Dear Environmental Community,
Diversity won last night. Let's celebrate that. But let's not confuse electoral progress with institutional progress.
Over the past few years, our movement has experienced significant backsliding from the commitments to equity and inclusion that gained momentum during the Obama administration and accelerated in the wake of George Floyd's murder in 2020. Organizations pledged to transform hiring practices, diversify leadership and board governance, invest in professionals from underrepresented communities, expand funding to frontline organizations, and give historically marginalized communities greater influence over policy priorities.
These commitments mattered because representative leadership has real consequences. It influences which environmental issues receive attention, how campaigns are developed, where resources are directed, and informs policy platforms. Communities disproportionately affected by pollution, climate disasters, inadequate infrastructure, and decades of disinvestment bring essential knowledge and perspectives that traditional environmental approaches have often overlooked.
Yet we need to ask how much of that commitment translated into lasting institutional change. As a Black professional who has spent years advancing equity across the environmental and outdoor movement, I've witnessed both the progress we've made and how quickly it can be undermined. I've seen the effects of layoffs, including my own, and organizational restructuring that raise difficult questions about the future of campaigns, programs, and community partnerships. I've also seen organizations increasingly appeal to the “political middle,” emphasize finding common ground, and pursue priorities perceived as less controversial. There is nothing wrong with finding common ground. It's been the bedrock of my career as a someone who has worked from the hood to the holler. But finding common ground should never mean abandoning the people, priorities, and principles that helped move our movement forward.
Also consider the parallels. While our movement has challenged the current administration's dismantling of environmental protections, DOGE-driven workforce reductions, and cuts to funding, we must also examine what's happening within our own institutions. The circumstances differ, but some of the consequences are troublingly familiar: the loss of experienced professionals, weakened community relationships, diminished organizing capacity, and reduced investment in communities we once pledged to prioritize.
We cannot celebrate diversity at the ballot box while accepting its decline within our own institutions.
The environmental challenges facing this country cannot be addressed through a narrow set of experiences, perspectives, and priorities. A movement that seeks to protect the nation's environment must be capable of representing and organizing the people who live in it, particularly those who have historically borne the greatest environmental burdens while receiving the fewest resources.
So as we celebrate last night's elections, I hope our movement also takes time for serious soul-searching. What happened to the commitments we made? Who has left? Where is the money going? Whose priorities are shaping our campaigns? And are we building a movement that reflects the country we serve, or retreating toward the constituencies and approaches that have historically defined it?
We have spent considerable energy demanding accountability from the federal government. We should be willing to demand that same accountability of ourselves.
