William Freudenburg
American sociologist
- 2 min read
- 2 chapters
Related on Lably
Through Sociology, Social theory and Rural sociology
Much of Freudenburg's research dealt with the relationship between society and the environment, often in rural communities. Although not opposed to forms of environmentalism which emphasize reducing one's impact on the environment (such as recycling), Freudenburg focused less on the role of consumers and more on the role of regulatory structure and actions of industry, emphasizing the socially structured sources of environmental impacts. He was involved in both rural and environmental sociology, and was elected and served as president of the Rural Sociological Society in 2004–2005, and at the time of his death was president-elect of The Association for Environmental Studies and Sciences (AESS), an organization which he helped found.
Education and career
Freudenburg completed his undergraduate work at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and then earned three graduate degrees, including his PhD, from Yale University. He began his professional career at Washington State University, then moved to the University of Wisconsin, where he spent most of his professional career. While he was still on the faculty at Wisconsin, he was nominated for an endowed professorship at the University of California, Santa Barbara, which he accepted, and he worked at UCSB until his death.
Sign in to keep reading
One more chapter is free with a Lably account.
Theory of double diversion
Freudenburg published a number influential ideas, but his central focus in recent years was on what he called the double diversion. Although in his latter years he taught in the program established in part by Garrett Hardin, and he often stressed his high regard for Hardin's work, the predictions that derive from Freudenburg's double diversion work are contrary to those associated with Hardin's "tragedy of the commons." Rather than being due mainly to the actions of individual consumers, Freudenburg argued, much or most of all environmental harm is actually due to a small number of organized producers. Contrary to the notion that environmental protection is bad for the economy and jobs, the worst sources of environmental harm are commonly due to a surprisingly small fraction of all economic activity—and to an even smaller fraction of the jobs. In the first peer-reviewed article in which this perspective was spelled out, for example, Freudenburg found that the majority of all toxic emissions in the U.S. economy came from industries that were responsible for only about 5% of the gross national product—and just 1.4% of the nation's jobs.
- The March 2012 issue of the Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences featured a "Symposium on the Legacy of William R. Freudenburg".