like many in my generation, by my senior year of high school i had succumbed to a form of ironic pessimism. today, not much has changed regarding my world view. spurred on by social media, my attitude is expressed through sarcastic, insensitive humor. it is a coping mechanism i have adopted to deal with the overwhelming amounts of troubling news i am exposed to every day: coronavirus, school shootings, racism, sexual violence, and global climate change and environmental destruction. the world seems to be ending, i’m still a student, and those who currently hold the power to make change are telling me that it’s my generation’s problem. what else can i do, besides fall into a spiral of anxiety and depression, than laugh?

more recently, though these issues continue to weigh on me, i have been privileged enough to be able to take a step back. i have reassessed my narrow definition of activism to include room for my own wellbeing. i am working to strip myself of the guilt and shame i experience surrounding feeling pressured to do the right thing. activism through self care, i believe, doesn’t receive enough emphasis. i have come to realize that my own loss of heart stems from a failure to address my basic needs. in her book, pleasure activism, adrienne maree brown elaborates on this radical form of self love. “pleasure activism,” she writes, “is the work we do to reclaim our whole, happy, and satisfiable selves from the impacts, delusions, and limitations of oppression and/or supremacy” (brown, 2019, p. 13). so often, i feel that my generation is overburdened with responsibility. instead of being taught to act for ourselves and our future, we are time and again reminded that it is up to us to fix the mistakes of those who came before us. by zooming out, and temporarily relieving myself of this pressure, i am able to gain perspective. i am educated and socially and economically privileged; i intend for my life to have purpose and a positive impact on the planet. but i am also a young adult. i am not yet ready to grow up, and i want to have fun. fun is always relevant. in fact, having fun and making an impact are not mutually exclusive. neither are having fun and being an activist. as i move through life, in order to stay motivated, i must feel inspired. in order to feel hope, i must be able to feel joy. at times, feeling joy requires that i temporarily dissociate from responsibility, whether it be through humor or intentional ignorance. this does not make me a bad person. other times, i feel joy by engaging more intentionally with the things and people that i love.

in this light, activism becomes tangible. holding a meaningful, educated conversation about green energy with my climate skeptic grandfather is activism. so is spending an afternoon learning to mountain bike with friends. in order to catalyze impactful and sustainable change, i must give attention to both the land and myself. sometimes, this act can be one in the same. by choosing to work at the local organic farm, for example, i am participating in small scale agriculture and supporting a local, female owned business. i am also working outside and with motivated people. in the future, i must continue to think intentionally about my decisions, actions, and goals. instead of marching around with a cardboard sign or passively listening to the news, i must zoom in. as kate orff writes in her essay mending the landscape, “it’s time to get our hands in the mud” (johnson & wilkinson, 2021, p. 183). the mud, whether it’s a difficult conversation with a family member, or quite literally working in the dirt, with the land, for the earth, is right in front of me. 

thus, activism is personal. activism is spreading love in my community. it is caring for myself and for others. in her poem, the big picture, ellen bass writes, “i try to look at the big picture./the sun, ardent tongue/licking us like a mother…” (johnson & wilkinson, 2021, p. 14). later she continues, “when i get home,/my son has a headache and, though he’s almost grown, asks me to sing him a a song./we lie together on the lumpy couch” (johnson & wilkinson, 2021, p. 15). here, bass plays with perspective, zooming in and out, connecting the sun to her son, whom she is loving and caring for. there is activism in this gesture. she ends her poem, “there never was/anything else. only these excruciatingly/insignificant creatures we love” (johnson & wilkinson, 2021, p. 15). in the face of overwhelming, unrelenting swarms of information, i find motivation in my community. 

in the end, everything is connected. by taking care of myself, i am taking care of the people i love. i am being an activist. the change i wish to see in the world must first take root in my mind and body. it must be communicated through my actions. impact is everyone and everywhere.

––

works cited

brown, adrienne maree. pleasure activism; the politics of feeling good. ak press, 2019.

johnson, ayana elizabeth, and katharine k. wilkinson. (eds). all we can save; truth, courage, and solutions for the climate crisis. one world, 2021.

cultural survival is a non-profit organization that advocates for the rights of indigenous peoples around the world. as the program manager for ‘cultural survival’s keepers of the earth fund (koef)’, bia’ni awards grants to grassroots indigenous-led organizations from different countries to support them as they achieve their autonomy and sovereignty. 

according to the koef website, “since 2017, the fund has provided grants and technical assistance to over 177 indigenous-led projects in 35 countries around the world, totaling $764,317 usd.” 

this past semester, i had the amazing opportunity to work closely with this organization as an advocacy intern, where i researched and wrote articles on various topics while providing general support on projects relating to indigenous rights. 

at the end of my internship, i was able to meet with bia’ni to discuss the impactful work that ‘cultural survival’ and the ‘koef’ are doing for the future of indigenous rights and sustainability. 

when asked if there was a particular project that stood out to her, bia’ni was able to share about a women’s project in chiapas, mexico that is producing organic food through sustainable indigenous practices. 

bia’ni said, “i think it is really nice because the project itself is about food but it also helps to empower young women in their community.” many koef-funded projects highlight gender equality in addition to supporting the revitalization of indigenous practices, because the two topics are often intertwined. 

when i asked her to share her favorite thing about working on the ‘koef’, bia’ni stated “i love having the opportunity to know a very diverse group of people. being indigenous myself, i really love the opportunity to know other people on other sides of the world, to know their culture, to know what they are doing, and also to know what they are facing or struggling with.”

indigenous peoples live in harmony with their environment. but according to bia’ni, “it is because we have been living in our territories and taking the time to get to know our land and environment.”

bia’ni shared that this harmony is also achieved by making mistakes. she explained, “we have faced moments in our lives where we, for example, polluted the river, but we learned from those experiences and we changed what we were doing so, with time, we learned how to live more in peace with nature.”

bia’ni cautions people not to make generalizations about indigenous peoples. she states, “we do have a lot of knowledge and it’s nice to hear that that is something that is now recognized, but what i would like for people to know is that not everyone or every culture knows everything.”

according to bia’ni, we often incorrectly say that ‘indigenous peoples have solutions for climate change’; this is a huge generalization. 

bia’ni says that “talking from my own experience, my territory is very specific and even though i am indigenous, i have no idea how indigenous peoples that live on the ice manage their environment.” 

bia’ni advises that, when talking about environmental solutions, “to remember that we need to go to the specific cultures and not just give a general idea of ‘oh all the indigenous peoples have knowledge’ because there are all kinds of problems.” 

it is important to remember that indigenous peoples “are a diverse group of people and are willing to help but also there are a lot of things that we need to learn, specifically about climate change.” 

bia’ni stated that “climate change has made indigenous people re-learn things we have been doing for a very long time.” for example, today with frequent severe weather events, food cultivation has become a large problem for many communities. bia’ni shared that “some of our partners are currently working to develop new alternatives and knowledge to produce food in a more efficient way.”

at the end of our interview, bia’ni left me with one piece of wisdom. in helping indigenous peoples fight for their land and for the environment, the most important thing is to learn. she said it is important, “to really be able and willing to learn from the most experienced people. that is our task.” 

i cannot say enough good things about ‘cultural survival’. the work that they are doing is directly benefiting thousands of indigenous peoples daily through the development of sustainable projects. i am so grateful to have had the opportunity to work closely with this organization and the amazing, selfless people that run it. 

projects like the ‘keepers of the earth fund’ are at the forefront of the fight against climate change, so we should continue to look to indigenous organizations like ‘cultural survival’ for guidance in this endeavor.

this interview has been edited for clarity and length.

q: tell me about your fundraiser.

a: i originally wanted to do something that would coincide with my hiking trip because it seemed like the perfect opportunity to fundraise for something that was important to me, and i chose the sierra club because they’re one of the leading organizations that helps the environment. i also wanted to take it a step further and go with something that would help with environmental justice and fighting against environmental racism because that was really important to me, especially as we see so many instances of systemic racism. there are so many different levels on which this happens and i chose the sierra club for that reason and i’m glad i was able to do it with them and raise so much.

q: was there a specific event that made you feel like you should involve yourself in the fight against environmental racism? was there anything that inspired you to do it?

a: i don’t know. it’s a new passion of mine. i think, seeing as a lot of stuff has come up with the black lives matter movement, i was just thinking about how like the outdoors can be a very white place. on my hike, it was crazy how… i mean, vermont’s a very white state, but i really didn’t see a lot of color. not only do a lot of communities of color not have access to hiking trails and other places where they can have outdoor activities, but there are so many cases of pollution and bad water. i guess just learning about flint and other places that have these crises because of other people’s uses of pollution. i don’t know. i guess just seeing that, they weren’t the ones polluting, it was other people in like mass corporations, so i thought it didn’t seem fair that they had to suffer because of other people’s actions.

q: what do you think is the biggest issue within climate inequity?

a: hmm, that’s a tough one. i think one of the biggest problems is the fact that people of color can create change in their community and they can try to fight to fix these issues, but it’s so much harder for them to fix the overall issues of why it’s happening and the pollution and the consumerism and everything that’s leading to it. i guess the fact that it’s an inequality and the fact that not only can these communities not fix the problem, but they can’t fix what’s causing it.

q: when was the first time you found out about climate inequity? was it just generally on social media or was it elsewhere?

a: yeah, i guess. it’s kind of hard to pinpoint. also, when i was driving home and i don’t know, we drive through baltimore a lot and there are these smokestacks and it’s, it’s actually funny because it’s turning trash into energy, but it’s still a major pollutant in baltimore. i guess my dad pointed that out to me and that was really crazy to see. but mainly social media, probably. my teacher is super passionate about that. i was interviewing her last year for this program i was doing and i asked her this question, i asked her, “do you think it’s harder for people without money to be able to fight for climate change?” she was absolutely like, “no, it’s the wealthy people who are creating these issues because they can buy everything and it’s not their concern.” once she said that, like i kind of just, my whole way of thinking turned around. that was really a turning point in that.

q: would you recommend that other people do things like you did, connecting with nature through a hike, or organizing a fundraiser to contribute resources to the fight?

a: yeah, definitely. i think the hike was life-changing. not only because i just think that being able to connect with the outdoors really inspired me to continue to fight for climate change, but the connection between the two made so much more sense because when i’m sitting in my suburban home, i don’t really see why i need to be supporting these causes, but in the woods, it left me thinking that if there weren’t people fighting to keep these trails alive and to keep other things like that going then i wouldn’t be there. i think that the connection between the two is very important.

q: do you think that our generation, high schoolers, gen z, whatever you want to call us, are aware of environmental racism? do you think it gets enough general press coverage?

a: i don’t think so. i think that racism and environmental issues get a lot of coverage, but i don’t think that a lot of people necessarily combine the two. maybe that’s just in the area we live in and like around us, since there are not hurricanes and there’s no pollution as much as in other areas, but no, i don’t think the two are necessarily combined as much as they should be. i think that that’s changing, but up until a few years ago, i’d never really heard of it.

q: do you think environmental racism should figure more prominently in political campaigns and in policymaking right now?

a: yeah. i think that obviously it should. i guess what we were saying before, there are environmental issues and racism and all of that and the need to create laws to fight both of them, but i mean, there’s a definite lack in laws that link them. it would be hard to, it seems like more of a local or state thing than a federal issue, because they’re so specific to different groups i guess.

q: for teenagers who maybe don’t have the time or means to go to organize a fundraising hike like you did, what can we do to fight everyday environmental racism in our lives?

a: i think that one’s hard, because if it’s not something you see in your community, it’s a lot harder to understand it than if it is something you’re experiencing every day. i guess that’s a problem teenagers face in a lot of different areas, because i don’t know, like posting. does that really help? i don’t know. yes it awakens people, but it’s not really action. i think that research and starting to learn about it is the first step. i think that’s really important, but is spreading awareness enough? that’s a good question. i definitely want to think about that, because i don’t really have a great answer. i think that it is hard because some people think that slacktivism is pointless, but at the same time it really does spread information quickly. i also think that since older generations just don’t understand it, we definitely have a chance to make something happen and create change.

born and raised in tampa bay, florida, fears attended a segregated school until sixth grade and studied art at st. petersburg college. he fell in love with journalism once he joined the school’s newspaper but found that there weren’t many opportunities for a young african american man to become a reporter in florida. in 1981, fears began studying at howard university where he majored in journalism and minored in both english and history.  

fears has covered wildlife, climate change, natural disasters, environmental racism, and so much more. he also has written about race, immigration, and the criminal justice system for the washington post, bringing extensive experience from his work at the los angeles times, the detroit free press and as the city hall bureau chief for the atlanta-journal constitution. recently, he and the team of climate journalists at the washington post won the 2020 pulitzer prize for explanatory reporting for the “2°c: beyond the limit” series, which breaks down how quickly the planet is warming and the resulting consequences. fears’ story focuses specifically on australia and how rising temperatures are threatening not only essential natural resources but an entire culture struggling to survive after centuries of persecution. 

in a conversation in late july, fears walked me through his experiences covering the environment and his pulitzer prize-winning work. he also gave insight on the decadeslong issue of excluding people of color in both the conservation movement and in newsrooms.  

this interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

q: when did you decide to pursue environmental journalism? 

a: i came to the post from the l.a. times and came in as a general assignment reporter. and a year after that, i started writing about race and ethnicity and that evolved into a number of things from criminal justice to immigration…a colleague of mine, david fahrenthold, who was covering the environment, decided that he wanted to cover congress and david left a void on the desk. 

i had expressed interest — just really sort of a passing interest — in covering the environment and an editor of mine remembered it and he thought i would be a good fit. i didn’t know at the time that i would be. and so i would say the long answer to your question is…i was assigned a position that i had a passing interest in. and i’ve been doing it now for 10 years because it has become one of the loves of my life.

q: was there a vocabulary or learning curve that you had to navigate when turning toward environmental journalism?

a: yes. scientists speak in an entirely different language from the rest of us. that was a huge learning curve to sort of understand how these research papers work, and what they were meant to say, and how they can inform journalism — and then how you had to sort of figure them (out), to read them, so that the average reader could understand that stuff. because you look at the papers we write about and you look at the stories and it couldn’t be more different. the other challenge was getting some scientists to speak in plain language about what they were saying, because scientists speak to other scientists. they don’t necessarily speak to you and me.

q: how did you overcome the challenge of taking scientific language and making it something absorbable for your audience?

a: lots of time. so, it would take me a long time to read these studies. i would spend lunch hours and time after work understanding not just the summary and the conclusions of the studies, but also the guts of them, the explanations for the types of lab work and models they use to make their case. and all of that reading sort of went into forming questions. when i approached the scientists — this is the thing — that i would find the authors, of course, and not just one author, but two authors and i would talk to at least two authors for each study and then talk to a scientist who wasn’t involved in the study to sort of inform me about what actually the study is trying to say. 

some scientists are patient, some aren’t, but … you have to be willing to look really stupid to them because these are very smart people. but you’re trying to answer (the) questions you have. i really didn’t care that some scientists might think that i wasn’t a scientist or i wasn’t up to speed  with certain things. i needed them to break down their information as much as they possibly could. sometimes, the scientists were surprised at their answers and were surprised at how they were explaining the science. they began to see that there was another way that they could explain what they were trying to say. so, it was a bit of give and take. it was sort of symbiotic. i would say that (it) took at least six years before i was truly comfortable with reading studies. i think i’m much better at it now. 

q: how would you describe your own experiences as a journalist of color covering this particular beat?

a: when i started on the beat, obviously, i went to numerous engagements hosted by conservation groups and i was astonished to find that the sector, this field of conservation, was even whiter than my own industry, journalism, which is pretty white itself. but conservation was really white and i found that intriguing. and i think that two or three years in, i was like, i just can’t believe that. i can’t believe that african americans and latinos and asian americans aren’t interested in the environment. 

so what’s happening here? and that led to my first story about diversity within green groups. and through writing that story, i learned a lot more about the environmental justice movement and how people in that movement had seen long before, that these groups weren’t just white, but they were racist. and they were sucking up (funding), and the foundations that basically gave them their marching orders and funded them also sort of left these groups without funds. 

when i went to the society of environmental journalists … you could almost count the number of black environmental reporters on your hand — on one hand, not both. and, that is itself frustrating because white journalists just weren’t writing about these communities, and although there’s an explosion of interest in environmental journalism because of the environmental justice issues now — because of this racial reckoning we’re in — those stories are few and far between. i don’t recall any. i couldn’t find any story when i wrote about diversity in these green groups. 

i couldn’t find that any white journalists had even thought to write that story. and that sort of tells you right there that they’re not engaged in these issues. they’re engaged in the way that these groups are engaged. it’s like, you know, we care more about the buffalo than about some area in some black community or latino community in los angeles that’s a heat zone, or that doesn’t have any green space, a park where children can play. so, those types of things, i think that that’s why black journalists or black environmental journalists are important because we see those things right away — those things that aren’t apparent to white journalists. 

i don’t want to disparage all white environmentalists or conservationists or white journalists. it’s just, they have serious blind spots and they don’t see everything and they don’t write with urgency about some of the things that people of color care about. … environmental justice is about to get some serious coverage. and i’m glad that i’m going to be a part of that.

q: can white journalists be effective storytellers now that this trend has been increasingly discussed and covered?

a: yeah, i think that they can be. i think that white journalists are fully capable of telling the story once they are engaged. and i think that they are capable of empathy and understanding, and i think that they can write good stories when they ask the right questions and follow the right signs. so, i think that nowadays, that is possible. so if we’re talking about right now, i believe that they can, but they have to first be engaged. they have to first care. and i think that they are coming around to that, but slowly.

q: you had mentioned the article you wrote in 2013 about the lack of diversity in the conservation movement. you recently wrote a story about the terrible history of the sierra club and many other organizations. how do you feel in this moment the conversation has progressed?

a: bob bullard said it best: it’s like baby steps. i think that the conversation right now around those stories that i wrote — the conversation around the story i wrote in 2013 is no different now than it was then. so these groups said that they would do more outreach and environmental justice work in 2013. the problem is they didn’t know how. they didn’t even know how to treat the employees. they hired black employees to come in and do the work. and so i think that they need to look at that. 

i think that the sierra club is drawing a straight line from its lack of diversity to its origins in white supremacy. and so, if that’s not enough to get you going, then nothing can. so, this is just a start. i know i’ve spoken to people who have no confidence that the sierra club will change. and the only way the sierra club can give them confidence is to change — a dramatic change. as michael brune, the executive director, said, “transformational change,” and that’s not just the sierra club. it’s the national wildlife federation, it’s the nature conservancy. it’s all these gigantic groups that get billions of dollars a year to do work that they do and cut black and brown people out of that. and so they have to learn that, one, their workforce needs to reflect the country, and two, that they have to learn how to do the work and give these people space to do the work. if they can’t, then they need to give the money to the groups that can.

q: in 2016 you wrote a piece called “racism twists and distorts everything.” i just want to read you a quick quote from that story, and pose the same question for you, now that we’re in 2020. you wrote, “black lives matter was trying to force a difficult conversation that many americans refused to have: how does racism drive inequality and fear, and how can we overcome that problem?”

a: racism creates the other and, let’s face it, it was created by white people long ago in order to sort of collectivize people who weren’t white and make them inferior and make white people superior. and when you’re operating with that belief, and then the stereotypes that come with that belief — that these people are more prone to crime, and these people are more prone to things that are anti-society — you create fear.

environmental racism is just under the entire umbrella of racism and you can go back to the way environmental racism essentially started with redlining — how white planners and the federal government, the federal housing administration and the public works administration, basically created black communities and basically also created white communities and made one group a pariah and the other group safe. when you’re making one group, the white group, safe, you sort of set aside the other group — largely black groups — for the most dangerous things. and so these black communities were redlined around the worst areas of cities and suburbs — areas where there were power plants and waste facilities, incinerators and refineries.

when city planners planned or zoned areas, they zoned them in and around black communities, or when they zoned housing areas for racial minorities, they zoned them in the worst places. and that’s how environmental racism came to be. how do you solve that problem? you recognize what happened, you recognize the zoning issues around this, and you have to tear it down. and i think that’s what environmental justice activists are doing.

q: you had mentioned how it’s so important to have climate journalists of color as part of the solution. why do you think environmental journalism is a beat that is predominantly covered by white journalists?

a: um, every beat is predominantly covered by white journalists. so i think, once again, when you talk about a lack of diversity in the field of conservation, there is a parallel lack of diversity within media, and that’s all forms of media — that’s television, magazines, and newspapers. and often, when african americans and asian americans are hired into these organizations, they’re siloed into particular beats and they’re not expected to cover certain things. and so, environmental science and environmentalism is just among those things.

covering this issue…it’s not something that i would have seen for myself. and i think that years ago, a lot of african american journalists would not have seen this for themselves, but the editor who thought that i would do a good job at this because i’m really able to translate difficult information and make it readable for a lot of people, was a black man. i don’t think that a white editor would have looked at me and said, ‘hey, darryl, you go handle that.’ it just doesn’t happen. so, just diversity in an editing position led to diversity in coverage of environmental issues at the washington post. 

q: i do want to talk about your story as part of the “2°c: beyond the limit” series. i was wondering if you could walk me through how you went about writing it.

a: the story in australia came about because australia happened to have a hotspot in it for 2°c…which is the so-called tipping point that the ipcc (intergovernmental panel on climate change) said is irreversible climate change. and so that area in australia was the tasman sea. i was looking at the assignment and i was like, interesting, interesting, interesting…then i tied the (dying) seaweed to an environmental justice issue to involve the first peoples of australia, which are so-called aboriginal people of australia — a white name provided to these people because white people thought that they were abnormal. 

i began telling their story about how they were tied to the sea and their origin story about being in australia (for) so long — 40,000 years — that they were able to walk to what is now an island. and also the story of their persecution. i used that as a narrative to drive the overall story — these people who were disenfranchised, who were trying to sort of reconnect to their culture and show australia that they have a unique place in australia’s culture, are losing their connection to the sea, which is their only way to demonstrate that they are a special people.

to me, that was just compelling. i just wasn’t prepared to discover all the horrible things that happened to the first people of australia, the palawa, as i later learned, and how they were wiped out essentially, by war and by persecution and basically bounties on their heads and (from) disease. and then the few that survived, the few that made it…white people began to lighten their skin color and take away their language and culture and were basically farmed out to white families as an attempt to breed the black out of them so that they can be white, like other australians. so i was like, ‘oh man, what a story here!’ and i think that story, because of the way i told it, because i’m a black journalist interested in the black diaspora, and how aboriginals fit into that and how they fit into australia’s history…it became one of the most important stories of the series.

q: what advice would you give to people, during an unstable job market to say the least, who want to get into journalism and environmental journalism?

a: first of all, you need to be grounded in journalism. you first need to be a good researcher, a good reporter, and a good writer. you also have to be bold. you have to rely on your perspective and your point of view and sort of claim stories and make them different and tell a bigger story. and you have to be really, truly passionate about the environmental issues that are out there. i was fortunate enough to have this passion for it. the environment is the most important thing on the planet going right now. what’s happening with the environment will determine whether we survive as a species, as human beings. have a passion for the work and be bold and represent. 

it was there that nobel laureates nelson mandela and archbishop desmond tutu began their illustrious careers. it was there that children brought the cruelties of apartheid into sharp focus in the 1976 soweto uprising. and it was there that present-day environmental justice activist makoma lekalakala realized the world was an unfair place, and that she could help make it right.

there was a lot that felt inherently unjust to lekalakala. and despite south africa now being 25 years into democracy, there is a lot that still feels skewed, she says, a lot that still needs to be fought for.

“there’s a multiplicity of issues that really, as a social justice activist, you look at and say, ‘what can be done? what can we do? what do policies or what does legislation say in the country?’” she said. “because some of what people were experiencing (then) and are still experiencing now is actually in direct contravention of what our beautiful constitution says.”

today, lekalakala is the director of earthlife africa johannesburg, where she leads grassroots efforts to urge the government to limit carbon emissions and transition to green energy for the sake of poor and unrepresented communities. in 2018 she and liz mcdaid of the southern african faith communities’ environment institute were awarded the prestigious global goldman environmental prize for their persistence in preventing the south african government from entering into a massive nuclear deal with russia.

the work of activists like her represents a new effort to elevate environmental justice in south africa, where the legacy of apartheid still weighs heavily on underprivileged and poorer communities.

in communities like the township where lekalakala grew up, the government-mandated racial divide of apartheid is gone, but many communities – predominantly black – still live in crippling poverty. it is a country with the world’s highest wealth disparity, and the poor do not have the resources to take on the industrial elite when industrial smokestacks emanate harmful chemicals, nuclear reactors dispose of toxic waste, and mine runoff pollutes water supplies. in this respect, nothing has changed since the apartheid era.

this is the case in south durban, which academics describe as one of the “most polluted areas in southern africa.” the area is home to two of south africa’s four oil refineries and about 200 smokestack industries, and residents have reported unusually high rates of asthma and cancer, including leukemia, due to industrial pollution.

it was to take on these environmental injustices that the south durban community environmental alliance — a coalition of 19 environmental justice ngos working together to take on industry in the city — was formed in 1995, just a year after the country’s much admired, extraordinary shift to democracy.

desmond d’sa, the alliance’s co-founder and current office coordinator, said that the end of apartheid brought about environmental legislation that ensured protections for non-white communities for the first time. the new south african constitution stated that everyone has a right “to an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being,” and eventually the national environmental management act was promulgated, which created a framework for cooperation across various spheres of government to manage and protect the environment.

d’sa added that the transition to democracy led to the establishment of better skilled pollution offices, resulting in better enforcement of the law.

“this never happened during the apartheid era,” he said.

as lekalakala discovered in her youth, however, legislation on paper has little power if not enforced.

jacklyn cock, a professor emeritus in sociology at the university of the witwatersrand, said that many of the rights south africans achieved in the transition to democracy exist “at a purely formal level” and the inequalities that expose poorer communities to pollution and environmental injustices have actually increased in the past 25 years due to government mismanagement.

“many people, i think, have felt that, ‘well, the struggle is over because apartheid is over,’ but what is over is racialized apartheid,” she said. “what is really strong in the present is class apartheid.”

unisa environmental science professor llewellyn leonard, an academic with expertise in south african environmental justice and sociology, agreed, saying that although laws like the national environmental management act are on the books, the state does not enforce them in practice.

“if we think about governance, you can have strong civil society organizations, but if you also don’t have strong governance to enforce the laws and regulations, that really doesn’t help,” leonard said.

many of earthlife africa’s campaigns are devoted to forcing government bodies to abide by the constitution and laws that are already in place. in 2017, the group won the first climate case in africa by challenging the department of environmental affairs’ authorization of the construction of a coal-fired power plant on the grounds that the department did not consider the plant’s effects on greenhouse gas emissions.

lekalakala hopes this will set a precedent so that greenhouse gas emissions will be included in future environmental impact assessments to prevent carbon emitting projects from being pursued.

earthlife africa has had several successes in using the judicial system. one month after the landmark climate case, the group used the courts to challenge the national government over the nuclear deal with russia. the massively expensive deal would have expanded south africa’s nuclear power industry but would also have produced more nuclear waste which up until then, south africa’s sole nuclear power plant had been improperly disposing of on indigenous lands. again, earthlife africa won, resulting in a cancellation of the nuclear deal and the goldman environmental prize for lekalakala and mcdaid.

earthlife africa is unusual in this approach, as most environmental justice organizations lack the resources to pursue costly court cases, and instead frequently focus on protests and mass mobilization campaigns to make people’s voices heard.

it is easier for people to become concerned about environmental justice issues if they can relate them to personal struggles in their own lives, lekalakala said.

“if people are living in poverty, and they don’t have water, it becomes easier to explain why there’s so much drought and you link the drought to people’s everyday struggles,” she said, making it easier “for people to also be part of a movement to make a difference and bring about change.”

cock noted that in south africa, a number of political organizations are advocating for environmental justice but are using more universally accessible terms.

“many of the issues that people are protesting about – access to clean water, access to refuse removal, to street lighting, to good roads, to housing, let alone adequate food – many of those are what we would call environmental justice issues but they’re seen as service delivery issues, so they’re not framed in that light,” she said.

cock suggested that many activists in south africa do not use environmental terms to describe similar issues because of the apartheid baggage of environmentalism in the country.

“during apartheid, environmentalism was understood as protecting threatened plants, animals and wilderness areas and it neglected human needs,” cock said. “so to some extent, environmentalism was a contaminated ideology, for a lot of poor black people particularly.”

rupert koopman, a botanist serving as the conservation manager of the botanical society of south africa, said conservation in south africa has a difficult past, with suspicion arising from its eurocentric history and the country’s legacy of land dispossession that allowed previous governments to set aside large tracts of land for national parks. in some instances, such as kruger national park, black people were moved off park land in living memory. land claims on portions of the park have been processed in terms of post-1994 land redistribution legislation. several claims remain unresolved.

its association with the country’s history of dispossession makes conservation a sensitive topic, he said. violent removals of people off the land has determined who has access to it and this has made it difficult to persuade black communities to embrace conservation widely, even now, so long after the new dispensation. but this is changing through outreach work by organizations like the botanical society, and as the narrative around the value of biodiversity is becoming more widely accepted.

lekalakala said that the notion that black communities have not been interested in conservation oversimplifies the issue and overshadows indigenous connections to the land.

“if people today are challenging companies who want to mine in their lands, doesn’t that mean that people are protecting their lands?” she said.

she believes strongly that environmental justice is interconnected with other social justice issues.

“all the issues that are confronting us are interlinked, so it’s just very difficult to disentangle social, economic and environmental issues and make them separate,” she said. “they all are one.”

one additional challenge facing especially rural communities is that in some cases, when the environmental fight is against industry, traditional leaders are not on the side of the protesting community.

d’sa put it even more strongly.

“chiefs and indunas can become killers,” he told new frame in april. “so we have to be aware that any exposure of the work that we’re doing to help communities comes with a risk. the chiefs are being paid off by these mining companies and threatening to kill people. many activists have had to move out of their areas.”

according to leonard, the power of mining companies comes from the fact that they supply one of the most valuable resources in south africa: employment. the unemployment rate in south africa is one of the highest in the world, at 29.1%. the percentage of south africans aged 15 to 24 who are not employed or pursuing education or training is even higher, at 32%.

from the research he has done on the mining industry in st. lucia — noted as south africa’s first world heritage site — leonard discovered that a weakness of the local environmental justice activism was the lack of youth involvement.

“when i spoke to them, they said the leaders don’t consult them so they are on the fence whether they should support mining or whether they should get involved in this movement because nobody’s speaking to them,” leonard said of the youth in st. lucia. “they said if the mines are giving them an opportunity, they’re going to take it because there’s no opportunities anywhere.”

leonard added that environmental justice solutions must address not only issues like pollution but social and economic inequalities as well.

“if you don’t address issues such as social justice and unemployment, then that’s going to be a challenge,” he said. “we’re going to have a big problem.”

leonard also said that youth engagement is critical, not only that they should be consulted in decision-making but involved in all parts of activism. one good example of this, he said, is the south durban alliance, which has specifically involved young people in water quality assessments. d’sa is also joined by seven young activists on the alliance board.

“the youth have surprised me as they have come out in numbers to all climate change and environmental issues that affect the people, especially pollution,” d’sa said.

one instance of this was in 2014, when the alliance successfully rallied the community to protest the environmental health implications of constant pollution from wasteman’s bulbul drive toxic landfill site. the landfill was shut down, and d’sa was awarded the goldman environmental prize for his use of public hearings and water quality tests to put pressure on industry.

another success was forcing oil giant shell to replace rotten pipelines in durban, drastically reducing the plant’s sulfur pollution.

d’sa said people repeatedly warned him he could not win against the giants of industry. “but,” he told new frame, “we showed even a small man can win.”

lekalakala said her biggest achievement has been galvanizing ordinary people into action and inciting others to become environmental justice activists.

“it’s not work,” she said. “it’s pursuing one’s ideals.”

the western world in this context refers to the portion of the world usurped by colonizers, like much of europe and north america, which has generally placed economic vitality above all. it’s astounding that it took until 1970, only 50 years ago, for many people in the americas to start acknowledging the importance of the environment. what was happening before then? those not in the western world, and those whose cultures persisted prior to the time when colonization and globalization usurped their lands (often people of color), generally acted as though every day was “earth day.”

these cultures understand the concept of only taking what is needed from the earth and playing an active role in contributing to their ecosystem’s health. these cultures see the world as common personhood inseparable from the individual, rather than a distinct entity from which resources are to be extracted.

for example, in their daily routine the kashia band of pomo indians, a native american group of california, have traditionally used native species for foods, sustainably use their local natural resources to create tools like baskets, manage the land through controlled fires, and “only take what is needed.”

another ancient culture that still exists today, which also emphasizes living in-sync with the environment, is that of many hindu people. hinduism has at least 90 holidays each year celebrating various aspects of life and nature including changing seasons, certain animal deities, and harvest times demonstrating that some cultures have literally performed a celebration of the earth at least two days a week on average. many hindus today have very modern lifestyles, heavily influenced by the western world, yet still maintain environmentally friendly aspects of their culture like practicing vegetarianism, using herbal remedies, and using zero-waste clay and leaf containers.

in the amazon, studies have shown that 11.8% of amazonian terra firme forests are sustainably-managed anthropogenic forests resulting from the in-tune management practices of indigenous people over more than five millennia. these people gained vast knowledge over time on how to cultivate and sustainably manage forests to suit their needs while maintaining essential biodiversity. within the first century of european colonization, the amerindian population was slashed by 90% and over time the forests and wilderness felt the effects of their new “caretakers” who promoted unsustainable economic development. as such, between 1970 and 2014, we saw a 60% decline in the size of vertebrate populations worldwide, despite the establishment of earth day.

while earth day was certainly not intended to be a green-washing campaign, it has unsurprisingly turned into one. one day a year, the western world gives tribute to the earth but people fail to take enduring action for the earth’s benefit. the result: false hope that sufficient change is occurring, which leads to continued environmental degradation and catastrophes that affects all of us as people.

we now see the detrimental effects of colonization as the starting point for its even more problematic grandchild: unsustainable economic development. one may argue, “the western world isn’t the one cutting down trees in the amazon and mining in africa,” or “look at how polluted india is.” however, in return we must ask, “what caused this destruction or pollution?” the actual root cause of the destruction and pollution is unsustainable economic development caused by consumer demand in the western world, and with our exponentially increasing appetite for disposable goods that are produced in or use raw materials from those countries.

while the effects of unsustainable economic growth are environmentally detrimental, can we learn lessons through our globalized world from native cultures who are more knowledgeable given their millennia of experience in thriving in-sync with the environment? wouldn’t it make most sense to follow their way of life and their relationships with the earth? while the outlook for environmentalism seems dreary, following the teachings of these other cultures is the solution. these are the people who should be consulted in the conservation movement given their millennia of environmental leadership.

take a moment to think about the top three environmentalists in the media. perhaps people like jane goodall, al gore, rachel carson, david attenborough, or greta thunberg come to mind.

notice, likely none of the people you thought of are non-western or even people of color. upon pondering the idea further, it may even be difficult to come up with the name of a single famous environmental activist who is not from the western world, despite the amount of land historically conserved by non-western people internationally. while these individuals may not be as well-known as jane goodall, they should be.

the western world must put an enduring spotlight on the people of cultures who have had resounding success in environmental conservation since the birth of humanity, often people of color, and learn from them. otherwise, we risk earth day and environmentalism fizzling out as a green-washing fad, without any concrete action taken and — even worse — the destruction of our home planet.

they thank us and we slip back into the crowd of protestors chanting in the shadow of the madison gas and electric plant. that photo op won’t be the last time i overthink a seemingly easy decision on this hot afternoon, because today is the global climate strike and i’m not attending it — i’m covering it.

as i march with the crowd from mg&e to the steps of the state capitol, it’s hard not to get swept up in the rousing speeches and impassioned chants, but i try to remember the journalistic guidelines i have been taught. 

when i first started at the badger herald, one of the university of wisconsin’s student newspapers, i was quickly taught the basics of unbiased journalism — speak to a representative from both sides, report only verifiable facts and do not post anything political to your social media. many of these “journalism ethics” were then expanded upon and further instilled into me through my classes at uw. 

at the strike, i stood next to my friends who waved large crayola-lettered signs and chanted passionately. as i weaved through the sweaty crowd, i tried to establish my own journalistic guidelines on the fly — i could accept pamphlets but i couldn’t hold a sign, my friends could post pictures i was in but i couldn’t post one myself, i could clap but i couldn’t cheer. 

looking back, i was definitely overthinking things, but my self-imposed limitations do a raise a question many environmental journalists are constantly facing — what is our role in the fight against climate change?

it may seem obvious that as with other global debates, our job is to inform the public and report the facts. but with climate change, these “facts” are often more complicated than they appear. 

climate change first really came into the public sphere in 1988 when dr. james hansen of the national aeronautics and space administration testified in front of a congressional committee and said he was “99 percent certain” that the warming trend of the previous few years was not because of natural variation, but was caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide and other artificial gases in the atmosphere as a result of the burning of fossil fuels. 

this story made the front page of the new york times under the headline, “global warming has begun, expert tells senate.” this article cited several scientists and mathematical models, all indicating that immediate action was needed. the piece included only one sentence acknowledging that some scientists believe the recent warmer temperatures are due to natural fluctuations. 

over 30 years later, the public’s perception of climate change has become increasingly divergent from the scientific discourse. 

ninety-seven percent of climate experts have concluded that human-caused climate change is a reality, according to the american association for the advancement of science. but as of 2019, 35% of americans think that global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 31% in 1997, according to a gallup poll.this same poll found that as of 2018, only 42% of americans would consider themselves an environmentalist, down from 76% in 1989.

i have seen how important this public perception of climate change can be in directing policy. one of my aforementioned crayola sign-toting roommates is marina minic, a uw junior studying chemistry and environmental studies and an executive board member for campus leaders for energy action now. 

clean is a student organization working through strikes and petitions to get uw to power the campus exclusively with renewable energy by 2050 and to derive all electrical power from renewable resources by 2030. i have covered several protests organized by clean and have joined them during their weekly petitioning around campus, their version of greta thunberg’s fridays for future. 

minic said that most students she interacts with support clean energy; they are just unaware that it is such a major issue at uw.  she said that whenever she tells students that only 1.61% of uw’s energy consumption comes from clean and renewable sources, they are disappointed and happy to sign clean’s petition. 

a major way clean informs students and gains visibility is through media coverage, minic told me. 

“if the chancellor wakes up the next morning and she sees every local paper has written about something, obviously you can’t ignore it at that point,” minic said. “it’s also a good way to raise awareness to other students to get involved in the movement because i think most people do care about this issue and maybe just didn’t know about it.”

this media attention has always been key for the environmental movement. however, in the years since hansen first testified before the senate, how the media covers climate change has shifted. 

a study published in 2003 by the global environmental change journal featured a content analysis of articles published by the wall street journal, the new york times, the washington post and the los angeles times from 1988 to 2002. the study found that the majority, 52.6%, of articles presented both the view that climate change is being caused by humans and the view that it is due to natural fluctuations, in a balanced way. the study also found that from 1988 to 2002, the articles’ focus on the need for immediate climate action decreased. 

this study is dated, but more recent studies show similar trends. the day after the intergovernmental panel on climate change released its report announcing that global warming is likely to reach 1.5°c between 2030 and 2052 if current trends continue, media matters for america analyzed the home pages of the top 50 newspapers in the country. they found that only 22 covered the report. 

this lack of coverage and the tendency to prioritize balance over accuracy may be connected to the politicization of climate change. a recent report published by the science communication journal conducted a content analysis of all climate change-related articles published by major newspapers in the u.s between 1985 and 2017. the report found that representations of climate change have become more politicized. 

the content analysis showed that political actors have been increasingly used as sources in recent years, while the use of scientists as sources has been decreasing. it also found that the mention of “democrats” and “republicans” in climate change-related articles have increased. 

the perceived politicization of climate change has influenced actions being taken to address it. when 350 madison, a climate action organization, petitioned the uw foundation to divest from fossil fuel industries, the foundation wrote a letter saying it did not want to do anything that would make the university be seen as a political actor, rather than an academic and research institution. 

this argument is not unique to uw. ari bortman, a university of pennsylvania junior and a campus organizer with fossil free penn, told me that when fossil free pushed for divestment at upenn, the administration said it did not want to make a political statement. that refusal, bortman said, is a political statement in itself. 

“at this point, their vehement resistance to make any kind of statement on the industry really belies their leanings,” bortman said. “we know that the fossil fuel industry destroys people’s lives, destroys people’s homes for profit… exxon admits to spending billions of dollars to spread false science to misinform people, that’s not debatable. to not say that these things are bad is a political statement.”

bortman’s reference to exxon mobile’s misinformation campaigns actually touches on part of why climate change has become so politicized. a recent report, “america misled,” analyzed internal corporate documents from the fossil fuel industry showing it knew about the reality of human-caused climate change for decades and actively funded denial and disinformation campaigns.  

one document from 1998 outlines the american petroleum institute’s global climate science communications plan. this plan includes a bullet point list titled, “victory will be achieved when.”

“media “understands” (recognizes) uncertainties in climate science,” one bullet point read.  “media coverage reflects balance on climate science and recognition of the validity of viewpoints that challenge conventional wisdom.”

corporations’ efforts to influence media messages about climate change have persisted throughout the years. one day in february, after covering clean’s divestment die-in where protestors chanted and laid down at the top of bascom hill as a part of the national fossil fuel divestment day, i came home to find marina fuming in the kitchen. 

i had been covering the protest for the badger herald, but the other school newspaper, the daily cardinal, had been given a pamphlet from the uw alumni foundation emphasizing that technically it is the foundation that is invested in fossil fuels, not the university. 

the resulting daily cardinal article said that students were protesting uw’s “alleged” investment in fossil fuels. 

the word “alleged” was eventually removed after the daily cardinal met with clean. in the meeting, clean’s executive board explained that because all $124,785,961 the foundation has invested in oil and gas is donated to uw, the university is still profiting off fossil fuel investments. 

seeing the importance media coverage plays in this issue, and the concerted effort those who profit from the fossil fuel industry have continued to put into influencing the media, makes me wonder — as a journalist, is it truly biased to take a stance on climate change? furthermore, as a student with a platform, do i have a responsibility to share that stance?

i think back to the global climate strike; standing on my tip toes with my arms outstretched trying to record the speakers, i remember how moved i was by what they said. 

one speaker, uw freshman crystal zhao, reflected on her experience moving from china to massachusetts at 14 and witnessing how climate change has affected different parts of the world. her speech moved me because she discussed the importance of everyone having a role in the climate movement. 

“i’m here today because i care about the future generation and selfishly, i am here today because i care about the reputation of our generation,” zhao said. “i don’t want us to be remembered as the generation that failed to act when we still had a chance to save our home.”

her speech brings me back to my original question: as a journalist, what is my role in the climate movement? this may be a question i continue to grapple with throughout my career. but i do know one thing — after zhao spoke, i cheered as loud as i could.