Advocacy in a Policy Void: Climate and Environmental Justice in a Deregulated Policy Environment across Governance Levels

Climate change and policy responses have become deeply contentious issues within the United States, revealing divides across political, economic, and social lines. This roundtable addresses the urgent challenge of advocating for climate and environmental justice amid federal deregulation, policy voids, and weakened oversight. In this period of socio-political upheaval, communities, organizations, and governments must consider how to advocate for climate change mitigation and adaptation in a deregulated policy environment.

This roundtable will discuss how social change has and can be achieved at different levels of governance–including at the city, county, state, national, and global levels–amidst this policy void and highlight the opportunities for Social Work to advance climate and environmental justice. Discussants will explore how the absence of policies at all levels has enabled harmful community decision-making that threatens community health and well-being. Through dialogue, they will equip participants with knowledge about social workers’ roles in advocating for justice despite policy fragmentation and federal deregulation. By examining successful cases, articulating challenges, and sharing innovative strategies, participants will explore how advocacy efforts can bridge policy gaps, legitimize climate action, and sustain progress in a difficult political climate.

This roundtable centers on these questions: How can we understand the current U.S. climate and environmental policy context? How have historical U.S. approaches to these issues shifted, particularly during the Trump Administration? What role does Social Work play in addressing these challenges? What actions and strategies should Social Workers prioritize moving forward?

Cristina Gomez Vidal: Environmental and climate justice advocates have long faced unjust policy-making due to policy voids at the local and state levels. The discussant will share how communities have resisted harmful decisions, such as the siting of polluting or extractive industries near disadvantaged communities, and how these strategies can inform today’s regulatory environment.

Taylor Brown: In the early months of the Trump Administration, the United States withdrew from the Paris Accords (again), moved to dissolve FEMA disaster relief to the state and local levels, rolled back key EPA protections, (re)committed to fossil fuel extraction, and halted investments through the Inflation Reduction Act. Taylor will diagnose this unprecedented federal policy void with attention to its historical context, international reception, and opportunities for mobilization.

Nadia Neimanas: Austin, Texas serves as a case study of a city pursuing ambitious environmental initiatives within an oil-dependent state lacking a statewide Climate Action Plan. Nadia will examine the critical role of municipalities in advancing and responding to climate change, particularly in the absence of comprehensive state-level guidance or frameworks to support local action.

Rachel Forbes: In recent months, U.S. social scientists have faced increasing barriers to accessing reliable and transparent climate and environmental data, largely due to executive-level rollbacks and policy shifts undermining federal science agencies' capacity to monitor, regulate, and disseminate information. Rachel’s presentation will discuss how social workers can be part of broader efforts of information resistance as social work research, practice and policy advocacy.