IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v49y2017i11p2457-2476.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Landfarming: A contested space for the management of waste from oil and gas extraction

Author

Listed:
  • Brian P Bloomfield
  • Bill Doolin

Abstract

The extraction of unconventional hydrocarbons, particularly through hydraulic fracturing (‘fracking’), has generated both support and opposition in many countries around the globe. Along with arguments about economic benefits, decarbonisation, transition fuels and groundwater contamination, etc., the rapid expansion of this industry presents a pressing problem as regards the disposal of the resultant waste – including drilling and cutting material, oil and gas residues, various chemicals used in the process, salts and produced water. One putative solution – ‘landfarming’ – is a disposal process that involves spreading oil and gas waste on to land and mixing it with topsoil to allow bioremediation of the hydrocarbons. This paper examines the case of landfarming in New Zealand where the practice has proved controversial due to its association with fracking, fears about the contamination of agricultural land and potential danger to milk supplies. Drawing upon Gieryn’s notion of cultural cartography and boundary work as well as the literature on the politics of scale it analyses the struggles for epistemic authority regarding the safety of landfarming. The paper concludes that scalar practices were central to the production of knowledge (and ignorance) in these credibility struggles, and that the prevailing cultural cartography of knowledge remained the arbiter and basis for policy. The case has wider implications in terms of the management of waste from unconventional hydrocarbons as well as other environmental issues in which the politics of scale figure in contested knowledge claims.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian P Bloomfield & Bill Doolin, 2017. "Landfarming: A contested space for the management of waste from oil and gas extraction," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(11), pages 2457-2476, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:49:y:2017:i:11:p:2457-2476
    DOI: 10.1177/0308518X17730582
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0308518X17730582
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0308518X17730582?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. Stephen M McCauley & James T Murphy, 2013. "Smart Growth and the Scalar Politics of Land Management in the Greater Boston Region, Usa," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(12), pages 2852-2867, December.
    2. Sally Eden & Andrew Donaldson & Gordon Walker, 2006. "Green Groups and Grey Areas: Scientific Boundary-Work, Nongovernmental Organisations, and Environmental Knowledge," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 38(6), pages 1061-1076, June.
    3. Alice Cohen, 2012. "Rescaling Environmental Governance: Watersheds as Boundary Objects at the Intersection of Science, Neoliberalism, and Participation," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(9), pages 2207-2224, September.
    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. Cleland, Jonelle & Rogers, Abbie A., 2010. "Putting the Spotlight on Attribute Definition: a knowledge base approach," Research Reports 107578, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    2. Eileen S. Johnson & Kathleen P. Bell & Jessica E. Leahy, 2018. "Managing the science-policy boundary: implications for river restoration," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(3), pages 281-289, September.
    3. Johan Munck af Rosenschöld & Steven A Wolf, 2017. "Toward projectified environmental governance?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(2), pages 273-292, February.
    4. Hodgson, Isla D. & Redpath, Steve M. & Fischer, Anke & Young, Juliette, 2018. "Fighting talk: Organisational discourses of the conflict over raptors and grouse moor management in Scotland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 332-343.
    5. Susan J. Gilbertz & Damon M. Hall & Lucas C. Ward & Matthew B. Anderson, 2019. "Science on the Sideline: Pragmatism and the Yellowstone River Basin Advisory Council," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(4), pages 1411-1424, March.
    6. Mikael Granberg & Karyn Bosomworth & Susie Moloney & Ann-Catrin Kristianssen & Hartmut Fünfgeld, 2019. "Can Regional-Scale Governance and Planning Support Transformative Adaptation? A Study of Two Places," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-17, December.
    7. Richard Helliwell & Sarah Hartley & Warren Pearce, 2019. "NGO perspectives on the social and ethical dimensions of plant genome-editing," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(4), pages 779-791, December.
    8. Chia‐Hao Ho & Steffen Böhm & David Monciardini, 2022. "The collaborative and contested interplay between business and civil society in circular economy transitions," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(6), pages 2714-2727, September.
    9. Sally Eden & Sylvia Tunstall, 2006. "Ecological versus Social Restoration? How Urban River Restoration Challenges but Also Fails to Challenge the Science – Policy Nexus in the United Kingdom," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(5), pages 661-680, October.
    10. Xi, Qiangmin & Mei, Lin, 2022. "How did development zones affect China’s land transfers? The scale, marketization, and resource allocation effect," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    11. McCall, Michael K., 2016. "Beyond “Landscape” in REDD+: The Imperative for “Territory”," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 58-72.
    12. Thomas J. Timberlake & Courtney A. Schultz, 2017. "Policy, practice, and partnerships for climate change adaptation on US national forests," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 257-269, September.
    13. John Lauermann & Anne Vogelpohl, 2017. "Fragile growth coalitions or powerful contestations? Cancelled Olympic bids in Boston and Hamburg," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(8), pages 1887-1904, August.
    14. Sharma, Kavita & Walters, Gretchen & Metzger, Marc J. & Ghazoul, Jaboury, 2023. "Glocal woodlands – The rescaling of forest governance in Scotland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    15. Lowe, Philip & Phillipson, Jeremy & Proctor, Amy & Gkartzios, Menelaos, 2019. "Expertise in rural development: A conceptual and empirical analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 28-37.
    16. Jichuan Sheng & Michael Webber, 2019. "Governance rescaling and neoliberalization of China’s water governance: The case of China’s South–North Water Transfer Project," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(8), pages 1644-1664, November.
    17. Paola Gazzola & Maggie H Roe & Paul J Cowie, 2015. "Marine spatial planning and terrestrial spatial planning: reflecting on new agendas," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(5), pages 1156-1172, October.

    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:envira:v:49:y:2017:i:11:p:2457-2476. 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.