Definitional argument: Nevada's commercial UAV debate and the case of threatened prosperity

Abstract

ABSTRACTNevada was granted a Certificate of Authorization from the Federal Aviation Administration in December 2013 to enter the market for commercial drone development and testing. Given safety and privacy risks of a policy authorizing commercial drone testing, it is surprising there was no organized public opposition in Nevada. Two competing worldviews were present in this debate. One argued that regulation of commercial drone development was a public good. The other contended that regulation would function as a barrier to economic growth. I argue that the latter worldview was ultimately more powerful because it was the product of a definitional argument, a powerful symbolic formula I call threatened prosperity. Were it not for this symbolic formula, significant protest might have emerged.