CSTPR Noontime Seminar: Adam Briggle
Guinea Pigs of the Shale: Informed Consent and the Politics of Fracking
by Adam Briggle, Department of Philosophy and Religion, University of North Texas
Abstract: Critics of fracking often argue that it represents not just an unsustainable energy policy but also a crisis of democracy. The claim is that 'the people,' not corporations or technocrats, should decide where, whether, and how to frack. This is often couched in terms of 'community rights,' which has become the predominant moral and legal justification behind municipal bans.
I think that a new democratic ideal might be better formulated in terms of 'informed consent.' As is the case with human subjects in biomedical research trials, those most vulnerable to harm should have the greatest say in decisions about fracking. The current political scheme thwarts the achievement of informed consent in many ways. Municipal government is the best existing institutional vehicle for the vulnerable to meaningfully participate in decisions that impact their lives. But to live up this ideal, we need far more than greater municipal control over fracking. We need to reform our democratic institutions so that anyone made vulnerable by a proposed industrial activity would be empowered to dictate the terms of that proposal. We need to create the political conditions in which the authority of the people living in proximity to possible harms would be recognized and made legitimate. We can catch a glimpse of what this looks like with institutional review boards and with the economist Elinor Ostrom's notion of 'polycentric governance systems.' Once we do that, I think we discover just why it is that fracking is inherently anti-democratic.
Biography: Adam Briggle is an assistant professor in the Department of Philosophy and Religion Studies and a faculty fellow at the Center for the Study of Interdisciplinarity at the University of North Texas.