Prepared by:
Amy Jerome and Jennifer Donahue
Environmental Planning Group
4350 E. Camelback, G-200
Phoenix, AZ 85018

JANUARY 2002

Prepared for:
Arizona Department of Transportation
206 South 17th Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
in cooperation with
U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Abstract
The information we received from the DOTs surveyed included a variety of responses regarding the level of implementation of environmental justice (EJ) policies, procedures and programs. Even though the level of implementation varies among the DOTs, the basic principles of EJ evaluation and response are consistent. Below, we have provided a synopsis of what can be called "best practices" for implementing an effective EJ program. The two models have been utilized in differing degrees by many DOTs. At least three DOTs have implemented the two models. However, the macro-level model has not been in practice for a long period of time and therefore its effectiveness has not fully been measured. Neither has the success of the micro-level (project specific) action been determined.

Even though there appears to be no considerable evidence of legal challenges to the more basic approaches used by some DOTs, the utilization of the proposed "best practices" is warranted. Continuing interest and concern for EJ issues in Arizona, and the potential for increased public awareness suggest that methods that formalize ADOTs EJ policies and procedures in this manner should be continued and expanded were necessary.

* Environmental Justice Report for the 2001 Regional Transportaiton Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area (PDF)

MTC is taking a grass-roots approach to identifying barriers to mobility and working to overcome them. With its Community-Based Transportation Planning Program, MTC has created a collaborative planning process that involves residents in minority and low-income Bay Area communities, community and faith-based organizations that serve them, transit operators, county congestion management agencies (CMAs) and MTC.

Launched in 2002, the Community-Based Transportation Planning Program evolved out of two reports completed in 2001 - the Lifeline Transportation Network Report and the Environmental Justice Report.

The Lifeline Report identified travel needs in low-income Bay Area communities and recommended community-based transportation planning as a way for communities to set priorities and evaluate options for filling transportation gaps. Likewise, the Environmental Justice Report identified the need for MTC to support local planning efforts in low-income communities throughout the region.

The TCDI program is an opportunity for the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) to support local development and redevelopment efforts in the individual municipalities of the Delaware Valley that implement municipal, county, state, and regional planning objectives. The TCDI program is intended to reverse the trends of disinvestment and decline in many of the region's core cities and developed communities by:

1. Supporting local planning projects that will lead to more residential, employment or retail opportunities;

2. Improving the overall character and quality of life within these communities to retain and attract business and residents, which will help to reduce the pressure for further sprawl and expansion into the growing suburbs;

3. Enhancing and utilizing the existing transportation infrastructure capacity in these areas to reduce the demands on the region's transportation network; and

4. Reducing congestion and improving the transportation system's efficiency. FY 2007 TCDI awards have been approved by Board on May 24, 2007.

As the debate on sustainable development and environmental justice has gathered momen tum, considerable attention has been paid to identifying key principles. In this paper, I highlight a number of core principles and then move on to examine differing styles of policy approach, which have gained favor among different sources, for moving toward the sustainable city from market-based neo- liberal reformism to deep green ecologically centered approaches. I highlight four broad categories of approach to sustainable urban development and begin linking those to the core principles of sustainable development.

University of Michigan

This article uses social movement theory to analyze environmental justice rhetoric. It argues that the environmental justice frame is a master frame that uses discourses about injustice as an effective mobilizing tool. The article identifies an environmental justice paradigm and compares it with the new environmental paradigm. In addition, the article discusses why the environmental justice movement grew so fast and why its adherents find the environmental justice frame so appealing.

This article reveals how local knowledge can improve planning for communities facing the most serious environmental and health risks. These communities often draw on their firsthand experience-here called local knowledge-to challenge expert-lay distinctions. Community participation in environmental decisions is putting pressure on planners to find new ways of fusing the expertise of scientists with insights from the local knowledge of communities. Using interviews, primary texts, and ethnographic fieldwork, this article defines local knowledge, reveals how it differs from professional knowledge, and argues that local knowledge can improve planning in at least four ways (1) epistemology, adding to the knowledge base of environmental policy; (2) procedural democracy, including new and previously silenced voices; (3) effectiveness, providing low-cost policy solutions; and (4) distributive justice, highlighting inequitable distributions of environmental burdens.

Key Words: local knowledge • environmental health • community planning

Department of Town and Regional Planning at the University of Sheffield.

The conceptualizations of justice that have most influenced recent debates in planning theory have focused on procedural concerns, while questions of value and the good have been regarded as problematic given a world of plurality and difference. This article argues that questions of value are an inescapable part of the activity of planning and hence its purpose is to identify the key dimensions of a reconceptualized notion of justice for planning. The argument is presented through consideration of two key themes: the relationship between the individual and the collective, and the notion of "reasonableness" in relation to matters of public policy related to planning. The implications of this analysis lead on to consideration of the scope of collective obligations and the nature of judgment and reasoning in planning. The article concludes by arguing that justice in planning is about situated ethical judgment- a conceptualization of justice that raises significant issues in relation to future developments in planning thought.

Key Words: justice • ethical judgment • planning theory

Denise Strong

College of Urban and Public Affairs, University of New Orleans.

This article describes a course, Environmental Justice Movement, initiated at the College of Urban and Public Affairs at the University of New Orleans in the spring of 1995. A companion to a course in environmental planning, the course was designed to prepare planning students to engage in the environmental policy debate by exposing them to its historical, moral, and technical dimensions. By examining strategies and tactics of planning practice, they learn to apply their analytic and research skills to appropriate advocacy, mediation, and community planning roles. The course seeks to connect the environmental justice movement with social movement theory, concepts of procedural justice, and advocacy and equity planning. It integrates propositions and concepts about the politics of planning, land use policies, and practices with political philosophy, populist beliefs and what Perry (1994) calls "the street-level Rawlsian approach."

Department of Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign

This article argues that environmental racism should be broadened to include the maldistribution of beneficial environmental conditions and proposes that advocacy planning may be an effective way to address the spatial absence of beneficial environmental services and amenities. The article examines advocacy in the context of neighborhood improvement, specifically around the placement of a streetlight and stop sign. Neighborhood infrastructure and transportation planning are vital for safety and quality of life, especially for communities of color, yet planning at this level often revolves around physical aspects of the neighborhood with minimal attention paid to planning processes and outcomes likely to marginalize and even endanger communities. Through an examination of one municipality's neighborhood-based advocacy approach to neighborhood improvement, this article considers the opportunities and challenges in using advocacy planning as a strategy to promote environmental justice on the streets and sidewalks of distressed urban neighborhoods.

Key Words: environmental racism • neighborhood improvement • advocacy planning • environmental justice

Environmental Justice in Transportation Planning and Policy: Some Evidence From Practice in the Baltimore-Washintgon DC Metropolitan Region.
Morgan State Univ., Baltimore, MD. National Transportation Center.
Product Type: Technical report
NTIS Order Number: PB2005-101330

Page Count: 56 pages
Date: Nov 2004
Author: S. Sen, L. M. Azonobi
The purpose of the report is to answer two broad research questions: (1) How is environmental justice in transportation addressed and implemented to take into account low-income populations and minority communities and their needs, problems, and aspirations; and (2) how are environmental justice data and concerns incorporated into the transportation decision-making process. The research employed multiple methods. These included a literature review; qualitative interviews with transportation planners, practitioners and policymakers, and other stakeholders in transportation planning and policy in the Baltimore-Washington D.C. metropolitan area; and a focus group in Baltimore. Our primary analytical framework was drawn from critical ethnography and studies of practices and discourse in public policy. Three different views of environmental justice emerged from this study of the Baltimore-Washington D.C. metropolitan area. Most private consulting firms in the area are engaged in environmental justice, because it's a source of job and contracts. Most public officials in the region are engaged in environmental justice and public participation because it's a federal regulation and requirement. However, most citizen and advocacy groups in the region environmental justice and its implementation as part of the agency's mission. The lack of uniform standards regarding environmental justice issues, coupled with scarcity of information as well as the complexity of the issues, are all obstacles to implementing and enforcing environmental justice principles. Access to information is an important issue for community organizations, advocacy groups, low income and minority groups. Public agencies often hold meetings at places that are not easily accessible, or at times difficult for transit dependent, low-income, and minority populations to attend. We recommend that transportation agencies in the Baltimore-Washington D.C. metropolitan area take a proactive stance in involving low-income and minority communities in the transportation policy and planning process. 

DVRPC's Public Participation Plan: A Strategy for Citizen Involvement

While today's public is far more sophisticated and modern standards are more all-inclusive, the basic tenet of public participation remains the same , to reach out to and satisfy as many populations as possible and to do so in an equitable and timely manner. Public participation is the only real way to ascertain the needs of a wide variety of citizens , the underinvolved and often unconcerned, the private sector, special interest activists, mature citizens, educators and parents, public officials, and the physically and economically disadvantaged. DVRPC believes that planning must be done with the public's full involvement and consensus.

We, therefore, have issued this publication which is designed for the DVRPC's Board, staff and the general public as an outline of the Commission's overall strategy for public participation, as well as the policies that have been adopted as inherent to the operation of this agency as we move into the 21st century.

The purpose of this memorandum is to issue clarification to you in implementing Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. 2000d-1) and related regulations, The President's Executive Order on Environmental Justice, the U.S. DOT Order, and the FHWA Order.

Title VI states that "No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." Title VI bars intentional discrimination as well as disparate impact discrimination (i.e., a neutral policy or practice that has a disparate impact on protected groups).

The Environmental Justice (EJ) Orders further amplify Title VI by providing that "each Federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations."

Increasingly, concerns for compliance with provisions of Title VI and the EJ Orders have been raised by citizens and advocacy groups with regard to broad patterns of transportation investment and impact considered in metropolitan and statewide planning. While Title VI and EJ concerns have most often been raised during project development, it is important to recognize that the law also applies equally to the processes and products of planning. The appropriate time for FTA and FHWA to ensure compliance with Title VI in the planning process is during the planning certification reviews conducted for Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) and through the statewide planning finding rendered at approval of the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).

This memorandum serves as clarification pending issuance of revised planning and environmental regulations.