IntroductionThe catastrophic event familiarly known as the BP Oil Spill, occurred on April 20, 2010, off the coast of Louisiana, when the mobile offshore drilling rig Deepwater Horizon when methane gas ignited, and exploded, killing and injuring dozens and causing the rig to sink with an unrestricted flow of oil to leave the damaged wellhead, below the Gulf of Mexico for almost 90 days, more than 50,000 gallons of oil were released each day. In one week alone, there was 3,850 square miles covered with oil—the largest spill in history. This journal article suggests that the BP Oil Spill is, in essence, a “cultural anomaly” for institutional changes in environmental management and fossil fuel production (Hoffman et al., 2011).

Problem Investigated
The spill itself and the deleterious after effects define the problem in general. In the aftermath of the BP Oil Spill, the challenge was to evaluate and investigate potential solutions. At issue was whether this event was truly a cultural anomaly—that is, was it a “scientific finding” that might lead to the creation of a crisis, within a specific paradigm. These cultural anomalies are thought to be able to trigger revolutionary advances in science, technology, and our overall understanding of the events true effect on our environment (Hoffman et al, 2011). By researching and analyzing the specific event and the impact and aftermath, socially, environmentally, and politically, we can better understand the net effects, negative, positive, neutral, or otherwise.

Method of Investigation
To assess the impact of the BP Oil Spill, the authors suggest that we should break the event up in terms of elemental processes: the context of the event: the resulting changes in societal order; and institutional impact. In assessing this situation, it should be noted and the rules of the environmental game had already changed at the point when the BP Spill occurred. Attention to environmental issues was already high, and both the general public and the corporate world were well aware of the effects of environmental mismanagement. Examining this issue brings back memories of the Love Canal events, the Exxon Valdez, and their respective impact upon the environment.

In the aftermath of any such environmental disaster, there are always numerous safety inspections, forensic review, and analysis of what went wrong, and how it might be prevented. Clearly some accidents are exactly that, accidental one-offs that were caused by a fluke occurrence. Others are due to the need for systemic change and/or because of institutional flaws or defects that have gone undetected or unreported over time, and ultimately culminate in negative consequences such as the BP Oil Spill.

Findings
The nexus between the BP case, and other spills, disasters and issues in the oil industry has shown that not much has occurred in the ways of institutional reform. By observing failed case studies like the BP Oil spill, the industry can learn “what not to do.” While we would like to think that lessons are learned from such disasters, as the authors note, these disasters also lead to real opportunities for entrepreneurs to propose change or methods for making change happen. Yet while these events give us more of a chance to effectuate deeper change, it has not really happened. At least not in terms of environmental management, and mitigating the challenges imparted by oil related activities such as consumption and drilling.
This type of event moves many actors to the foreground, including the oil companies themselves, environmentalists, the Gulf States, the various Governments impacted. In this instance there was great opportunity for the United States to make a statement on the need for environmental stewardship and reform. And instead the President of this country elected to make a ploy for renewable energy, which has some merit, but is not entirely germane to resolving and/or mitigating the situation at hand.
Conclusion
While the post-spill events have the potential to be a catalyst for longer term change in terms of how environmental management can be used to more safely manage the drilling and consumption process of oil, as noted in the article, true change has yet to happen in this regard. What has happened for the better however, is that the harsh effects of the spill have resulted in making it impossible for those advocating for drilling in remote and pristine parts of the world, to claim that they can do so without environmental impact or at least that they can do so in a safe manner. Likewise, regulatory scrutiny has increased at least in terms of safety, which is always a societal benefit, and one that can ultimately benefit the environment as well.