TY - JOUR
T1 - Please in my backyard
T2 - Quiet mobilization in support of fracking in an appalachian community
AU - Jerolmack, Colin
AU - Walker, Edward T.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/9/1
Y1 - 2018/9/1
N2 - Environmental justice and social movements scholarship demonstrates how not-in-my-backyard activism by more privileged communities leaves the disadvantaged with “locally unwanted land uses.” Yet it overlooks instances of local support for risky industries. Our ethnographic case shows how a rural, white, mixed-income Pennsylvania community adopted a please-in-my-backyard stance toward shale gas extraction (fracking). Residents invited development on their land and supported it through quiet mobilization. While landowners prioritized benefits over risks, economics cannot fully explain their enthusiasm. Consistent with public opinion research, partisan identities and community obligations undergirded industry support even when personal benefits were limited. Devotion to self-reliance and property rights led residents to defend landowners’ freedom to lease their land. Cynicism toward government precluded endorsing environmental regulation, and the perception of antifracking activists as “liberal” outsiders linked support for fracking with community solidarity. This case illustrates why communities may champion risky industries and complicates theories of nonmobilization.
AB - Environmental justice and social movements scholarship demonstrates how not-in-my-backyard activism by more privileged communities leaves the disadvantaged with “locally unwanted land uses.” Yet it overlooks instances of local support for risky industries. Our ethnographic case shows how a rural, white, mixed-income Pennsylvania community adopted a please-in-my-backyard stance toward shale gas extraction (fracking). Residents invited development on their land and supported it through quiet mobilization. While landowners prioritized benefits over risks, economics cannot fully explain their enthusiasm. Consistent with public opinion research, partisan identities and community obligations undergirded industry support even when personal benefits were limited. Devotion to self-reliance and property rights led residents to defend landowners’ freedom to lease their land. Cynicism toward government precluded endorsing environmental regulation, and the perception of antifracking activists as “liberal” outsiders linked support for fracking with community solidarity. This case illustrates why communities may champion risky industries and complicates theories of nonmobilization.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057834569&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057834569&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1086/698215
DO - 10.1086/698215
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85057834569
SN - 0002-9602
VL - 124
SP - 479
EP - 516
JO - American Journal of Sociology
JF - American Journal of Sociology
IS - 2
ER -