IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i12p4320-d372535.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lagging and Flagging: Air Pollution, Shale Gas Exploration and the Interaction of Policy, Science, Ethics and Environmental Justice in England

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Watterson

    (Occupational and Environmental Health Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland, UK)

  • William Dinan

    (Communications, Media & Culture, Faculty of Arts & Humanities, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland, UK)

Abstract

The science on the effects of global climate change and air pollution on morbidity and mortality is clear and debate now centres around the scale and precise contributions of particular pollutants. Sufficient data existed in recent decades to support the adoption of precautionary public health policies relating to fossil fuels including shale exploration. Yet air quality and related public health impacts linked to ethical and environmental justice elements are often marginalized or missing in planning and associated decision making. Industry and government policies and practices, laws and planning regulations lagged well behind the science in the United Kingdom. This paper explores the reasons for this and what shaped some of those policies. Why did shale gas policies in England fail to fully address public health priorities and neglect ethical and environmental justice concerns. To answer this question, an interdisciplinary analysis is needed informed by a theoretical framework of how air pollution and climate change are largely discounted in the complex realpolitik of policy and regulation for shale gas development in England. Sources, including official government, regulatory and planning documents, as well as industry and scientific publications are examined and benchmarked against the science and ethical and environmental justice criteria. Further, our typology illustrates how the process works drawing on an analysis of official policy documents and statements on planning and regulatory oversight of shale exploration in England, and material from industry and their consultants relating to proposed shale oil and gas development. Currently the oil, gas and chemical industries in England continue to dominate and influence energy and feedstock-related policy making to the detriment of ethical and environmental justice decision making with significant consequences for public health.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Watterson & William Dinan, 2020. "Lagging and Flagging: Air Pollution, Shale Gas Exploration and the Interaction of Policy, Science, Ethics and Environmental Justice in England," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-30, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:12:p:4320-:d:372535
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/12/4320/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/12/4320/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert J. Brulle, 2018. "The climate lobby: a sectoral analysis of lobbying spending on climate change in the USA, 2000 to 2016," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 289-303, August.
    2. Fry, Matthew & Brannstrom, Christian, 2017. "Emergent patterns and processes in urban hydrocarbon governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 383-393.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laurent Auzoult & Crisanta-Alina Mazilescu, 2021. "Ethical Climate as Social Norm: Impact on Judgements and Behavioral Intentions in the Workplace," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-9, June.

    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. Jonas Meckling & Jesse Strecker, 2023. "Green bargains: leveraging public investment to advance climate regulation," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 418-429, April.
    2. Shakil, Mohammad Hassan, 2021. "Environmental, social and governance performance and financial risk: Moderating role of ESG controversies and board gender diversity," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Stern, Nicholas & Sivropoulos-Valero, Anna Valero, 2021. "Innovation, growth and the transition to net-zero emissions," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114385, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Nicholas Stern & Anna Valero, 2021. "Innovation, growth and the transition to net-zero emissions," CEP Discussion Papers dp1773, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Giorgos Galanis & Giorgio Ricchiuti & Ben Tippet, 2022. "The Global Political Economy of a Green Transition," Working Papers - Economics wp2022_22.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    6. Leonardo E. Stanley, 2024. "Cambio Climático y Desarrollo sustentable: Incertidumbres y Narrativas," Revista Ciencias Administrativas (CADM), IIA, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Instituto de Investigaciones Administrativas, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, issue 23, pages 1-9, January- .
    7. Stern, Nicholas & Valero, Anna, 2021. "Innovation, growth and the transition to net-zero emissions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    8. 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).
    9. Ivan Slobozhan & Peter Ormosi & Rajesh Sharma, 2020. "Which bills are lobbied? Predicting and interpreting lobbying activity in the US," Papers 2005.06386, arXiv.org.
    10. Sugandha Srivastav & Ryan Rafaty, 2023. "Political Strategies to Overcome Climate Policy Obstructionism," Papers 2304.14960, arXiv.org.
    11. Matthew C. Nowlin, 2022. "Who should “do more” about climate change? Cultural theory, polycentricity, and public support for climate change actions across actors and governments," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(4), pages 468-485, July.
    12. Ankrah, Isaac & Lin, Boqiang, 2020. "Renewable energy development in Ghana: Beyond potentials and commitment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    13. Srivastav, Sugandha & Rafaty, Ryan, 2021. "Five Worlds of Political Strategy in the Climate Movement," INET Oxford Working Papers 2021-07, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    14. Kanwalroop K. Dhanda & Joseph Sarkis & Dileep G. Dhavale, 2022. "Institutional and stakeholder effects on carbon mitigation strategies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 782-795, March.
    15. Samuel Trachtman & Jonas Meckling, 2022. "The climate advocacy gap," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 1-7, June.
    16. Susanne Stoll-Kleemann & Susanne Nicolai & Philipp Franikowski, 2022. "Exploring the Moral Challenges of Confronting High-Carbon-Emitting Behavior: The Role of Emotions and Media Coverage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-19, May.
    17. Nuno Guimaraes Costa & Gerard Farias & David Wasieleski & Anthony Annett, 2021. "Seven Principles for Seven Generations: Moral Boundaries for Transformational Change," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 313-328, December.
    18. Nicholas Stern & Anna Valero, 2021. "Innovation, growth and the transition to net-zero emissions," POID Working Papers 008, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    19. Robert Brulle & Christian Downie, 2022. "Following the money: trade associations, political activity and climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 1-19, December.
    20. Ivan Slobozhan & Peter Ormosi & Rajesh Sharma, 2020. "Which bills are lobbied? Predicting and interpreting lobbying activity in the US," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2020-03, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..

    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:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:12:p:4320-:d:372535. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.