Environmentalism has hit a rough patch. While climate change and industrial activity wreak havoc, the movement often focuses on conserving natural beauty and rare species. Sure, these efforts matter, but they miss a critical part of the equation: how environmental issues affect human health. By zeroing in on biodiversity, we sometimes overlook the real-world impacts on people, especially those in vulnerable communities.
Take the example of the U.S. environmental movement. It began with President Grant’s establishment of Yellowstone National Park in 1872. Since then, the focus has largely been on high-profile projects, like national parks and endangered species. These initiatives attract donors because they look good on paper and fit neatly into a conservation narrative. But issues like polluted air and climate-related diseases don’t get the same attention. According to research, these problems lead to significant health issues, especially among marginalized groups, yet they often fly under the radar.
For instance, air pollution from oil and gas activities contributes to around 90,000 premature deaths annually in the U.S. It also triggers over 216,000 cases of asthma in children each year. The toll isn’t distributed equally; communities of color often bear the brunt of this pollution due to past policies like redlining, which placed industrial projects near their neighborhoods. Overwhelming evidence shows that this selective focus on conservation sterilizes crucial discussions about environmental inequalities.
As climate change accelerates, tropical diseases like dengue and Zika are starting to appear in non-tropical areas. Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico highlighted how vulnerable communities are often the hardest hit by climate disasters. When environmentalism and public health operate in silos, many suffer needlessly.
Interestingly, countries are starting to understand the benefits of connecting these two spheres. In China, the “Two Control Zones” policy aimed to cut sulfur dioxide emissions and lower acid rain, resulting in improved health outcomes. Similar measures in the U.S. could potentially save over 53,200 lives annually, according to researchers. The economic benefits of reducing pollution could exceed $600 billion yearly, demonstrating that protecting the environment and public health can go hand-in-hand.
For environmentalism to truly thrive, it must evolve. Protecting forests, reefs, and biodiversity is essential, but it’s equally vital to safeguard human health. Until we embrace both aspects, we’re limiting our ability to fully address environmental challenges. By recognizing that the planet and its people are interconnected, we can build a more comprehensive and impactful movement.
