ENS 301.02:
Investigating the Socio-Economic and Environmental Impact of Muskegon Lake Area of Concern Beneficial Use Impairment Removal in terms of Environmental Injustice in Muskegon Shoreline Communities
Embedded Files
Lauren Calkins
Introduction
Introduction
Healthy water systems provide important societal benefits such as cultural, spiritual, and existential well-being and provide a source of soft fascination through natural environments that restore attention capacity without effort for the entire water belt community. As Muskegon Lake approaches qualifying for being de-listed as an Area of Concern by the EPA, many Great Lake conservation groups question how future shoreline land use will affect property values, ecosystem health, and equal access to environmental services.
Literature Review
Muskegon sits at the crossroads of two of the oldest Native American Footpaths or travel-ways and has a sandy coast perfect for large ship docks.
Logging and paper mills, steel and metal forging; provided the base for automotive and furniture manufacturing to boom. These corporations wrote their own property laws and were held to almost no environmental guidelines, dumping wastewater and industrial sediment directly into the water.
Muskegon once housed more millionaires than anywhere in the U.S. due to these industries but certain neighborhoods have suffered from these environmental injustices more than others due to "a long history of zoning as a tool of racial exclusion,” still shown today in radically defined zones, dating back to red-listing (Carpender, et. al. 2023).
Muskegon Lake was designated as an Area of Concern, AOC, by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, in 1987. But it was not until the Great Lakes Restoration Initiatives creation by Congress in 2010 that real action was taken (Muskegon, 2023).
Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) Removed from Muskegon Lake AOC list
Restrictions on Fish and Wildlife Consumption ***2013***
Tainting of Fish and Wildlife Flavor ***2013***
Degradation of Fish and Wildlife Populations ***2023***
Fish Tumors or Other Deformities
Bird or Animal Deformities or Reproduction Problems
Degradation of Benthos ***CURRENT***
Restrictions on Dredging Activities ***2011***
Eutrophication or Undesirable Algae ***CURRENT***
Restrictions on Drinking Water Consumption or Taste and Odor Problems ***2013***
Beach Closings or Lake Water Quality in relation to human health ***2015***
Degradation of Aesthetics ***2021***
Added Costs to Agriculture or Industry
Degradation of Phytoplankton and Zooplankton Populations
Loss of Fish and Wildlife Habitat
It is estimated that the direct economic benefit of restoring the Great Lakes will ultimately total at least $50 billion, with another $30–50 billion in short-term multiplier effects, such as Ecosystem Services, ES, resulting in a healthy return on the estimated $26 billion total cost needed to fully implement the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Committees plan (Austin et al., 2007).
This map shows a comprehensive view of the Remediation and Restoration Projects with Partners
Ecosytem Services, or E.S.s, such as:
Recreational Boating
Birding
Beach Use
Park Visitation
Swimming
Fishing
Duck hunting
Are only possible through healthy water systems. Integration of these valueable services into Environmental Policy is crucial for effective management.
Ecosystem Services are the most utilizable and therefore have the greatest economic impact in the most heavily populated and historically degraded ecosystems in the Great Lakes. This geographical correlation increases the population positively impacted by renovation and sustained aquatic health.
By recognizing the benefits of ecosystem services, policymakers can make better-informed decisions that reflect the true value of natural resources and benefit the most people. This quantifying framework will help to prioritize political actions that enhance ecological health while providing societal benefits, ensuring a interdisciplinary whole and balanced approach to natural resource management.
Environmental Justice as a Theoretical Framework
Environmental Justice refers to the fair distribution of environmental burdens and benefits across different social groups and communities; ensuring that no group, particularly marginalized or vulnerable populations, faces disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards. The core idea is to provide equal protection and access to natural resources for all, regardless of race, economic status, or geographic location. The three principles underlying environmental justice include;
distributive justice- focuses on the fair allocation of environmental goods and the need to mitigate the burdens of pollution and environmental degradation that disproportionately affect vulnerable groups
procedural justice- the importance of inclusive decision-making processes, where all stakeholders, especially those impacted by environmental policies, have a voice in the planning and implementation stages
restorative justice- or the restoration of communities affected by environmental harm.
These three principles will guide my research by making allowing room for critique in how the Muskegon Lake restoration processes have perhaps disproportionately impacted marginalized communities and a background knowledge of historical institutional racism that have shaped the lakeside communities actively participating in shaping current outcomes.
Ecosystem Services thinking aligns with the innate goals of sustainable development, which embodies “central notions of inter-generational justice within Earth’s natural biological and physical limitations over space and time” (Loos, et. al., 2023). Yet, with justice being a normative concept of what is considered to be morally right; social perception of what justice looks like, as well as its configuration and implementation, varies according to historical, social, and legislative context (Loos, et.al., 2023).
By placing inter-generational environmental justice at the heart of transformative change, we seek “just transformations” to sustainability along the Muskegon Lakeshore.
Research Question
I hope to show the possible gentrification along the newly renovated Muskegon Shoreline and how that may lead to inequality of beneficial use/access and continued commercial ecosystem degradation.
In addition to the direct economic impact on the shoreline through land use and property value I will include a look at the distributive justice of environmental benefit from Area Of Concern restoration through the measurement of individual use of Ecosystem Services and perspective on renovation based on neighborhood stratified surveys that state that these economic “opportunities may heighten local anxieties about who will capture the benefits and who will be left out, or - even worse - pushed out” (Buday et al, 2021).
References
Austin, J., Litan, B., Courant, P., Anderson, S., Healing Our Water -- Great Lakes Coalition, Council of Great Lakes Industries, Great Lakes and St Lawrence Cities Initiative, & THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION. (2007). Healthy waters, strong economy. In THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION [Report]. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/20070905_GLEI.pdf .
Buday, A., DeVasto, D., Woznicki, S., Dorman, R., Lemmen, K., & Urquhart, M.. My Muskegon Lake Survey Report 2021. In Muskegon Lake Watershed Partnership, GVSU Center for Scholarly and Creative Excellence, & West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission, My Muskegon Lake Survey Report 2021. https://www.gvsu.edu/cms4/asset/46326646-90A1-796F-7917AE00DCC9F7F0/mml_report_web.pdf .
Carpenter, C., Augst, T., Fierke-Gmazel, H., Neumann, B., & Wooten, R. (2023). Pursuing antiracist public policy education: An example connecting the racist history of housing policy to contemporary inequity. Journal of Extension, 61(1). https://doi.org/10.34068/joe.61.01.02
Purdue University. abelle@illinois.edu. Division Street Outfall - Muskegon Lake AOC. (2023). GREAT LAKES MUD. https://www.greatlakesmud.org/division-street-outfall---muskegon-lake-aoc.html
Dorman, R., Buday, A., Woznicki, S. A., DeVasto, D., & Fergen, J. (2023). Great Lakes for whom? Community outcomes in the Muskegon Lake and White Lake areas of concern. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 49(5), 1166–1178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2023.07.008
Garcia, H., Murphy, L., Wendland, B., & Wu, T. (2021). Assessing equity and environmental justice in the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.Great Lakes Commission. (2024, May 20). Muskegon Lake - Great Lakes Commission. https://www.glc.org/work/aocs/muskegon .
Isely, P., Isely, E. S., Hause, C., & Steinman, A. D. (2018). A socioeconomic analysis of habitat restoration in the Muskegon Lake area of concern. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 44(2), 330–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2017.12.002 .
Isely, P., Nordman, E., Robbins, K., Cowie, J., & Grand Valley State University. (2019). Muskegon Lake Area of Concern Habitat Restoration Project: Socio-Economic Assessment revisited. https://muskegonlake.org/documents/12-2019_Muskegon-Lake-AOC-Habitat-Restoration-Project.pdf .
Moore, Lindsay. lmoore@mlive.com. (2024, June 18). Adelaide Pointe cited by EGLE for environmental and permit violations. Mlive. https://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/2024/06/adelaide-pointe-cited-by-egle-for-environmental-and-permit-violations.html .
Loos, J., Benra, F., Berbés-Blázquez, M., Bremer, L. L., Chan, K. M. A., Egoh, B., Felipe-Lucia, M., Geneletti, D., Keeler, B., Locatelli, B., Loft, L., Schröter, B., Schröter, M., & Winkler, K. J. (2023). An environmental justice perspective on ecosystem services. Ambio, 52(3), 477–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-022-01812-1 .
Muskegon Lake Watershed Partnership, EPA, and EGLE celebrate BUI removals. (2023, July 11). https://www.michigan.gov/egle/newsroom/mi-environment/2023/07/11/muskegon-lake-watershed-partnership-epa-and-egle-celebrate-bui-removals .
Steinman, A. D., Cardinale, B. J., Munns, W. R., Ogdahl, M. E., Allan, J. D., Angadi, T., Bartlett, S., Brauman, K., Byappanahalli, M., Doss, M., Dupont, D., Johns, A., Kashian, D., Lupi, F., McIntyre, P., Miller, T., Moore, M., Muenich, R. L., Poudel, R., . . . Washburn, E. (2017). Ecosystem services in the Great Lakes. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 43(3), 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2017.02.004 .
United Nations, Leave No One Behind: Equality and Non-Discrimination at the Heart of Sustainable Development, Report No. 1780449283 (New York, NY: United Nations, 2017).
Page updated
Report abuse