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 language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 334-345 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Journal of Risk Research |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Mar 4 2019 |
Fingerprint
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
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. / Buttny, Richard.
In: Journal of Risk Research, Vol. 22, No. 3, 04.03.2019, p. 334-345.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
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
AN - SCOPUS:85065109229
VL - 22
SP - 334
EP - 345
JO - Journal of Risk Research
JF - Journal of Risk Research
SN - 1366-9877
IS - 3
ER -