This visualization works very well for presenting the ethnographic case. It shows the contradictions of Austin's "environmentally-conscious" reputation combined with policies of gentrification and exclusion, particularly against Latinos and blacks residents.
While the caption presents the case quite clearly. The idea that this "clean" city is actually toxic for some of its residents is implicit, but the notion has the potential for a more nuanced discussion using the terminology of toxicity.
The ethnographer provides details of the source of this image (Tane Ward of Equilibrio Norte). The composition shows the contradiction behind Austin's reputation as "the best place to live", which seems to be hand in hand with a gentrification process.
The composition is nicely achieved, however, it would be helpful to have the date of the Census data in it.
This composition is very rich in data, the idea of a "clean" toxicity is there, perhaps you could further develop a conceptualization of toxicity that is "hidden", is toxic for some, or maybe a discussion of gentrification as displaced toxicity.
The federal government’s funding for land development in the 1960’s, which established the legal framework for taking land and deferring the social and economic cost of expanding the university, had a significant impact in increasing the capacity of research universities to expand spatially (Tretter 2016).
In the early 90’s, Austin would set out to perfect what would come to be known as the “Austin Model of Development,” which, for the most part, is just about bringing the state of Texas, through the university, into the local growth coalition as a leading actor (Tretter 2008, 75). The university created an internal institutional system that eased technological transfer and encouraged profitable commercialization of discoveries, which were firmly joined by a host of new state government initiatives.
Austin's environmental justice organizations, including PODER (People Organized in Defense of Earth and her Resources) most prominently, had to work to get the environmental community to realize that people were part of the environment, and that building toxic technology manufacturing plants in areas where lower class communities of color live and work and where their children go to school and play is an environmental issue.
Staying true to its “weird” reputation, Austin, Texas is a place full of contradiction and complications. On the one hand, the Austin community is praised as one of the most environmentally conscious cities, not only in Texas, but in the United States (World Resources Institute 2004).
Texas is the highest energy consuming state in the second highest energy consuming nation in the world (EIA 2017). In fact, Texas has led the US in energy consumption rates every year since 1960, when the Environmental Information Administration started keeping track. Texas also has a long history and reputation as an energy producer and is currently the nation’s highest producer of crude-oil, natural gas, and lignite coal, and accounts for 30% of the United States’ total oil refining capacity (EIA 2017). On the other hand, Texas has recently become a world competitor in renewable energy.
