The Battle over Fracking: The Mobilization of Local Residents (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Extractive Industries and Society, 2019
This analysis of in-depth interviews with members of Frack Free Denton and Denton Taxpayers for a Strong Economy explores the dynamic divide caused by hydraulic fracturing in Denton, Texas. The most vocal and persuasive groups involved in the debate have discursive power to influence public opinion, which in turn shapes policies and practices. This analysis shows that pro- and anti-fracking groups conveyed an attachment to and ownership of the local land and engaged in harsh “othering” discourse to describe the opposing group. This study contributes to scholarly understandings of the relationship(s) between public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing, land use, and proximity.
In this policy ethnography we examine the discourse related to unconventional natural gas development in western Pennsylvania in order to illuminate expressions of political power in attempts to manufacture consent. We focus on the overlapping spheres of influence between the state and capital to dissect techniques of governance as they operate at the level of civil society. Data collection from fieldwork and discourse analysis, particularly focused on discourse about recent legislation to regulate the booming natural gas industry in Pennsylvania, reveals the ways in which industry proponents attempt to corral public opinion to the goal of extracting and amassing capital. We analyze how industry actors try to gain and draw from the authority and approval of the state in those efforts. In turn, the state uses its socially sanctioned authority to reframe water, land, air, community, health, and self around a paradigm that interprets those as sources of profit. This case study examines how, under neoliberalism, the state organizes knowledge on the topic of fracking such that the balance of power shifts further out of democratic reach. Dans cette étude ethnographique nous examinons le discours relatif au développement de gaz naturel non classique dans l'ouest de la Pennsylvanie, pour éclairer les expressions du pouvoir politique ne sont utilisées pour fabriquer un consensus. Nous nous concentrons sur les sphères d'influence entre l'Etat et le capital fait chevauchement, interroger les techniques de gouvernance car elles opèrent au niveau de la société civile. La collecte des données de travail sur le terrain et l'analyse du discours, en particulier l'accent sur le discours sur la récente législation pour réglementer l'industrie du gaz naturel en plein essor en Pennsylvanie, révèle la façon dont les promoteurs de l'industrie tentent d'encercler l'opinion publique à extraire et accumuler du capital. Nous analysons comment les acteurs de l'industrie essaient de gagner et de tirer de l'autorité et de l'approbation de l'État dans ces efforts. En contrepartie, l'État utilise son autorité, socialement sanctionnée, pour recadrer l'eau, la terre, l'air, la communauté, la santé, et la personne autour d'un paradigme fait interprète les choses comme des sources de profit. Cette étude de cas examine comment, sous le néolibéralisme, l'Etat organise les connaissances sur le sujet de la fracturation hydraulique comme l'a fait la balance du pouvoir va plus loin hors de contrôle démocratique. En esta etnografia politica examinamos el discurso relacionado con el desarrollo no convencional de gas natural en Pensilvania occidental con el fin de clarificar las expresiones de poder político en sus intentos por generar aprobación. Nos centramos en las esferas de influencia sobrepuestas entre el estado y capital para así diseccionar técnicas de gobernanza debido a que estas operan al nivel de la sociedad civil. Datos recogidos en trabajo de campo y análisis sobre el discurso, particularmente enfocado en el discurso sobre legislazion reciente para regular el auge de la industria de gas en Pensilvania, revela las maneras en las cuales los defensores de la industria intentan contener a la opinión publica con el objectivo de extraer y acumular capital. Analizamos como los actores de la industria tratan de ganar, y sacar de autoridad y aprobación al estado en estos esfuerzos. A su vez, el Estado usa su autoridad socialmente sancionada para replantearse a sí mismo al igual que la tierra, el agua, el aire, comunidad y la salud en torno a un paradigma que los interpreta como fuentes de lucro. Este caso estudio examina como bajo el neoliberalismo el Estado organiza la información en relación a fractura hidráulica para que el balance del poder se mueva aun mas afuera del alcance democrático.
Framing fracking: private property, common resources, and regimes of governance
In this policy ethnography we examine the discourse related to unconventional natural gas development in western Pennsylvania in order to illuminate expressions of political power in attempts to manufacture consent. We focus on the overlapping spheres of influence between the state and capital to dissect techniques of governance as they operate at the level of civil society. Data collection from fieldwork and discourse analysis, particularly focused on discourse about recent legislation to regulate the booming natural gas industry in Pennsylvania, reveals the ways in which industry proponents attempt to corral public opinion to the goal of extracting and amassing capital. We analyze how industry actors try to gain and draw from the authority and approval of the state in those efforts. In turn, the state uses its socially sanctioned authority to reframe water, land, air, community, health, and self around a paradigm that interprets those as sources of profit. This case study examines how, under neoliberalism, the state organizes knowledge on the topic of fracking such that the balance of power shifts further out of democratic reach.
2012
Exploration and development of natural gas resources includes the use of hydraulic fracturing, a process that can potentially contaminate domestic water sources. While industry seeks access to Bureau of Land Management leases for new wells, their proximity to communities can have serious negative consequences on their health and life style, raising questions of how sites are selected and concerns about environmental justice. This case scenario explores the manner in which the residents of Delta County, Colorado, organized in response to proposed lease sales and how grassroots mobilization uses technology and proactive mechanisms to affect public policy.
Risk Society and Anti-Politics in the Fracking Debate
Social Sciences, 2018
Fracking in the United Kingdom has yet to reach full industrial development, but it is still subject to significant opposition. This study uses Beck's risk society theory and anti-politics to examine the views voiced by opponents to fracking in Yorkshire, England. A qualitative approach was used. Semi-structured interviews with protesters and local newspaper reports were evaluated to provide a thematic analysis. The study drew upon discourse analysis and framing literature to reveal discourses within the interviews. Although there are signs of post-materialist concerns with the environment, these issues did not dominate the discussion. Scientists were not held responsible for the risks involved in fracking. Instead, the economic greediness of politicians and austerity measures were perceived as putting the environment and human health at risk. Interviewees thought fossil fuel energy production was economically advantaged over more sustainable energy and jobs in the low carbon economy. Protesters' trust in politicians had been eroded, but faith in democracy remained. It is argued that the consensual post-politics of risk society have not led to a reinvigoration of democratic debate. Instead anti-politics have taken place, due to the frustration of citizens. Protesters wanted a citizen-led deliberative approach to the concerns raised. Such a process would have to go beyond the consensual, and recognise the inherently agonistic process of democracy if it is to succeed.
NIMBYs or Concerned Citizens? Responding to Shale Oil and Gas Development
Planners, policymakers and citizens in US states where “fracking” for natural gas and oil is occurring have to sort out conflicting narratives about the development of these fossil fuel resources. In one narrative, people who raise questions about shale development are frequently described as NIMBYs: people who will use the resource, but don’t want it developed near them, i.e. “Not In My Back Yard.” The NIMBY label is intended to depict people who raise questions about shale development as selfish and uninformed. But an examination of the concerns raised during local policy making in communities that may be affected by shale oil or shale gas development indicates that the NIMBY label is unwarranted. Questions about the costs and trade-offs involved in shale development are substantive and informed by evidence.They raise issues about the economic and social viability of places where this type of resource development occurs, and the ability of communities to control their own future. A sizable subset of shale development opponents resist fossil fuel development generally and favor more public and private investment in distributed, renewable energy. To caricature resistance to shale resource development as NIMBYism misrepresents the public response.
Case Studies in the Environment, 2019
Shifts in natural gas supply and demand since the early 2000s have triggered proposals for import and export terminals in coastal locations around the United States. Demand for such facilities is likely to grow with increasing rates of natural gas exports. Clatsop County, Oregon, is one such location that experienced over 10 years of debate surrounding the development of these facilities. The first liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility was proposed in this area in 2004; the final was withdrawn in 2016. While residents expressed both support and opposition early on, opposition dominated by the end. Drawing on insights from the literature on social movements, we conduct a case study of community response to LNG proposals in Clatsop County. We show how opponents were able to successfully frame the potential risks of LNG in a manner that had strong community salience, allowing them to appropriate resources and create political opportunities to advance their cause and influence local and ...
In this dissertation, I study the network structure and content of a transnational movement against hydraulic fracturing and shale development, Global Frackdown. I apply a relational perspective to the study of role of digital technologies in transnational political organizing. The core question driving this inquiry is: In what ways are environmental activists using new media technologies to challenge socio-political power structures? I examine the structure of the social movement through analysis of hyperlinking patterns and qualitative analysis of the content of the ties of one European strand of the movement. I explicate three actor types: coordinator, broker, and hyper-local. This research intervenes in the paradigm that considers international actors as the key nodes to understanding transnational advocacy networks. I argue this focus on the international scale obscures the role of globally minded local groups in mediating global issues back to the hyper-local scale. While international NGOs play a coordinating role, local groups with a global worldview can connect transnational movements to the hyper-local scale by networking with groups that are too small to appear in a transnational network. I also examine the movement’s messaging on the social media platform Twitter. Findings show that Global Frackdown tweeters engage in framing practices of: movement convergence and solidarity, declarative and targeted engagement, prefabricated messaging, and multilingual tweeting. Global Frackdown tweeters integrate personal action frames with collective action frames, as well as engage in hybrid framing practices, that I describe as transnational frame jumping. The episodic, loosely-coordinated and often personalized, transnational framing practices of Global Frackdown tweeters support core organizers’ goal of promoting the globalness of activism to ban fracking. Global Frackdown activists use Twitter as a tool to advance the movement and to bolster its moral authority, as well as to forge linkages between localized groups on a transnational scale. In order to contextualize the anti-hydraulic fracturing social movement within the wider mediated discourse on the shale industry, I also study the relative prominence of negative messaging about shale development in relation to pro-shale messaging on Twitter across five hashtags (#fracking, #globalfrackdown, #natgas, #shale, and #shalegas). I analyze the top actors tweeting using the #fracking hashtag and receiving @mentions with the hashtag. Results show statistically significant differences in the sentiment about shale development across the five hashtags. Results show the discourse on the main contested hashtag #fracking is dominated by activists, both individual activists and organizations. The highest proportion of tweeters posting messages using the hashtag #fracking were individual activists, while the highest proportion of @mention references went to activist organizations. These results suggest hashtags can act as cohesive mediated public spheres within and of themselves. Thus, hashtags can be thought of as reflective of, and formative of, distinct “hashtag publics.” This study shows that activism against unconventional fossil fuels brings together very localized concerns about environmental risks associated with extractive industries with more abstract global concerns. I conceptualize this type of movement as a translocal environmental movements, which includes the following dimensions: the fusing of material and symbolic concerns, linkages across affected and potentially affected communities in at least two world regions, a sense of shared interests and goals, and the framing of opposition to shale development in terms of both local concerns and global ones.