Ethnicity, Not Culture? Obfuscating Social Science in the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Case
Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

Ethnicity, Not Culture? Obfuscating Social Science in the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Case

Published Web Location

https://doi.org/10.17953Creative Commons 'BY-NC' version 4.0 license
Abstract

INTRODUCTION On 29 March 1989, the Exxon Valdez foundered on Bligh Reef just outside the Valdez Arm of Prince William Sound. Nearly eleven million gallons of crude oil spilled through the ship’s ruptured hull. An oil slick and oil balls drifted with tides and currents throughout large portions of Prince William Sound, southwest down the Kenai Peninsula to Kodiak Island, and then northeast into Cook Inlet. The consequences for the native and nonnative residents of the oiled area were many. One of the damage suits brought against Exxon Corporation was filed by a group of Native American residents from villages in the spill area who sought compensation for the damage the spill inflicted on their culture, and for cultural deprivation resulting from damage. The assertions made by social scientists for the native plaintiffs that their culture had been damaged; the assertion made by a social scientist for the respondent, Exxon Corporation, that native culture had been “smashed” centuries prior to the spill and that the modest differences between natives and nonnatives in the spill area at the time of the spill were “ethnic” only; and the decision of the federal judge at least in part informed by this “expert” testimony” constitute the occasion for this analysis. The consequences of the bad and irresponsible social science used in informing attorneys for both sides and informing the judge were serious and injured the natives.

Main Content
For improved accessibility of PDF content, download the file to your device.
Current View