Environmental Hazard and Institutional Betrayal

Abstract

In this in-depth case analysis of the massive Guadalupe Dunes oil field spill in California’s San Luis Obispo County, it is argued that understanding community members’ interpretations of risk requires attention to the broader social and historical contexts within which interpretation occurs. This conceptualization differs from conventional approaches to studying risk that tend to treat the phenomena more narrowly, as discrete “variables” that can be measured objectively by experts or that can be assessed as reactions of lay people to single, isolated events. The main finding from this study is that community members’ interpretations of the risks posed by the Guadalupe Dunes spill (the largest in U.S. history) were affected profoundly by the social and environmental history of the local area. In this case, perceptions of present and future risk associated with the massive contamination of Guadalupe Dunes grew more from impressions of the way corporate and governmental institutions in the area mishandled this and previous oil-related hazards than from fear of health risks associated with the discrete Guadalupe Dunes event. Community members reacted to the threat from the immediate event but also experienced a more encompassing sense of risk associated with a perceived breach of trust on the part of corporate and governmental institutions. From their impression of institutional neglect, misconduct, and cover-up, they developed a sense of institutional failure and feelings of betrayal and anger. As this case suggests, when a complete breakdown in trust of this kind occurs, community members’ perceptions of and reactions to risk can be seen as “rational” but cannot be understood as merely calculative responses to the physical hazards associated only with the immediate, discrete event. By reporting how community members and other members of the lay public experienced this more encompassing sense of risk, this study illustrates the critical importance of context in risk research. Implications for developing theories of risk perception are discussed.

Perceptions of climate change risk to forest ecosystems and forest-based communities

“…5 -THE FORESTRY CHRONICLE nologies that are possible sources of risk can also influence perceptions of risk (Beamish 2001). In some cases, preconceptions, attitudes, and cognitive limitations in informationprocessing capacity lead individuals and organizations to underestimate or overestimate risk (Khaneman et al 1982, Clarke 1993.…”

Site the Mine in Our Backyard! Discursive Strategies of Community Stakeholders in an Environmental Conflict in New Zealand

“…Specifically, this article considers the role of the community as a stakeholder and organizing processes involved as community members evaluate and react to the initiative to mine Globe Hill. The key contributions of this article are to add to the gap in the current stakeholder literature on the community as a stakeholder (G. R. and also to extend the arguments of Beamish (2001), who claims that local environmental and social history is intertwined with an understanding of "community as stakeholder. "…”

“…He concludes that community interpretations are affected considerably by local environmental and social history. Hence, Beamish (2001) advocates the "critical importance of context" (p. 5) in research about community risk.…”

“…The use of discursive strategies as an approach to data analysis enables an exploration into the social and environmental history of communities (the gap identified by Beamish, 2001) and allows for an examination of not just what the community has said but also the social conditions that enabled them to construct their claims. This approach, therefore, adds value through providing an explanation of the wider context and a close examination of the way that community claims are constructed.…”

Risk in the redwoods: contending for normalcy in timber country

“…Freudenburg (1993) found Downloaded by [Florida Atlantic University] at 01:32 19 November 2014 that in surveys regarding the handling of nuclear waste, expressed concerns for 'recreancy,' or the inability of institutional actors to carry out their responsibilities, had the greatest explanatory value in determining levels of concern. These concerns are most likely to grow with experience, to the extent that members of the public place little faith in the actions taken by regulators (Beamish, 2001). To remedy these limits of both science and management, some scholars have urged the employment of a different kind of science.…”