Grassroots justice communities know Kansas City’s needs better than huge nonprofits

Environmental and climate justice are increasingly mainstream ideas, from work like mine in academia, to executive orders issued by President Joe Biden. There are more opportunities than ever for large organizations to support environmental justice work and collaborate with environmental justice-oriented grassroots communities, including here in Kansas City.

But there is a dark side: These new opportunities, if not approached with equity and accountability, can allow organizations, academics and government institutions to become extractive — for money, attention and professional gain — while failing to center the members of communities most harmed by environmental injustice.

Over the past year, the White House has launched Justice40, an initiative to deliver 40% of federal investments in climate, clean energy, affordable housing, clean water and other areas of concern to marginalized communities. The federal government has touted millions of grant dollars to support this work, grabbing the attention of nonprofits and private institutions alike.

This work isn’t brand new. My colleagues and fellow activists have been painstakingly working for environmental justice for decades. Some of these hardworking grassroots organizers have been able to harness the momentum of Justice40 to access greater funding for their vital work; others are still overlooked — struggling for investments in their communities while also having to fight off advances from larger organizations that want attention and credit for belated investments in grassroots justice-oriented work.

Environmental justice movements work from the ground up. That means that they start with community. Community-driven movements have been the most effective at addressing environmental injustices, whether from historic contamination or ongoing industrial emissions. The National Academy of Sciences agrees. Its research has demonstrated that community-driven interventions are more impactful and sustainable than those prescribed by regional nonprofits or academic institutions. Community participation and leadership are key.

It’s good that federal dollars are available to fund environmental justice work. It would be better if the funding were accessible to the grassroots groups that have been doing this work for years. Instead, we see those community groups being crowded out by larger, well-established organizations that can afford professional grant writers and have connections to the media. Locally, environmental justice funding that should go to front-line communities is supporting the salaries of part-time, privileged, suburban soccer moms.

Local nonprofits ask grassroots organizers to sign on to letters of commitment, to agree to collaboration or partnerships that are not equitable, for projects the grassroots organizers have had little or no say in designing. Well-meaning nonprofits, including in Kansas City, are intentionally parachuting into grassroots efforts to extract community knowledge for funding. This is not a solid foundation for a trusting relationship between a larger nonprofit and a grassroots community organization.

It’s long past time for accountability. Black people are not responsible for teaching white people to mind their privilege. We white people must do the work on ourselves, repeatedly. Likewise, environmental justice organizers and overburdened communities should not have to teach academics, nonprofits and foundations to mind their privilege. Rather, we should be supporting their work — on their terms.

I have a challenge for the government offices providing funding, and likewise the large foundations that claim interest in supporting the environmental and climate justice movements, with apparently limited understanding of what happens on the ground. The Government Accountability Office made multiple recommendations in 2019 to ensure that efforts toward environmental justice are fulfilled and effective. What is still missing from implementation is accountability for those who claim and aim to serve but come from a place of privilege — whether from academia, industry or government.

Right now, federal grant funding is made available to target groups equally — but not equitably. An equitable approach to funding would give those with fewer resources but stronger ties to their community a better shot at obtaining the financial support they deserve, with less red tape so they can actually obtain their goals: to elevate and empower communities that have been historically marginalized and ignored. This approach would also hold the funders to a different standard — one that truly supports equity and resilience.

It is time to ensure that our outcomes and intentions to support justice movements are aligned. We can do this.

Elizabeth Friedman works as an academic in environmental and primary care medicine in Kansas City.