Environmental Controversies, Interactional Resources, and Rural Communities

Siting Versus Exposure Disputes

Stephen Robert Couch, Steve Kroll‐Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

66 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Abstract Differences in the types of social conflict occuring in facility siting disputes and toxic contamination cases are compared. An ecological‐symbolic perspective and the concept of strong and weak ties are used to interpret the nature of social conflict in two rural Pennsylvania communities and in cases in the literature. Overall, community solidarity appears likely to be enhanced in siting disputes and undermined in exposure situations. To explain this, two conflict paths are developed that move from the presence or absence of the hazard agent to individual perceptions, the generation of collective threat beliefs and the formation of strong ties, the emergence of alternative leadership and its relationship to official authorities, and finally the formation of weak ties. In each case, the type of community conflict results from the nature of the perceived environmental threat and the social process that threat sets in motion. Practical implications for rural community development are discussed. 1994 Rural Sociological Society

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)25-44
Number of pages20
JournalRural Sociology
Volume59
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1994

Fingerprint

rural community
social conflict
threat
resources
social process
community development
rural development
environmental pollution
solidarity
community
leadership
literature

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{b020e16287f449e5928a93f16b01980f,
title = "Environmental Controversies, Interactional Resources, and Rural Communities: Siting Versus Exposure Disputes",
abstract = "Abstract Differences in the types of social conflict occuring in facility siting disputes and toxic contamination cases are compared. An ecological‐symbolic perspective and the concept of strong and weak ties are used to interpret the nature of social conflict in two rural Pennsylvania communities and in cases in the literature. Overall, community solidarity appears likely to be enhanced in siting disputes and undermined in exposure situations. To explain this, two conflict paths are developed that move from the presence or absence of the hazard agent to individual perceptions, the generation of collective threat beliefs and the formation of strong ties, the emergence of alternative leadership and its relationship to official authorities, and finally the formation of weak ties. In each case, the type of community conflict results from the nature of the perceived environmental threat and the social process that threat sets in motion. Practical implications for rural community development are discussed. 1994 Rural Sociological Society",
author = "Couch, {Stephen Robert} and Steve Kroll‐Smith",
year = "1994",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1549-0831.1994.tb00520.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "59",
pages = "25--44",
journal = "Rural Sociology",
issn = "0036-0112",
publisher = "Rural Sociological Society",
number = "1",

}

Environmental Controversies, Interactional Resources, and Rural Communities : Siting Versus Exposure Disputes. / Couch, Stephen Robert; Kroll‐Smith, Steve.

In: Rural Sociology, Vol. 59, No. 1, 01.01.1994, p. 25-44.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Environmental Controversies, Interactional Resources, and Rural Communities

T2 - Siting Versus Exposure Disputes

AU - Couch, Stephen Robert

AU - Kroll‐Smith, Steve

PY - 1994/1/1

Y1 - 1994/1/1

N2 - Abstract Differences in the types of social conflict occuring in facility siting disputes and toxic contamination cases are compared. An ecological‐symbolic perspective and the concept of strong and weak ties are used to interpret the nature of social conflict in two rural Pennsylvania communities and in cases in the literature. Overall, community solidarity appears likely to be enhanced in siting disputes and undermined in exposure situations. To explain this, two conflict paths are developed that move from the presence or absence of the hazard agent to individual perceptions, the generation of collective threat beliefs and the formation of strong ties, the emergence of alternative leadership and its relationship to official authorities, and finally the formation of weak ties. In each case, the type of community conflict results from the nature of the perceived environmental threat and the social process that threat sets in motion. Practical implications for rural community development are discussed. 1994 Rural Sociological Society

AB - Abstract Differences in the types of social conflict occuring in facility siting disputes and toxic contamination cases are compared. An ecological‐symbolic perspective and the concept of strong and weak ties are used to interpret the nature of social conflict in two rural Pennsylvania communities and in cases in the literature. Overall, community solidarity appears likely to be enhanced in siting disputes and undermined in exposure situations. To explain this, two conflict paths are developed that move from the presence or absence of the hazard agent to individual perceptions, the generation of collective threat beliefs and the formation of strong ties, the emergence of alternative leadership and its relationship to official authorities, and finally the formation of weak ties. In each case, the type of community conflict results from the nature of the perceived environmental threat and the social process that threat sets in motion. Practical implications for rural community development are discussed. 1994 Rural Sociological Society

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028113791&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028113791&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1549-0831.1994.tb00520.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1549-0831.1994.tb00520.x

M3 - Article

VL - 59

SP - 25

EP - 44

JO - Rural Sociology

JF - Rural Sociology

SN - 0036-0112

IS - 1

ER -