Prof. Christophe Courchesne on Environmental Advocacy

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/03/21

Professor Christophe Courchesne, Director of the Environmental Advocacy Clinic at Vermont Law and Graduate School, discusses the challenges of integrating social equity into environmental sustainability. He highlights how environmental laws often lack equity considerations and how enforcement strategies can advance environmental justice. Courchesne shares examples from his legal career, including cases in Massachusetts and advocacy for Oklahoma’s Tar Creek community. He emphasizes the need for policies addressing cumulative impacts and expanding public participation in environmental decisions. He also predicts growing youth activism and a shift toward state-level climate action in response to federal policy changes.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, we are here with Prof. Christophe Courchesne. He is the Director of the Environmental Advocacy Clinic and an Assistant Professor of Law at Vermont Law and Graduate School. Before joining Vermont Law and Graduate School in 2022, he served as Deputy Chief of the Energy and Environment Bureau and Assistant Attorney General in Massachusetts, where he led initiatives addressing the climate crisis and advancing environmental and racial justice.

Christophe has dedicated his career to integrating environmental law with clean energy solutions while ensuring equitable outcomes for marginalized communities. His expertise in environmental law and advocacy continues to drive impactful, systemic changes in policy and practice nationwide. Thank you very much for joining me today. I appreciate it.

Prof. Christophe Courchesne: You’re welcome.

Jacobsen: From your perspective, what are the most significant challenges in integrating social equity into environmental sustainability initiatives? For example, legal frameworks might present challenges at some point.

Courchesne: One of the most significant challenges is that many environmental laws were not originally written with social equity goals in mind. They were primarily designed to achieve public health and environmental protection objectives, often with a strong focus on economic feasibility. These laws typically assume the continuation of the existing industrial and regulatory frameworks, which can inadvertently reinforce existing social inequities.

Many environmental laws promote gradual technological advancements within economic constraints rather than encouraging transformative change. As a result, systemic inequities persist, and in some cases, legal structures even maintain these inequities.

A clear example of this is land use policy. Regulations such as wetland protection laws and zoning ordinances often prioritize preserving existing land use patterns. This means that communities with abundant green space and environmental amenities remain protected. In contrast, those experiencing environmental degradation or economic disadvantages do not necessarily benefit from the same legal protection or investment level.

Over the past two decades, significant efforts have been made to incorporate environmental justice and social equity into policymaking. These efforts have influenced decision-making processes and expanded community participation in environmental law. However, many of these gains have been incremental, fragile, and incomplete.

At the federal level in the United States, we now witness significant pushback against environmental justice initiatives. Much of the environmental justice policy has been implemented through executive actions rather than permanent legislative reforms, making it vulnerable to political shifts. Without durable legislative integration, environmental justice remains susceptible to changes in administration and policy priorities.

In summary, environmental policy does not inherently prioritize social equity. While efforts to integrate equity considerations into environmental law have progressed, they have not yet achieved lasting, structural change.

Jacobsen: So, what are examples in your own work where environmental activism has been positive and constructive in advancing social justice for communities that have been overlooked, either by derivation or directly?

Courchesne: I will mention two examples from my current and prior positions.

The first example is my previous leadership role at the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office, where I focused on energy and environmental litigation. One area we successfully prioritized was ensuring that when the state—in this case, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts—took enforcement action against a polluter or a violator of environmental laws, we would proactively consider environmental justice in our decisions.

We carefully examined the impacts associated with each violation. Where appropriate, we engaged community members and local organizations to assess the significance of these violations for affected communities. We then directed enforcement resources to those communities and violations to promote equity in environmental outcomes, particularly for communities historically marginalized in environmental decision-making.

Many of these communities had been subjected to land use decisions that placed highways directly through their neighbourhoods, close to residential areas, or exposed them to industrial activities that polluted their air and water. By prioritizing enforcement in these areas, we significantly improved environmental conditions and provided tangible benefits to those affected.

On the other hand, when we reached settlements or favourable outcomes in cases—whether by taking polluters to court or negotiating agreements to settle environmental violations—we worked to address existing environmental harms.

In both efforts—selecting cases and determining remedies—community activism was critical in shaping government action. Local advocacy drove awareness, concern, and, ultimately, meaningful change. We actively engaged with community members in environmental justice communities to help shape how we exercised our enforcement discretion.

This example illustrates how environmental justice considerations and efforts to address inequities often emerge from grassroots activism, leading to partnerships between communities and government agencies tasked with environmental protection.

One specific example from that prior role is the numerous settlements we reached, which directly benefited affected communities. In some cases, we secured funding for air filters in homes in environmental justice communities as part of pollution settlements. In other cases, we focused enforcement efforts on asbestos violations in urban neighbourhoods with high public health risks.

By allocating enforcement resources to these critical issues, we were able to address dangerous, ongoing violations of environmental laws—violations that affected communities daily.

So, that’s one key example of how enforcement strategies can be leveraged to advance environmental justice.

Now, moving to another context—my current position as a clinical law professor at Vermont Law and Graduate School—I am leading the Environmental Advocacy Clinic. One of our wonderful clients is an environmental justice organization in northeast Oklahoma. That community has faced decades of degradation from toxic pollution caused by legacy mining operations upstream.

The hazardous waste site associated with these mines is known as Tar Creek, and it has been one of the longest-standing Superfund sites in the country. This has resulted in large-scale lead poisoning among the local population, particularly affecting many children who have suffered severe health consequences due to environmental lead contamination.

Our client, an environmental justice organization called LEAD Agency, has been fighting for this community for years, drawing significant attention to the cleanup of the legacy mining area. This effort has been made even more challenging due to the bankruptcy and dissolution of the mining companies that once operated there, leaving few private entities to fund the massive cleanup required.

Despite these obstacles, our client has engaged in advocacy efforts alongside my students, working to address legal issues affecting the community and collaborating to improve environmental conditions and restore the health of the local waterway.

This example reflects a broader pattern across the country, where community groups have mobilized, utilized legal resources where available, and brought attention to pressing environmental harms affecting their neighbourhoods. These two distinct success stories demonstrate how social equity issues can be integrated into the environmental space. They illustrate the progress and advocacy that have taken place over the last several decades.

Jacobsen: Figuring out that big policy or law—what’s your policy? What progressive policies are most effective, or sufficiently effective, in merging environmental sustainability with equitable outcomes at the federal and state levels?

Courchesne: That’s a big question.

One important policy that is much needed—and is in the early stages of implementation in certain states—is the focus on cumulative impacts. This concept recognizes that new industrial projects and pollution sources cannot be considered in isolation when approving them.

You must consider new projects in the context of the history of environmental pollution and harm that the host community has already endured. You also need to assess the contributions of a new facility or modifications to an existing project seeking government approval. It is essential to determine how these changes will exacerbate existing problems rather than evaluating them in a vacuum against some abstract standard of environmental performance or pollution control.

The policy of integrating cumulative impacts into environmental project analysis is still in its early stages of implementation across various states. We are just now seeing efforts to give this policy real enforcement power—so that if a proposed project is located in a disadvantaged community, it will face greater scrutiny and may be difficult to approve.

Federal law already requires considering cumulative impacts when analyzing and approving projects. This information must be publicly available to increase transparency about potential environmental effects. However, it has historically been rare for cumulative impacts to lead to the denial of a project at either the federal or state level. Changing that precedent is long overdue.

Another critical progressive policy—one that has been much more widely adopted and continues to have significant impacts—is enhancing public participation in environmental decision-making at the federal, state, and local levels.

This policy has roots in the early days of environmental law. However, over the past decade, there has been a renewed focus on ensuring that the communities affected by projects and policy decisions have a genuine opportunity to participate—not just on paper but in reality.

Efforts to improve public participation include increased translation and language interpretation services, adjustments to public meeting schedules to accommodate working people, and ensuring that hearings do not only occur during inaccessible times—such as 10 a.m. on a Tuesday—but instead take place in the evenings or on weekends when more community members can attend.

Another key improvement has been the expansion of electronic participation options. Previously, people had to visit government offices during business hours to access permits or project documents. Many agencies have made these materials available online, allowing the public to review and comment on projects from anywhere.

These efforts to expand public participation in environmental decision-making have been highly successful. However, they remain a work in progress. Public notice provisions and opportunities for the public to provide input still need improvement.

In recent years, efforts have also been made to compensate grassroots organizations for their time intervening or participating in public processes. This is another important progressive policy that helps promote social equity by ensuring that impacted communities have the resources and capacity to engage meaningfully in environmental decision-making.

Jacobsen: What are the emerging trends for advocates and legal professionals in climate justice?

Courchesne: One of the key emerging trends is a renewed focus on state and local governments. We saw this shift during the Trump administration. We will likely see it again as the federal government retreats from climate action. As a result, there will be increased pressure on state and local governments to take meaningful steps to address climate change.

Youth climate activism will continue to grow. Young people’s leadership in the climate movement has already had a significant impact over the past decade. I expect this momentum to build as younger generations remain deeply concerned about their futures and the threats that climate change poses to their dreams and long-term plans.

We will see increasing pressure from young people demanding policy reforms that more effectively address the risks of climate change. Their advocacy drives the conversation and pushes for stronger, more urgent climate policies.

Jacobsen: Professor Courchesne, thank you very much for your time today.

Courchesne: You’re welcome. 

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.