Sociologists of risk tend to presume that populations have static perceptions of risk that can be correlated with their degree of technical expertise or their structural relation to society. Such commentators show little interest in human agency unless it is the agency of professional risk communicators educating the public. This analysis of the conflict over a radioactive incinerator in Livermore, California, emphasizes the fluidity of public perceptions of the incinerator and the agency of activists in shaping those perceptions in a battle for rhetorical position with the U.S. Department of Energy. At a historical moment (the end of the cold war) when the media was publicizing decades of environmental problems in the U.S. nuclear weapons complex, activists were able to defeat the incinerator by creating a transitory alliance with local developers and by using rhetorical strategies that slyly undermined the official discourse on risk.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barnet, Richard. 1969. The economy of death. New York: Atheneum.
2.
Beck, Ulrich. 1992. The risk society: Towards a new modernity. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a theory of practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Brewer, Boni. 1989. Stark threatens to sue lab over toxics incinerator. Valley Times, 18 January.
10.
Broad, William. 1985. Star warriors: A penetrating look into the lives of the young scientists behind our space age weaponry. New York: Simon & Schuster.
11.
Broad, William. 1992. Teller’s war: The secret story behind the star wars deception. New York: Simon & Schuster.
12.
Cabasso, Jackie, and Susan Moon. 1985. Risking peace: Why we sat in the road. Berkeley, CA: Open Books.
13.
Cochran, Thomas, Stan Norris, and Oleg Bukharin. 1995. Making the Russian bomb: From Stalin to Yeltsin. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
14.
Covello, V.1983. The analysis of actual versus perceived risks. New York: Plenum Press.
15.
Covello, V.1991. Risk comparisons and risk communication. In Communicating risk to the public, edited by R. Kasperson and P. Stallen, 79-124. Boston: Kluwer.
16.
Dalton, Russell, Paula Garb, Nicholas Lovrich, John Pierce, and John Whiteley. (1999). Citizens nuclear weapon production and environmental destruction in the United States and Russia. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
Data missing from incinerator report. 1989. Livermore Independent, 8 March.
18.
DeWolk, Roland. 1989. Toxic waste dumps, secrecy sour town’s relationship to the facility. Oakland Tribune, 13 August.
Douglas, Mary, and Aaron Wildavsky. 1982. Risk and culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.
21.
Downey, Gary. 1986. Risk in culture: The American conflict over nuclear power. Cultural Anthropology1:388-412.
22.
Epstein, Barbara. 1988. The politics of prefigurative community: The non-violent direct action movement. In Reshaping the U.S. Left: Popular struggles in the 1980s, edited by Mike David and Michael Spriker, 63-92. London: Verso Books.
23.
Epstein, Barbara. 1991. Political protest and cultural revolution: Nonviolent direct action in the 1970s and 1980s. Berkeley: University of California Press.
24.
Fiorino, Daniel J.1990. Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values15:226-243.
25.
Flynn, J., P. Slovic, and C. K. Mertz. 1993. Decidedly different: Expert and public views of risks from a radioactive waste repository. Risk Analysis13:643-648.
26.
Fradkin, Philip. 1989. Fallout: An American nuclear tragedy. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
27.
Francis, Sybil. 1996. Warhead politics: Livermore and the competitive system of nuclear weapons design. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
28.
Frankenfeld, Philip J.1992. Technological citizenship: A normative framework for risk studies. Science, Technology & Human Values17:459-484.
29.
Gallagher, Carole. 1993. American ground zero: The secret nuclear war. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30.
Gardner, G. T., and L. C. Gould. 1989. Public perceptions of risks and benefits of technology. Risk Analysis9:225-242.
31.
Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
32.
Gramsci, Antonio. 1992. Prison notebooks. New York: Columbia University Press.
33.
Grant, John. 1984. The day we bombed Utah. New York: New American Library.
34.
Gusterson, Hugh. 1996. Nuclear rites: A weapons library at the end of the cold war. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Jasanoff, Sheila. 1990. The fifth branch: Science advisors as policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37.
Jeffers, Michelle. 1989. Brown tops in fund-raising for city races. Tri-Valley Herald, 1 October.
38.
Kang, David. 1987. Bumpkins and eggheads: A cultural look at Livermore in the 1950s. Honors thesis, Stanford University.
39.
Kotz, Nick. 1988. Wild blue yonder: Money, politics, and the B-1 bomber. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
40.
Krimsky, S., and D. Golding, eds. 1992. Social theories of risk. New York: Praeger.
41.
Laclau, Ernesto, and Chantal Mouffe. 1985. Hegemony and socialist strategy: Toward a radical democratic politics. London: Verso Books.
42.
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 1982. Thirty years of technical excellence. Livermore, CA: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Communications Resources Office.
Livermore officials castigate DOE for denying request for hearing. 1988. Livermore Independent, 26 October.
45.
Livermore to fight East Avenue closure. 1988. Livermore Independent, 11 May.
46.
Lobbyist hired to deal with the labs. 1988. Livermore Independent, 15 June.
47.
Makhijani, Arjun, Howard Hu, and Katherine Yih, eds. 1995. Nuclear wastelands: A global guidebook to nuclear weapons production and its health and environmental effects. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48.
Margolis, Howard. 1996. Dealing with risk: Why the public and the experts disagree on environmental issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49.
McCrea, Frances, and Gerald Markle. 1989. Minutes to midnight: Nuclear weapons protest in America. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
50.
McElroy, Claudia. 1998. Kazakhs pay for Soviet nuclear tests. Manchester Guardian Weekly, 29 March, 5.
51.
Melman, Seymour. 1970. Pentagon capitalism: The political economy of war. New York: McGraw-Hill.
52.
Melman, Seymour. 1974. The permanent war economy. New York: Touchstone Books.
53.
New uranium pollution is found in wells at U.S. A-plant in Ohio. 1990. The New York Times, 4 January.
54.
Parkin, David. 1968. Middle class radicalism. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
55.
Perhac, Ralph M.1998. Comparative risk assessment: Where does the public fit in?Science, Technology, & Human Values23:221-241.
Rogers, Keith. 1990. EPA tells lab incinerator days are over. Valley Times, 12 September.
63.
Rosenberg, Howard L.1980. Atomic soldiers: American victims of nuclear experiments. Boston: Beacon Press.
64.
Roth, Emilie, M. Granmger Morgan, Baruch Fischhoff, Lester Lave, and Ann Bostrom. 1990. What do we know about making risk comparisons?Risk Analysis10:375-387.
65.
Sapolsky, Harvey. 1990. The politics of risk. Daedalus119 (4): 83-96.
66.
Schneider, Keith. 1989a. Decades of plutonium peril at an arms plant. The New York Times, 20 November.
67.
Schneider, Keith. 1989b. U.S. temporarily shutting down nuclear plant for safety problems. The New York Times, 30 November.
68.
Schneider, Keith. 1990a. Report warns of impact of Hanford’s radiation. The New York Times, 13 July.
69.
Schneider, Keith. 1990b. U.S. tells of peril in “40”s radiation to the northwest. The New York Times, 12 July.
70.
Schwarz, M., and M. Thompson. 1990. Divided we stand. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
71.
Sjoberg, L., ed. 1987. Risk and society: Studies of risk generation and reactions to risk. Boston: Allen and Unwin.
