Analysis Finds Nature Loss Is Felt Unequally Across Race And Income

Across the United States, communities of color are three times more likely than white communities to live in nature-deprived areas, according to an analysis from Conservation Science Partners, commissioned by the Center for American Progress and Justice Outside. Additionally, three-quarters of individuals living in nature-deprived places have low household incomes.

Nature loss is felt unequally across race and income, according to the analysis. This is important considering that nature loss is connected to racial disparities, social vulnerabilities, public health issues, pollution, and climate risks. For example, those who live near more trees have lower rates of asthma. Nature isn’t just aesthetic – it affects the everyday health and wellness of Americans who may or may not have access to national parks, community green spaces, or backyard gardens.

The analysis looked at demographic data from the 2020 U.S. Census and the 2019-2023 American Community Survey and then compared the data across more than 50 measures of climate risk, pollution, and infrastructure.

It found that, nationwide, communities of color comprise 74 percent of those living in nature-deprived places, with white communities making up the other 26 percent. Of the communities of color living in nature-deprived places, 55 percent are Black, 54 percent are Latino, 44 percent are Asian, and 41 percent are Native American.

The authors underscore that “the disparities in who is able to live near nature are not random but are systematic and tied to multiple layers of discrimination and inequality.”

Income is also a critical factor in predicted who is most affected by nature loss. Nearly 74 percent of nature-deprived communities have low household incomes, and 60 percent are living below the poverty line. Residents of these communities are already more likely to be in poorer health than those living in higher-income communities, so it is especially crucial that these communities are able to benefit from nearby nature, which is directly correlated with better health outcomes. The analysis points out that the health outcomes tied to nature are so substantial that every $1 invested in parks saves nearly $3 in health care costs.

A notable disparity in nature deprivation by race and income exists in every state. However, disparities for communities of color are most pronounced in many northeastern states, including Rhode Island (94 percent), New Jersey (93 percent), and Connecticut (92 percent). Similarly, states where communities with low household incomes are most prevalent in nature-deprived areas include Connecticut (94 percent), Delaware (90 percent), and Rhode Island (88 percent).

In rural areas, the numbers look somewhat different, as 70 percent of white rural communities experience nature deprivation compared with 30 percent of rural communities of color. Agricultural land is a significant driver of nature loss in rural areas such as the Midwest, taking up more than 160 million acres of the region’s land. Rural communities also face higher exposure to nitrogen fertilizer and pesticides.

The analysis also shows that areas with the most severe nature loss also the face the highest climate dangers: more severe flooding, deadlier extreme heat, stronger storms, and increasing coastal hazards. For example, six percent of communities are located where extreme flood risk and nature deprivation converge. Of this group, 73 percent are communities of color and 26 percent are white communities.

“Today’s nature gap was not inevitable,” states the analysis. “It is the result of decisions about zoning, conservation priorities, and public health. These choices include where oil and gas wells are built, where parks are protected, and who is invited to the table and has a say when making these decisions.”