Abstract

In this paper, I use an interaction between environmental justice activists, local city officials, and representatives of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish the role of place-based identities in intersectional politics of belonging for environmental justice activists. I analyze a conversation around the word we that occurred during a Collaborative Problem Solving workshop run by EPA Region 4 to explore how mundane, everyday practices of politics of belonging impact environmental justice activists’ abilities to achieve their self-defined goal. I examine how activists and city officials used the term we, colloquially a term of inclusion, as a political tool. The term was simultaneously used to make distinctions about who did and did not belong and to eliminate differences by homogenizing the broader we. For environmental justice activists, the workshop brought to the forefront the influence of geography on intersectional positionalities. While discussions and lack of specification of we may seem benign, in practice, they define belonging and exclusion, reinforcing existing power structures that perpetuate environmental injustices. From a theoretical perspective, I highlight the importance of place as an intersectional axis of difference for critical environmental justice scholars. In conclusion, I reflect on how intersectionality can be used to rethink conceptions of we in micro-scalar politics of belonging for environmental justice activists.

摘要

在本文中，我利用环境正义活动家、当地城市官员和美国环境保护署 (EPA) 代表之间的互动来确定地方身份在环境正义活动家的交叉归属政治中的作用。我分析了在 EPA 第 4 区举办的协作解决问题研讨会期间发生的围绕“我们”一词的对话，以探讨归属政治的平凡日常实践如何影响环境正义活动家实现其自定义目标的能力。我研究了活动家和市政官员如何使用我们，通俗地是一个包容的术语，作为一种政治工具。该术语同时用于区分谁属于谁不属于谁，并通过将更广泛的我们同质化来消除差异。对于环境正义活动家来说，研讨会将地理对交叉位置的影响带到了最前沿。虽然对我们的讨论和缺乏规范似乎是良性的，但在实践中，它们定义了归属和排斥，强化了使环境不公正长期存在的现有权力结构。从理论的角度来看，我强调了地方作为批判环境正义学者的交叉差异轴的重要性。总之，我反思了如何使用交叉性来重新思考我们的概念 在环境正义活动家归属的微观标量政治中。