Over the last few weeks, I have been researching the Capitalocene, a theory describing the era that we are in today; an era in which capitalism is the prominent controlling factor in environmental health and/or degradation. With growth in technology, urbanization, and rapid individual growth through trade, trends in the prosperity and sustainability of the environment have arisen in correlation with various regional attributes relating to capitalism and wealth. Through the use of data on income, wealth, race, and access, a correlation has continued to appear in which minority groups, and groups of lower income statuses, tend to exist in regions that also suffer from increased levels of pollution and overall environmental degradation. Obviously, an inequitable valuation has occurred in considering the equal right/accessibility to healthy environments and living for all. So how do we achieve this? These Capitalocentric ideologies are the same that I am beginning to reflect on in my concentration, and hone in my further studies on.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, “Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies” (EPA, 2018) (also referenced to in Lab Nine). In order to achieve a sound form of controlling environmental health, and overall EPI scores, we need to find a way to employ guidelines that encompass the ideals of Environmental Justice, into global actions and solutions. Environmental Justice as a concept, however, is much easier said that accomplished, especially under faced political constraints. Current forms of capitalism do not support this notion, despite a ‘free market.’ Through the implementation of Environmental Justice in regulating environmental issues fairly and equally around the globe, hot spots would be more easily avoided, if not eliminated entirely. As could the non-uniformity of outsourced pollution sources due to trade and exporting. The Paris Agreement for example, created a basis of minimal standards for 196 countries involved, that promoted a global effort to fight climate change and prevent detriment, specifically combatting greenhouse gas emissions. However, as seen over the past year in the United States’ withdrawal from the agreement, global efforts involve government cooperation. Perhaps if there was more equitability between government powers across all nations, this could shift. Until then, the strive for absolute growth in capitalism needs not necessarily to be placed on the back burner, but environmental health, biodiversity, and long-term sustainability should, from the given observations, be prioritized.