Unprecedented shale oil development in recent years exerts growing pressure on America's energy transportation infrastructure, particularly its rail systems. Corresponding to this growth, the number and severity of train... [ view full abstract ]
Unprecedented shale oil development in recent years exerts growing pressure on America's energy transportation infrastructure, particularly its rail systems. Corresponding to this growth, the number and severity of train accidents has also increased, with communities across the country responding to heightened perceptions of risk with diverse policy and civic measures. Some have blocked oil storage facilities and rail spur projects, others have experienced increases in protests and civic organizing. Meanwhile, a far greater number of communities located along the same rail corridors have taken no such actions, raising questions about conditions influencing both perceptions of, and societal responses to, energy transportation risks.
Grounded in Foucauldian discourse theory, this research examines representations of fossil fuel by rail through the identification of discourses associated with pro, anti, and neutral community perceptions of and responses to oil by rail transportation. We conduct a manual content analysis of national, state, and local newspaper articles (n=151) reporting on community responses to the rail transportation of fossil fuels published between 2007 and 2017, the period coinciding with significant increases in U.S. shale oil development. Prefigured discursive themes were drawn from discourse and natural resource dispute literatures as well as emerged through content analysis, including trust/mistrust in free markets, government, and/or technology; democratic/undemocratic values of fair play or equal representation; and involvement of communities in decision-making or response processes. We identify dominant discursive themes and areas of discursive conflict in different rail communities as well as response type/s and demographic and population characteristics with which they are associated.
Key findings show oppositional responses often arise in association with discursive misalignment, or conflict, between community-centered discourses emphasizing fairness or equity, and industry- or government-centered discourses emphasizing free markets or trust in regulatory or technical oversight; however, findings are nuanced across metropolitan and rural areas. Findings extend risk perception, discourse, and natural resource sociology literatures, with civic and policy implications across rail communities.
