Executive Summary

This report examines recent actions and policies of the Los Angeles Dodgers baseball organization in relation to key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The analysis focuses on incidents concerning historical land disputes, corporate partnerships, and community relations, particularly with the Latino population. The findings indicate a significant misalignment between the organization’s practices and the principles outlined in SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG 13 (Climate Action), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The report details the organization’s involvement in legislative matters, its controversial sponsorship deals, and its response to social justice issues affecting its core fan base.

1.0 Historical Injustice and Legislative Intervention: Chavez Ravine

The legacy of the Chavez Ravine communities, displaced in the 1950s to enable the construction of Dodger Stadium, presents an ongoing challenge to social equity and justice. This issue directly relates to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), which call for inclusive communities and redress for historical wrongs.

1.1 Assembly Bill 1950 and Institutional Lobbying

A legislative effort, Assembly Bill (AB) 1950, was introduced to establish a task force to study reparations for the families forcibly removed from Chavez Ravine. The bill’s trajectory and eventual veto raise questions about institutional accountability, a cornerstone of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

• Legislation Vetoed: Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed AB 1950, citing a preference for a local commission over a state-level task force.
• Undisclosed Lobbying Efforts: Public records reveal that the Los Angeles Dodgers and the team’s previous owner, Frank McCourt, lobbied state officials, including the Legislature and the governor’s office, regarding AB 1950. Their official stance on the bill was not disclosed.
• Impact on Justice and Accountability: The lobbying efforts, coupled with the veto, have been interpreted by the bill’s author, former Assembly member Wendy Carrillo, as an obstruction of efforts to address a historical injustice, undermining the principles of SDG 16. The failure to create a mechanism for reparations conflicts with the goal of reducing inequalities (SDG 10).

2.0 Environmental Responsibility and Corporate Partnerships

The Dodgers’ commercial partnerships have drawn scrutiny, particularly in the context of SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). The team’s relationship with the fossil fuel industry is seen as contradictory to the global sustainability agenda.

2.1 Sponsorship by Phillips 66

The team maintains a prominent sponsorship deal with oil company Phillips 66, whose 76 brand is advertised throughout Dodger Stadium. This partnership is in direct conflict with efforts to promote climate action and responsible consumption.

1. Public and Political Opposition: A petition signed by 28,000 people and a formal request from California Senate Majority Leader Lena Gonzalez have urged the Dodgers to terminate the sponsorship.
2. Conflict with Climate Action (SDG 13): State officials have accused Phillips 66 of participating in a campaign to obscure the facts about the climate crisis. By promoting a fossil fuel company, the Dodgers are perceived as undermining SDG 13.
3. Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Communities: Climate change and air pollution disproportionately harm low-income communities and people of color, including the Latino communities that form a large part of the Dodgers’ fan base. This connects the environmental issue back to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

3.0 Social Equity and Community Relations

The organization’s engagement with its diverse fan base, especially on matters of social justice, is a critical measure of its commitment to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

3.1 Response to Federal Immigration Enforcement

The team’s response to federal immigration raids in Los Angeles highlighted a perceived disconnect with its significant Latino fan base.

• Delayed Reaction: The Dodgers organization remained silent for nearly two weeks as immigration enforcement activities intensified in the region, causing distress within the community. This was in stark contrast to other local sports teams, such as Angel City FC, which responded immediately.
• Eventual Action: The team eventually took action by denying federal agents entry to stadium parking lots and pledging a $1 million donation to assist local immigrant families.
• Critique of Response: Critics argue the response was reactive and lacked the proactive solidarity required to build trust and support the principles of justice and reduced inequality (SDG 10 and SDG 16). The vague language of the team’s official statement was seen as insufficient.

4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations for SDG Alignment

The Los Angeles Dodgers organization faces significant challenges in aligning its corporate behavior with fundamental Sustainable Development Goals. A pattern of prioritizing commercial interests over social and environmental responsibilities has damaged its relationship with key community stakeholders. To foster stronger, more sustainable and just institutional practices, the following actions are recommended:

• Embrace Transparency and Accountability (SDG 16): Publicly clarify its position on the historical injustice of Chavez Ravine and support initiatives, such as a memorial, that seek to provide redress for displaced families.
• Promote Climate Action (SDG 13): Re-evaluate and terminate partnerships with corporations that actively contribute to the climate crisis, such as Phillips 66, to demonstrate a genuine commitment to environmental sustainability.
• Champion Reduced Inequalities (SDG 10): Develop a proactive and consistent policy of support for the social justice issues that affect its diverse fan base, moving beyond reactive statements to become a leader in promoting equity and inclusion.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses several interconnected issues of social, economic, and environmental justice that are relevant to multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The primary SDGs addressed are:

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: This is a central theme, touching upon the historical injustice against Mexican American families, the current challenges faced by Latino immigrants, and the disproportionate environmental burdens on communities of color.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The core issue of the Chavez Ravine displacement, where families were forcibly removed from their homes to make way for development, directly relates to housing rights and inclusive urban land use.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: The article explicitly discusses “climate justice,” linking the Dodgers’ sponsorship by an oil company to the climate crisis and its harmful effects, particularly on vulnerable communities.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: This goal is relevant through the discussion of reparations for historical injustices, access to justice for displaced families, and the influence of corporate lobbying on legislative processes, which affects the accountability and transparency of institutions.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals: The article scrutinizes the partnership between a private entity (the Dodgers) and an oil company (Phillips 66), highlighting the role and responsibility of the private sector in achieving or hindering sustainability goals. It also shows the role of civil society partnerships in advocating for change.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues raised, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• Target 10.2: “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.” This target is connected to the article’s focus on the marginalization of Mexican American families in the past and the current struggles of the Latino and immigrant communities, who are described as being targeted by “federal agents… rounding up brown-skinned people.”
• Target 10.3: “Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation.” The proposed bill, AB 1950, which aimed to “study reparations for Mexican American families forced from their homes,” is a direct example of an attempt to promote legislation to address a historical inequality of outcome.

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

• Target 11.1: “By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services…” The historical context of the article, which describes how “Los Angeles officials uprooted three communities, seizing land for a housing project that would ultimately fall through,” directly relates to the failure to ensure access to adequate housing and secure land tenure for the residents of Chavez Ravine.

SDG 13: Climate Action

• Target 13.b: “Promote mechanisms for raising capacity for effective climate change-related planning and management… including focusing on… local and marginalized communities.” The article highlights the concept of climate justice, noting that the climate crisis “is especially harmful to low-income families and people of color, including L.A.’s Latino communities.” The protests and calls for the Dodgers to drop their oil sponsor are efforts to focus on the impact on these marginalized communities.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• Target 16.3: “Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.” The effort to pass AB 1950 to study reparations is an attempt to seek justice for the “injustice that occurred when Los Angeles officials uprooted three communities.” The veto of the bill represents a setback in this pursuit of justice.
• Target 16.7: “Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.” The article raises questions about this target by revealing that “the Dodgers lobbied state officials on the bill” and that the governor’s reason for the veto might have been influenced by this behind-the-scenes lobbying, suggesting a decision-making process that may not have been fully responsive to the affected community’s advocates.

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

• Target 17.17: “Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships…” The article provides a critical examination of a private-private partnership (Dodgers and Phillips 66) that runs counter to climate goals. It also showcases the power of civil society partnerships, such as the “28,000 people [who] have signed a petition” and organizers like Alicia Rivera from “Communities for a Better Environment” who are working to hold the corporate partners accountable.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article mentions or implies several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress:

Indicators for SDG 10 & 16 (Reduced Inequalities, Justice)

• Legislative Action: The status of Assembly Bill 1950 (passed by legislature, then vetoed) serves as a direct indicator of political will to address historical injustices. Future progress could be measured by the reintroduction or passage of similar legislation.
• Financial Commitments: The Dodgers’ pledge of “$1 million to assist local immigrant families” is a specific, quantifiable indicator of support for a marginalized community. The article notes that the team promised “additional announcements,” the fulfillment of which would be another indicator.
• Corporate Lobbying Records: The article points to an “open-source database that compiles state records” showing which entities lobbied on AB 1950. These records are an indicator of private sector influence on policy-making.

Indicators for SDG 13 & 17 (Climate Action, Partnerships)

• Corporate Sponsorships: The existence of the Dodgers’ sponsorship deal with “oil company Phillips 66” is an indicator of a partnership that conflicts with climate action. The termination of this deal would be a key indicator of progress.
• Public Petitions and Protests: The petition that “28,000 people have signed… urging the team to end its relationship with oil company Phillips 66” is a quantifiable indicator of public and civil society pressure for corporate accountability on environmental issues.

Indicators for SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities)

• Historical Displacements: The fact that “three communities were bulldozed to make way for Dodger Stadium” is a historical indicator of failure to protect housing and land rights.
• Memorialization and Recognition: A proposed indicator of progress is the call for the Dodgers to “support a memorial for displaced Chavez Ravine families,” which would measure the team’s willingness to formally acknowledge the historical injustice.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: latimes.com