Paper Short Abstract:

People living close to a fluorochemical plant in The Netherlands do not just have to grapple with PFAS pollution, but also with official knowledge and advice about PFAS exposure. Building on our ethnographic research and auto-ethnographic experiment, we explore how public information about toxic che

Paper Abstract:

Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) – toxic, persistent, and bioaccumulating pollutants – are now said to be ‘everywhere’ in the environment. This causes troubles, especially for communities in particularly polluted areas, such as the swimmers, eaters, gardeners, and fishers living near a fluorochemical plant in The Netherlands, where we did ethnographic research.

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) now advises a maximum intake of PFAS of 4.4 nanograms per kg of body weight per week. National health authorities translate this value into information that supposedly enables citizens to make ‘responsible choices’ to limit exposure. Distributing information thus aims to care for the health of citizens without compromising their freedom. This approach follows a linear model of decision-action: (1) value-neutral knowledge about pollution is collected, (2) relevant values are weighed, and (3) subsequent action is taken.

Our ethnographic research shows, however, that more scientific knowledge about PFAS does not help make better decisions but creates new troubles to grapple with. To understand what is going wrong as official information meets practical concerns, we embarked on the auto-ethnographic experiment of trying to follow public guidance on PFAS exposure for one week. Our experiences while aiming to follow the guidelines illustrate troubles with modeling a population as rational decision-makers and raise questions about efforts to care for the affected communities trying to grapple with official information and scientific knowledge in their everyday practices. We argue that it is important to think beyond the ‘decision-making citizen’ as the figure to care for.