From livelihood to a hazardous waste - a case study of asbestos mine in Paakkila

(1)

From livelihood to a hazardous waste – a case study of asbestos mine in Paakkila

University of Eastern Finland

The department of Geographical and Historical Studies

Eetu Ahlberg

Environmental Policy and Law, Natural Resources Governance Master’s thesis

Supervisors: Rauno Sairinen and Tuija Mononen

July 2019

(2)

Faculty

Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies

Unit

Department of Geographical and Historical Studies

Author

Eetu Ahlberg Name of the Thesis

From livelihood to a hazardous waste – a case study of asbestos mine in Paakkila

Major

Environmental Policy and Law, Natural Resource Governance

Description Master’s Thesis

Date 17.7.2019

Pages 72

In this study, I will be focusing on the discussion over asbestos from the 1ate the 1960s until yearly 2000s. The study is a qualitative case study about the former asbestos mine in Paakkila, Tuusniemi. The purpose is to explain the change over time and what meanings asbestos is given, and what are the motives behind them. The discussion is analyzed by utilizing the risk society as the theoretical framework of the study. Although the mine of Paakkila was the largest producer of asbestos in Finland and in the Nordic Countries there have been no studies about it.

The research data of the study consists of five theme interviews of former employees or inhabitants in Paakkila during the operational years of the mine, two documentary films that focus on the closure of mine in the 1977 and the sensation over the dangerousness of asbestos in the 1997. The newspaper articles consist of 53 newspaper articles on the local newspaper Koillis-Savo, the regional newspapers Savon-Sanomat and Karjalainen, the nationwide newspapers Helsingin Sanomat and Iltalehti, and other minor newspapers and magazines.

The methods used for the analysis are discourse analysis and framework analysis as a secondary method. Discourses illustrates how asbestos is given different meanings: first it was a unique mineral and a gift for the people of Finland but in the late 1990s it was frightening and a fatal carcinogen.

The research presents how the discussion over asbestos changed greatly when the time passed by because asbestos was recognized as a health hazard by the legal praxis and science. Asbestos as a risk materialized after symptoms such as asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma.

However, the case is not that simple; there are dozens of motives why asbestos was not seen as a risk, such as the voluntariness and historical connection to the old employee. Even though asbestos was fatal for almost every family in Paakkila they do not accuse the employer and every case of death and diseases are handled privately.

Key words

Risk society, asbestos, mining, discourse analysis

(3)

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Topic

In this thesis, I will study the discussion over asbestos in a small mining community called Paakkila. The focus will be on the discussions over the asbestos mining in Paakkila.

Specifically, I will focus on the discussion over asbestos during the mine’s operational years and after it was shut down, how it was managed by the community authorities and the managers of the mine, what kind of language is used by laymen and experts, and who has the right to prove that asbestos is a risk for health, and whose burden is it. Thesis is based on environmental policy and it utilizes sociological mining research. Although the events in Paakkila take place in the past, from the early 1960s till the early 2000s, the subject is still topical because discussion over the responsibility of the mining is becoming more and more important.

The study is a qualitative case study and data includes semi-structured theme interviews, local and regional newspaper articles, and documentaries. Every worker and inhabitant have their individual experience about asbestos mining and it’s the good and bad impacts on their health and livelihood¹. For example, in Paakkila even though they knew that asbestos is dangerous for health, it is about their livelihood.² However, there are scientific facts that asbestos increases the mortality rate: between 1936 and 1968 there were 228 deaths at ages 17 to 82 who were exposed to asbestos. This was 24 deaths more than the average death rates of Finland. The major causes for death caused by asbestos were chronic illness, asbestosis, lung cancer, and respiratory tuberculosis.³

For the first time, the dangers of asbestos were described in 1898 by H. M Inspector of Factories of UK. The first case of death caused asbestos exposure was published in 1924 in medical literature. Hence, the professionals had knowledge about the dangers of asbestos for human health and rising death numbers were noticed by mid 1920s. However, the usage of asbestos continued in the Great Britain as well as in other countries around the world.⁴ The scientific knowledge about the dangers of asbestos did not mean that the mining and usage

1 Mononen et al. 2018, p. 10-11

2 Pekkinen 2000, p. 75

3 Nurminen, 1972

4 Budgen 2004, p. 77-39

(6)

asbestos in construction would be banned, perhaps because of strong lobbying by the industrial companies.

Based on the 2^nd article of the contemporary Mining Act (503/1965) asbestos was categorized as an original mining mineral such as iron, gold, and copper. Over time, asbestos was recognized as a risk which is reflected in the forthcoming regulation. In the decree of Council of State about the asbestos work (886/1987) the 2nd article recognized asbestos as a health hazard and contained the working instructions when working with asbestos and was a transitional act towards prohibiting asbestos as a whole. Finally, the decree of Council of State (852/1992) prohibited the production, importing, exporting, and the introduction of a ban of usage of asbestos. The ban prohibition was laid down the regulation based on the Occupational Safety Act (299/1958) 14 article, and the 43 and 44 articles in the Chemical Act (744/1989). Even though asbestos was banned by the Finnish government in the 1990s, nowadays asbestos is still a topical subject because it was widely used in buildings in the 1960s and 1970s which require renovation today. The demolition work is dangerous for health because asbestos particles make dust that can emanate to workers’ organs.

1.2. The research problem and approach

The purpose of my research is to find out how asbestos mining as a risk is expressed in the research data and if it has changed over time. One of my objectives is to create a trajectory about asbestos as a risk, and its meanings. I will focus on how people validate their opinions and what kind of meanings they give to asbestos and mining of it in Paakkila. Asbestos mining in Finland concentrated on two mines: asbestos mine of Paakkila and Maljasalmi.

Maljasalmi was relatively small in comparison to Paakkila which was the only significant asbestos mine in Finland. The user of the language has the power to outline the meanings of asbestos. The focus is on data: how language is used in their validation.

The main questions of the study are built around the meanings asbestos is given to the asbestos mining in Paakkila and events related to it on from the 1960s to the early 2000s.

The research questions are:

- How the risks of asbestos mining were perceived and how have they changed in Paakkila?

(7)

- What kind of meanings asbestos mining is given in Paakkila and how it changed over time?

- What does the language express about the position of asbestos in Paakkila?

The study aims to find out how asbestos mining in Paakkila materializes from the perspective of risk society. I will reflect Paakkila mine from the risk society perspective where asbestos is the risk. The language used in different times reflects the contemporary status that asbestos is given in Paakkila and describes the societal state of asbestos on those days.

1.3.The case of Paakkila

Paakkila is nowadays a quiet, small village in eastern Finland and part of municipality of Tuusniemi. However, Paakkila has a colorful history that differs from similar remote villages. This is because it locates in the heart of the asbestos deposit.⁵ Tuusniemi and especially Paakkila is located in the very heart of the asbestos zone, therefore asbestos has been known in the area for centuries. The area in eastern Finland is well known for its rich natural resources; nearby, approximately 25 km away from Paakkila used to be Outokumpu mine that was in operation nearly for a century from the early years of 1900 until it was shut down in in the late 1980s, and Luikonlahti mine in Kaavi, approximately 24 km away from Paakkila was a copper mine from the late 1960s until early 1980s. The enrichment plant in Luikonlahti is still active because they enrich the ore transported from Polvijärvi mine.

Asbestos can be separated into two main types; amphibole asbestos and serpentine or chrysotile asbestos. Asbestos cement extracted in Paakkila has been made of silicate mineral composition. Asbestos has many beneficial characteristics such as it is fireproof, and it is fibrous. In the construction industry asbestos has been used for wall- and roof sheets and mixed with cellulose in card and fabrics.⁶

The mining rights of Paakkila and the mining companies changed several times during its history. Suomen Asbesti Oy was founded in 1900 by Johan Fabritius, C. Mechelin, Claes Björnberg, and F.G. Björnberg. Their purpose was not to utilize and enrich the asbestos

5 Pekkinen 2000, p. 54

6 Rissanen 2000, p. 316

(8)

deposit by themselves but to rent the mining rights to an external actor and supply unprocessed asbestosis to foreign companies. Eventually, they rented the rights to a Danish company F.L. Smith & Co that was functional until 1910. From that period, the cape is called the ‘Danish cape’. Mine was not in use until 1918, but then a German Becker & Haag company got interested because Germany needed resources after the First World War even though product quality was not high. Suomen Asbesti Oy was incorporated to Suomen Mineraali Oy and enrichment started in 1922 because of the increased competition in the asbestos markets. A setback for the company was the Second World War when the mine had a few workers and production was significantly scaled down. The last owner of mine was Paraisten Kalkkivuori Oy that changed later into Partek Oy when Suomen Mineraali was sold to them in 1959.⁷

Finland was in the middle of industrialization and it influenced the development of the asbestos mine. For example, the transportation changed from using horses to shipments by sea and building a new railroad and constructing an asbestos processor.⁸ Mine was an important employer and a center of community. During the active years, asbestos dust was everywhere and hardly no one knew its dangerousness in the 1940s.⁹ The mine gave livelihood to a significant amount of people in the area in its different duties from mining to farming and mining research in Paakkila just to name a few. During its operational years the number of employees increased from six in 1917 to the peak of 160 employees in the 1950s.

The wellbeing compared with other professions in the area was better due to better salaries and regular pay periods. The company did community charity in the area to help their employees in their daily life and took care of their well-being in their free time. During the operational years of mining the companies took care of the workers. In the beginning they donated plots for houses, helped with the construction of houses, and gave required timber for a lowered prize for houses. Later the company organized trips for example to Koli national park, took employees to cruises, and organized Christmas parties to employees and their families. They also took employees to movies, circuses and borrowed cars for local sports clubs for their trips to competitions.¹⁰

7 Pekkinen 2000, p. 56-58, 75

8 Rissanen 2000, p. 319

9 Leppänen 2000, p. 82-83

10 Pekkinen 2000, p. 71-72

(9)

Asbestos caused numeral diseases, i.e. asbestosis and lung cancer, in Paakkila for employees and their families, Later, the occupational safety of the mine was improved by installing air conditioning, putting respirators into operation, and installing asbestos extractor for the drilling dust. According to Pekkinen, the fatal dangerousness of asbestos came as a surprise to everyone in the late 1970s, even though employees were aware that dust is not good for health. Even though the community members knew that asbestos is dangerous they were generally against shutting down the mine and factory because it was a question about workplace livelihood. In 1975, Partek Oy closed the asbestos mine, for several reasons. As many other mines, the mine located in a rural area, therefore, the transportation expenses were high. Another increasing expense was that they had to mine deeper and deeper.

Eventually, the dangerousness of asbestos was recognized, and compensatory materials replaced asbestos and weakened the sales of asbestos products.¹¹

For a 20 to 25 people, Partek offered jobs in a new metal company in Paakkila. However, the company started temporary layoffs soon after founding and was sold to the family of Huhtinen who still nowadays runs the company named Paakkilan Konepaja Oy.¹². The rest were offered jobs in company’s other mines and factories across Finland or they retired.

Around 75 people were still without a job after relocation and establishing the metal company but, many of them were retiring because of age or released to a disability pension.¹³

The health hazard of asbestos was studied already earlier, but at the beginning of the 1970s many studies proofed the connection of cancer, mesothelioma and asbestos. For example, a study by Nurminen designates that the risk of lung cancer among asbestos workers with a minimum of three months of exposure is about 2-3,5 times than expected. He gathered the data for the research by a survey from 1933 to 1966 with total of 1030 workers.¹⁴ Based on increasing amount of similar results, the Finnish Council of State gave decision on the control of asbestos and control of the disadvantages caused using asbestos. The only asbestos mine of Finland and the Nordic countries was closed in 1976.¹⁵

11 Pekkinen 2000, p. 73-75

12 Pekkinen 2000, p. 75

13 Savon Sanomat 15^thof February in 1975: Metalliyritys tulossa Paakkilaan

14 Nurminen 1972, p. 112, 118

15 Nikkarinen et al. 2001, p. 5

(10)

For more than 20 years asbestos in Paakkila and the former mine were quiet. However, quiet life was broken in May in 1996 when a bank named Merita organized a forced sale of a cabin that located in the shore of Paakkilanniemi, close to the former asbestos mine. This launched a debate where the focus was on the cleaning of the land under the cabins and polluted mining area that contained asbestos.¹⁶ The issue was that Tuusniemi zoned plots on the shore of Paakkilanniemi, where the mine located, but did no research for the land that does it contain asbestos or not. Many of the plots were sold to new owners without them knowing about asbestos, which is why they started to demand the restoration of the land. Nowadays other materials have replaced asbestos products. All that is left of the mine are the workings filled with water, old office buildings, and the factory. The discussion over the dangerousness of asbestos have continued to this day although the mine was shut down a long time ago.¹⁷

1.4. Asbestos as a health hazard

Asbestos was widely used in Finland as well as around the world because it is an extremely versatile mineral fiber; it is flexible and yet strong, it does not conduct heat or electricity well, it has high absorbency, high mechanical stability, and it is resistant to acids and bases.¹⁸ Asbestos was used in many forms; spray, mass, mixed with cement, and sheets. The usage of asbestos was, for example as spray in the fire protection, thermal insulation, and insulation of the ventilation ducts. It was widely used in all the residential buildings and factories in pipes, facades, floors, walls, and insulator in boilers. The abundant utilization of asbestos in construction is still today seen as substantial asbestos removal in private homes, apartment buildings and other buildings.¹⁹

However, it is dangerous for health. In Finland, the government started to restrict the usage of asbestos in the 1960s to the halfway of the 1970s and in the 1990s asbestos was not used in the building. The workers were exposed to asbestos dust in all stages of work from mining to shoveling processed asbestos into fabric sacks. People who are working with asbestos are

16 Savon Sanomat, 10^th of May in 1996: Myydään vapaa-ajan kiinteistö Tuusniemen kunnassa

17 Pekkinen 2000, p. 77

18 Ross et al. 2008, p. 27

19 Työterveyslaitos 2016, p. 3-14

(11)

in danger because it is not possible to remove microscopic asbestos particles from lungs as particles emanates through the nose and larynx and part of the particles attach to slime walls of bronchus. A portion of the particles moves to the digestion system causing similar irritation as in lungs. Lastly, some particles are transmitted in the tissues of lungs causing the loss of resilience of tissues that is necessary for lungs.²⁰

The cumulative factors increase the risk of lung cancer that is already high when exposed to asbestos. It is consistent because asbestosis and its development is identified to require substantial exposure. The more the workers exposed to asbestos, the more the risk of lung cancer increases. ²¹ For example, smoking increases the risk of lung cancer significantly; the risk of getting lung cancer multiplies if a person is smoking tobacco and exposed to asbestos.²² Among the group that worked in Paakkila, 81% of men were smoking whereas 14% of the female workers smoked. Also, not all the people who worked in Paakkila had the same exposure to asbestos because of different duties such as sprayers exposure more than for instance the truck drivers. Based on the research by Kokki et al. work-related exposure appears to be the main cause of risk of lung cancer among residents living close to the asbestos mine of Paakkila.²³ Therefore, it is possible that smoking has had impact on men’s health in Paakkila and the cumulative impact of smoking with the asbestos exposure increased the amount of diseases.

The most common asbestos disease is the pleural plaque that is not causing the insufficiency of lungs and are not precursors of cancer. Even a relative exposure to asbestos can cause the asbestos particles to emanate into lungs but these can be seen with an x-ray after decades after exposure. Abundant exposure to asbestos dust for years to decades may cause scar formation in lung tissues i.e. asbestosis. The most fatal deceases caused by asbestos are the lung cancer, carcinoma of the larynx, and pleura cancer. There is no safe threshold for carcinogenic exposure and the risk of cancer increases as exposure increases. Characteristic of diseases caused by asbestos is that time delay after being exposed can be long; at least 10 years but usually 20-40 years, or, even longer.²⁴

20 Vikström 1993, p. 13-14

21 Nynäs 2017 p. 34

22 Työterveyslaitos 2016, p. 10

23 Kokki et al. 2001 p. 319

24 Työterveyslaitos 2016, p, 9-10

(12)

According to Ringo, professionals have known in the middle 1980s the dangerousness of asbestos for human health. Before this asbestos was not generally viewed as a hazard, even though during the 1960s it was known that it is not good for health. In those days, the safety textbooks featured incomplete information about asbestos in the workplace. After the dangerousness of asbestos was broadly known many former employees started legal actions against companies claiming that companies should have known that it can cause diseases and there was not sufficient protection in the workplace.²⁵

To give perspective how common asbestos related diseases were, and still are, I will be presenting the study by the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health that analyses possible cases of work-related diseases from 2005 to 2014. It is a part of occupational risk professions that has been registered into the work-related disease register. Based on the study, mesothelioma was the third most common confirmed occupational disease and asbestos with noise are still the most significant cause of the occupational diseases. People of the working age were confirmed with 238 cases of occupational cancer; hence it is still a topical issue.

Most of the occupational cancers are caused by asbestos. Among the people past 65 years, asbestos pleural plaque disease is the most common disease whereas asbestosis, mesothelioma and lung cancer are also at the top of the list.²⁶

The same problems have been seen internationally around the world over the increase of diseases caused by asbestos is seen around the world. Good example is Japan. Asbestos was vital for the defence industry of Japan during the Second World War. At the same time external import from abroad became impossible, which lead to the situation where they had to utilize their own deposits. After the war had ended the impacts on asbestos mine workers’

health became known when numerous people died from diseases caused by asbestos.

However, the connection between asbestos and deaths was not seen in the beginning because only a few deaths were found to be caused by asbestos although the truth was different.

Later, the increased amount of deaths awaked to study the health impacts of asbestos and the causal connection between asbestos and the asbestos workers’ diseases and deaths were found. It might be that the increased amount of deaths forced the state authorities to start actions.²⁷

25 Ringo 2004, p. 51-52, 55

26 Työterveyslaitos 2019, p. 3-7, 156

27 Morinaga – Shinohara 2001, p. 55-56, 59

(13)

In Japan, former employees were eligible for seeking compensation for the diseases caused by asbestos. However, it was the year 2006 when the amount of compensations increased because of the media encouraged the families and support groups and started information campaigns to alert and educate the people. This caused that the matter became political because government authorities overlooked the advises of experts. However, in 2005 a new asbestos compensation framework was established. Eventually, asbestos as a risk for health was recognized by Japanese government authorities in 2005.²⁸

The dangers of asbestos started to emerge in the USA and Great Britain during the 1920s and 1930s when the asbestos workers started to seek compensation for their diseases and injuries. At the same time, the asbestos as a health risk was recognized in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which was the biggest medical organization in the USA.

The British and American journals found out in their studies that asbestos is connected to lung cancer and asbestosis. The international organization ILO published at the same time their study were dangers are noted and demanded that asbestos should be controlled by regulation.

Nevertheless, the evidence and regulation did not meet because of the strong lobbying by the asbestos industry. It was found in the 1970 that it is not only the workers, but also the people who live in the mining area that can get diseases caused by asbestos. Finally, the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 in the USA was the most significant impulse to prevent diseases caused by asbestos.²⁹ The government of the USA banned first in 1973 the materials that contain asbestos spraying³⁰, the bans were extended to involve all spray materials in 1978, in 1975 EPA banned the use of asbestos in construction³¹, in 1977 it was banned in fireplaces and wall compounds³², in 1989 there was a ban for the new use of asbestos³³, and finally in 1990 a ban for spray-on materials that contain more than 1% of asbestos in construction³⁴.

28 Morinaga – Shinohara 2001, p. 66-68, 72

29 Lemen – Landrigan 2017, p. 2-7

30 National Emission Standards for Hazardous air Pollutants

31 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

32 Consumer Product Safety Commission

33 Toxic Substances Control Act

34 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

(14)

2. RISK SOCIETY

2.1.Risk in the modern society

In the following chapter I will present the theoretical framework of the study, the theory of the risk society. The objective is to connect the asbestos mining to the theory and analyse the case in its framework. Many matters affect how risk is seen and experienced and the purpose of the study is to present what kind of matters affect to the risk perception and what are the reasons behind them. Because the study proceeds in chronological order, the perception of the risk chances through time and my purpose is to find out did it chanced. The increased utilization of the environment increases the amount of risks. How the asbestos is seen or what are the motives behind the opinions affects to the level of the risk. The theory gives significance to the press; how and what it states about a risk. One area of study is the language use by laymen and experts, how their respond reflects from the risk society perspective. From the perspective of the theory, asbestos and mining of it in Paakkila is the one that is causing the risk. The purpose of the study is to present how the asbestos mining as a risk occurs on different times when the time passed and then, to analyse what reasons are on the background when the level of asbestos as a risk is lower or higher.

Throughout centuries the meaning of ‘risk’ has varied, and it has become more common in numerous cases. Change to the modern meaning of ‘risk’ happened during enlightenment in the 17^th and 18^th centuries. The era emphasized objective scientific exploration and rational thinking to understand human progress and social order where natural and social worlds can be calculated, measured and, hence predicted. The technical meaning for likelihood of a

‘risk’ can be estimated as known or knowable whereas uncertainty is applied when these likelihoods are incalculable or unknown.³⁵ The technological development brought new risks. To control the fear of risk and to guarantee safety, new regulations were set, and risks were discussed in the public space.³⁶

Risk can be divided into different fields such as environmental risks, economic risks, and social risks. In the context of welfare state social risks can be separated into traditional and

35 Lupton 1999, p. 5-7

36 Salmi 1997, p. 58

(15)

modern social risks. Traditional social risks have existed before the modern social security was born and the present social security is built on the basis of these risks. Traditional social risks contain illness, disability to work, industrial accident, unemployment, age and death risks which affect people for their entire life.³⁷

Risks can be classified based on area of life they have an impact.³⁸ In the case of Paakkila, the question is about the environmental health risk because asbestos causes diseases and it is a social risk because the area where they live is basically unsafe at some level a long time after mine is shut down. Additionally, the cumulative impact may lead to the psychological risk that means the decrease of well-being and the ability to function decreases because of diseases and losing of a job.

From the perspective of social sciences, the risk is tied to understandings of what formulates dangers, hazards, and threats and for whom. The modern risks contain risk from chemical pollution, genetically modified organisms, and atomic radiation that cannot be perceived by humans. Therefore, it is a risk for humans until they are found out as symptoms such as cancer.³⁹ Asbestos is a similar modern risk that cannot be perceived by humans and it materializes after the person is found out to have asbestos, mesothelioma, and lung cancer.

The concept of risk developed with an idea that there is always possibility of loss or damage.

One of the modernist views of risk is that it can be either ‘good’ or ‘bad’, however risk is used to relate exclusively to negative consequences, especially in the technical assessments of risks and more to negative rather than disastrous consequences. These two concepts create the concept of the accident. Hence, risk is a rather slack term in day-to-day language.In present western societies ‘risk’ and adjective ‘risky’ is commonly used by both experts and laymen. Research by experts has developed tools for analyzing and measuring risk: risk assessment, risk analysis, risk management, and risk communication which are used to measure and control risk as wide-ranging as public health, economics, the law, and business and the manufacturing.⁴⁰

37 Havakka 2018 p. 125

38 Kamppinen et al. 1995, p. 16

39 Barbara – van Loon 2000, p. 3

40 Lupton 1999, p. 7-9

(16)

The risk consists of two components: harm and the size and malignancy of it and the probability of materialization. From the societal perspective, the risk can stand for the wide range of impacts that can be divided on the well-being of people, the economic and environmental impacts. Even though the risk can be calculated mathematically, defining the risk relates to subjectivity. The subjectivity means that people evaluate risks in different ways and the social acceptance of the level of risk reflects the values and feeling of the people. The risk experienced is influenced by emotional aspects such as frightfulness, wrongfulness, and non-voluntariness. ⁴¹

The techno-scientific field signifies the contemporary scientific research and development.

It underlines the connection between science and technology, and it is often described endorsing the objectivity, realism and universality of science. ⁴² According to Lupton, the discussion about the risks in the techno-scientific field contains various aspects:

- How well risk has been known or calculated?

- What is the gravity of a risk in terms of its potential effects?

- How precise is the science that it utilized to measure and calculate risk?

- How extensive are the causal or predictive type that is created or comprehend?

- Why risks arise and what affects people’s respond of risks?

Based to the techno-scientific literature the problem between scientific, government and industrial organizations and the public relation is that public concern has become more concerned about risks and challenged the techno-scientific risk knowledge, creating the distrust towards institutions.⁴³

Studies have discovered that there is a causal connection between closeness and people’s likeliness to be concerned about risks. A risk that is recognized to be well-known or voluntary is considered more acceptable and less likely than those that are considered new or imposed. Another characteristic of risk is that people tend to be risk reluctant when confronted with profits and risk seeking when facing negative impacts.Individuals who are susceptible to the risk that has occurred must consider that the benefits of that act will overshadow the costs. This is based on the linear relationship model between information on

41 Sitra 2002 p. 8-9

42 "Technoscience." Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Ethics. Retrieved July 03.

[ https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/technoscience]

43 Lupton 1999, p.17-18

(17)

a risk, the development of an attitude of risk, and the practice of preventing the risk happening to oneself.⁴⁴

The media imposes news about environment where ‘environment’ and ‘nature’ are being repeated till the limits of the bearing point. However, environmental issues are not just news among news. Increasingly, the environmental news changes from news that does not touch to reality that affects your daily life. The environmental risks can be realized in many ways, for example in Kärkölä, Järvelä was revealed that the pollutant, sawmill has directly endangered the health of the community by draining chlorophenol to the groundwater, even though by senses the surrounding environment has not changed. Clean water, the normal element of everyday life was suddenly polluted and dangerous.⁴⁵

2.2.Knowledge of risk

Risks exist in nature and in principle can be recognized by scientific measuring and calculating and managed by utilizing the information obtained. However, sometimes laymen disapprove what is considered the ‘appropriate’ or the ‘right’ risk of their knowledge. The responses of laymen to risks are often described being unscientific when they base the knowledge to low-grade and primitive sources such as ‘intuition’. Calculations of experts are the ’objective facts’ of risk which contradict with the ‘subjective facts’ of laymen, which are not considered as accurate as facts by experts, because their conception of risk is unbiased and neutral.⁴⁶

However, from a constructionistic perspective, sociocultural contexts tie all knowledge where the knowledge originates. From this perspective, no knowledge, not even scientific is never value-free but rather is invariably the product of the way of seeing. A risk is continuously constructed and negotiated in social interaction and the formation of meaning;

therefore, it is not in a static space. The judgement of ’expert’ is therefore biased rather than

‘objective’ and ‘neutral’. Both laymen’s and expert’s judgement about a risk are similarly affected by sociocultural processes.⁴⁷

44 Lupton 1999, p. 20-21

45 Lahti – Saarela 1991, p. 307

46 Lupton 1999, p.18-19

47 Lupton 1999, p. 29

(18)

There has been a debate over laymen’s over-estimation, under-estimation and the difficulty of using probabilities for some types of risk. For example, psychometric researchers have found that laymen are more likely to estimate that risk is likely to take place if information connected to it is accessible and easily recalled and incline to overemphasize risk related to situations where it can easily be imagined as occurring to oneself.⁴⁸

The book Gegengifte: die organisierte Unverantwortlichkeit by Ulrich Beck discusses the risk society and modern problems of risk management in societies in quite aggravate manner.

Beck claims that risks have arisen because technological and governmental authority has allowed risks to exist with regulation and other control management methods. He states that what is really dangerous doesn’t exist and what we cannot shut down and control is legal.⁴⁹ According to Beck science has important meaning in proving the truth when protesting people have to use the techno-scientific language, the same language as the experts have used.⁵⁰

This leads to the situation where people are strongly dependent on the scientific definition of experts, however, the press can take a role by providing more simplified information about risk for people.⁵¹ When toxicity levels are being re-evaluated based on the latest researches there will be significant changes, for example some groceries might be bad for people. New causal, judicial assessment rules define winners and losers in a new manner. These new rules might collapse if the press starts a campaign or people change their perception habits.⁵² In the key role of defining the risk it is central who and how they must prove the dangerousness of certain material and emission. It means that victims have to first point out the damage A, then they have to prove that material X causes the damage A. Thirdly, victims have to point out that origin of the material X comes from the company Y. Lastly, they must demand that person Z is responsible for causing the damage which is almost impossible according to Becks and he calls it as the extremely unequal burden to prove.⁵³

48 Lupton 1990, p. 20

49 Beck 1990, p. 125

50 Beck 1990, p. 96

51 Beck 1990, p. 123

52 Beck 1990, p. 205

53 Beck 1990, p. 190

(19)

Beck claims that jurisdiction and legal praxis are lagging in situations where polluters are known but still cases end up on their side. The amount of jurisdiction grows but still the case is about defining the attitude about risks.⁵⁴ On that time, this can be seen from the Finnish Supreme Court case 1998:87 where court conveyed that dangerousness of asbestos has been known ever since 1945 when relevant literatures were published. In the 1960s and beginning of the 1970s nawareness of dangerousness of asbestos dust as causing diseases still common.

In those days, the Finnish health authorities understanding about the dangerousness of asbestos dust is based on the social and health ministry’s approved maximum concentration of asbestos. In this case, the district court looked that company could not be required in retrospect to know the impacts better.

Working class might be in danger when company where they are working is systematically taking risks to achieve maximal incomes despite risks being considerable. This new development creates contradictions between companies and occupational groups. However, the experience and benefits from the company prevent the working class from thinking ecologically, especially in risk dangerous production.⁵⁵

There are alternative interpretations for risks, for example in the reporting of accidents and disasters in oil drilling in the North Sea has blamed rough seas even though accidents and disasters might have been avoided with better working methods and equipment. Beck refers to this as the anchoring heuristic that has been used when the starting point of reporting has been numbers of dangerousness of drilling action, even though in reality during drilling happened only one third of fatal accidents.⁵⁶

The discussion about risks highlights the evaluation mistakes made by laymen whereas the experts’ reports are taken notice on decision-making by government and companies. An important characteristic in risk debate is that it highlights the exaggeration of risks when indifference is far more dangerous. Perhaps if the experts have stated that factory or equipment is safe other impressions are false. If the change of risk is calculated and found minor the concerned laymen will calculate incorrectly.⁵⁷

54 Beck 1990, p. 193

55 Beck 1990, p. 209-213

(20)

Table 1. Slovic’s perception of risk in the modern technological development ⁵⁸

Slovic has created a risk map about individual and society perspective, the division of these, joint relations, and role of risks in broader environment. The risk map is divided into four sectors based on uncertainty and emotional division: dread – safe and knowability – unknown.⁵⁹ The basis of Slovic’s perception of risk in the modern technological development is that it has created chemical and nuclear technologies which have potential to cause an environmental disaster that has an impact on the people in a long range. The analytic expert applies risk assessment to evaluate hazards, normally named “risk perceptions.” These complex technologies are not known well by the laymen. Significant influence on present understanding about risk perception is based on geography, political science, sociology, psychology, and anthropology.⁶⁰ These disciplines focus on a different points of view; geography focuses on understanding the human behavior when facing hazards⁶¹, sociological and anthropological perspectives focus on how perception and acceptance of risk is connected to social and cultural elements, and psychological approach focuses on how close ones and family convey how the hazard is experienced.⁶² Slovic places

58 Slovic 1987

59 Kamppinen et al. 1995, p. 98-99

60 Slovic 1987, p. 280-281

61 Burton et al. 1993, p. 30

62 Short 1984, p. 711

(21)

asbestos in the map of risk perception to an unknown risk like pesticides that are dreadful but not as dreadful as nuclear reactor accidents.⁶³

2.3.Controlling the risk and responsibilities

Risks are often discussed from the perspective of the layman and expert. Policymakers must ponder their decision-making whether to listen to the people who have exposed to some chemical or other polluting material or the smaller group of experts and what kind of experts they should listen. In a modern society, only a few people have an expertise to evaluate risks.

Characteristic in risk discourse has been to emphasize the superiority of the scientific concept in relation to the misunderstandings of laymen. The perspective of laymen has been presumed to be primitive or a skewed version of experts’ perspective. For example, business manager believes more to risk assessment made by an expert such as an engineer or a doctor compared with a philosopher or a regular worker.⁶⁴

According to Beck ‘some side issue may force experts on the defensive position’. In other words, the motives of experts such as doctors and engineers might have an impact on the decision-making.⁶⁵ The development of life insurance changed doctors’ working culture as an expert when they started to give statements about the state of health of their customers for administrative purposes at the beginning of the 20th century. Normally, the doctor is interested are their patients’ health, but the growth of life insurances demanded them to take notice of the ‘third party’ quarter i.e. insurance companies’ interests. This meant that the status of doctors was strengthened but also, they were exposed to external supervision.

Change also meant that the working practice was standardized, and their autonomy was narrowed. Insurance companies wanted to aim towards objective evaluation, and they saw that doctors are not impartial because too often they drive patients’ interests. Hence, they wanted to standardize the practice with fillable forms. From the doctors’ point of view life insurance controls were a significant additional source of income, and an incentive for all doctors to get involved. Unlike in many other countries, Finland had no specialized inspection doctors, even though companies had a list of suitable doctors and those who are

63 Slovic 1987, Figure 1, p. 282

64 Kamppinen et al. 1995, p. 173-174

65 Beck 1990, p. 94

(22)

in a blacklist because they are unreliable. Because of the reform of life insurance inspections, the work of the doctors was more exposed to external supervision. The result of this is that doctors won in economic security, but they lost in autonomy.⁶⁶ In Paakkila, the town doctor had a major role in defining the risk for health during the operational years of mining because the options for workers to go to see a doctor is limited. However, when Partek sold all its properties in Paakkila, the workers had to seek compensation from faceless insurance company which they had no connection to. As it is possible, the decision-making by doctors of the insurance company might have impacted by their employer.

A risk can appear suddenly without clues. When, a central employer causes an environmental problem and endangers the health of the people it puts the municipality authorities into difficult position. In 1987, Kärkölä, in the community center of Järvelä, significant amounts of chlorophenol were found in groundwater that was used for drinking water. Based on the recommendation of WHO there can be maximum of 10 mg of chlorophenol in the liter of water that it is drinkable, however, in Kärkölä the concentration level of chlorophenol was 141 mg in 1987 and years later 200 000 mg/l. A high level of concentration can increase the risk of cancer and can cause damages in liver and kidneys. After the environmental disaster was revealed, the health authorities initiated a research that was focusing on the inhabitant of a municipality who had exposed the most and authorities began to monitor the state of health. The analysis on the soil revealed that the origin of chlorophenol was an industrial factor that was using chlorophenol substantial that prevents wood from becoming moldy till 1984. However, the research did not find out the origin of substantial in soil and how it got there. It is possible that there was chlorophenol in soil a long time before the founding of it.

The costs for purification of the polluted soil was significant.⁶⁷

In the chain of events, the sawmill claimed that even though it was the biggest user of chlorophenol it is not responsible for the costs because it was already there before the substantial was prohibited. Interesting in the case is that it put the municipality of Kärkölä into difficult situation, as the sawmill was the biggest taxpayer and employer. Because of this, the authorities of Kärkölä were careful in their actions and statements and the municipal

66 Jauha 2014, p. 243-247, 255

67 Lahti – Saarela 1991, p. 308

(23)

manager had a dismissive attitude towards it. Later, the municipality authorities denied that significant increases in water bills are not to hide the expenses of a new inlet works.⁶⁸

The study found out that the people who were financially dependent from the sawmill did not view the sawmill guilty and liable for damage as often as the other people. Based on the interview data of the research there was an apparent connection to theory because the sawmill was the foundation of economic wellbeing and employment of the community, hence the reactions were careful to its environmental accident.When, livelihood depends on the polluting company, people’s reactions are restrained because the purification of soil would have negative impacts on the company’s economy. This strong economic link to the polluter prevents people from acting even though it would threaten health.⁶⁹

2.4. The analytic framework of the research

The theoretical framework of my research is built on the risk society presented above. From the risk society perspective, the asbestos is a risk for health, hence an occupational risk as well as a risk for the people who lived in Paakkila during the operational years of the mine.

The objective of the thesis is to study the risks of asbestos mining in Paakkila, the meanings asbestos mining is given in Paakkila and the changes at meanings, and what is the position of asbestos in Paakkila.

The goal is to find out the risks of asbestos mining for the workers, how risk was noticed and then recognized as well as the experiences and impression of the workers. In order to be able to answer these questions the impacting factors must be defined. As Paakkila was a rural village from far away from larger towns, the people did not have that many options where to get the livelihood. Still, they might have had an option to seek livelihood from somewhere other place. Then again, Paakkila was their home where they wanted to live. As they went to work for the asbestos mine, in the course of time they formed a bond with the mine and employer. Later, when the risks of asbestos mining became widely known they had many factors that impacted to their opinion on asbestos mining and what meanings it is

68 Lahti – Saarela 1991, p 308-309

69 Lahti – Saarela 1991, p. 314-316

(24)

given. They had to ponder over the values and set other values more important than others, such as livelihood and health.

Table 2. Factors that affect how asbestos is experienced

The ‘perception of risk’ by Slovic is in line with the theory and I will be utilizing it as well to draw the completeness of the case on how asbestos mining as a risk was experienced in different times and why did the expression of risk change.

As well as the employer and employee ponder their values and consequences of the realization or non-realization of values. From the risk society perspective, employer and employees are concerned about the materialization of their values. Employer is concerned about economic values such as the materialization of investments whereas employees are concerned about livelihood and health impacts. Values can also be divided into the egocentric values such as the individual loss of health or job or unselfish values such as the loyalty towards employer. In a case of an accident or emerged health hazard individuals have to ponder what the most important value is for them, such as health or livelihood and when they make decision, they give more weight to a value that is more important.⁷⁰ The starting point in my research is that the dangerousness of asbestos was ‘unavoidable harm’ for the

70Kamppinen et al. 1995, p. 40

(25)

employees of the mine but concern over health increased over time when more knowledge arose about the asbestos as a risk for health. In my study, laymen stand for the employees and occupants of the asbestos mine of Paakkila and people who have lived there whereas experts stand for the doctors, engineer, and other people who oversaw the mine.

Ulrich Beck claims that ‘the organized freedom from liability’ of the press controls the general discussion that is in this case asbestos as a health hazard and through it impacts to the opinions of the people and how the asbestos as a risk is experienced.⁷¹ I will not approach the study from this perspective because it is rather radical and puts the press in presumption where the press are not independent. As Lankester et al. found out in their study that the independent press can have an impact on the public expression of environmental issues.

Thus, my target is to find out what kind of meanings the newspaper articles give to asbestos as a risk at different times and analyze these meanings by fitting them to discourses and frames in a chronological order.

71 Beck 1990, p. 98

(26)

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1.Qualitative research

Qualitative research is called as an understanding research because the separation of traditions is based on the way of knowing; phenomenon can be either understood or explained. Fundamentals of qualitative research are the theoretical content of observations.

The theoretical concentration of observations means that the individual's perception of the phenomenon, the implications of the phenomenon being studied, or the tools used in the research will affect the outcome of the research. In an empirical analysis, data collection and analysis methods have significant importance.⁷²

The data of qualitative research is observed usually as a whole because it exposes the structure of a singularly understood internal logical entirety. Matters that are viewed as reliable and in connection with the explicable pattern or viewed as part of the mystery must be able to be clarified that they do not conflict with the interpretation given. Qualitative analysis is based on two phases: reducing perceptions and solving the mystery. The separation of this kind can only be done analytically and practically reducing perceptions and solving the mystery are always interwoven with each other. The research data is always analyzed only through the theoretical-methodologic perspective; hence the data analysis takes notice only to that what is essential from the theoretical framework perspective of the research and questioning of the research. In this way, the research subject matter remains in a more manageable form. The second idea of simplifying is to cut down the number of findings by connecting them by finding a common characteristic or denominator or by shaping a rule that applies without fail in this respect to the whole research data. Resolving the puzzle means that based on the produced leads and clues, the interpretation of meanings is done about the studied phenomenon.⁷³

3.2. Case study

The cornerstone of the case study methods is to produce knowledge specifically related to space and time that are bound to circumstances, phenomena, processes, meanings and

72 Tuomi – Sarajärvi 2018, p. 20-21

73 Alasuutari 2011, p. 31-35

(27)

knowledge.⁷⁴ The case study focuses on one particular case, which has been restricted to a smaller entity. The research method is characterized by its concentration on one case by creating a thorough knowledge of it, which nevertheless reduces the importance of generalization.⁷⁵ My research is a case study because I focus on former asbestos mine in Paakkila and its former employees and people who have lived in that village during operational years of the mine. A key characteristic of case study is to use various sources of evidence because with a single source of evidence it might be insufficient for answer the research questions. There are no theoretical notions in the beginning because before gathering research data it is difficult to know what theories are the most suitable for the research. Theoretical notions clarify later when there is comprehension about the data.In this thesis, various sources of evidence mean that there are three different sources: interviews, newspaper articles, and documentaries. Research data together enables that subject case can be understood, and suitable theories are being utilized. Using all three sources together it is possible to answer to the research questions.⁷⁶

The case study methods require a context of interpretation that answers where the specific case locates in a larger picture. My objective is to build a picture of the asbestos mine of Paakkila from the perspective of environmental and occupational health risks. The objective of the case strives to interpret the cultural understanding about the community, the rules that bind it, and their impact on social activity.⁷⁷ The case study is based in particular on a theory testing or development of a method and is usually based on the assumption of predictability of phenomena. The case study requires a theoretical framework on which the findings can be generalized. The generalization refers specifically to theoretical claims, and the researcher must be able to make a substantiated claim as to what is the case.⁷⁸

3.3. Social constructivism

Roughly speaking, the use of language is possible to analyze from two possible perspectives:

language as the mirror of reality or as the construction of reality. The realistic viewpoint, the picture of reality presumes language is a tool for getting knowledge about facts. From the

74 Laine & Peltonen 2007, p. 111

75 Saarela-Kinnunen – Eskola, 2015, 180

76 Gillham 2000, p.1-2

77 Laine & Peltonen 2007, p 101-102, 104

78 Huutoniemi 2014, p. 192

(28)

point of view of the construction of reality i.e., the social constructivism language is not reviewed as a bridge to reality but part of reality. The discourse analytic research is based on the constructivism perspective. Feelings, objectives, matters, and institutions are identified as a research subject. Even though the research subject is not always articulated verbally, the researcher can approach these subjects only through symbols and meanings that are culturally possible.⁷⁹

I have chosen social constructivism as my methodological framework because in social constructivism and discourse analysis the interest is on how social reality is built through language and other actions, i.e., they have a common interest in analyzing texts and spoken language.⁸⁰ Written and spoken words in a social context arbitrate meaning aids the construction of the concept or knowledge. Words are seen as an instrument that assists to achieve the work of learning that is the mobilization of knowledge. From the constructivist perspective, thinking happens in communication. ⁸¹

3.4. Discourse analysis

The discourse analysis can be defined as a study of language and other meaningful activities that analyze in detail how the social reality is produced in various practices.⁸² The framework of the discourse analysis is built with following theoretical presumptions:

1. the presumption of the constructive nature of the social reality of language use 2. the presumption of various parallel and competition of existence among with rival

meaning systems

3. the presumption of meaningful context-relatedness

4. the presumption of the involvement of actors in the meaning system 5. the presumption of the consequences of language use⁸³

The importance of presumptions is dependent on the research problem and configuration.

Language is a practice that not only to describe the world but also it gives meanings and at

79 Jokinen et al. 2016, p. 14

81 Hirtle 1996, p. 91

(29)

the same time organizes, rebuilds, and changes the social reality where we live in. When using the language, we give more significance to the targets that we are talking and writing.

The constructive idea links closely to the classification of the socially divided system of meanings. Meanings are thought to be formulated in the relationship with each other. We constantly use classifications based on differences in meaning in our everyday use of language, for example we discuss the higher and lower social class i.e. bosses and workers because hierarchic dichotomies are rooted in our habits of structuring social reality. The systems of meanings do not come out randomly from individuals, but they are built as part of the social practice.⁸⁴

An objective of the study is to find out how the social reality builds in the discussion about asbestos mining and to describe matters, phenomena, actions and activities. In this study, it is possible to find the competing systems of meanings because the asbestos mining awakes diverse opinions which people attempt to promote. As in the discourse analysis, the potential interactivity of the material is considered in the analysis as a contextualizing factor.

Generally speaking, contextual consideration in the analysis means that the activity being analyzed is considered at a particular time and in a specific place to be targeted. As in this study, analysis proceeds in a chronological order where the time and place are divided into events.⁸⁵

In the discourse analysis, the central position of the study is not individuals, but social practices. In this case, the review focuses on the linguistic use of individuals in different situations and the broader systems of meaning they produce. Based on this, the study examines what kind of self-images the social practices have developed, e.g. bosses, engineers, and underprivileged. The presumption of the consequences of language use is about focusing on what the linguist does with his expression at any given time and what it has produced. From this perspective, the objective is to track down the contradictory meanings that people use in their language. ⁸⁶

Normally, the use of language is organized in some way because it does not form from separated statements. Discourses are created when these statements are connected with each

84 Jokinen et al. 2016, p. 21-22

85 Jokinen et al. 2016, p. 26-39

86 Jokinen et al. 2016, p. 43-49

(30)

other’s for example in discussions or written texts. In an interview, the use of language is variable and occasionally, contradictory. During interviews, we continuously utilize categorization based on differences in meaning. Therefore, discourses not only illustrate the reality, but discourses also categorize different phenomenon and their perspectives of scrutiny. In a way, the interest is not in itself the language but the different way of speaking and the practice of speech of the target. In a discourse, the interest concentrates how these different ways of speaking and the practices of speech are produced and sustained with the help of the social meanings of language.⁸⁷

The language of our everyday life is differing, multivocal and, occasionally contradicting.

The interest in the discourse analysis focuses on this variety of language. The changes in the use of language are not kept as inconsistent but how the language can produce different matters and functions. Functions mean all the possible consequences that the language might have. The concept covers the deliberated and unintentional consequences as well as the context-sensitive and far-reaching consequences. Therefore, it is about acting by using the language in a broad sense about all the possibilities that language opens. The variability of language is interpretable in relation to the different systems of meanings that actors lean on at a given time as well as continuously chancing interaction situations where the functions of language are created. When studying these systems of meanings and context sensitive functions, the researcher doing discourse analysis leans strongly on the research data and its detailed inspection. Various sources of data are suitable for discourse analysis: interviews, everyday discussions, video and meeting recordings, newspaper articles, news, scientific researches, public documents and letters. A rich research data may differ from perspectives, different pieces of systems of meanings as well as data that has interactive nature.⁸⁸ In my research, I will analyze the expressions of asbestos in the newspaper articles, documentaries, and interviews by discourse analysis. I focus on what meanings asbestos is given to different times chronologically and what are the motives, purposes, and meanings behind the discussion and given sense.

(31)

3.5. Secondary tool – the framework analysis

Discourse analytic research contains numerous different concepts to produce meanings.

Meaning and its dimension extends broadly where parts of the concepts are more characteristic for discourse analysis and some parts are tradition relative which are still applicable in the discourse analysis. One of these concepts is the framework analysis.⁸⁹ The terminology and concept of the frame come from a Sociologist Erving Goffman (1974) who developed the frame analysis on the basis that individuals in the society apply one or more frameworks that are suitable for that event. ⁹⁰ Some of the frameworks we instinctively recognize such as when we go to a checkout of a grocery shop to buy supplies, we recognize that it is a purchasing action, hence we must pay to get the groceries. Another example is that when we go to see a doctor in a white coat and stethoscope on shoulders, we apply a doctor-patient frame of interpretation and believe the expert's words. The same applies to other situations when we require the guidance of experts to define the situation.⁹¹

According to Goffman, every situation has its primary framework that crafts the situation understood. The primary frameworks are customary conceptions of reality that guides individuals to understand phenomenon and situations similarly. People do not formulate the primary frameworks. Therefore, the primary frameworks are subconscious and culture- bound, and their objective is to share the same meaning with each other’s in the cultural frame.⁹²

For the past decade studying media has recovered to its glory years. At the same time, the interpreting of media articles has become utilized by sociologists and humanists along with the communication studies. Regardless of discipline, the targets are similar: the products of media or the community respond to media where articles can be studied as texts. The idea that language produces meanings bases on representation that refers to presenting and representing.⁹³

90 Goffman 1974, p. 21

91 Karvonen 2000, p. 79-80

92 Goffman 1974, p. 21, 27

93 Väliverronen 2003, p 13, 19

From livelihood to a hazardous waste - a case study of asbestos mine in Paakkila