The At-Risk Rainbow: Climate Change and LGBTQ+ Communities
Even as an openly-queer woman, I confess that the intersections between sustainability and LGBTQ+ issues seemed initially obscure to me. A key part of my coming-out story did certainly involve the comfort I found in the natural world–thank you, Big Bend National Park–but I still failed to see how queer issues could be incorporated into more extensive discussions of environmental justice. Perhaps this lack of understanding is unsurprising. After all, race is the largest determinant of environmental injustices. However, as I learned through my research, possessing multiple marginalized identities–like identifying as LGBTQ+ and as a person of color–tends to compound the effects of already-present environmental inequities. Geographic considerations, housing issues, inaccessible healthcare, and economic factors all contribute to LGBTQ+ experiences of environmental injustice.
According to the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law, LGBTQ+ people in same-sex couple households are more likely to live in coastal areas and cities, especially those on the West Coast. Climate change poses significant threats to these parts of the United States. Such threats include rising sea levels, increased risk of extreme weather events, saltwater intrusion, and rampant wildfires. These climate risks are further compounded by the fact that LGBTQ+ individuals and couples are more likely to live in areas with poor infrastructure and fewer resources. In the event of a natural disaster, LGBTQ+ communities face greater challenges in recovering than non-marginalized groups.
Housing concerns exacerbate the geographic risks that contribute to the LGBTQ+ population’s vulnerability. LGBTQ+-identifying young adults possess a 2.2 times greater risk of homelessness than non-LGBTQ+ individuals, and transgender people are more likely to experience discrimination when seeking shelter. These housing issues stem from patterns of institutional and interpersonal discrimination that continue to plague the LGBTQ+ community. For example, past exclusive urban planning policies often drove LGBTQ+ people into low-income areas with poor infrastructure. In the wake of natural disasters, LGBTQ+ couples have been unable to access FEMA housing resources; even when provided access to shelter, such spaces are unequipped to support LGBTQ+ families and individuals.
The discussion of disaster response also includes healthcare considerations. LGBTQ+ individuals are more likely to suffer from respiratory illnesses and deal with mental health issues. Additionally, LGBTQ+ people are significantly more likely to contract HIV. Unfortunately, emergency shelters and medical services often lack HIV treatments and gender-affirming care. This lack of preparedness to serve LGBTQ+ communities in the aftermath of disasters poses substantial threats to our lives.
A common thread connects all of the aforementioned climate risks associated with LGBTQ+ communities: economic inequality. On average, LGBTQ+ adults of all racial backgrounds are 15% more likely to experience poverty. This likelihood varies on an individual level and is dependent on other factors, including gender identity and race. For example, people of color that identify as LGBTQ+ have higher poverty rates than White individuals. Given that climate change disproportionately threatens the impoverished, these statistics prove especially sinister.
Evidently, LGBTQ+ communities face several forms of injustice that inform our vulnerability to climate change. These injustices highlight the need to continue integrating LGBTQ+ concerns into the broader environmental justice movement. Organizations like Out for Sustainability, Queer Nature, and the Venture Out Project do critical work in building community resilience for LGBTQ+ people. However, these organizations remain relatively small in scale. The environmental movement currently does not contain a large-scale LGBTQ+-focused organization, and I suspect this situation exists for two primary reasons.
First, many of us are already involved in other environmental projects and often possess leadership roles in those entities. Second, the climate risks associated with possessing a LGBTQ+ identity are not necessarily common knowledge, even in organizing spaces. While the environmental movement may not need an LGBTQ+-focused organization with extensive capacity, we must put more energy into ensuring that LGBTQ+ communities are included in advocacy and disaster preparedness discussions. The pursuit of an equitable, sustainable future for all requires that we do so.
RCC National Environment Leadership Fellow — Anna Hyslop – University of Oklahoma
Anna is a junior at the University of Oklahoma studying Economics and Global Energy, Environment, and Resources, with a minor in the Arabic language. During her freshman year, she founded Students for Local Action (SLA), the university’s first organization dedicated to providing students with real-world experience in sustainable policy creation. In the summer of 2024, she interned in the Department of Energy’s Office of Technology Transitions.