Race, class and chemicals: The political ecology of environmental injustice in Arizona

Three case studies were compared, each focusing on the development of an environmental injustice claim. The claims took place in three very demographically different communities in Central Arizona. The areas studied were South Central Phoenix (the predominantly minority urban site of hazards including a hazardous waste facility); Queen Creek (the predominantly white suburban site of a factory using hazardous materials); and Hayden (the predominantly Mexican-American rural site of a copper smelter). The social, demographic and labor histories of each area were found to interrelated in important ways, giving rise to the present day situation of residents in proximity to a hazardous facility. In two of the sites (Hayden and Queen Creek), occupational hazards inside the plant were found to be linked together with environmental hazards outside. In the third site (South Central Phoenix), the development of major transportation corridors was an important factor in reproducing the situation in which people of color live near environmentally hazardous facilities. Racial/ethnic and social class identities were found to be important in the way that area residents framed (or defined) the environmental injustice, and in the actions they took to redress the injustice; the process and success or failure of these actions was found to be partially dependent upon how the problem was framed. The way in which frames were linked together was found to be important, in that the linkage of environmental injustice with racial/ethnic injustice in South Central Phoenix generated more attention for the claim than the linkage of environmental injustice with workplace health and safety injustice (as in Hayden). In South Central Phoenix, a conflict of interest between two levels of local government presented an important political opportunity for claims makers. The chemical contaminants themselves were also important in determining the success of the claim when it consisted of a class-action lawsuit in which health damages were claimed: the plaintiffs had a better chance of prevailing in cases involving older chemicals that have been more thoroughly studied than in cases with newer chemicals whose effects on the human body are largely unknown.