On the Road Again: Montanas Changing Landscape Pdf

• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts
• PMC5858731

Extr Ind Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 Nov 1.

Published in concluding edited form as:

PMCID: PMC5858731

NIHMSID: NIHMS917696

Cultural Theory of Take chances equally a Heuristic for Understanding Perceptions of Oil and Gas Development in Eastern Montana, Usa

Jamie McEvoy

^aSection of Earth Sciences, Montana State Academy, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA

Susan Gilbertz

^bSection of Social Sciences & Cultural Studies, Montana Land University-Billings, Billings, MT 59101, USA

Matthew Anderson

^cSection of Geography, Eastern Washington University, Cheney, WA 99004, USA

Kerri Jean Ormerod

^dSection of Geography, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, NV 89557, Usa

Nicolas Bergmann

^aDepartment of Earth Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717, Us

Abstract

This paper applies Douglas' cultural theory of adventure to sympathize perceptions of risk associated with oil and gas development in eastern Montana. Based on the analysis of interviews with 36 rural residents, findings show the dominant perception of risk is most closely aligned with an Individualist worldview. Despite direct experience with oil or wastewater spills, most interviewees described spills every bit "no big bargain", viewed nature as resilient, and felt that the economic benefits outweigh negative impacts. Cultural theory was a useful heuristic for understanding this dominant worldview, equally well every bit identifying points of deviation. For example, interviewees discussed the benefits of landowner associations – a more Egalitarian approach to dealing with oil companies. Some landowners relied on external authorities (east.g., sheriff) when dealing with oil companies, revealing a Hierarchical approach to issues they face. Interviewees expressed frustration with the lack of enforcement of existing regulations, which can be interpreted as either support for - or indictment of - Hierarchical solutions. While the Individualist worldview is ascendant, our qualitative analysis reveals the complex tensions at work amid rural residents. The results suggest areas where policymakers, advocacy groups, and residents may notice mutual footing to accost potential environmental and health risks.

Keywords: Cultural Theory of Take a chance, Chance Perception, Oil and Gas Development, Montana

one. Introduction

Oil and gas development poses potential risks to environmental and human being health — especially when spills occur (Adgate et al., 2014; Colborn et al., 2011; Vengosh et al., 2014). Yet, perception of risk varies among individuals and communities (Boudet et al., 2014). While several studies take carefully catalogued the positive and negative impacts of oil and gas evolution (Jaquet, 2014, Ellis et al. 2016), fewer studies accept sought to understand the socio-cultural factors that underpin differences in hazard perception (c.f., Malin, 2014; Fernando and Cooley, 2016; Veenstra et al., 2016; Willow, 2014). This paper applies the cultural theory of gamble and the associated grid-group typology (Douglas and Wildasky, 1982; Schwarz and Thompson, 1990) to understand the perceptions of 36 residents in 6 oil-rich counties in eastern Montana (MT). We are peculiarly interested in identifying and understanding the dominant cultural worldview of eastern Montanans and how this relates to views of nature and perceptions of oil and gas development. For this, nosotros plow to Douglas' cultural theory of gamble.

2. Literature Review: Cultural Theory of Hazard

Mary Douglas and her colleagues developed the cultural theory of risk in the early 1980s as an culling to the dominant technical, rational, and psychological approaches used to assess risk perception (Douglas and Wildasky, 1982; c.f., Slovic, 1987; Starr, 1969; Tansey and O'Riordan, 1999). Cultural theory views perception of adventure as a social process whereby some risks are recognized while others are suppressed depending on one'south values and preferred grade of social club (i.due east., worldview). Every bit Wildasky and Dake (1990) explicate, "individuals choose what to fright (and how much to fear it), in order to support their style of life ¹ " (p. 43). Co-ordinate to Douglas (1992), take chances is a social construct where individuals appraise the same dangers merely come to unlike opinions of risk based on underlying cultural biases associated with their way of life. Cultural theory of risk is, by definition, focused on collective, social, and shared conventions that influence individual perceptions. Cultural theory posits that gamble perception is a "culturally standardized response" (Douglas, 1992, p.40). In short, socio-cultural context is the primary explanation for different perceptions of adventure.

While "risk" can be defined as "the probability of an event combined with the magnitude of the losses and gains that it will entail" (Douglas, 1992, p.40), Douglas notes that "adequate risk" (i.e., socially desirable notions of safety) is always a political question and never a probability. Cultural theorists assert that there is no fix mechanism or formula for determining the level of acceptable take chances in a society. Acceptable risks are determined based on a particular rationality and notions of what is reasonable (Douglas, 1992). To aid in cultural analysis and make sense of competing preferences and aversions to different risks, a typology is used which classifies take chances perceptions into four distinct means of life or worldviews. Each worldview is differentiated by grid, which is the degree to which social interactions should be constrained by rules and norms, and group, which indicates the degree to which people are incorporated or bonded into social groups. Another way of summarizing these positions is to call up of the group axis as answering the question "who am I?" (or "who am I with?") and the grid centrality as answering the question "how should I acquit?" (Schwarz and Thompson, 1990, p. six; Tansey and O'Riordan, 1999; Wildavsky, 1987). The resulting quadrants describe four cultural ways of life or worldviews regarding take chances: 1) Fatalists (Depression Group, Loftier Grid); two) Individualists (Low Group; Low Filigree); 3) Hierarchists (High Grouping; Loftier Grid); and iv) Egalitarians (High Group; Low Grid).

Using this grid-group typology, Schwarz and Thompson (1990) overlaid four contradictory views of nature to highlight how the worldviews used in cultural theory fit with different perceptions of the resiliency or fragility of the natural earth. Their typology suggests unlike management options to deal with the dissimilar cultures of risk perception in regards to ecology hazards (Figure i).

Schwarz and Thompson'due south (1990) diagram of Cultural Theory of Risk's Grid-Group Typology and Views of Nature (image from Silverman, 2010)

For instance, Individualists prioritize individual liberty and responsibility (Low Group) over associations and alliances. In terms of behaviors, they favor market-based solutions and cocky-policing over superlative-downward regulations (Depression Grid). As this example demonstrates, cultural preferences shape agreement too as the advisable institutional arrangements and policies. According to Schwarz and Thompson (1990), the Individualist worldview corresponds with a perspective of nature that is benign and robust, therefore able to tolerate and absorb the negative impacts from guild. People who are aligned with the individualist view are likely to be dismissive of environmental and technological risks because restrictions to personal freedoms would needlessly impede the benign extraction and use of natural resources. Thus, faith in nature's resiliency is a necessary precondition for this worldview's coherence.

Egalitarians are besides Low Filigree, meaning they resist externally imposed controls and restrictions on selection; they favor small-scale organizations and fright that external, hierarchical intrusions volition bring about social differentiation, which conflicts with their goal of fostering egalitarian social relations. In stark contrast to Individualists, Egalitarians are more closely bonded and prioritize collectivism, cooperation, and communal forms of organizing (High Group). They want the rules to use to anybody equally. They view nature as imperceptible and highly fragile, which means fifty-fifty pocket-sized disturbances to nature's rest should be prevented, equally they may consequence in catastrophic outcomes (Schwarz and Thompson, 1990). Egalitarians promote this precautionary principle and strive to protect the most vulnerable members of club from environmental and technological risks.

Hierarchists prefer highly structured organizations with clear rules and well-divers, ranked roles that lead to social differentiation; like a military system, they are willing to defer to institutionalized authority and bureaucratic government (Loftier Grid). Social bonds and responsibilities are strong among them (High Grouping). They view nature as "perverse/tolerant" (Schwarz and Thompson, 1990, p. x). This detail phrasing emphasizes that their view of nature is resilient, but only within limits (Schwarz and Thompson, 1990). Therefore, Hierarchists meet a need for strict regulations and monitoring to avoid reaching a tipping point that would disrupt a perceived "remainder" in nature. Ecology and technological risks are best assessed and managed by experts.

Lastly, the Fatalists are the marginal members of society with weak social ties (Low Group), all the same experience many social forces exterior of their control (High Grid). Slaves in the antebellum South provide one case of fatalists (Ellis and Wildavsky, 1990). Schwarz and Thompson (1990) use the example of a chronically unemployed person, who wanders from "ane welfare centre to some other ad infinitum" (pg. eight). Unable to influence events in their life, fatalists are unlikely to participate in political life and simply "endure" whatever comes their style. This fits with a view that nature is capricious and therefore cannot be managed.

It is notable that, for Douglas, no individual, firm, or community sits entirely inside i cultural worldview or the other, rather each is more or less Hierarchical, Individualist, Egalitarian, or Fatalistic to varying degrees (Douglas, 1992). Indeed, several authors suggest that the grid-group typology should only be used as a heuristic – a tool for thinking near social phenomenon (Malsch, 2012; Tansey, 2004; Westward, et al., 2010). Tansey (2004) argues that recent attempts to quantify cultural theory accept converted what is a theory of institutional forms into "a psychological theory of risk perception" which is applied to the private, rather than to a club (p. 27). We apply the grid-group typologies equally a guide to analyze perceptions of oil and gas development and understand why many eastern Montanans view oil and gas development as an acceptable adventure.

1. Case Study

Eastern Montana is 'Big Heaven State,' known for its wide-open up landscapes and the western sensibilities that embody the pioneer spirit: independence and grit. This stark and isolated landscape largely depends on the Missouri and Yellowstone River Basins to provide the necessary wet to sustain its rural agricultural economies (Wyckoff, 2006). Although near of the region has experienced a decline in population over the past 80 years, a smaller subregion nested in the far eastern section of Montana has managed to maintain a more than robust economic system (Economic Profile Organization, 2017; Wyckoff, 2002). With a population exceeding 40,000 in an area simply larger than Massachusetts, the half-dozen canton area of Sheridan, Roosevelt, Richland, Dawson, Wibaux, and Fallon (Figure ii) complements its product of high value grain bolt and livestock ranching with oil and gas extraction (Economic Profile System, 2017; Smith and Haggerty, forthcoming 2018; U.Southward. Army Corps, 2016). In fact, these six counties, which contain our study surface area ² , collectively produced over 88 percent of the state'due south oil in 2015 (Flowers, 2016).

Map of six oil-producing counties in Eastern Montana

The region first experienced an oil boom in the 1950s and quickly became Montana'due south nearly important oil producing region with the discovery of the energy rich Williston Basin (Malone et al., 1991). Although North Dakota has functioned as the epicenter of the recent "Bakken nail," the Elm Coulee oil field in Richland County currently produces roughly one-half of Montana's oil. The potential exists for additional development in Richland every bit well as Sheridan and Roosevelt Counties (Richmond, 2012). The other 3 counties in our report—Dawson, Wibaux, and Fallon—certainly felt the impacts of the once frenzied Bakken development, but their oil product comes primarily from an older play known equally the Red River formation (Eastern Montana Impact Coalition, 2015). In this region land ownership resides largely with rural landowners and farmers, therefore these individuals are directly subjected to the impacts from new infrastructure including new wells and pipelines (Smith and Haggerty, forthcoming 2018).

Spills related to oil extraction have affected both individuals and communities. When a 2015 Bridger Pipeline interruption leaked more than than thirty,000 gallons into the Yellowstone River, the city of Glendive's water supply became contaminated with benzene, a known carcinogen. At one point benzene levels reached three times the legal limit (Hudson, 2017). Although major pipeline spills are covered extensively by the media, many smaller spills occur frequently across the region, as registered in the Montana Board of Oil and Gas (MT BOG) database of spills. Because the area increasingly uses hydraulic fracturing technology to recover much of its oil, a higher gamble exists for wastewater surface spills and blowouts (Lund et al., 2015).

iv. Methods

We used archival and snowball sampling methods to identify landowners whose properties had been directly impacted by an accidental spill of industrial materials, typically crude oil or saltwater. We used the MT BOG online database, which maintains an inventory of spills related to oil and gas activity throughout the country. From the BOG database, we extracted a list of all of the spills from January to October of 2015. This list included information on 140 spills, almost of which occurred in half dozen counties in eastern MT (Figure 2). The size of the spills ranged from a few gallons to hundreds of barrels. In addition to the volume of the spill, each entry indicated the blazon of materials involved, the landowner, and the reporting entity (oft the political party responsible for causing and cleaning upward the site). We further organized our list geographically with the goal of interviewing approximately the same number of landowners in each county. Additionally, we identified landowners who had direct experience with the 2011 pipeline pause that involved the Yellowstone River. Nosotros were also directed by several interviewees to talk with two landowners who live near a new solid waste matter disposal facility (WORC, 2015). Interviews were conducted over a 3-calendar month period (Jan–March) in 2016, which coincided with the refuse of the most contempo oil and gas boom in the region. The results described here are based on the analysis of 24 recorded interviews with 36 interviewees (in some cases a spouse or neighbor was besides present and contributed to the interview). Thirty-two interviewees were landowners who experienced oil and/or wastewater spills on their property, iii were public officials from the town most impacted by oil and gas development, and one was a public official from the boondocks impacted past the 2011 oil spill in the Yellowstone River. Interviews were conducted at the interviewee's dwelling house (or part) and/or at the site of the spill. Most interviews lasted well-nigh one 60 minutes. As each interview became more than redundant, with fewer contributions to understanding the breadth or depth of experiences, the inquiry team determined saturation signal had been reached (Cameron, 2005).

The interview protocol was organized around the key dimensions of the grid-group typology to arm-twist responses about views on nature's resiliency/fragility, including regulatory preferences (grid axis), and sense of customs/individualism (group centrality). Interviews were recorded (with permission) and afterwards transcribed and coded using Nvivo 11. The research team adult thematic codes using the cultural theory of risk and the grid-group typology every bit a conceptual framework (Schwarz and Thompson, 1990). Two rounds of coding were conducted by 2 different researchers.

5. Results

Our analysis reveals the dominant worldview of eastern Montanans, too as their complexities and contradictions, when assessing the risks of oil and gas development. While we institute some examples of narratives that fit nicely within a unmarried grid-grouping quadrant, more usually, we found a swell deal of contradiction in people's perceptions of oil and gas. Douglas does non claim that this typology will place pure types, simply that it can reveal ways in which the individual is embedded in a cohesive cultural customs based on perceptions of risk, responsibility, and competence. Using cultural theory of risk as a heuristic device to organize emergent narratives about the environment, community, and individual rights, our assay reveals the complex prepare of tensions at work among these community members who are struggling to maintain their rural mode of life and protect and provide for their families.

v.1 Dominant Narrative: Spills are "no big deal", nature is resilient, and economic benefits outweigh negative impacts

Our interviews in eastern Montana reveal that the people who are exposed to the most acute risks associated with oil and gas development – spills – are most closely aligned with an Individualist's worldview. In talking with landowners who had experienced a spill on their property, we found that spills were by and large viewed every bit "no big deal." In fact, crude oil was often viewed as "fertilizer." As one landowner said:

"Everybody talks about a barrel of oil or a butt of water. Well, in my book, a barrel of oil is nothin'. If y'all spread 10 barrels of oil out beyond my land, by next spring, the grass is going to exist that much taller."

This low-risk view of spills prevailed among most interviewees. In keeping with Schwarz and Thompson'southward (1990) adaptation of cultural theory, this depression risk perception among our interviewees tended to correlate with the dominant view that nature is resilient:

"[The state] is very resilient. Y'all can do a lot to the land, and it'll come dorsum … It'll kinda accept care of itself – regrow and cover upwards all the mistakes that they made years and years ago."

Of the 24 analyzed interviews, only i interviewee described a "fragile" nature in a manner more than consequent with an Egalitarian point-of-view. This description stood in stark contrast to the way others described nature:

What worries me a lot is that people don't seem to think it's a big deal… Any kind of pollution anywhere in the world impacts everybody who lives on the planet. Not as directly for sure, but everything, everything, that happens has an impact. Much larger than the initial bear on at this site.

Also in keeping with the Individualist worldview, most interviewees believed that, overall, the economic benefits of oil and gas development outweigh negative community or ecology impacts. However, this was rarely a straightforward conclusion since nearly people held mixed views about the industry. 1 of the biggest concerns expressed by interviewees was anticipation about how their customs had changed. When asked if he thought the community was improve off as a result of oil and gas development, one person opined:

No [information technology isn't]. Everything's went upward. I mean the fuel costs. In that location's no reason they should have been that high. What they charge for fuel and gas here -- and groceries have tripled!…[And] a lot of these teachers…they tin can't afford to live here. I mean they're talking $1,700, $2,000 dollars a calendar month for an apartment…then the groceries on top of it. Information technology just doesn't brand sense.

As another person described:

Nobody locked the door earlier the [local school teacher was murdered]… At present it'southward just a whole unlike customs. I mean for us to talk near traffic… You shouldn't have to think about how yous're going to get across boondocks.

Some interviewees mentioned concerns nigh negative impacts on homo health, groundwater, and wildlife, however this was non a widespread or pressing concern. As one interviewee said:

Yous do worry near health, I do. I breathe that in, I smell propane. I take no idea what the air quality is. Nosotros have a lot more sinus health, allergy issues, our optics, all kinds of stuff nosotros didn't have before. Can't evidence what it's related to. And coincidence, could exist, we're getting older.

City officials were concerned virtually h2o quality and public health due to irregular trailers and campsites that popped upward overnight:

The campers and the transient housing were the biggest problems on water quality that you worried about, because at that place were literally tens of thousands…you would go from here…30 miles out in the hills and you lot'd meet a power pole for a stock well and there might not exist a house for v miles and there would exist iii campers parked around information technology because there was power there.

Nosotros asked what these campers were doing with their wastewater and the urban center official said:

Dumpin' it on the basis. Well-nigh of the RVs, I mean most of 'em were just dumping information technology on the basis.

Despite recognized risks, complaints, and concerns, the Individualist culture in eastern Montana is supportive of continued oil and gas development in the region. After a long conversation about the pros and cons of oil development, we asked people to weigh the balance. The majority of interviews (n= 19) ended that, on balance, the economical benefits of the manufacture far outweigh the negative impacts. Even the family that had experienced one of Montana's largest saltwater spills appreciated oil and gas development:

Yeah [the recent oil and gas smash] helped us considerably… We put up a shop when the [auto body] shop burned down in '99. Built that get-go store in that location next to the house. And and so in 2012, we built the big store. Nosotros outgrew the little i and then fast - and a lot of trucks wouldn't fit in that store, so we built the real big shop and was able to pay for it and not borrow a dime. So yep the oil nail actually helped.

Another landowner described the departure oil and gas had made in ane generation:

My mom and dad lived pretty poorly. Nosotros didn't' own annihilation new… When the oil field came and they started drilling… it made [my dad's] life a lot easier. And mine likewise.

Others noted the potential benefits of development for the broader community:

Some of the big companies that move in here will exist probable to donate to different fundraising things that keep in a small boondocks.

Ii interviewees noted that their biggest business concern would be the lack of oil and gas activity:

If you enquire everyone in this community what's stressful in their life, it's the price of oil. Everybody's worried nigh their job.

Fifty-fifty the two landowners about afflicted by a new waste product disposal facility weren't "anti-oil and gas." Despite beingness frustrated with the lack of transparency and accountability in the permitting and monitoring of the waste facility, both landowners acknowledged the financial benefits of the manufacture and the free energy it produces. For example, after proudly describing the five solar panels he had on his holding, one said:

I like oil too and I employ a lot of information technology. We use it farming, ranching. And we're not going to get away from it for probably another generation, even if nosotros wanted to – or two or three. And the domestic production, I'm non all against it either. Having some domestic supply, just in lieu of - depending on the rest of the crazy world - is a smart thing. But at the same fourth dimension, aren't nosotros smart enough to do the best task with it in the world?

The other nearby landowner made a similar statement:

Myself and my family unit, we don't feel like we're anti oil and gas. We have friends and family that are in the oil manufacture. We probably utilise more diesel fuel fuel than everybody in this room combined for farm and ranching. So I respect information technology. We have to have it.

When asked if, overall, oil and gas benefits the community, this landowner said, "Absolutely, information technology'south beneficial. Information technology is beneficial." They are non bullheaded to the negative impacts of oil and gas; however, they recognize that fossil fuels are simply office of everyday life.

In contrast to the majority, five people reported that the benefits did not outweigh the negative impacts. Amidst these more concerned individuals were city officials in the town most directly impacted by increased truck traffic and unplanned growth—not individual landowners. When asked if it was worth having an oil boom every in one case in a while, ane official scoffed, "Oh I'd give information technology to any customs. They tin have information technology." Another urban center official replied:

You have to be very savvy. There'southward as much coin lost on every down turn. There'southward probably twice equally much money lost as there ever is fabricated. And everybody from elsewhere, y'all know, thinks that everybody here is rich… Oil wells are just a pain. They're an ecology gamble and a traffic hazard.

5.ii Individual as Negotiator: By Choice or By Necessity?

Following cultural theory, the dominant views expressed above indicate an Individualist worldview: low perception of run a risk, economic benefits are highly valued, and a belief that nature is resilient. Ane of the values ascribed to the Individualist worldview is favoring markets and market transactions as the optimal way to organize social club and manage risk. Co-ordinate to Schwarz and Thompson (1990), the "freedom to bid and bargain" is highly valued amid Individualists (p. 6). From this worldview, the virtually efficient way to control externalities is through contracts and bargaining between the two afflicted parties (east.grand., between landowners and oil companies) (Coase, 1960; Robbins et al., 2014). In our interviews, information technology was very clear that individuals played an important role equally negotiators. Some people saw their leases as a style to regulate oil companies themselves:

Well at that place's always talk near irresolute rules or laws effectually the state to limit oil companies to do certain things, but you could put that in your lease… like this set back rule we're dealing with… if information technology'due south a 3,000 barrel a 24-hour interval well [it] probably wouldn't hurt so bad having it right next to your shelterbelt. Simply if information technology's a twenty barrel a solar day or 20 butt a week, then information technology'd be meliorate if information technology was a one-half-mile abroad. Especially if it had stinky gas.

This seems similar a straightforward, Individualist solution for regulating oil and gas without the interference of government officials. Afterwards listening to several stories near what happens after a spill occurred, it became clear that the degree to which an individual made demands and was an effective negotiator fabricated a departure in terms of what steps were taken to remediate the site and what level of compensation was awarded. Ane interviewee mentioned getting paid $fifteen per rod of pipeline that crossed her belongings. Nosotros asked how she knew what toll to ask for and she explained:

Yous're always talking with your neighbors and different people … and you got to be in contact with them. Some neighbors enquire more than and the oil companies know if they pay it and so they're going to accept to pay you besides.

Even so, when asked if she felt like there was community support for dealing with these questions, she responded:

No. You lot're on your own. You're definitely on your ain because, yous know, certain people - like this place I rent - they're only after the coin. I've heard people don't fifty-fifty charge them for the pipeline only to go them, you know, to keep drilling.

Another interviewee had learned to ask for almanac leases, rather than a one-time payment:

I really really, always always push an annual rental … considering then that almanac rental always stays with that surface rights agreement. So, if I become to sell the property, I can tell my landowner that I'm selling information technology to, "yeah, that well up in that location, there are no minerals but I get $ii,000 or $3,000 a year, you know, for our rental for that." And yous know, they're like, "Oh, okay. That'southward worth something to take that at that place."…But the landowner gets absolutely nil for those spots if you haven't negotiated some blazon of annual rental with 'em…cause most of the oil companies…I mean their philosophy - they desire to pay that guy up front end and exist washed with information technology.

We followed upwards past asking where he learned to negotiate for annual payment. He said, "Aah, but from seeing, you know, what I accept."

Merely in our conversations, it sounded similar being a negotiator was a burden and source of stress – especially for already busy farmers. Ane landowner described his experiences with the oil company to try to go a well moved to a dissimilar part of his property:

[The oil company] said they wouldn't motility it, just nosotros negotiated. That'south the whole thing. You have to know the legals, you have to study information technology, yous have to effigy out who they are and how they operate. You have to be a geologist. And you have to be a negotiator. You have to know oil and gas, you accept to know everything. And nosotros're but farmers! We just really want to farm and raise cattle – and you tin can't be that! You actually, really tin't be that. Or y'all're going to lose something.

To try to reduce the burden on private landowners, a more Egalitarian solution was implemented at the local level. We found that many interviewees participated in (or at least acknowledged the importance of) a customs resource organization known as Northeast Montana Land & Minerals Owners Association ³ . Here, one member described what the organization does:

They formed probably 40 years agone, probably 3 oil booms ago, and their mission, I believe, is to help land owners and mineral owners deal with oil companies on leases. It was a manner for landowners equally a grouping to gather and try to get legislation washed, to aid people work together to come with solutions to problems, and become better leases and educate…Nosotros invite the Board of Oil and Gas to speak usually once or twice a year…It'southward just the fashion to work together. Let's say an area is going to exist a hot zone for oil development, well, now everybody tin piece of work together for damages for leases. It'southward a win-win.

His married woman added:

Or if at that place's problems, the group might have a committee that will go to the Board of Oil and Gas or legislatures or something and say, "You know there's a big outcome going on out here. And we really need to try to solve it." And when you've got a group behind you and they have a little bit of ascendancy, they'll heed a little better and it'southward like shooting fish in a barrel… easier [than] a single landowner who peradventure doesn't know anything or maybe is shy - I hateful doesn't desire to go out at that place and fight for themselves, merely they know they demand to.

The Individualist view expressed by interviewees in eastern Montana demonstrates that they practise not believe that their productive landscapes accept been irrevocably harmed; nor do they seek amercement that are multiparty or joint. Instead, they view individually negotiated transactions as the accepted solution to injury. They besides have that damages incurred are monetizable. Yet, their cultural preference places the individual in the position to negotiate compensation from the offending person or system.

5.3 Private as Enforcer: "You accept to be your own watchdog and sheriff"

In add-on to having to negotiate complex legal landscapes, many interviewees told us stories almost how they stumbled upon a leak or something that wasn't correct – and they were the ones who had to exist the "watchdog" and report it to the company and/or to a state authority, such as the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Section of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC), or the Board of Oil and Gas (BOG). As one person told us:

If I don't become aroused about it or insist that it be washed…then some of them volition try to pause the rules. That'south why citizens have to exist educated. That'south why I'm a fellow member of the Northeast Montana State and Mineral Owners Associations.

As some other interviewee told us:

I caught an oil company pumping out of one of our wells and dumping information technology and then I called the DNRC… I said, 'well I caught them.' The police force says they're non supposed to practise that. Well they did stop the next twenty-four hour period. But the just reason they did is considering I defenseless them.

Another landowner was having a disagreement with an oil company about whether they had a lease on the land to put a new well site. She said:

Considering I had gone to the Oil and Gas Meetings, I knew that I had the correct to recieve written notice at least then many days in advance… this visitor wanted to come up in [right away] and I told them they couldn't. I told them 'If you're there on Th morning, the sheriff will be there'…I said, 'I [volition] accept the sheriff in that location and all your equipment will be impounded and I will press charges as far as I can'.

While the abilty (or obligation) for individuals to enforce rules fits with the Individualist worldview, the latter two cases exemplify how landowners invoked the threat of external authorities (e.g., DEQ or sheriff) – expressing sentiments more in line with the Hierarchical worldview. Yet, they are not endorsing a technocratic approach where decsions are made past an outside good authority, just they are willing to use such government as leverage in their neogiation with oil and gas companies.

five.4 Interim as Negotiator and Enforcer is Stressful

When asked to describe the level of stress (on a calibration of one to ten) caused by the spill or oil and gas in general, one indivudal laughed:

Ane. Ha. [The oil spill] goes away pretty fast, and [the companies] are actually quite good about trying to get along with the landowners.

Near 1-third of the people we spoke with expressed similiarly low levels of stress. Another one-3rd of the people we spoke with expressed moderate levels of stress. But there was also ane-3rd of interviewees who felt very high levels of stress:

I ran a business downwards in [another state] for 15 years. I built homes and stuff downwardly there and it's loftier stress, high volume – and I felt more stress with this [oil spill] than I ever did down there dealing with people day in and day out.

In many cases, the stress stemmed from having to act as a negotiator or enforcer. I landowner described his experience getting compensated. He ranked his stress level equally an eight on a calibration of ten:

I'yard talking pipelines, the seismographing, nosotros had them come through here with those [thumpers]… They want to do information technology immediately. They went across here with the thumpers, only they were merely going to exercise information technology at night because it was spring and it was thawing… They got stuck and they pulled each other out. I mean, there was ruts vi feet deep! And they just left them! I mean, they were here, and so they were gone. But I finally fought and fought and got a lawyer. And they paid me.

In several cases, the experience of stress was gendered, with wives reporting greater levels of stress than their husbands, such as the following exchange:

Interviewer: If you recollect about the most stressful episode of your life, how does this oil spill compare to that? Where would you put this on a 1 to 10 scale?

Wife: Maybe a 4 or a v. We've had a pretty stressful life.

Husband: I would put it as a 1.

Wife: No. For you perhaps. Considering you weren't on the telephone and on email all twenty-four hour period and all night for weeks. Information technology was very stressful for me. I was getting emails from people I know all over the world and from people wanting to do radio interviews and people wanting to come up by the site with tv set crews… it was a constant barrage of phone calls and emails and I really didn't know that much.

5.5 Anti-Regulatory or Frustrated with Regulators?

Dislike for externally imposed restrictions (i.e., land or federal regulations) is another hallmark characteristic of Individualists. Therefore, we would expect to detect strong anti-regulatory views. And this view did be amongst some interviewees:

Some of those regulations go way over. If people would start using mutual sense once more and be responsible for their actions, they wouldn't demand every bit many regulations. I hateful you lot wouldn't tell your child, 'Oh look there's a fire, go run across if it's hot – stick your mitt in it.' And that'due south the type of common sense they don't have out there on oil well sites. They don't call back before they exercise something.

But more commonly we found that interviewees expressed a loftier level of frustration with what they viewed as ineffective regime agencies and unenforced regulations, with statements such equally:

Regulations, you know – I know what kind of give-and-take that is for a lot of people – simply you could make a good case that the lack of oversight or regulations is what caused a lot of the issues that we've had lately.

Or:

Enforcement would really make a big divergence. There'southward really some awfully good regulations, nothing is perfect… We can improve them, I'm sure, but there's a lot of adequately decent regulations in place. Nobody enforces them and I recall, from what I've been told and hear and meet, [information technology's] mostly because information technology's oil and gas and they're powerful.

In general, interviewees were not seeking an expansion of government to preclude risks, only there was a strong feeling amid several interviewees that current rules were non well enforced. While this could be interpreted as back up for hierarchical solutions (i.e., regulations), it tin can besides be interpreted equally an indictment of this approach to ecology management.

6. Conclusions and Word

Given the national and international business almost the ecology and health risks of oil spills – especially in the instance of spills, nosotros set up out to use cultural theory of risk to understand the ascendant worldview of residents in six oil-producing counties in eastern Montana. Based on the analysis of 24 interviews with 36 people, we found that the ascendant discourse is that oil spills are "no big deal", nature is resilient, and the economic benefits outweigh the negative community or environmental impacts. These views most closely align with the Individualist worldview in the grid-group typology (Douglas and Wildasky, 1982; Schwarz and Thompson, 1990).

While much of the narrative about oil and gas development fits within the Individualist quadrant, it also deviates in important means. For example, while some people touted the landowner's ability to cocky-regulate the industry by putting restrictions in their leases, there were many stories of frustration by landowners who were forced to human activity as negotiator and enforcer. While preference for individual contracts and market transactions are indications of an Individualist worldview, we observed the stress associated with the uneven power struggles between customs members and manufacture. In the face up of these tensions and stresses, many people turned to a landowner group – an Egalitarian solution – that helps landowners negotiate fair leases and brings greater attention to the problems faced past rural Montanans. The shift from a low group to high group strategy suggests that there is some solidarity among residents. Nevertheless, this local community response to the effect does not modify the fundamental power structure that shapes relations between oil and gas companies, individuals, and officials in these communities. Furthermore, the coordinated approach does non point that their cultural blazon has crossed over to Egalitarian. The cooperation with landowner groups may exist considered a quid-pro-quo agreement between individuals equally opposed to bonding together as equals to fight an unwanted outsider.

The furthest deviation from the Individualist worldview was when landowners who were acting equally 'enforcers' invoked the threat of external government (sheriff, etc.), signifying the existence of a hierarchical solution to their problem. Interviewees' frustration with a lack of enforcement of existing rules can be interpreted every bit either support for – or indictment of – the Hierarchical worldview. Information technology is important to annotation that reliance on external authorization is not the first choice of the Individualist, who places a high value on individual freedoms. Nonetheless, while "Individualistic cultures prefer minimum say-so, only enough to maintain rules for transactions, they exercise not reject all authority; if it leaves them lonely, they will get out information technology lonely" (Wildavsky, 1987, p. eleven). This finding illuminates the frustration some Montanans have with not having the individual capability to deal with the risky situations they are exposed to, notwithstanding it does not indicate an abandonment of their cultural preferences.

We found that it was useful to use cultural theory'south filigree-group typology as a heuristic to analyze our findings. However, given the complex experiences and narratives of people and communities, nosotros caution confronting methodological attempts to straightjacket individuals into a unmarried quadrant (c.f., Dake, 1992; Kahan et al., 2007). Instead we outline the "culturally standardized response" (Douglas 1992, p.xl) of eastern Montanans in the face of continued oil and gas evolution.

These findings suggest areas where policymakers, advocacy groups, and residents may find common ground to accost potential environmental and health risks. While rural residents are unlikely to exist compelled by arguments almost the fragility of nature, they might be interested in programs that assistance landowners sympathise their rights and develop their negotiating skills. Improving the responsiveness of regulatory agencies to landowner concerns would likely build trust and perhaps show the value of regulations designed to protect environmental and human wellness.

The eastern Montana way of life (i.east., worldview) impacts people'due south perceptions and what is considered an appropriate response to the risks associated with oil and gas development. In this case, the Individualist worldview justifies oil and gas extraction as long as the people are compensated for damages. Given that there are numerous potential impacts of oil and gas development, these Individualists have a lot at stake, however they also view the state as a productive source of income. The working landscapes of Montana are not considered fragile or virgin. Their increased vulnerability may increase solidarity in the customs; yet the worldview revealed here more closely reflects the cultural values of Individualism. They talk nearly oil and gas – peculiarly the negotiating and enforcing – as a stressor, and some have concerns regarding their ain health or the environment. But while Individualists may acknowledge that oil and gas development in eastern Montana is risky, it is more often than not viewed as an acceptable risk, so much then that information technology is "no big deal." The apply of cultural theory helps to illuminate this dissimilar context of calculation.

​

Highlights

• Cultural theory is used equally a heuristic; worldviews and risk perceptions are circuitous

• Dominant view: spills are 'no big deal', nature is resilient, accidents are inevitable

• Economic benefits of oil and gas are by and large seen as outweighing risks

• Country owner associations are seen as a manner to deal with oil companies and stress

• Sometimes external authority is necessary to deal with energy development

Acknowledgments

We'd like to thank our interviewees for sharing their time and stories with us – and for the many cups of coffee we were given. As well, thanks to the undergraduate enquiry assistants at MSU-Bozeman, MSU-Billings, and Eastern Washington University who accompanied us on the many trips to eastern MT to deport interviews. Thanks to Dionne Zoanni, MSc student at MSU-Bozeman for creating the map in Figure 2. The authors accept full responsibility for omissions and errors.

Funding

This inquiry was supported by the National Institute of Full general Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [Award Number P20GM103474]. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily stand for the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Abbreviations

BOG	Board of Oil and Gas
DEQ	Section of Environmental Quality
DNRC	Department of Natural Resources and Conservation
MT	Montana

Footnotes

^oneFor cultural theorists, a 'way of life' is a set of values and ideas almost social order, every bit described in Effigy 1. Ways of life are as well chosen worldviews, cultural types, and/or political cultures in the literature.

²Funding for this report was provided past the National Institute of Full general Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health through Montana INBRE which focuses on rural and tribal communities in Montana. The geographical scope of our study was therefore limited to Montana.

³Interestingly, when we asked virtually another landowner group - Northern Plains Resource Quango – several people said it was "too environmental."

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accustomed for publication. As a service to our customers nosotros are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please notation that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

• Adgate JL, Goldstein BD, McKenzie LM. Potential public wellness hazards, exposures and health effects from unconventional natural gas development. Environ Sci Technol. 2014;48(15):83-7-20. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Bickerstaff K, Walker G. The place(due south) of thing: Matter out of identify-public understandings of air pollution. Prog Hum Geog. 2003;27:45–67. [Google Scholar]
• Boudet H, Clarke C, Bugden D, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C, Leiserowitz A. "Fracking" controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing. Energ Policy. 2014;65:57–67. [Google Scholar]
• Cameron J. Focusing on the focus group. In: Hay L, editor. Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography. Oxford University Printing; South Melbourne, Victoria: 2005. pp. 116–132. [Google Scholar]
• Coase R. The problem of social cost. J Law Econ. 1960;three(1):1–44. [Google Scholar]
• Colborn T, Kwiatkowski C, Schultz K, Bachran One thousand. Natural gas operations from a public health perspective. Hum and Ecol Gamble Appraise: An Int J. 2011;17(5):1039–1056. doi: x.1080/10807039.2011.605662. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
• Dake G. Myths of nature: cultural and social construction of risk. J Soc Bug. 1992;48(four):21–37. [Google Scholar]
• Douglas M. Risk and Blame: Essays in Cultural Theory. Routledge, London; New York: 1992. [Google Scholar]
• Douglas Thou, Wildasky A. Hazard and Culture: An Essay on the Pick of Technological and Ecology Dangers. University of California Press; Berkeley, CA: 1983. [Google Scholar]
• Economic Profile Arrangement. A profile of socioeconomic measures – county region. Sheridan County, MT; Roosevelt Canton, MT; Richland Canton, MT; Dawson Canton, MT; Wibaux County, MT; Fallon County, MT: 2017. Jul 31, p. 43. [Google Scholar]
• Eastern Montana Bear upon Coalition. Regional Bear upon Assay, 2015, March. [accessed 08.21.17]; A study of free energy related impacts on the xvi- canton region represented by the Eastern Montana Impact Coalition. http://epedc.com/brochures/smEMICimpactanalysis2015.pdf.
• Ellis C, Theodori GL, Petrzelka P, Jackson-Smith D, Luloff AE. Anarchistic risks: The feel of acute free energy development in the Eagle Ford Shale. Energ Res & Soc Sci. 2016;20:91–98. [Google Scholar]
• Ellis R, Wildavsky A. A cultural analysis of the role of abolitionists in the coming of the Civil War. Comp Stud Soc Hist. 1990;32:89–116. [Google Scholar]
• Fernando F, Cooley DR. Attitudes towards shale oil development in western North Dakota: The part of identify-based community values. Attitude Germination. 2016;46:132–146. [Google Scholar]
• Flowers DL. How Montana counties rank for oil, gas product. Fairfield Lord's day Times; 2016. May 10, [accessed 08.21.17]. http://www.fairfieldsuntimes.com/oil_and_gas/article_35f03e68-1702-11e6-867d-5fb4f3bbac46.html. [Google Scholar]
• Hudson Chiliad. DEQ fines pipeline visitor $1M for 2015 oil spill virtually Glendive. Billings Gazette; 2017. Feb. [accessed 08.21.17]. http://billingsgazette.com/news/country-and-regional/montana/deq-fines-pipeline-company-yard-for-oil-spill-about-glendive/article_abb8a736-3bb0-56d8-9107-d8f046bec3ba.html. [Google Scholar]
• Jacquet JB. Review of risks to communities from shale free energy evolution. Environ Sci Technol. 2014;48:8321–8333. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Kahan DM, Braman D, Gastil J, Slovic P, Mertz CK. Culture and identity-protective cognition: Explaining the white-male result in run a risk perception. J Empir Legal Stud. 2007;4:465–505. [Google Scholar]
• Lund H, Weight W, Lopach D. [accessed 08.21.17]; Fracking in Montana: Asking Questions, Finding Answers. 2015 Dec; http://bogc.dnrc.mt.gov/Misc/Petition_For_Rulemaking/Petition_Literature_Cited/Lund%20et%20al.%202015.pdf.
• Malin South. In that location'southward no real choice but to sign: neoliberalization and normalization of hydraulic fracturing on Pennsylvania farmland. J Env Stud and Sci. 2014;4(1):17–27. [Google Scholar]
• Malone M, Roeder R, Lang W. Montana: A History of Two Centuries. two. University of Washington Press; Seattle: 1991. [Google Scholar]
• Malsch B, Tremblay MS, Gendron Y. Sense-making in compensation committees: a cultural theory perspective. Organ Stud. 2012;33(3):389–421. [Google Scholar]
• Richmond T. Montana's new energy borderland: What are the prospects? [accessed 08.21.17]; Economic Outlook. 2012 http://www.bber.umt.edu/pubs/energy/12energy.pdf.
• Robbins R, Hintz J, Moore SA. Markets and commodities. In: Robbins R, Hintz J, Moore SA, editors. Surround and Society: A Critical Introduction. Wiley Blackwell; UK: 2014. pp. 31–48. [Google Scholar]
• Schwarz Thou, Thompson 1000. Divided We Stand: Redefining Politics, Applied science, and Social Option. Academy of Pennsylvania Press; Philadelphia: 1990. [Google Scholar]
• Silverman H. Climate, worldviews and cultural theory. [accessed 08.23.17]; People and Place. 2010 http://www.peopleandplace.cyberspace/2010/03/09/climate-worldviews-and-cultural-theory/
• Smith K, Haggerty J. Devolved governance and alternative dispute resolution programs: An instance from the Bakken. In: Brasier K, Cotton fiber M, Whitton J, editors. Governing Shale Gas: Development, Citizen Participation and Determination Making in the US, Canada, Australia and Europe. New York: Routledge; 2018. Forthcoming. [Google Scholar]
• Starr C. Social benefits versus technological risks. Sci. 1969;165(3899):1232–1238. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Slovic P. Perception of risk. Sci. 1987;236(4799):280–285. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Tansey J. Risk as politics, culture as power. J Gamble Res. 2004;7(1):17–32. [Google Scholar]
• Tansey J, O'Riordan T. Cultural theory of risk: A review. Health, Risk & Soc. 1999;one(i):71–90. [Google Scholar]
• U.South. Army Corps of Engineers and U.Due south. Department of the Interior. [accessed 08.21.17]; Lower Yellowstone Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Montana: Terminal Ecology Impact Statement. 2016 Oct; https://www.usbr.gov/gp/mtao/loweryellowstone/EIS/2016feis.pdf.
• Vengosh A, Jackson RB, Warner Due north, Darrah TH, Kondash A. A critical review of the risks to water resources from unconventional shale gas evolution and hydraulic fracturing in the United States. Environ Sci Technol. 2014;48:8334–8348. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Veenstra AS, Lyons BA, Fowler-Dawson A. Conservation and conservationism: Differential influences of social identities on behavior about fracking. Env Commun. 2016;10(3):322–336. [Google Scholar]
• W J, Bailey I, Winter M. Renewable energy policy and public perceptions of renewable energy: A cultural theory approach. Energ Policy. 2010;38:5739–5748. [Google Scholar]
• Western Organziation of Resource Councils (WORC) [accessed 31 July 2017]; No Time to Waste. 2015 http://world wide web.worc.org/publication/no-fourth dimension-to-waste/
• Wildavsky A. Choosing preferences past constructing institutions: A cultural theory of preference germination. Am Polit Sci Rev. 1987;81:3–21. [Google Scholar]
• Willow AJ. The new politics of ecology degredation: Un/expected landscapes of disempowerment and vulnerability. J Pol Ecol. 2014;21(1):237–57. [Google Scholar]
• Wyckoff W. Life on the margin: The development of the waning west. Montana: The Magazine of Western History. 2002;52(3):xxx–43. [Google Scholar]
• Wyckoff W. On the Route Once more: Montana's Changing Landscape. University of Washington Printing; Seattle: 2006. [Google Scholar]

butlermovenciought.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5858731/

Share this post