Corporate Influence and the PFAS Contamination Crisis

Abstract

This study explores the dynamics of legislative conflicts surrounding PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) regulation in Massachusetts, focusing on the strategies employed by industry representatives and pro-regulatory advocates giving testimony at public hearings. Through a qualitative analysis of hearing transcripts and testimonies, the study reveals two primary lobbying strategies: an appeal to a status quo bias by emphasizing economic burdens and a "splitting hairs" tactic that emphasizes scientific nuances to advocate for a risk-based approach to regulation. In contrast, pro-regulatory advocates highlighted the known risks of PFAS exposure and served as foils to industry narratives. The study highlights the strategic communication tactics used by interest groups to influence policymakers and sheds light on the complex landscape of environmental regulatory debates in Massachusetts, emphasizing the role of public interest groups in countering the influence of private interest groups.