Flint Water Crisis as Environmental Racism: A Sociological Analysis

Introduction

The Flint Water Crisis is one of the worst incidents of toxic lead poisoning to occur in the history of the city and of Michigan. This crisis began in April 2014 as an unprecedented consequence of austerity measures adopted in the city of Flint to address an existing financial crisis. Those measures involved switching to the Flint River as the city's main water supply. As a result of this decision, the Flint Water Crisis emerged and disproportionately affected poor communities and minorities living in the city. Since then, the issue has attracted considerable scholarly attention and become the subject of numerous studies examining its causes and its impact on affected communities.

This paper examines the Flint Water Crisis from an environmental perspective, treating it as a case of environmental racism. The analysis employs sociological and environmental concepts and theories to develop a deeper understanding of the environmental racism that underlies the crisis.

The Flint Water Crisis is an important issue for various stakeholders, including environmentalists, policymakers, and sociologists. It is important because it highlights environmental injustice carried out by a government against poor communities and racial minorities. The focus by Flint's local government on the costs of water supply — without consideration of the probable health and well-being effects on poor communities and Black residents — was an indicator of environmental injustice. State and local health officials failed in their responsibilities to safeguard the health and well-being of these communities. Moreover, the Flint Water Crisis is significant because it is not a case of environmental pollution caused by a private actor, which is the more typical source of environmental injustice, but rather a case of the local state acting in a neoliberal manner (Pulido, 2016).

The research question guiding this study is: How is the Flint Water Crisis a reflection of environmental racism or injustice rather than a case of unprecedented environmental pollution?

The thesis advanced in this paper is that the Flint Water Crisis reflects how the city's local government devalued the lives of its residents to such an extent that their health and well-being were subordinated to the financial solvency objectives of the municipality.

This paper begins by identifying a relevant theoretical framework — Environmental Racism theory — and explaining how it relates to the thesis and research question. This is followed by a comprehensive literature review drawing on peer-reviewed sociological sources. The review identifies key environmental and sociological concepts and uses them to develop the thesis and answer the research question. The discussion section advances three arguments in support of the thesis. The paper concludes with a summary of findings and the most significant insights drawn from the analysis.

Environmental Racism Theory and Its Relevance

Environmental Racism theory holds that environmental injustice occurs when minority neighborhoods disproportionately bear a greater environmental burden than white neighborhoods in the context of a nationwide, state, or local phenomenon (Ulezalka, 2007). The theory refers to any policies, directives, or practices that disproportionately affect communities on the basis of race or skin color, and it was developed on the premise that environmental mismanagement produces disproportionate economic and environmental impacts — particularly on minority groups and communities.

According to Dicochea (2012), the social force of race with respect to natural resources plays an important role in the development of environmental justice in the United States. Existing literature demonstrates that environmental justice is rooted in dominant value systems across various social structures and discourses. These dominant value systems are the premise upon which Environmental Racism theory is built. The theory contends that environmental injustice in the handling of natural resources reflects discriminatory dominant values embedded in social structures.

Environmental Racism theory is strongly linked to the Flint Water Crisis and the thesis statement of this paper. Pulido (2016) argues that the Flint Water Crisis was not caused by a polluter cutting costs or a reckless emitter — the usual causes of environmental injustice — but was instead brought about by an act of environmental racism, since the relevant officials in Flint acted within the context of neoliberalism. In this regard, Environmental Racism theory provides a suitable framework for understanding the crisis, developing the thesis, and answering the research question. The theory's significance lies in its capacity to establish the link between governmental policies, directives, or practices and the disproportionate economic and environmental impacts on communities differentiated by race or color (Ulezalka, 2007). Because the Flint Water Crisis disproportionately affected poor communities and African Americans — the majority population in the city — Environmental Racism theory offers a productive lens through which to examine race and class factors in the crisis.

Literature Review: Environmental Injustice in Flint

Campbell, Greenberg, Mankikar, and Ross (2016) examined the Flint Water Crisis through an environmental injustice perspective. They argue that the city's failure to properly treat its municipal water system following the change in the main water source constituted an environmental injustice, because the resulting disaster most severely affected the majority African-American population and poor communities living in Flint. The study concluded that the facts of the Flint Water Crisis demonstrate that the incident was driven by environmental injustice. Even though the African-American community had raised concerns and complaints regarding water quality after the change in the municipal water source, those concerns were ignored by relevant public officials and agencies. Additionally, state officials chose to save money without regard for environmental protections for the affected communities.

Pulido (2016) concurs that state officials in Flint prioritized cost savings — achieved by changing the water system — at the expense of community health and well-being. Pulido (2016) further argues that the Flint Water Crisis was produced by the local state's decision to act within a neoliberal context, through which officials demonstrated how they devalued residents' lives by subordinating them to the municipality's financial solvency goals. Unlike Campbell et al. (2016), however, Pulido (2016) emphasizes racial capitalism as a key sociological component of the crisis. Racial capitalism holds that existing capitalist systems exploit social and cultural differences based on gender, nationality, race, and region. The Flint Water Crisis reflects racial capitalism insofar as financial solvency goals were used to exploit social and cultural differences — particularly those of race.

Bellinger (2016) agrees with both Campbell et al. (2016) and Pulido (2016), characterizing the Flint Water Crisis as an abject failure to protect public health. Consistent with Pulido's (2016) racial capitalism framing, Bellinger (2016) argues that local state officials prioritized financial solvency at the expense of the public health of poor communities and African Americans. While residents repeatedly raised concerns about water quality, those concerns were largely ignored by the relevant authorities. In doing so, the city of Flint committed what Bellinger (2016) describes as a social crime by endangering the lives of its communities and disregarding their complaints.

Salinsky (2016) compared the Flint Water Crisis to the 1993 Milwaukee cryptosporidium parvum outbreak, using an environmental justice perspective since both incidents involved significant environmental impacts on municipal water supplies. Salinsky (2016) concluded that the Flint Water Crisis constituted a case of environmental injustice — a finding consistent with the other studies reviewed here. A key basis for this conclusion is that the Flint crisis received a comparatively poor government response relative to the Milwaukee outbreak. Although the population demographics of both cities are broadly similar, government response in Milwaukee was faster and more robust. Salinsky (2016) attributes this disparity to the fact that Milwaukee's surrounding areas have predominantly white, higher-income populations. In Flint, by contrast, the government was relatively reluctant to respond because the crisis impacted poor communities and people of color, which is a clear indicator of environmental injustice and racism.

Oz and Bisgin (2016) offer a complementary perspective, characterizing the Flint Water Crisis as a man-made disaster reflecting government failure at all levels. First, the government prioritized financial solvency goals without considering the environmental consequences of switching the municipal water source. Second, when city residents complained about water quality, the government was slow to respond until the environmental impacts became widespread and severe. From a sociological perspective, Oz and Bisgin (2016) attribute responsibility for the crisis to governmental failure at every level, despite citizens' numerous efforts to express dissatisfaction and raise concerns.

Dettloff and Bernico (2017) argue that the Flint Water Crisis illuminates three major domains of human experience: ontology, responsibility, and social exclusion. The crisis is understood as a product of the city's public water infrastructure decisions. Following the change in the municipal water source, the unfolding of the crisis moves from ontology to responsibility (politics) to social exclusion. At the ontological level, the water contained lead, lacked corrosion control treatment, and was potentially harmful for consumption. At the level of responsibility, consumption of the contaminated water caused lead poisoning among various communities, including children. Although communities raised concerns, relevant officials initially ignored them and were slow to act. Responsibility for the crisis is attributed to local state officials (Oz & Bisgin, 2016; Dettloff & Bernico, 2017). The situation ultimately exposed the social exclusion of poor communities and the majority African-American population, who were disproportionately affected by the water crisis.

Conclusion

The Flint Water Crisis is one of the most significant recent tragedies in the history of the city and of the United States. Characterized by toxic lead poisoning of the municipal water supply following the government's decision to change the water source, the crisis is — as this analysis has demonstrated — a reflection of environmental racism and injustice by the government. The local state government failed to demonstrate accountability by prioritizing financial solvency goals over the well-being and environmental protection of its citizens. This lack of accountability is further evidenced by the government's inadequate response to community concerns about water quality until the environmental impacts became severe and widespread.

The theoretical framework of Environmental Racism, combined with the sociological concepts of racial capitalism, neoliberalism, and social exclusion, provides a robust explanation for why the Flint Water Crisis unfolded as it did and why its burdens fell disproportionately on poor communities and African-American residents. Ultimately, the government undervalued the lives of its people in favor of financial solvency — a conclusion that carries important lessons for environmental policy, public health governance, and the pursuit of racial justice.

Bellinger, D. C. (2016, March 24). Lead contamination in Flint — An abject failure to protect public health. The New England Journal of Medicine, 374, 1101–1103.

Campbell, C., Greenberg, R., Mankikar, D., & Ross, R. D. (2016, October). A case study of environmental injustice: The failure in Flint. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(10). Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5086690/

Dettloff, D., & Bernico, M. (2017). Atmoterrorism and atmodesign in the 21st century: Mediating Flint's water crisis. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Psychology, 13(1), 156–189.

Dicochea, P. R. (2012). Discourses of race & racism within environmental justice studies: An eco-racial intervention. Ethnicity and Race in a Changing World: A Review Journal, 3(2), 17–28.

Duke Law News. (2017, January 13). Flint crisis yields lessons in social justice, law, and policy. Duke University. Retrieved from https://law.duke.edu/news/flint-crisis-yields-lessons-social-justice-law-and-policy/

Fehlbaum, A. (2016, January 25). Don't drink the water: The crisis in Flint from a sociological perspective. Sociology in Focus. Retrieved from http://sociologyinfocus.com/2016/01/dont-drink-the-water-the-crisis-in-flint-from-a-sociological-perspective/

Oz, T., & Bisgin, H. (2016, October). Attribution of responsibility and blame regarding a man-made disaster: #FlintWaterCrisis. Social Web for Disaster Management, 16. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.03480.pdf

Pulido, L. (2016, July 27). Flint, environmental racism, and racial capitalism. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 27(3), 1–16.

Salinsky, J. I. (2016, August 1). Comparing the 2014–2016 Flint Water Crisis to the 1993 Milwaukee cryptosporidium outbreak. Environmental Justice, 9(4), 119–128.

Ulezalka, T. (2007). Race and waste: The quest for environmental justice. Temple Journal of Science Technology and Environmental Law, 26(1), 51–73.