IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v42y2024i2p250-267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fracking and epistemic injustice: A feminist critique of knowledge formation

Author

Listed:
  • Yasminah Beebeejaun

Abstract

The expansion of fracking, an intensive form of hydrocarbon extraction, has been met with increasing public hostility, spanning a diverse range of interests and political allegiances. However, to date, few authors have engaged with the role of gender and women activists. In this paper, I consider how gender and gendered ideas have been used as a resource to underpin fracking protests in the USA and UK. I find that a problematic gendered binary has emerged that undermined the veracity of anti-fracking protestors’ opposition and aligns with modes of planning governance that valorize universal and objective forms of knowledge. Drawing upon a feminist epistemological stance, I turn to a planning dispute over noise levels in Lancashire, England, to explore the limits to current forms of knowledge production. I argue that specific actors, behaviours, and forms of knowledge become framed as gendered and unreliable in the sphere of technical decision making, diminishing our understanding of the complexities of human experience and subjectivity within spatial planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Yasminah Beebeejaun, 2024. "Fracking and epistemic injustice: A feminist critique of knowledge formation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 42(2), pages 250-267, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:42:y:2024:i:2:p:250-267
    DOI: 10.1177/23996544211036465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23996544211036465
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/23996544211036465?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jieling Xiao & Lisa Lavia & Jian Kang, 2018. "Towards an agile participatory urban soundscape planning framework," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(4), pages 677-698, March.
    2. Fry, Matthew & Briggle, Adam & Kincaid, Jordan, 2015. "Fracking and environmental (in)justice in a Texas city," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 97-107.
    3. Kirk Jalbert & Abby Kinchy & Simona Perry, 2014. "Erratum to: Civil society research and Marcellus Shale natural gas development: results of a survey of volunteer water monitoring organizations," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 4(1), pages 121-121, March.
    4. Kirk Jalbert & Abby Kinchy & Simona Perry, 2014. "Civil society research and Marcellus Shale natural gas development: results of a survey of volunteer water monitoring organizations," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 4(1), pages 78-86, March.
    5. Howell, Rachel A., 2018. "UK public beliefs about fracking and effects of knowledge on beliefs and support: A problem for shale gas policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 721-730.
    6. Dobruszkes, Frédéric & Efthymiou, Marina, 2020. "When environmental indicators are not neutral: Assessing aircraft noise assessment in Europe," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    7. Jennifer Dodge, 2015. "The deliberative potential of civil society organizations: framing hydraulic fracturing in New York," Policy Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 249-266, May.
    8. Goldstein, B.D., 2014. "The importance of public health agency independence: Marcellus shale gas drilling in Pennsylvania," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 104(2), pages 13-15.
    9. Susan Owens, 2004. "Siting, sustainable development and social priorities," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 101-114, March.
    10. Evensen, Darrick & Stedman, Rich, 2017. "Beliefs about impacts matter little for attitudes on shale gas development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 10-21.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Richard Milligan & Tyler McCreary & Na’Taki Osborne Jelks, 2021. "Improvising against the racial state in Atlanta: Reimagining agency in environmental justice," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(7), pages 1586-1605, November.
    2. Liuyang Yao & Dangchen Sui & Xiaotong Liu & Hui Fan, 2020. "The Psychological Process of Residents’ Acceptance of Local Shale Gas Exploitation in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-20, September.
    3. Abby Kinchy & Sarah Parks & Kirk Jalbert, 2016. "Fractured knowledge: Mapping the gaps in public and private water monitoring efforts in areas affected by shale gas development," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(5), pages 879-899, August.
    4. Martínez-Espiñeira, Roberto & García-Valiñas, María Á. & Matesanz, David, 2019. "Public Attitudes towards Hydraulic Fracturing in Western Newfoundland," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    5. Andersson-Hudson, Jessica & Rose, Jonathan & Humphrey, Mathew & Knight, Wil & O'Hara, Sarah, 2019. "The structure of attitudes towards shale gas extraction in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 693-697.
    6. Ben Brucato, 2015. "The New Transparency: Police Violence in the Context of Ubiquitous Surveillance," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(3), pages 39-55.
    7. Frances Drake, 2018. "Risk Society and Anti-Politics in the Fracking Debate," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-22, November.
    8. Sibo Chen, 2020. "Debating Extractivism: Stakeholder Communications in British Columbia’s Liquefied Natural Gas Controversy," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, December.
    9. McCauley, Darren & Pettigrew, Kerry, 2023. "Building a just transition in asia-pacific: Four strategies for reducing fossil fuel dependence and investing in clean energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    10. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    11. Liuyang Yao & Qian Zhang & Kin Keung Lai & Xianyu Cao, 2020. "Explaining Local Residents’ Attitudes toward Shale Gas Exploitation: The Mediating Roles of Risk and Benefit Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-13, October.
    12. Marcos-Martinez, Raymundo & Measham, Thomas G. & Fleming-Muñoz, David A., 2019. "Economic impacts of early unconventional gas mining: Lessons from the coal seam gas industry in New South Wales, Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 338-346.
    13. Susan T. Zimny & Margaret C. Reardon, 2021. "Environmental justice expansion in the context of fracking," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(2), pages 234-246, June.
    14. Yasminah Beebeejaun, 2017. "Exploring the intersections between local knowledge and environmental regulation: A study of shale gas extraction in Texas and Lancashire," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(3), pages 417-433, May.
    15. Ericson, Sean J. & Kaffine, Daniel T. & Maniloff, Peter, 2020. "Costs of increasing oil and gas setbacks are initially modest but rise sharply," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    16. Cai, Zhengyu & Maguire, Karen & Winters, John V., 2019. "Who benefits from local oil and gas employment? Labor market composition in the oil and gas industry in Texas and the rest of the United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    17. Paul Chiambaretto & Elodie Mayenc & Hervé Chappert & Juliane Engsig & Anne-Sophie Fernandez & Frédéric Le Roy, 2021. "Where does flygskam come from? The role of citizens’ lack of knowledge of the environmental impact of air transport in explaining the development of flight shame," Post-Print hal-03514706, HAL.
    18. Clarke, Christopher E. & Evensen, Darrick T.N., 2023. "Attention to news media coverage of unconventional oil/gas development impacts: Exploring psychological antecedents and effects on issue support," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    19. Fry, Matthew & Brannstrom, Christian, 2017. "Emergent patterns and processes in urban hydrocarbon governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 383-393.
    20. Mehmet Soyer & Kylen Kaminski & Sebahattin Ziyanak, 2020. "Socio-Psychological Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Community Health and Well-Being," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-9, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:42:y:2024:i:2:p:250-267. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.