Mitigation Masking and Polluted Human Agency

• In Event: 2251 - Section on Environmental Sociology Roundtables (1 hour)
  In Refereed Roundtable 60min: 18. Political Economy of Environmental Regulation

Abstract

This case study builds on prior research that introduced “mitigation masking” into environmental regulation and offending literature to reveal victim blaming behaviors among officials that serve to block residents from becoming stakeholders in the governance process. Analysis of the business operations of a steel recycling plant located in a residential neighborhood indicated that the business expanded an estimated 138% since entering an agreed order with Indiana Department of Environmental Management and the Environmental Protection Agency. Only 18% of the expanded business operations were used for mitigation purposes, but the company succeeding in convincing state and local regulatory officials that residents’ concerns should be excluded from the governance process. Residents remain concerned because public health officials have identified elevated rates of several types of cancers and neurological diseases in the community, and the mitigation efforts only address surface water runoff. Other pollution issues, such as a groundwater pollution plume and heavy metal contamination of the air, remain unaddressed. But initial research into the emotional geography of residential proximity to expanding industry suggests that living in a toxic environment may impact residents’ ability to hope for the possibility of justice. This paper further explores how mitigation masking permits more than the pollution of the environment: mitigation masking may be polluting citizen human agency itself.

Author

• Sherrie M. Steiner, Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne