'Something happened': The relevance of the risk society for describing the siting process for a municipal landfill

Geografiska Annaler, Series B: Human Geography

Volumn 81, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 91-109

  Baxter, Jamie ^a   Eyles, John ^b   Elliott, Susan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^b MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Equity; Expert; Landfill; Lay; Ontario; Risk society; Technological environmental hazards

Indexed keywords

EID: 0002827481     PISSN: 04353684     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1468-0467.00051     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. ARMOUR, A. (1992): The co-operative process: facility siting the democratic way, Plan Canada, March: 29-34.
2. BAXTER, J. and EYLES, J. (1999): The utility of in-depth interviews for studying the meaning of environmental risk, Professional Geographer, (2).
3. BAXTER, J., EYLES, J. and WILLMS, D. (1992): The Hagersville tire fire: interpreting risk through a qualitative research design, Qualitative Health Research, 2(2): 208-37.
4. BECK, U. (1987): The anthropological shock: Chernobyl and the contours of the risk society, Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 32: 153-65.
5. BECK, U. (1992a): Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, ed. and trans. M. Ritter, M Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6. BECK, U. (1992b): From industrial society to the risk society: questions of survival, social structure and ecological enlightenment, Theory Culture and Society, 9: 97-123.
7. BOWEN, W., SALLING, M., HAYNES, K. and CYRAN, E. (1996): Toward environmental justice: spatial equity in Ohio and Cleveland, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 85(4): 641-63.
8. BROWN, P. (1992): Popular epidemiology and toxic waste contamination: Lay and professional ways of knowing, Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 33(September): 267-81.
9. BULLARD, R. (1990): Dumping in Dixie: Race, Class, and Environmental Quality, Boulder: Westview Press.
10. CHAVIS, B. (1994): Preface, in BULLARD, R. (ed.): Unequal Protections: Environmental Justice and Communities of Color, San Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Books.
11. CUTTER, S. (1995): Race, class and environmental justice, Progress in Human Geography, 19(1): 111-22.
12. CUTTER, S. (1993): Living With Risk, New York: Edward Arnold.
13. CUTTER, S., HOLM, D. and CLARK, L. (1996): The role of geographic scale in monitoring environmental justice, Risk Analysis, 16(4): 517-26.
14. DOUGLAS, M. (1993): Review of Shrader-Frechette, K. (1991) Risk and Rationality: Philosophical Foundations for Populist Reforms, American Political Science Review, 87(2): 485.
15. DOUGLAS, M. and WILDAVSKY, A. (1982): Risk and Culture, Berkeley: University of California Press.
16. DRAPER, E. (1993): review of BECK, U. (1992), Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, Contemporary Sociology, 22(5): 641-4.
17. EDELSTEIN, M.R. (1988): Contaminated Communities, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
18. ELLIOTT, S. and TAYLOR, S.M. (1996): Worrying about waste: diagnosis and prescription, in MUNTON, D. (ed.): Siting By Choice: Waste Facilities, NIMBY, and Volunteer Communities, Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
19. ELLIOTT, S., TAYLOR, S.M., WALTER, S., STIEB, D., FRANK, J. and EYLES, J. (1993): Modeling psychosocial effects of exposure to solid waste facilities, Social Science and Medicine, 37(6): 791-804.
20. EYLES, J., TAYLOR, M., JOHNSON, N. and BAXTER, J. (1993a): Worrying about waste: Living close to solid waste disposal facilities in Southern Ontario, Social Science and Medicine, 37(6): 805-12.
21. EYLES, J., TAYLOR, S.M., BAXTER, J., SIDER, D. and WILLMS, D. (1993b): The social construction of risk in a rural community: Responses of local residents to the 1990 Hagersville (Ontario) tire fire, Risk Analysis, 13: 281-90.
22. FISCHHOFF, B., SLOVIC, P. and LICHTENSTEIN, S. (1981): Lay foibles and expert fables in judgements about risk, in O'RIORDAN, T., and TURNER, R. (eds): Progress in Resource Management and Environmental Planning, Chichester: Wiley.
23. FURUSETH, O. (1990): Impacts of a sanitary landfill: spatial and non-spatial effects on the surrounding community, Journal of Environmental Management, 31: 269-77.
24. FURUSETH, O. and O'CALLAGHAN, J. (1991): Community response to a municipal waste incinerator: NIMBY or neighbor, Landscape and Urban Planning, 21: 163-71.
25. GIDDENS, A. (1990): The Consequences of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press.
26. GIDDENS, A. (1991): Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Cambridge: Polity Press.
27. GOFFMAN, E. (1959): The presentation of the Self in Everyday Life, Harmondsworth, Middx: Penguin.
28. HALL, J. (1994): Review of Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, Beck, U. (1992), Sociological Review, 42(2): 344-6.
29. HANNIGAN, J. (1995): Environmental Sociology, New York: Routledge.
30. JERRETT, M., EYLES, J., COLE, D. and READER, S. (1997): Environmental equity in Canada: an empirical investigation into the income distribution of pollution in Ontario, Environment and Planning A, 29(10): 1777-800.
31. JOHNSON, B. and COVELLO, V. (1987): The Social and Cultural Construction of Risk, Boston, MA: Reidel.
32. KAHNEMAN, D. and TVERSKY, A. (1979): Prospect Theory: An analysis of decision under risk, Econometrica, 47(2): 263-91.
33. LAIRD, F.N. (1989): The decline of deference: The political context of risk communication, Risk Analysis, 9(4): 543-50.
34. LASH, S. (1994): Reflexivity and its doubles: structure, aesthetics, community, in BECK, U., GIDDENS, A., and LASH, S.: Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
35. LASH, S. and WYNN, B. (1992): Introduction, in BECK, U. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, Newbury Park CA: Sage.
36. LAWRENCE, D. (1996): Approaches and methods of siting locally unwanted waste facilities, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 39(2): 165-87.
37. LEISS, W. (1994): Review of BECK, U. (1992), Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, Canadian Journal of Sociology, 19(4): 544-7.
38. LEISS, W. (1996): Three phases in the evolution of risk communication practice, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 545: 85-94.
39. LEISS, W. and CHOCIOLKO, C. (1994): Risk and Responsibility, Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
40. MOL, A. and SPAARGAREN, G. (1993): Environment, modernity and the risk-society: the apocalyptic horizon of environmental reform, International Sociology, 8(4): 431-59.
41. MUNTON, D. and CASTLE, G. (1993): Proceedings, Symposium on the Siting of Hazardous Waste Treatment Facilities, Vancouver: University of British Columbia.
42. NEUTRA, R. (1985): Epidemiology for and with a distrustful community, Environmental Health Perspectives, 62: 393-97.
43. NORMAN, G. AND NEWHOUSE, M. (1994): The volatile mixture of politics, psychology and science: retelling the story of UFFI, proceedings from Environmental Epidemiology: Environment for Society or Science in Society, Hamilton: Environmental Health Program and Institute of Environment and Health.
44. O'RIORDAN, T. (1983): The cognitive and political dimensions of risk analysis, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3: 345-54.
45. PERROW, C. (1984): Normal Accidents, New York: Basic Books.
46. PETTS, J. (1995): Waste management strategy development: a case study of community involvement and consensus-building in Hampshire, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 38(4): 519-36.
47. PLOUS, S. (1993): The Psychology of Judgement and Decision Making, New York: McGraw-Hill.
48. RAYNER, S. (1992): Cultural theory and risk analysis, in KRIMSKY, S. and GOLDING, D. (eds): Social Theories of Risk, Westport, CT: Praeger.
49. RAYNER, S. and CANTOR, R. (1987): How fair is safe enough? The cultural approach to societal technology choice, Risk Analysis, 7: 3-13.
50. ROBERTS, H. (1993): Review of Beck, U. (1992), Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, Sociology, 27(4): 708-9.
51. SHRADER-FRECHETTE, K. (1991): Risk and Rationality: Philosophical Foundations for Populist Reforms, Berkeley: University of California Press.
52. SILVERMAN, D. (1993): Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analyzing Talk, Text and Interaction, London: Sage.
53. SLOVIC, P. (1987): Perception of risk, Science, 236: 280-5.
54. SLOVIC, P., FLYNN, J. and GREGORY, R. (1994): Stigma happens: Social problems in the siting of nuclear waste facilities, Risk Analysis, 14(5): 773-7.
55. SLOVIC, P. FISCHHOFF, B. and LICHTENSTEIN, S. (1982): Why study risk perception?, Risk Analysis, 2(2): 83-93.
56. STARR, C. (1969): Social benefit versus technological risk, Science, 165: 1232-8.
57. STATISTICS CANADA (1991): Census of population, Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services.
58. TONN, B., TRAVIS, C., GOELTZ, R. and PHILLIPPI, R. (1990): Knowledge-based representations of risk beliefs, Risk Analysis, 10(1): 169-84.
59. UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST (1987): Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States: A National Report on the Racial and Socio-Economic Characteristics of Hazardous Waste Sites, New York, NY: United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice.
60. VON NEUMANN, J. and MORGENSTERN, O. (1944): Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
61. WILDAVSKY, A. and DAKE, K. (1990): Theories of risk perception: Who fears what and why?, Daedalus, 119: 41-60.
62. WYNN, B. (1992): Risk and social learning: Reification to engagement, in KRIMSKY, S. and GOLDING D. (eds): Social Theories of Risk, Westport, CT: Praeger.
63. ZEISS, C. and LEFSRUD, L. (1996): Making or breaking waste facility siting successes with a siting framework, Environmental Management, 20(1): 53-64.