1

Prisons are an Environmental Injustice: Recommendations for Change

Environmental Justice Project Part Two

Emma K. Pedersen
College of Social Work, University of South Carolina
SOWK 668: Environmental Justice and Social Work
Professor Ben Roth
February 21, 2023
 2

Incarcerated individuals far too often bear the burdens of environmental injustice due to

the siting of prisons near Superfund sites. Superfund sites are federally designated areas of land

that have been contaminated due to the dumping of or improper handling of toxic waste and they

have been linked to numerous health issues and lower life expectancy (USEPA, 2022). Over

32% of United States prisons are neighboring these toxic waste sites (Wang, 2022). This has led

to the constant and forced exposure of prisoners to harmful air pollution and toxic drinking

water, resulting in a multitude of health problems among prisoners such as skin rashes,

respiratory problems such as Valley Fever and Legionnaire’s disease, cancer due to exposure to

coal ash, and infection from bacteria outbreaks to name just a few.

U.S. policy has failed to protect these individuals due to the lack of clear guidelines, lack

of inclusivity, and failure to hold parties responsible for their blatant disregard of the rights of

prisoners. We see this through the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to not require

Environmental Impact Statements to consider the impact of the proposed project (building a

prison) on the health of the individuals inside of the prisons, only on the environment

surrounding it (Bayles, 2016). In addition, Clinton’s 1994 mandate required federal agencies to

address “environmental justice for low income and minority groups,” but the Federal Bureau of

Prisons has said, in response to being accused of not complying with this order, that it “does not

[consider] federal inmates [to be] a minority or low income population” (Bayles, 2016). The

responses from these federal agencies back up claims that say that prisoners are viewed as an

expendable population. To reach environmental justice, there must be an extension of the rights

afforded to the incarcerated population, such as the legislated human right to a clean

environment, and there must be more inclusivity in the Environmental Impacts Statements to

include all populations that will be affected by the prison.

 3

On July 28, 2022, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution stating that a

“clean, healthy, and sustainable environment” is a human right, not a privilege (ILO Newsroom,

2022). The Human Rights Council is an “intergovernmental body” within the UN tasked with

advocating for and promoting human rights. The resolutions they propose are not legally binding

but are “political expressions” that represent the Council’s position (United Nations, 2021). The

recognition of these rights at the international level prompts governments to work harder to meet

these rights and “transform” the resolutions into concrete “legal obligations” (Meshel, 2018, p.

282)

The United States is a country that is involved with the UN, but has not shown much

action in passing legislation to actualize environmental human rights. In 2013 the US “firmly

opposed the inclusion of a paragraph defining the human right to safe drinking water and

sanitation” and the paragraph was excluded as a result of their lack of support. Then again in

2014, the US “dissociated itself” from paragraph 21 of the Council’s resolution that said “the

human right to safe drinking water and sanitation entitles everyone without discrimination to

have access to sufficient, safe, acceptable, [etc] water…in all spheres of life” (Meshel, 2018, p.

285). Furthermore, on July 28, 2022, the same day the UN passed the human right to a clean

environment resolution, the US released an “explanation of position on the right to a clean,

healthy, and sustainable environment resolution” which said that although they support this

resolution, they “do regret the loss of important human rights language throughout the process”

(United States Mission to the United Nations, 2022). While it has not been said that the US was

one of the countries that fought back against that language, their past stances show that that

assumption may not be too far off.

 4

The human right to safe drinking water is not recognized at the federal level but is to a

limited extent at the state level. Unfortunately, the legislation that does exist has been ineffective

and not enforced. For example, in California, the water code says that “every human being has

the right to safe, clean…accessible water adequate for human consumption” but also states that

“this section does not expand any obligation of the state to provide water” (Meshel, 2018, p.

287). This piece of legislation shows that there is a clear gap between the granting of a human

right to drinking water and the actualization of that human right.

It should be the government’s responsibility to ensure this right by having real measures

in place that alleviate this environmental injustice. This starts by the United States finally

showing its support for the inclusion of a human right to not only drinking water, but also clean,

breathable air. This support could be the tipping point for getting it recognized internationally,

which would then trickle down into our federal and state governments. The recognition of this

human right would provide the political and social pressure needed to make actual legal and

policy differences. Another positive aspect this would have would be the “symbolic power” It

would give to vulnerable communities, such as the prison population, that have been impacted by

this for so long and empower them to demand that their rights be upheld (Meshel, 2018, p. 293).

The recognition of this right would finally give prisoners the legal backing that they need to

make cases against their treatment and forced exposure.

The recognition of a human right to drinking water and clean air could also help put the

legal pressure on the Environmental Protection Agency to finally include the incarcerated

population in Environmental Impact Statements. There has been many efforts in the past to

pressure the EPA to consider this population a vulnerable one, but they have been unsuccessful.

In 2015, the Human Rights Defense Center submitted a “public comment” to the EPA that
 5

highlighted their “lack of consideration for environmental justice among the millions of prisoners

in the US” (Tsolkas, 2016). This comment was cosigned by 138 various social justice and

environmental rights groups. Despite these efforts, there was no mention of any prisoners in the

EPA’s 2020 Environmental Justice Plan.

There was a small move toward inclusivity in 2017 when the EPA added a “prison layer”

to its Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping tool. This layer allows the public to overlay

the locations of prisons with the location of superfund and hazardous waste sites (Loftus- Farren,

2017). Advocates hope that this tool will be helpful in fighting against new prison projects

because they will have evidence of the environmental hazards in that area, but this tool does little

to help prisoners already being exposed to the harmful environments because prisoners still are

not considered in the EPA’s environmental justice context (Loftus- Farren, 2017). If the right to

clean drinking water and clean air were recognized as human rights it would not matter as much

if they were considered a vulnerable population or not because the playing field would be more

equal. Although incarcerated individuals do lose some of their Constitutional rights, they do not

lose their human rights and they could use this as real leverage to fight against their constant and

forced exposure to air pollutants and toxic water.

As evidenced, the United States has not supported, and has actively fought back against

the recognition of a human right to clean drinking water and air. The inability of the government

to recognize this most basic life necessity has lead to an increase in the disproportionate effects

of this environmental crisis, leaving not only the prison population, but other vulnerable

populations behind. As one activist points out: the question shouldn’t be “whether a human right

to water should exist, but whether our state and federal governments are fulfilling it” (Meshel,

2018, p. 297). It is time for the US government to recognize that it is their responsibility to
 6

ensure these most basic human rights, and to begin to acknowledge the prison population, and

others, as nonexpendable populations.

 7

References

Bayles, C. (2016, May 25). Behind bars on polluted land. The Atlantic. Retrieved February 21,

2023, from https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/05/behind-bars-on-polluted-

land/484202/

ILO Newsroom. (2022, September 29). UN General Assembly recognizes human right to a

clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. International Labour Organization. Retrieved

February 21, 2023, from

https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_857164/lang--en/

index.htm#:~:text=This%20reality%20was%20recognized%20by,been%20a%20long

%20time%20coming.

Loftus- Farren, Z. (2017). EPA adds prison locations to its Environmental Justice Mapping Tool.

Earth Island Journal. Retrieved February 21, 2023, from

https://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/articles/entry/epa_adds_prison_locations_to

_its_environmental_justice_mapping_tool/

Meshel, T. (2018). Environmental Justice in the United States: The Human Right to Water.

Washington Journal of Environmental Law & Policy, 8(2), 282–297.

Tsolkas, P. (2016). Over 130 organizations challenge EPA to consider prisoners in

environmental justice plan. Nation Inside. Retrieved February 21, 2023, from

https://nationinside.org/campaign/prison-ecology-project/posts/over-130-organizations-

challenge-epa-to-consider-prisoners-in-environmental-justice-plan/
 8

United Nations. (2021). The right to a healthy environment: 6 things you need to know | UN

news. United Nations. Retrieved February 21, 2023, from

https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/10/1103082

United States Mission to the United Nations. (2022, July 28). Explanation of position on the

right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment resolution. United States Mission to

the United Nations. Retrieved February 21, 2023, from

https://usun.usmission.gov/explanation-of-position-on-the-right-to-a-clean-healthy-and-

sustainable-environment-resolution/

USEPA. (2022). What is a Superfund? EPA. Retrieved February 21, 2023, from

https://www.epa.gov/superfund/what-superfund

Wang, L. (2022). Prisons are a daily environmental injustice. Prison Policy Initiative. Retrieved

February 21, 2023, from

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2022/04/20/environmental_injustice/