Accounting for ‘how we know’ about the safety/risks with hydrofracking

an intergovernmental hearing on the revised Environmental Impact Statement on whether to permit hydrofracking in New York state

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

An intergovernmental hearing on permitting hydrofracking in New York State is examined. This hearing proved to be a key moment in the debate on hydrofracking. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) advocates for accepting their revised Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), while some Assembly members raise concerns about the risks and are critical of the EIS. The focus is on how techno-scientific discourse is formulated to argue for or against permitting hydrofracking. In particular, models are cited. The DEC uses extreme-case formulations to amplify their knowledge claims about their modeling. ‘Extreme-case formulations’ involve heightened, maximal descriptions of how they know through modeling. Formulations can also be used to deflate the accuracy of modeling. The boom-and-bust cycle model is challenged by the DEC through the practice of reformulation. The boom-and-bust cycle is reformulated to a more benign process to counter the Assembly member’s account. Such techno-scientific discourse of modeling and with their extreme-case formulations need to be seen as a situated social activity and for their discursive, rhetorical, or affective dimensions in contexts such as intergovernmental hearings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)334-345
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Risk Research
Volume22
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 4 2019

Fingerprint

Audition
know how
Environmental impact
environmental impact
Conservation
conservation
discourse
knowledge
Safety
Modeling
Discourse

Keywords

  • discursive analysis
  • Environmental Impact Statement
  • Hydrofracking
  • intergovernmental hearing
  • modeling

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
  • Engineering(all)
  • Social Sciences(all)
  • Strategy and Management

Cite this

@article{9dbe8e5fe766438b816c86549c228c8d,
title = "Accounting for ‘how we know’ about the safety/risks with hydrofracking: an intergovernmental hearing on the revised Environmental Impact Statement on whether to permit hydrofracking in New York state",
abstract = "An intergovernmental hearing on permitting hydrofracking in New York State is examined. This hearing proved to be a key moment in the debate on hydrofracking. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) advocates for accepting their revised Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), while some Assembly members raise concerns about the risks and are critical of the EIS. The focus is on how techno-scientific discourse is formulated to argue for or against permitting hydrofracking. In particular, models are cited. The DEC uses extreme-case formulations to amplify their knowledge claims about their modeling. ‘Extreme-case formulations’ involve heightened, maximal descriptions of how they know through modeling. Formulations can also be used to deflate the accuracy of modeling. The boom-and-bust cycle model is challenged by the DEC through the practice of reformulation. The boom-and-bust cycle is reformulated to a more benign process to counter the Assembly member’s account. Such techno-scientific discourse of modeling and with their extreme-case formulations need to be seen as a situated social activity and for their discursive, rhetorical, or affective dimensions in contexts such as intergovernmental hearings.",
keywords = "discursive analysis, Environmental Impact Statement, Hydrofracking, intergovernmental hearing, modeling",
author = "Richard Buttny",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
day = "4",
doi = "10.1080/13669877.2017.1378251",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "334--345",
journal = "Journal of Risk Research",
issn = "1366-9877",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Accounting for ‘how we know’ about the safety/risks with hydrofracking

T2 - an intergovernmental hearing on the revised Environmental Impact Statement on whether to permit hydrofracking in New York state

AU - Buttny, Richard

PY - 2019/3/4

Y1 - 2019/3/4

N2 - An intergovernmental hearing on permitting hydrofracking in New York State is examined. This hearing proved to be a key moment in the debate on hydrofracking. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) advocates for accepting their revised Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), while some Assembly members raise concerns about the risks and are critical of the EIS. The focus is on how techno-scientific discourse is formulated to argue for or against permitting hydrofracking. In particular, models are cited. The DEC uses extreme-case formulations to amplify their knowledge claims about their modeling. ‘Extreme-case formulations’ involve heightened, maximal descriptions of how they know through modeling. Formulations can also be used to deflate the accuracy of modeling. The boom-and-bust cycle model is challenged by the DEC through the practice of reformulation. The boom-and-bust cycle is reformulated to a more benign process to counter the Assembly member’s account. Such techno-scientific discourse of modeling and with their extreme-case formulations need to be seen as a situated social activity and for their discursive, rhetorical, or affective dimensions in contexts such as intergovernmental hearings.

AB - An intergovernmental hearing on permitting hydrofracking in New York State is examined. This hearing proved to be a key moment in the debate on hydrofracking. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) advocates for accepting their revised Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), while some Assembly members raise concerns about the risks and are critical of the EIS. The focus is on how techno-scientific discourse is formulated to argue for or against permitting hydrofracking. In particular, models are cited. The DEC uses extreme-case formulations to amplify their knowledge claims about their modeling. ‘Extreme-case formulations’ involve heightened, maximal descriptions of how they know through modeling. Formulations can also be used to deflate the accuracy of modeling. The boom-and-bust cycle model is challenged by the DEC through the practice of reformulation. The boom-and-bust cycle is reformulated to a more benign process to counter the Assembly member’s account. Such techno-scientific discourse of modeling and with their extreme-case formulations need to be seen as a situated social activity and for their discursive, rhetorical, or affective dimensions in contexts such as intergovernmental hearings.

KW - discursive analysis

KW - Environmental Impact Statement

KW - Hydrofracking

KW - intergovernmental hearing

KW - modeling

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065109229&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85065109229&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13669877.2017.1378251

DO - 10.1080/13669877.2017.1378251

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 334

EP - 345

JO - Journal of Risk Research

JF - Journal of Risk Research

SN - 1366-9877

IS - 3

ER -