Fracking the Debate: Frame Shifts and Boundary Work in Dutch Decision Making on Shale Gas

Tamara Metze*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

47 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The meaning of hydraulic fracturing for shale gas is contested worldwide: is it an energy game changer, a transition fuel, or a technology that poses severe environmental problems? In the Netherlands, a policy controversy developed in which fracturing was reframed from ‘business as usual’ to a potential environmental risk. This article theoretically and empirically describes this shift by arguing that the technology of hydraulic fracturing for shale gas is a boundary object that created a sphere of engagement for all sorts of actors. In this sphere, they negotiated a common but soft meaning of this technology. These negotiations consisted of frame contests. As part of those contests, the discursive strategies of framing and boundary work enabled opponents to create uncertainty about economic benefits and environmental impact. The shift in meaning transformed the issue from an economic one with standard governmental rules and regulations into a planning issue that needs more precaution.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)35-52
JournalJournal of Environmental Policy and Planning
Volume19
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Jan 2017

Keywords

  • boundary object
  • boundary work
  • framing
  • hydraulic fracturing
  • Shale gas

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Fracking the Debate: Frame Shifts and Boundary Work in Dutch Decision Making on Shale Gas'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this