IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i9p912-d77704.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing Wastewater Practices in Unconventional Shale Development: Newspaper Coverage of Stakeholder Concerns and Social License to Operate

Author

Listed:
  • Joel Gehman

    (Department of Strategic Management and Organization, Alberta School of Business, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R6, Canada)

  • Dara Y. Thompson

    (Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2H1, Canada)

  • Daniel S. Alessi

    (Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2E3, Canada)

  • Diana M. Allen

    (Department of Earth Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada)

  • Greg G. Goss

    (Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2E9, Canada)

Abstract

In this article we review prior literature regarding the concept of social license to operate, and related concepts, including corporate social responsibility, sustainable development, stakeholder management and cumulative effects. Informed by these concepts, we search for newspaper articles published in North American provinces and states where the Barnett, Duvernay, Marcellus and Montney shale plays are located. Using these data, we tabulate coverage of stakeholder concerns related to hydraulic fracturing and wastewater practices, and compare the extent to which these concerns vary over place and time. Our vocabulary analyses identify differences in the types and quantities of newspaper coverage devoted to concerns regarding hydraulic fracturing activities in general and wastewater practices in particular. We interpret these differences as suggesting that obtaining a social license to operate is likely not a one size fits all proposition. By understanding which stakeholder concerns are most salient in particular places and times, oil and gas operators and regulators can better tailor their strategies and policies to address local concerns. In other words, the findings from this study indicate that conventional understandings of risk as a technical or economic problem may not be adequate for dealing with unconventional resource challenges such as hydraulic fracturing. Operators and regulators may also need to manage social and cultural risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Joel Gehman & Dara Y. Thompson & Daniel S. Alessi & Diana M. Allen & Greg G. Goss, 2016. "Comparative Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing Wastewater Practices in Unconventional Shale Development: Newspaper Coverage of Stakeholder Concerns and Social License to Operate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-23, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:9:p:912-:d:77704
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/9/912/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/9/912/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael J. Lenox, 2006. "The Role of Private Decentralized Institutions in Sustaining Industry Self-Regulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(6), pages 677-690, December.
    2. Franks, Daniel M. & Cohen, Tamar, 2012. "Social Licence in Design: Constructive technology assessment within a mineral research and development institution," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(7), pages 1229-1240.
    3. Prno, Jason, 2013. "An analysis of factors leading to the establishment of a social licence to operate in the mining industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 577-590.
    4. Boudet, Hilary & Clarke, Christopher & Bugden, Dylan & Maibach, Edward & Roser-Renouf, Connie & Leiserowitz, Anthony, 2014. "“Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 57-67.
    5. Joshua Keller & Jeffrey Loewenstein, 2011. "The Cultural Category of Cooperation: A Cultural Consensus Model Analysis for China and the United States," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 299-319, April.
    6. Moffat, Kieren & Zhang, Airong, 2014. "The paths to social licence to operate: An integrative model explaining community acceptance of mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 61-70.
    7. Parsons, Richard & Lacey, Justine & Moffat, Kieren, 2014. "Maintaining legitimacy of a contested practice: How the minerals industry understands its ‘social licence to operate’," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 83-90.
    8. Alessandro Toscano & Filiberto Bilotti & Francesco Asdrubali & Claudia Guattari & Luca Evangelisti & Carmine Basilicata, 2016. "Recent Trends in the World Gas Market: Economical, Geopolitical and Environmental Aspects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Robert W. Howarth & Anthony Ingraffea & Terry Engelder, 2011. "Should fracking stop?," Nature, Nature, vol. 477(7364), pages 271-275, September.
    10. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel & Giuliani, Antonio Paco, 2014. "Contextualizing entrepreneurial innovation: A narrative perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1177-1188.
    11. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    12. Eleanor Stephenson & Karena Shaw, 2013. "¨ A Dilemma of Abundance: Governance Challenges of Reconciling Shale Gas Development and Climate Change Mitigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-23, May.
    13. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi & Jha, Awadhesh N. & Rogers, Howard, 2014. "Natural gas from shale formation – The evolution, evidences and challenges of shale gas revolution in United States," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-28.
    14. Jianu Daniel Muresan & Mihail Vincentiu Ivan, 2015. "Controversies Regarding Costs, Uncertainties and Benefits Specific to Shale Gas Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-17, March.
    15. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fry, Matthew & Brannstrom, Christian, 2017. "Emergent patterns and processes in urban hydrocarbon governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 383-393.
    2. Carrasco-Farré, Carlos & Snihur, Yuliya & Berrone, Pascual & Ricart, Joan Enric, 2022. "The stakeholder value proposition of digital platforms in an urban ecosystem," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    3. António Mateus & Luís Martins, 2021. "Building a mineral-based value chain in Europe: the balance between social acceptance and secure supply," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(2), pages 239-261, July.
    4. Miron Avidan & Dror Etzion & Joel Gehman, 2019. "Opaque transparency: How material affordances shape intermediary work," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 197-219, June.
    5. Dumbrell, Nikki P. & Adamson, David & Wheeler, Sarah Ann, 2020. "Is social licence a response to government and market failures? Evidence from the literature," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    6. Zhaoxian Zheng & Yan Zhang & Bingyan Li, 2023. "Sensitivity Assessment of Boron Isotope as Indicator of Contaminated Groundwater for Hydraulic Fracturing Flowback Fluids Produced from the Dameigou Shale of the Northern Qaidam Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Fernandez, Viviana, 2021. "Are extractive ventures more socio-environmentally committed?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    8. Cong Dong & Xiucheng Dong & Joel Gehman & Lianne Lefsrud, 2017. "Using BP Neural Networks to Prioritize Risk Management Approaches for China’s Unconventional Shale Gas Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-18, June.
    9. Hongxun Liu & Jianglong Li, 2018. "The US Shale Gas Revolution and Its Externality on Crude Oil Prices: A Counterfactual Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luke, Hanabeth, 2017. "Social resistance to coal seam gas development in the Northern Rivers region of Eastern Australia: Proposing a diamond model of social license to operate," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 266-280.
    2. Bice, Sara & Brueckner, Martin & Pforr, Christof, 2017. "Putting social license to operate on the map: A social, actuarial and political risk and licensing model (SAP Model)," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 46-55.
    3. Omotehinse, Adeyinka O. & De Tomi, Giorgio, 2020. "Managing the challenges of obtaining a social license to operate in the pre-mining phase: A focus on the oil sands communities in Ondo State, Nigeria," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 18(C).
    4. Xu, Min & Liu, Yong & Cui, Caiyun & Xia, Bo & Ke, Yongjian & Skitmore, Martin, 2023. "Social acceptance of NIMBY facilities: A comparative study between public acceptance and the social license to operate analytical frameworks," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    5. Demajorovic, Jacques & Lopes, Juliana Campos & Santiago, Ana Lucia Frezzatti, 2019. "The Samarco dam disaster: A grave challenge to social license to operate discourse," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 273-282.
    6. James A. Pollard & David C. Rose, 2019. "Lightning Rods, Earthquakes, and Regional Identities: Towards a Multi‐Scale Framework of Assessing Fracking Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 473-487, February.
    7. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Moffat, Kieren & Louis, Winnifred, 2017. "Conceptualising the role of dialogue in social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 137-146.
    8. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz & Kural, Orhan, 2020. "The effects of the mining operation activities permit process on the mining sector in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    9. Alberto Diantini & Salvatore Eugenio Pappalardo & Tim Edwards Powers & Daniele Codato & Giuseppe Della Fera & Marco Heredia-R & Francesco Facchinelli & Edoardo Crescini & Massimo De Marchi, 2020. "Is this a Real Choice? Critical Exploration of the Social License to Operate in the Oil Extraction Context of the Ecuadorian Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-24, October.
    10. Stuart, Alice & Bond, Alan & Franco, Aldina M.A. & Baker, Julia & Gerrard, Chris & Danino, Vittoria & Jones, Kylie, 2023. "Conceptualising social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    11. John Colton & Kenneth Corscadden & Stewart Fast & Monica Gattinger & Joel Gehman & Martha Hall Findlay & Dylan Morgan & Judith Sayers & Jennifer Winter & Adonis Yatchew, 2016. "Energy Projects, Social Licence, Public Acceptance and Regulatory Systems in Canada: A White Paper," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 9(20), May.
    12. Amoako, Kwame Oduro & Lord, Beverley R. & Dixon, Keith, 2021. "Narrative accounting for mining in Ghana: An old defence against a new threat?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    13. Costanza, Jennifer Noel, 2016. "Mining Conflict and the Politics of Obtaining a Social License: Insight from Guatemala," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 97-113.
    14. Anna Katharina Provasnek & Anton Sentic & Erwin Schmid, 2017. "Integrating Eco‐Innovations and Stakeholder Engagement for Sustainable Development and a Social License to Operate," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 173-185, May.
    15. Eerola, Toni, 2022. "Corporate conduct, commodity and place: Ongoing mining and mineral exploration disputes in Finland and their implications for the social license to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    16. Smits, Coco C.A. & van Leeuwen, Judith & van Tatenhove, Jan P.M., 2017. "Oil and gas development in Greenland: A social license to operate, trust and legitimacy in environmental governance," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 109-116.
    17. Juliana Segura-Salazar & Luís Marcelo Tavares, 2018. "Sustainability in the Minerals Industry: Seeking a Consensus on Its Meaning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-38, May.
    18. Leena Suopajärvi & Karin Beland Lindahl & Toni Eerola & Gregory Poelzer, 2023. "Social aspects of business risk in the mineral industry—political, reputational, and local acceptability risks facing mineral exploration and mining," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 36(2), pages 321-331, June.
    19. Richert, Claire & Rogers, Abbie & Burton, Michael, 2015. "Measuring the extent of a Social License to Operate: The influence of marine biodiversity offsets in the oil and gas sector in Western Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 121-129.
    20. Santiago, Ana Lúcia & Demajorovic, Jacques & Rossetto, Dennys Eduardo & Luke, Hanabeth, 2021. "Understanding the fundamentals of the Social Licence to Operate: Its evolution, current state of development and future avenues for research," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:9:p:912-:d:77704. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.