This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. All quotations are drawn from an interview with Dr. Ranganathan; minor fixes have been made only for obvious transcription errors. Even when not directly quoted, all commentary is either directly from Dr. Ranganathan or based on her direct quotes.
What does it mean to lack not just environmental resources, but the fundamental freedom to live a healthy and dignified life? How are environmental harm, labor exploitation, and inequality produced together within broader economic systems? We spoke to Dr. Malini Ranganathan, an Associate Professor in American University's School of International Service, to hear her distinct perspective on these questions.
Trained as a political ecologist and critical geographer, her vast expertise spans the fields of environmental justice, political ecology, and land and labor studies within the context of urban development. Dr. Ranganathan spent much of her childhood moving around the world and being exposed to political discourse from an early age, in large part due to her parents' careers as Indian diplomats. She was in Ethiopia during one of the most major famines in East African history, lived in the USSR shortly before the Berlin Wall came down, and returned to India to work for numerous prominent environmental organizations before later moving to the US to attend graduate school at UC Berkeley. Drawing on this global upbringing and first-hand experiences, she has long examined how environmental inequalities are produced—and who bears their costs. Her research challenges conventional approaches to environmentalism by placing people, particularly marginalized laborers and communities, at the center of environmental justice debates.
In this interview, Dr. Ranganathan introduces the concept of “environmental unfreedoms,” critiques the limits of mainstream environmentalism, and explores how late-stage capitalism produces both ecological harm and social inequality. She also reflects on the resurgence of labor movements (i.e., “hot labor summer”), the importance of framing environmental issues through everyday experiences, and the role of grassroots community-building in sustaining hope amid systemic crises.
MAEVE: You've spoken in your classes about your role as an urban geographer and how the term “environmental unfreedoms” is a large part of your work. How would you define or describe this phenomenon as it relates to your labor and justice research?
DR. RANGANATHAN: To answer that question, I’ll start with a little bit of background on the kind of work I do; what gets me up in the morning and what makes me excited. I have academic training from a PhD in critical geography with a focus on several subfields that cross over into anthropology, urban studies, sociology and environmental justice. For me, both my personal experience growing up as well as my academic “activation” made me gravitate towards looking at political ecologies and environmental inequities.
During her graduate studies at UC Berkeley, Dr. Ranganathan realized that much of what people take for granted (like a clean living environment and potable running water) are fundamental to our essential human freedoms; the freedom to thrive and live a fulfilling life. When these basic rights are denied, we’re essentially deprived of our full potential to be human. The issue wasn’t just about the scientific calculations of pollutant exposure or sea level rise, but about the broader idea of individual “humanity”. This led her to conceptualize the notion of environmental unfreedoms, an idea that goes beyond equity and environmental outcomes or harms to represent a more holistic understanding of human dignity, a dignity that is taken away when basic environmental rights are absent.
During the first Trump presidency in 2016-17, Dr. Ranganathan observed the resurgence of an insidious discourse framing environmental regulation; many seemed to perceive it as a threat to American freedoms as a whole. She recalled an infamous quote from Myron Ebell, a fossil fuel lobbyist and a political advocate for climate change denialism, who claimed that environmental and climate regulations were "strangulating American freedoms." Finding this perspective to be the exact opposite of what is needed in this moment, she instead argues that human freedoms flourish through stronger environmental protections via regulatory and legal frameworks, rights guarantees, and economic systems that enable people to live healthy lives affordably and accessibly. Her work within environmental unfreedoms aims to connect the notions of freedom and environment by highlighting where these freedoms are lacking and subsequently advocating for their restoration.
MAEVE: Can you provide a breakdown on the differences between environmentalism and environmental justice? How do we best engage with these differences with people in our communities and spaces?
DR. RANGANATHAN: Environmentalism is often the thing that people first think of; the protection of non-human species or protecting nature against humans. There’s this binary about a nature ‘out there’ contrasted with human society; this binary is completely collapsed in environmental justice. With environmental justice, humans are part of that nature and protecting them is just as important as protecting the environment.
Environmentalism traditionally focuses on the protection of non-human flora and fauna and natural resources and spaces, essentially creating a distinction and safeguarding nature against human destruction. Dr. Ranganathan emphasizes how this perspective creates a binary in mainstream environmentalism by stratifying nature “out there” versus human society. In contrast, environmental justice scholarship recognizes that humans are an integral part of the environment and that the very same ecological environments degraded by plantation slavery, mining, and resource extraction also destroy communities of people. These kinds of environmental harms are unevenly distributed, particularly for essential workers in more traditional types of “labor” roles like sanitation and agriculture. All to say, she urges us to understand that environmental degradation cannot and should not be separated from human harm; the two must be understood together in order to make any kind of positive change.
Dr. Ranganathan traces environmentalism’s origins to figures like Rachel Carson, whose book Silent Spring (1962) was a pivotal catalyst for the environmental movement, and to the wildlife protection movements of the 1970s aimed at creating national parks preserving “pristine” wilderness. She calls attention to the problematic nature within the concept of an “untouched wilderness”, dubbing it a kind of collective “historical amnesia” and pointing to the mass dispossession of Indigenous peoples involved in creating these parks in the first place.
In her view, environmental justice puts people back at the center of the conversation around climate and allows us to think much more capaciously about what the environment constitutes as a whole. The environment is where we live, work, play, and worship; it’s not an abstract, distant concept we can simply remove ourselves from. She recalls how Martin Luther King Jr. stood in solidarity with Memphis sanitation workers in 1968 as they went on strike to demand higher wages and better working conditions, underscoring the link between social justice and environmental health. These kinds of historical examples, where there’s a precarity convergence of vulnerabilities within civil rights movements, highlights the ways in which environmental justice expands both what counts as the environment and what is worth protecting.
MAEVE: As we’ve entered into our current period of late-stage capitalism, can you explain how this kind of economics system has contributed to this stark discrepancy between humans and nature, if at all? How has it stratified the gap between the powerful and the powerless, or the industrial polluters and the communities they disproportionately impact?
DR. RANGANATHAN: The problem arises when market-based solutions and green consumerism become the only conversation, and there’s no discussion of systemic and structural issues. The essential truth in capitalism is that it’s very profitable to exploit nature and to create this notion that there is a separation between humans and nature. That binary is extremely profitable; in the same way it leads us to “other” ourselves from nature, it also allows us to marginalize groups of people that have been historically vulnerable to exploitation within these economic systems.
A fundamental truth of capitalism is the systemic way in which it profits by exploiting nature and reinforcing the perceived separation between humans and the natural world. This binary, she explains, is highly profitable as it enables the externalization and marginalization of both nature and certain groups of people like migrants or low-wage laborers, many of whom are subjected to deplorable working conditions and minimal wages as a result. This ability to “other” and exploit is a core tenant in the perceived success of modern capitalism and neoliberal politics. The same logic extends to the perceived disposability of many communities treated as “sacrifice zones”; toxic waste and pollutants are either an active health hazard in their daily places of work or have been nonconsensually dumped into their neighborhoods with little to no regard for health or bodily autonomy.
Dr. Ranganathan acknowledges that businesses often co-opt environmental concerns through “green capitalism” (known more broadly under the umbrella term “greenwashing”) by marketing sustainability as a profitable venture that's aligned with consumer consciousness. While economic mechanisms like cap-and-trade, carbon pricing, and other market-based solutions do play a pivotal role, she cautions against allowing these to dominate environmental discourse. When these approaches become the only topic of conversation, we end up ignoring the deeper systemic and structural issues at hand. Tackling environmental and social problems requires addressing multiple interconnected vulnerabilities simultaneously, and green consumerism cannot be a substitute for confronting massive fossil fuel subsidies, political lobbying by fossil fuel interests, or the extreme inequities in modern concentrations of wealth. The way we understand problems shapes the solutions we pursue, and if we focus too narrowly on consumption or population control, our solutions will also be narrow. But recognizing structural issues demands a call for systemic change. For Dr. Ranganathan, “fixing the problems of late-stage capitalism cannot involve just tinkering around the edges with green consumerism and sustainable business programs.” She urges creative thinking when it comes to innovative business practices and progressive politics, particularly for those that aim to challenge the status quo. Young people have increasingly realized the inadequacy of incremental fixes and the need for bold, systemic transformation beyond partisan divides. Substantive change is a necessity when it comes to the intertwined crises of environmental degradation, social injustice, and economic inequality.
MAEVE: I’d like to bring up another term you use in your work and in your teaching, known colloquially as ‘hot labor summer.’ It sticks with me because it’s both timely and memorable, and it seems to refer to the rise and growing popularity of trade and labor-oriented jobs. How do you see this trend intersecting with the increasing demand for sustainability-related initiatives?
DR. RANGANATHAN: That term has multiple meanings to it. On the one hand, it plays on the ‘hot girl summer’ idea of something being trendy. There’s also the literal extreme heat; cities across the US and around the world have experienced record deadly heat waves in recent years. Third is the fact that labor is no longer just coming out to protest on behalf of better working conditions or wages, but are now actively advocating for protections against toxins and pollutants in their places of work.
Dr. Ranganathan sees a powerful resurgence within global labor movements, evidenced by recent mass employee strikes at Amazon and Starbucks, nurse and healthcare worker protests, and anti-ICE marches in Minneapolis and in the US broadly. In her words, “Labor is essentially the backbone of how capitalism works… if workers act collectively and stop working, they can bring the economy to a halt. That’s people power.” She reflects on the history of labor movements, particularly how key rights like the eight-hour workday and women’s workplace protections were won through collective organizing and the formation of labor unions. The era of the Reagan administration marked a severe assault on these unions with efforts to criminalize and undermine them, a trend that has continued and intensified to this day. Current progressive leaders like Senator Bernie Sanders (VT-D) have called for a return to working-class values and union strength, and today’s labor resurgence is evidence of that legacy. Dr. Ranganathan stresses the relevance of moving labor from the fossil fuel sector to the growing green jobs market, emphasizing growth patterns in renewable energy manufacturing. She sees this as both a critical challenge and an opportunity, with students and activists playing a vital role in shaping the just transition to green jobs and in labor being included as a vital part of the environmental puzzle moving forward.
MAEVE: Through my time at AU, I’ve realized that communicating sustainability and climate issues is just as important as achieving advancements in the field. If these issues and their consequences aren’t communicated effectively, there’s a vacuum that leaves a lot of room for misinformation and fear.
DR. RANGANATHAN: We take for granted that people would care about climate and the environment, but they often don’t. It’s exhausting and, unfortunately, it’s very visible. But these conversations aren’t going away; the green job transition and broader progressive agenda will come back.
The politically charged discourse around sustainability and government spending, particularly around renewables and subsidies, does little to determine the actual flow of money. An example of this is the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act (2022); a policy crafted on a Democratic platform and aimed at providing loans and tax breaks for renewable energy projects, whose primary benefactor was Republican-controlled congressional districts. Dr. Ranganathan uses this observation to highlight the importance of how issues are framed. She emphasizes the need for progressive environmental actors across policy, social activism, business, and other spheres to improve how they frame environmental and climate issues. Framing environmental concerns around work could be a more powerful approach than focusing solely on climate change. This subtle, even subversive, reframing could make environmental issues resonate more deeply with a broader audience by connecting them to everyday experiences and struggles. She sees this as a promising strategy to engage people more effectively.
Dr. Ranganathan acknowledges a frustrating and disheartening reality; many people simply don’t care about climate and environmental issues. Dr. Ranganathan finds that many of her peers are too optimistic in thinking that climate science is widely understood and accepted. Despite this, she sees hope and opportunity for creativity and fresh thinking.
MAEVE: We have seen so many of these environmental justice and labor issues at such vast, systemic, and historical scales. How can we as individuals remain productive and inherently positive in our collective fight for climate justice?
DR. RANGANATHAN: Staying positive is a Herculean task, there are good days and bad days. My bad days seem to include being disillusioned by the federal government. On my good days I look at a situation like Minneapolis, whose organized so well because they have been slowly, like earthworms over many years, been building a really robust mutual aid infrastructure that wasn't necessarily prepared for or geared to the thought that one day they're going to have to battle masked men with guns in the streets. The people in your generation are really calling attention to systemic issues like militarism, war, genocide, and oligarchy. It’s not just about putting in the right number of solar panels; that cannot be the beginning and end of the conversation.
The power of grassroots community-building is one of the best tools available to fight injustice. Dr. Ranganathan highlights the powerful example of neighborhood networks organizing food deliveries to immigrant households when many were afraid to leave their homes during the peak of the ICE raids. This slow, persistent work of creating communities of care gives her real hope; when push comes to shove, we’re capable of rising up and meeting the challenge. Even as many in her generation continue to uphold the status quo and protect the existing systems of power, the youth are embracing a broader, systemic perspective that addresses interconnected social, political, and economic injustices alongside environmental concerns. She urges broader learning from these kinds of examples, recognizing the importance of flexibility and the ability to pivot across issues when the underlying lattice of care infrastructure is already in place. This resilience and adaptability, she says, are vital sources of optimism for the future.