Karen M. O'Neill

Rivers by Design

The United States has one of the largest and costliest flood control systems in the world, even though only a small proportion of its land lies in floodplains. Rivers by Design traces the emergence of the mammoth U.S. flood management system, which is overseen by the federal government but implemented in conjunction with state governments and local contractors and levee districts. Karen M. O’Neill analyzes the social origins of the flood control program, showing how the system initially developed as a response to the demands of farmers and the business elite in outlying territories. The configuration of the current system continues to reflect decisions made in the nineteenth century and early twentieth. It favors economic development at the expense of environmental concerns. O’Neill focuses on the creation of flood control programs along the lower Mississippi River and the Sacramento River, the first two rivers to receive federal flood control aid. She describes how, in the early to mid-nineteenth century, planters, shippers, and merchants from both regions campaigned for federal assistance with flood control efforts. She explains how the federal government was slowly and reluctantly drawn into water management to the extent that, over time, nearly every river in the United States was reengineered. Her narrative culminates in the passage of the national Flood Control Act of 1936, which empowered the Army Corps of Engineers to build projects for all navigable rivers in conjunction with local authorities, effectively ending nationwide, comprehensive planning for the protection of water resources.

The international politics of national parks

National parks are the keystone institutions of environmental conservation. Because national parks make certain lands part of the state itself, international agencies and nongovernmental organizations that promote national parks propose, in effect, to alter the state, as well as the local economy and state relations with social groups. Has international political pressure caused states to create national parks? I consider whether countries highly involved in international politics have the largest proportions of land in national parks. I conclude that many states create minimal park systems as symbolic gestures to the international community. Field researchers may find it easier to explain the success or failure of parks if they identity why state officials decide that adopting international conservation norms will enhance state authority over people and state sovereignty over land.

Speaking with One Voice: Risk Communication Lessons from the US Anthrax Attacks

It is often said that in times of crises experts, officials, and organizations should speak with one voice. But this homily has not been subjected to either conceptual or empirical scrutiny. We begin those tasks in this paper. To pursue our analysis, we use statements from the popular and scholarly presses; we also use our interviews with local officials in New Jersey, USA, who had to respond to the anthrax attacks in the fall of 2001. We outline some of the meanings of the admonition to speak with one voice and discuss the rhetorical significance of the advice. Our argument is that it may be wise to speak with one voice, but this can not be taken for granted. Difference audiences may well need different messages or different kinds of messages. Speaking with multiple voices is often the most effective way to advance meaningful communication.

Communication Triage: An Anthrax Case Study

DURING A TERRORISM ATTACK, harried government officials can’t always communicate equally well to everyone. Thus, agencies must decide how to allocate time and personnel, the scarcest resources of all. Just as medics triage the wounded on the battlefield, communicators on the front lines of the war on terrorism separate “urgent” from “later” tasks. They must decide: Which populations are the most important to reach? When? What information is the most critical to convey? Risk communication research in an area of New Jersey that had no cases of anthrax illustrates the need for communication triage. During the anthrax attacks of 2001, phone calls, e-mails, and faxes overwhelmed local, county, and state agencies in New Jersey. Most state and federal resources were directed at the Hamilton postal facility, which was closed on October 18 because anthrax was diagnosed in a worker there (see Fig. 1 for timeline of events). While others have documented the events on the front lines at the Hamilton facility,1 in this article we describe the communication siege at the Monmouth Processing and Distribution Center that included erroneous media reports of two cases of anthrax. The Monmouth experience illustrates the need for government officials to develop ways to communicate with populations who consider themselves to be at risk, even though they may not be in the immediate area of exposure. Developing criteria for audience triage might help define specific secondary audiences. Our research is based on more than 20 interviews with public health professionals, emergency responders, police officers, elected officials, health practitioners, and other decision makers, combined with extensive document review (including media coverage, agency documents, and electronic correspondence to listservs). All quotes, unless otherwise noted, were obtained in these interviews. To ensure the confidentiality of sources, we use ambiguous references to interviewees’ gender. Because one of the goals of terrorism is to make many people feel like they are vulnerable to attack, we argue that the lessons learned about communication triage from Monmouth are particularly important for leaders in areas that may never be directly exposed to a weapon such as anthrax: