing Water Affordability
Pacific Institute | August 14, 2013...
Summary
A new pilot study in California shows many households, even within affluent communities, routinely spend over the affordability threshold of 2 percent of...
A new pilot study in California shows many households, even within affluent communities, routinely spend over the affordability threshold of 2 percent of their household income on their water bill. The number of water systems with “unaffordable” rates varies by region and measure used – which has important implications for policy makers.

Assessing Water Affordability: A Pilot Study in Two Regions of California, from the Pacific Institute in partnership with Community Water Center and Fresno State University, looks at both an urban and rural case: the Sacramento metropolitan area and the Tulare Lake Basin. In Sacramento, using the most common form of determining affordability – the annual water bill as a percent of median household income at the water system scale – few water systems appeared to suffer from unaffordable rates. In contrast, in the Tulare Lake Basin, 18 percent of systems had unaffordable rates. Using a more fine-grained measure based on household income levels reveals even higher levels of unaffordability in both regions.

In the Sacramento metropolitan region, measuring on a water-system-wide scale vs. a household scale means the difference between recognizing zero water systems with unaffordable rates vs. 100,000 households with unaffordable water rates. In the rural Tulare Lake Basin, measuring on these different scales means finding only nine out of 51 water systems with unaffordable rates vs. nearly 4000 households with unaffordable water rates – some 40% of the households in the study group.

“Water rate affordability is a central element to water access, and cost makes water excludable and inaccessible to those who cannot afford it,” said Dr. Juliet Christian-Smith of the Pacific Institute. “Water affordability is also a major concern to public welfare, safety, and security. When households are unable to make their water payments, consequences can include public health crises, social unrest, and lost revenue for water providers that can threaten their fiscal stability.”

The study’s results show that a significant number of areas within water systems have unaffordable rates, even if the system as a whole does not, and so it may be more important to consider household income rather than median income when assessing and addressing water affordability.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
California’s Climate Adaptation Water Strategy: An Analysis of Implications for Individual and Community Rights and Responsibilities
$0.00
Add to Downloads

California’s Climate Adaptation Water Strategy: An Analysis of Implications for Individual and Community Rights and Responsibilities
Department of Water Resources | July 31, 2009...
Summary
The inevitable consequences of climate change will put some of California's people and communities more at risk than others. Because of location and...
The inevitable consequences of climate change will put some of California's people and communities more at risk than others. Because of location and a limited capacity to adapt, vulnerable populations may face profound and disproportionate harm. California's Climate Adaptation Strategy planners are seeking ways to address this potential harm.

The California Adaptation Strategy (CAS) Working Groups are seeking to address the impact of climate change on the state’s vulnerable populations. This analysis therefore asks how California can create a policy environment for equitable adaptation processes and outcomes. This analysis begins with a literature review on equity issues in adaptation planning, then examines the Water Working Group’s draft climate adaptation strategies, and then presents the results of twenty-six expert interviews.

Two key concerns in the development of adaptation policy that arise in this analysis are feedback loops between vulnerable communities and policymakers and direct access to resources to enable greater adaptive capacity. While this analysis looks closest at the Water Working Group’s strategies, it is anticipated that many of the findings will apply to the overall strategy.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
California’s San Joaquin Valley: A Region in Transition
$0.00
Add to Downloads

California’s San Joaquin Valley: A Region in Transition
Congressional Research Service | December 12, 2005...
Summary
CRS was requested to undertake a study of the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) and a comparison with another U.S. region. The eight-county San...
CRS was requested to undertake a study of the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) and a comparison with another U.S. region. The eight-county San Joaquin Valley, part of California’s Central Valley, is home to 5 of the 10 most agriculturally productive counties in the United States. By a wide range of indicators, the SJV is also one of the most economically depressed regions of the United States.

This report analyzes the SJV’s counties and statistically documents the basis of current socioeconomic conditions. The report further explores the extent to which the SJV shares similarities with and differs from the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) area and a 68-county Central Appalachian subregion which contains some of the most economically distressed counties in Appalachia. The report also examines the role of federal expenditures in the cities and counties of the SJV.

During the past twenty-five years, population growth rates in the SJV were significantly higher than for California or the United States and their projected growth rates over the next 20 years are also significantly higher. In 2000, the SJV also had substantially higher rates of poverty than California or the United States.

Poverty rates were also significantly higher in the SJV than in the ARC region, although the rate is somewhat lower than that of the Central Appalachian subregion. Unemployment rates in the SJV were higher than in California or the United States and the ARC area. Per capita income and average family income were higher in the SJV than in Central Appalachia, but per capita income in the SJV was lower than in the ARC region as a whole. SJV households also had higher rates of public assistance income than did Central Appalachian households. Madera County ranked among the 10 lowest per capita income Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) in the United States in 2003, and the other 5 MSAs in the San Joaquin were all in the bottom 20% of all U.S. MSAs. Other indicators of social well-being discussed in the report showed that the SJV is a region of significant economic distress.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Drought and Equity in California
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Drought and Equity in California
Pacific Institute | January 9, 2017...
Summary
Drought and Equity in California is the first statewide analysis of the impacts of the drought on California’s most vulnerable communities. This report...
Drought and Equity in California is the first statewide analysis of the impacts of the drought on California’s most vulnerable communities. This report provides information community groups can use to advocate for their own interests, as well as to inform policymakers and other decision-makers interested in crafting more effective drought response strategies, particularly to address the needs of the state’s most vulnerable communities.

The report finds that during the state’s ongoing drought, water shortages and price hikes affected access to safe, affordable water for Californians, with substantial impacts on low-income families and communities burdened with environmental pollution. The report also examines the effects of a rapidly declining salmon population on commercial and tribal fishermen and finds that the decline and variability of salmon populations during droughts has impacted those dependent on the fish for income, food, and cultural traditions.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Drought and Equity in the San Francisco Bay Area
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Drought and Equity in the San Francisco Bay Area
Pacific Institute | June 29, 2016...
Summary
California’s ongoing drought has wide-reaching impacts, from how we grow crops to the price of electricity. Often overlooked is its impact on disadvantaged...
California’s ongoing drought has wide-reaching impacts, from how we grow crops to the price of electricity. Often overlooked is its impact on disadvantaged communities. The Pacific Institute and The Environmental Justice Coalition for Water (EJCW) conducted community-based participatory research with eight Bay Area community-based groups to explore and document the drought’s impacts on low-income people in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Through a series of collaborative meetings, surveys, and in-depth analyses of data, the group produced a groundbreaking report that sheds light on specific drought-related hardships faced by low-income residents and offers recommendations for mitigating those impacts.

“This report is the first examination of the drought’s impacts on low-income communities in the Bay Area,” says Colin Bailey, Executive Director of EJCW. “Contrary to the conventional wisdom, the report shows the same hardships that befall California’s more rural communities are present in urban areas as well. The report calls on decision makers to account for and address these inequities in our drought responses.”

The project team examined available data on drought impacts for the Bay Area, such as the number of households without water. The group identified affordability and water infrastructure conditions as key concerns for low-income communities, along with inequitable water use, whereby wealthier households typically use more water than lower income households. These are persistent concerns in many communities but have been exacerbated by the drought.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Environmental Justice in California Government
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Environmental Justice in California Government
State of California | October 1, 2003...
Summary
In California, we have spent over a century and billions of dollars to preserve and protect the environment for current and future generations....
In California, we have spent over a century and billions of dollars to preserve and protect the environment for current and future generations. The EJ movement asks us to put real people in that environment, particularly the most vulnerable populations such as ethnic minorities, low-income persons, the young and the elderly. In a nutshell, EJ can be said to be the vision and process of creating socially just, sustainable human and ecological systems, where all participate fully in decisions affecting their lives.

The Governor’s Office of Planning & Research (OPR) assists the Governor and the Administration in land use planning, research, liaison with local government, small business advocacy, rural policy, and various interagency taskforces. 1999 legislation defined EJ in California law and also established OPR as the coordinating agency in state government for environmental justice (EJ) efforts. The placement of the central EJ program within OPR demonstrates the Legislature’s understanding that EJ efforts require coordination at the highest level of state government. Indeed, California is the only state that has placed its EJ effort within
the Chief Executive’s Office.

The legislation establishing OPR as the “coordinating agency in state government for environmental justice programs” (California Government Code § 65040.12) directs the OPR director to consult with state agencies and interested members of the public and private sectors in this state, coordinate its efforts and share information regarding EJ programs with federal agencies, and review and evaluate any information from federal agencies that is obtained as a result of their respective regulatory activities.

This policy report is intended to provide a brief history of EJ, report on the status of OPR's efforts, and provide an outline of EJ findings, goals and policies for future EJ efforts within state government. Much work remains to ensure that the most vulnerable of Californians, including people of color and low-income persons, are treated with dignity and respect regarding environmental decisions. OPR views its work thus far as a modest, although significant beginning.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Environmental Justice in California State Government
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Environmental Justice in California State Government
Governor's Office of Planning and Research | November 5, 2003...
Summary
In California, we have spent over a century and billions of dollars to preserve and protect the environment for current and future generations....
In California, we have spent over a century and billions of dollars to preserve and protect the environment for current and future generations. The EJ movement asks us to put real people in that environment, particularly the most vulnerable populations such as ethnic minorities, low-income persons, the young and the elderly. In a nutshell, EJ can be said to be the vision and process of creating socially just, sustainable human and ecological systems, where all participate fully in decisions affecting their lives.

The Governor’s Office of Planning & Research (OPR) assists the Governor and the Administration in land use planning, research, liaison with local government, small business advocacy, rural policy, and various interagency taskforces. 1999 legislation defined EJ in California law and also established OPR as the coordinating agency in state government for environmental justice (EJ) efforts. The placement of the central EJ program within OPR demonstrates the Legislature’s understanding that EJ efforts require coordination at the highest level of state government. Indeed, California is the only state that has placed its EJ effort within the Chief Executive’s Office.

The legislation establishing OPR as the “coordinating agency in state government for environmental justice programs” (California Government Code § 65040.12) directs the OPR director to consult with state agencies and interested members of the public and private sectors in this state, coordinate its efforts and share information regarding EJ programs with federal agencies, and review and evaluate any information from federal agencies that is obtained as a result of their respective regulatory activities.

This policy report is intended to provide a brief history of EJ, report on the status of OPR's efforts, and provide an outline of EJ findings, goals and policies for future EJ efforts within state government. Much work remains to ensure that the most vulnerable of Californians, including people of color and low-income persons, are treated with dignity and respect regarding environmental decisions. OPR views its work thus far as a modest, although significant beginning.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Environmental Justice Program Implementation for Lahontan Region
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Environmental Justice Program Implementation for Lahontan Region
Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board | January 30, 2015...
Summary
The Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan Water Board) reviewed how environmental justice (EJ) is conducted in the region and examined new...
The Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan Water Board) reviewed how environmental justice (EJ) is conducted in the region and examined new ways to improve our efforts to benefit the disadvantaged communities in our region. The challenges faced by disadvantaged communities (DACs) in the Lahontan region are unique and often different than other DACs in more urban regions. This report provides an assessment of existing efforts to help DACs and catalogs EJ concerns. In addition, the report includes recommendations to enhance DACs participation in the regulatory process, expand access to funding and technical assistance, and improve water quality and drinking water.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Environmental Justice Program Update: 2013-2015
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Environmental Justice Program Update: 2013-2015
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) | May 10, 2016...
Summary
A report to the Governor and the Legislature on actions taken to implement Public Resources Code Sections 71110-71116 This report details the progress...
A report to the Governor and the Legislature on actions taken to implement Public Resources Code Sections 71110-71116

This report details the progress that the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) and its boards, departments, and office (BDOs) have made from summer 2013 to the end of 2015. By law, CalEPA is required to prepare a report to the Governor and Legislature every three years on the activities it has undertaken in achieving the objectives identified in the Intra-Agency Environmental Justice Strategy.

The first section of this report provides updates on significant environmental justice legislation passed in California since 2013. The second section of the report provides updates on CalEnviroScreen, the Environmental Justice Compliance and Enforcement Working Group, and the Environmental Justice Small Grant Program.

The third section describes the BDOs’ community partnership with the Identifying Violations Affecting Neighborhood (IVAN) tool. Finally, the fourth section provides an account of the environmental justice accomplishments and goals of the Agency’s BDOs.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details
Human Costs of Nitrate-contaminated Drinking Water in the San Joaquin Valley
$0.00
Add to Downloads

Human Costs of Nitrate-contaminated Drinking Water in the San Joaquin Valley
Pacific Institute | March 1, 2011...
Summary
While most Californians take for granted that safe water is readily available at the turn of a tap, a growing number of communities,...
While most Californians take for granted that safe water is readily available at the turn of a tap, a growing number of communities, primarily in the San Joaquin Valley and other agricultural areas of the state, face very real impacts from nitrate contamination of the drinking water sources serving their homes and schools. New research led by the Pacific Institute, The Human Costs of Nitrate-Contaminated Drinking Water in the San Joaquin Valley, finds that nitrate contamination of groundwater has wide-reaching effects on California’s health, economic vitality, and environmental well being, disproportionately affecting low-income households and Spanish-speaking residents.

The analysis brings a stark reality check to the fore as the Central Valley Water Board considers a new regulatory program for irrigated lands, the primary source of nitrate contamination in the San Joaquin Valley. There have never been any regulatory requirements on irrigated agriculture to protect groundwater from fertilizers, which are the primary source of nitrate in the valley. Nitrate levels have increased dramatically in drinking water supplies over the last few decades.

The new study, The Human Costs of Nitrate-Contaminated Drinking Water in the San Joaquin Valley, a collaboration of the Pacific Institute, Community Water Center, Clean Water Fund, and California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, focuses on the household costs of avoiding nitrate-contaminated drinking water connected to community water systems and the costs to these systems of removing or avoiding nitrates, and it points to key policies and further research needed to better understand and resolve this entrenched challenge.

The eight-county San Joaquin Valley has some of the most contaminated aquifers in the nation: 92 drinking water systems in the San Joaquin Valley had a well with nitrate levels above the legal limit from 2005-2008, potentially affecting the water quality of approximately 1.3 million residents. In addition to public water systems, the State Water Board sampled 181 domestic wells in Tulare County in 2006 and found that 40% of those tested had nitrate levels above the legal limit.

View Document
Become a member to access this feature
Download NowEmail Details