Issue Framing and Citizen Apathy Toward Local Environmental Contamination

We adapt the frame-alignment perspective in order to demonstrate how institutional framing shapes media coverage of a toxic crisis. This framing activity is described as a new approach to managing public responses to contamination that differs from the approach characterizing contamination episodes at Love Canal and Woburn, MA. Our analysis focuses on the process by which actors responsible for managing toxic crises carefully construct and manage a coordinated risk frame. We refer to this as institutional framing and illustrate how it shapes media framing of a toxic event. We conclude by proposing further research to identify the causal relationship between institutional framing and the absence of mobilization.     

FINANCIAL MARKETS' SHUTDOWN AND REACCESS

We employ a discrete‐time parametric duration model on a group of 121 countries over the period 1970–2011 and find that the probability of the end of financial markets' shutdown and reaccess falls as these events become longer. We also show that: (1) shutdown episodes are longer when economic prospects are poor and the degree of financial openness falls, the chief executive has been in office for long periods, and the country has a default history and (2) spells of reaccess tend to be longer when economic growth improves and financial openness increases, there are neither government crises nor government instability, and the country did not default in the past. (JEL C41, G15)     

TOXICITY AND COMPLICITY: Explaining Consensual Community Response to a Chronic Technological Disaster

The absence of citizcn mobilization following the announcement of high levels of dioxin in a New England river, and subsequent Superfund listing, is cxplained in light of previous research that stresses the conflict and controversy that surround community contamination. Interviews with area residents and government officials, observations of public meetings, and content analyses of newspapcr articles, EPA press releases, and other official documents provide three explanations for the absence of citizen mobilization: (1) shared knowledge of the community's industrial history meant the river's contamination did not disrupt taken-for-granted assumptions about the community, (2) the "discovery" of the contamination by a government agency and its subsequent impression management served to defuse the public outrage that would otherwise lead to controversy and confrontation, and (3) elected officials, who were able to get resources to the agencies that could handle the problem, supported the decisions of the agencies rather than criticizing them or accusing them of negligence.