Industrial reconversion symposium

[colist-admin at comm-org.utoledo.edu]

[ed:  thanks to Larry for the thoughts on industrial conversion.  
More discussion is welcome.]

From: Larry Yates <lyates at chej.org>

Re the announcement of the sympositum on industrial reconversion 
-- 

Sites that are "abandoned by market forces and public authorities" 
are also quite often toxic sites -- in fact, that is frequently the 
reason for their abandonment.  

I don't know anything about the intent of this symposium, or about 
its organizers. But I do know that the push to get land back into use, 
associated with the catch phrase "brownfields" in the USA, is often 
used to override the concerns of neighbors and environmentalists. 
An example is the Avtex plant in Front Royal, Virginia, a facility 
which was the major local employer, and which stayed open for 
some time after its toxicity was known, and then was abruptly 
closed, with major job losses. Because it is close to Washington, 
and because the town elite is eager to get the jobs and tax base 
back, the site has become a poster child for "reconversion." As a 
result, issues raised by neighbors -- odors, water contamination, 
health effects -- and issues raised by environmentalists -- toxic 
wastes sitting in a flood plain of the Shenandoah River -- are being 
ignored in the rush to redevelop the site.  

As we "mobilize actors in civil society to work together to revitalize 
such sites" let's make sure we include local people concerned for 
their families' health, environmental watchdogs, and a participatory 
and precautionary approach.  

Every community is unique, and has the right to be fully informed 
and to make its own choices, and find its own balance among 
issues. Economic revitalization is only one goal among many. To 
my mind, the only way to measure success on the part of a 
community is to see if it is achieving the goals it has freely chosen, 
based on being fully informed, having all the resources it deserves, 
and with broad and active community participation.  

For some of the "abandoned" communities we work with, for 
example, the goal is to relocate all the residents, not to revitalize. 
The risks of staying far outweigh any potential redevelopment 
benefit.   

This issues should be considered in every community, especially 
lower income or lower wealth communities. Toxic sites are far from 
unusual, at least here in the USA. After all, we here at CHEJ just 
released a report that found that in just five states that we looked 
at, there are over 1,100 public schools within a half-mile radius of a 
known contaminated site. Schools are not generally consciously 
placed in unsafe or highly industrialized locations, so a problem 
affecting communities in general is certainly indicated by this 
information.  

Larry Yates