IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v40y2020i12p2524-2538.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explanatory Matrices on the Causes of a Tailing Dam Collapse in Brazil: The (Dis)Articulation of Epistemes

Author

Listed:
  • Juliana Aurora de Oliveira Lopes
  • Léo Heller

Abstract

Mining tailing dam ruptures are increasingly common events in South America. Due to their high potential degree for avoidance, they are considered to be technological disasters and often have a considerable impact on local populations and communities, as well as affecting the ecosystem. The failure of the Fundão dam in 2015 in the Brazilian State of Minas Gerais (is) considered one of the largest socioenvironmental disasters in the country's history. Different explanations for the causes of the disaster were put forward by various social actors. This article critically analyzes these discourses through the theoretical‐methodological reference of the social theory of discourse, with the aim of understanding the various discursive contexts of the causes of the breach of the dam. The analysis and understanding of these explanatory matrices suggested that different discourses present different epistemological approaches to the causes of the disaster, related to aspects such as sociohistorical, political, ideological, and asymmetric relations of power. The statements had different emphases, being associated with distinct epistemic positions that were often not in convergence. Moreover, certain terms and approaches reinforce or minimize processes of vulnerability experienced by the affected populations. These discourses present consents, dissents, and contradictions and when systematically integrated can improve the planning of risk management and broaden the understanding related to technological disaster occurrence.

Suggested Citation

  • Juliana Aurora de Oliveira Lopes & Léo Heller, 2020. "Explanatory Matrices on the Causes of a Tailing Dam Collapse in Brazil: The (Dis)Articulation of Epistemes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(12), pages 2524-2538, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:40:y:2020:i:12:p:2524-2538
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.13578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13578
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.13578?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. Downer, John, 2010. "Anatomy of a disaster: why some accidents are unavoidable," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 36542, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Charles N. Haas, 2003. "Minding the Machines: Preventing Technological Disasters," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1355-1356, December.
    3. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2010. "Risk Management and Governance," Risk, Governance and Society, Springer, number 978-3-642-13926-0, May.
    4. Andreas Klinke & Ortwin Renn, 2012. "Adaptive and integrative governance on risk and uncertainty," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 273-292, March.
    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. Aven, Terje & Renn, Ortwin, 2018. "Improving government policy on risk: Eight key principles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 230-241.
    2. Yanwei Li & Araz Taeihagh & Martin de Jong & Andreas Klinke, 2021. "Toward a Commonly Shared Public Policy Perspective for Analyzing Risk Coping Strategies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 519-532, March.
    3. Joel Rasmussen & Jens Ewald, 2022. "The Relation Between Socioeconomic Status and Risk Attitudes: A Nuclear Accident Scenario in Sweden," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 541-555, November.
    4. Sisira S. Withanachchi & Ilia Kunchulia & Giorgi Ghambashidze & Rami Al Sidawi & Teo Urushadze & Angelika Ploeger, 2018. "Farmers’ Perception of Water Quality and Risks in the Mashavera River Basin, Georgia: Analyzing the Vulnerability of the Social-Ecological System through Community Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-26, August.
    5. Sven Ove Hansson & Terje Aven, 2014. "Is Risk Analysis Scientific?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1173-1183, July.
    6. Schweizer, Pia-Johanna & Bovet, Jana, 2016. "The potential of public participation to facilitate infrastructure decision-making: Lessons from the German and European legal planning system for electricity grid expansion," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 64-73.
    7. Ortwin Renn & Andreas Klinke, 2013. "A Framework of Adaptive Risk Governance for Urban Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-24, May.
    8. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    9. Benjamin D. Trump & Christy Foran & Taylor Rycroft & Matthew D. Wood & Nirzwan Bandolin & Mariana Cains & Timothy Cary & Fiona Crocker & Nicholas A. Friedenberg & Patrick Gurian & Kerry Hamilton & Jan, 2018. "Development of community of practice to support quantitative risk assessment for synthetic biology products: contaminant bioremediation and invasive carp control as cases," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 517-527, December.
    10. Bjerga, Torbjørn & Aven, Terje, 2015. "Adaptive risk management using new risk perspectives – an example from the oil and gas industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 75-82.
    11. Aven, Terje, 2013. "A conceptual framework for linking risk and the elements of the data–information–knowledge–wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 30-36.
    12. Leena Suopajärvi & Karin Beland Lindahl & Toni Eerola & Gregory Poelzer, 2023. "Social aspects of business risk in the mineral industry—political, reputational, and local acceptability risks facing mineral exploration and mining," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 36(2), pages 321-331, June.
    13. Pieter van Gelder & Pim Klaassen & Behnam Taebi & Bart Walhout & Ruud van Ommen & Ibo van de Poel & Zoe Robaey & Lotte Asveld & Ruud Balkenende & Frank Hollmann & Erik Jan van Kampen & Nima Khakzad & , 2021. "Safe-by-Design in Engineering: An Overview and Comparative Analysis of Engineering Disciplines," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-28, June.
    14. Natalia Vladimirovna Gryzunova & Victoria Ivanovna Pyatanova & Viktoriya Valeryevna Manuylenko & Konstantin Vasilievich Ordov, 2019. "Models of credit limit-setting for companies as means of encouraging competitiveness," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 7(1), pages 615-625, September.
    15. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2012. "On the Risk Management and Risk Governance of Petroleum Operations in the Barents Sea Area," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1561-1575, September.
    16. Xiaoteng Ma & Ziyu Tang & Dan Wang & Hao Gao, 2020. "The Influence of Risk Culture on the Performance of International Joint-Venture Securities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, March.
    17. Roman Batko, 2021. "Evaluation of Audit Criteria for Cultural Institutions: A Research Report," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 478-493.
    18. Grzegorz Drozdowski & Joanna Rogozińska-Mitrut & Jacek Stasiak, 2021. "The Empirical Analysis of the Core Competencies of the Company’s Resource Management Risk. Preliminary Study," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-12, June.
    19. Vasco Barroso Gonçalves, 2020. "Uncertain Risk Assessment and Management: Case Studies of the Application of the Precautionary Principle in Portugal," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 939-956, May.
    20. Aven, Terje, 2013. "Practical implications of the new risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 136-145.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:40:y:2020:i:12:p:2524-2538. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.