Recreancy Revisited: Beliefs about Institutional Failure Following the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill

Abstract

In 1993, Freudenburg suggested the term “recreancy” to refer to behaviors associated with institutional failures, which he distinguished from the consequences of such failures. This article revisits issues related to recreancy associated with the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. Using qualitative data collected in Cordova, Alaska, between 2002 and 2010, we examine notions about recreancy and technological disasters. Findings highlight perceptions of institutional failures associated with the spill and cleanup activities, providing insights into the social consequences of such failures for those most directly affected by them, including loss of ontological security, the emergence of corrosive communities, and diminished social capital. We extend the discussion about recreancy to include organizational processes intended to address economic, social, and environmental consequences of technological disasters. Our data reveal a persistence of beliefs about recreancy associated with the Exxon Valdez oil spill and the subsequent litigation, and their consequences for long-term community impacts.

Keywords:

• disaster litigation
• Exxon Valdez oil spill
• institutional failure
• oil spills
• recreancy
• technological disasters

Acknowledgments

Major funding for this research was provided by grants from the National Science Foundation, Arctic Social Science Division: ARC-1042926, DDP-910109, OPP-0082405, OPP-002572, and OPP-0852932. Additional support was provided by the Natural Hazards Center, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, and the Department of Sociology and College of Arts & Sciences, Oklahoma State University. The technical support provided by Sandra Gray and Nnenia Campbell is most appreciated. The contents and interpretations in this article are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect the policy or position of the National Science Foundation.

Notes

As defined by Putnam, social capital is “connections among individuals—social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them” (2000, 19).

In 2002–2003, author Ritchie conducted 48 interviews with subjects selected using a “criterion-based selection” sample design (for details, see Ritchie 2004). In 2009–2010, 35 of the original 48 study participants were reinterviewed by authors Ritchie and Gill.

A fundamental challenge associated with presenting the findings of qualitative research in peer-reviewed publications is page limitations that preclude inclusion of more than a small subset of available data. The quotes presented here are representative of a convergence of themes in the data and of narratives, as well as quantitative data cited but not included in the article (e.g., see Ritchie 2004, 2012). Although the comments were made by individuals, they reflect community processes and the consequences of both recreancy and perceptions of recreancy.

For a discussion of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms see Marshall, Picou, and Schlichtmann (2004).