Citation

Freudenburg WR, Gramling R, Laska S, Erikson KT. Soc. Sci. Q. 2009; 90(3): 497-515.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, Southwestern Social Science Association and the University of Texas, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1540-6237.2009.00628.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Objectives. Although many observers have interpreted Hurricane Katrina's damage to New Orleans as a case of nature striking humans, we draw on the sociological concept of the growth machine to show that much of the damage resulted instead from what humans had done to nature—in the name but not the reality of "economic development."

Methods. We triangulate findings from multiple qualitative techniques, including first‐hand fieldwork, interviews, and analyses of historical records. We focus on a particularly telling illustration: the Mississippi River‐Gulf Outlet, a transportation canal.

Results. Although the canal was widely predicted to deliver prosperity, it mainly created environmental damage, destroying wetlands that had formerly protected New Orleans from hurricanes. Despite enthusiastic predictions about its economic importance—plus millions of dollars in ongoing federal investments—the "outlet" was used by only a dozen of the ships for which it was designed during the entire last year before Katrina hit.

Conclusions. This was clearly not a case of an "enduring conflict" between the environment and the economy; it was a case where economic benefits to a tiny number of beneficiaries created profound costs to the environment, and to humans in turn. Claims about supposed "economic benefits" from environmentally harmful projects need to be examined more closely in other contexts, as well.