SAGE Encyclopedia of Environmental Justice, edited by Dorceta E. Taylor, available here.

Mountaintop removal (MTR) is a strip mining practice that has destroyed over 500 mountains, 1.45 million acres of forest, and more than 2,000 streams in Central Appalachia since the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments spurred demand for low-sulfur coal. Despite federal reclamation requirements under the 1977 SMCRA, only 7.9% of 71,140 analyzed sites achieved meaningful forest recovery, as companies routinely obtain state-level waivers with little follow-through on promised development.

This chapter synthesizes decades of peer-reviewed research documenting MTR's cascading impacts. Environmentally, valley fill operations bury headstreams and contaminate water systems with sulfates, lead, arsenic, and mercury—rendering water sources undrinkable for communities dependent on unregulated wells. Wildlife populations including the eastern hellbender and cerulean warbler face endangerment. Public health outcomes are equally severe: elevated rates of birth defects, lung cancer, cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases persist alongside documented increases in depression and anxiety that some researchers term "solastalgia." Economically, MTR delivers fewer, lower-paying jobs of shorter duration compared to underground mining, with maps showing the poorest Appalachian counties concentrated where MTR activity is highest.

Grassroots resistance continues amid inadequate federal oversight and powerful coal lobbying. Yet MTR remains fully legal—a case study in how extractive industries externalize environmental, health, and economic costs onto vulnerable communities while delivering disproportionate benefits elsewhere.

Disasters and Double Standards

with Bailey Gerrits

Forthcoming in Governors and the Crises that Define Them, edited by Saladin Ambar, John Farmer, Kristoffer Shields, and John Weingart. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press

This chapter examines how gender and intersectionality shape the experiences of women governors in the United States, particularly during times of crisis and disaster. While disasters offer opportunities for leadership visibility, they also expose and exacerbate systemic inequalities, including sexism, racism, and violence against women in politics (VAWIP). Drawing on historical examples, intersectional theory, and original social media analysis of COVID-19-era gubernatorial communications, we find that crises act as watershed moments that underscore these disparities, revealing how disasters disproportionately affect marginalized communities while subjecting women leaders to heightened, differential scrutiny. We demonstrate that women governors, particularly women of color, face unique forms of violence and harassment that differ significantly in tone and intensity from those directed at men in the same office. Ultimately, this targeted violence not only endangers individual officeholders but also erodes public trust, impedes policy compliance, and threatens the integrity of the democratic system.

with Clara Araújo & Mala Htun

Gender and Representation in Latin America, edited by Leslie Schwindt-Bayer, 211-227. New York: Oxford University Press.

We argue that the reasons for women’s low numbers in elected office in Brazil derive from aspects of the country’s political institutions. These include candidate-centered electoral rules, the fragmentation of the party system, and decentralized nomination procedures within political parties. The high cost of political campaigns, and the interaction of incumbency and access to television time for candidates, augment these barriers. Despite their low numbers, women in elected office have worked together through a women’s caucus in Congress (bancada feminina) to promote legislation on women’s rights issues.