IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v43y2013i3p474-496.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fractured, Fragmented Federalism: A Study in Fracking Regulatory Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Barbara Warner
  • Jennifer Shapiro

Abstract

Unlike the regulation of other heavy industries, fracking--in which companies create cracks in shale rock to extract gas, oil, or other substances--has been exempted from federal reach, leaving regulation to the states, which appear vulnerable to capture by energy interests. As fracking has expanded, become more complex, and generated considerable controversy, some states have sought to quash local government efforts to impose more stringent regulations. Citizens and activists have sought redress through the courts, and some states are fighting over the transport of waste disposal across state lines. The story is one of fractured, fragmented federalism that illustrates the key role played by regulated interests that prefer state to federal regulation, resulting in a variable, often weak state regulatory regime. Copyright 2013, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Barbara Warner & Jennifer Shapiro, 2013. "Fractured, Fragmented Federalism: A Study in Fracking Regulatory Policy," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 43(3), pages 474-496, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:43:y:2013:i:3:p:474-496
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pjt014
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Boying & Zheng, Mingbo & Zhao, Xinxin & Chang, Chun-Ping, 2021. "An assessment of the effect of partisan ideology on shale gas production and the implications for environmental regulations," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 45(3).
    2. Steven Nelson & Jonathan M. Fisk, 2021. "End of the (Pipe)Line? Understanding how States Manage the Risks of Oil and Gas Wells," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(2), pages 203-221, March.
    3. Esterhuyse, Surina & Avenant, Marinda & Redelinghuys, Nola & Kijko, Andrzej & Glazewski, Jan & Plit, Lisa & Kemp, Marthie & Smit, Ansie & Vos, A. Tascha, 2018. "Monitoring of unconventional oil and gas extraction and its policy implications: A case study from South Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 109-120.
    4. Matthew Fry & Christian Brannstrom & Trey Murphy, 2015. "How Dallas became frack free: hydrocarbon governance under neoliberalism," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(12), pages 2591-2608, December.
    5. Fry, Matthew & Brannstrom, Christian, 2017. "Emergent patterns and processes in urban hydrocarbon governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 383-393.
    6. Bugden, Dylan & Kay, David & Glynn, Russell & Stedman, Richard, 2016. "The bundle below: Understanding unconventional oil and gas development through analysis of lease agreements," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 214-219.
    7. Kroepsch, Adrianne C., 2018. "Horizontal drilling, changing patterns of extraction, and piecemeal participation: Urban hydrocarbon governance in Colorado," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 469-480.
    8. Arnold, Gwen & Farrer, Benjamin & Holahan, Robert, 2018. "How do landowners learn about high-volume hydraulic fracturing? A survey of Eastern Ohio landowners in active or proposed drilling units," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 455-464.
    9. Ilia Murtazashvili & Veeshan Rayamajhee & Keith Taylor, 2023. "The Tragedy of the Nurdles: Governing Global Externalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-15, April.
    10. Ilia Murtazashvili & Ennio E. Piano, 2019. "Governance of shale gas development: Insights from the Bloomington school of institutional analysis," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 32(2), pages 159-179, June.
    11. Joshua C. Hall & Christopher Shultz & E. Frank Stephenson, 2018. "The political economy of local fracking bans," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 42(2), pages 397-408, April.
    12. Shawn Olson Hazboun & Hilary Schaffer Boudet, 2020. "Public Preferences in a Shifting Energy Future: Comparing Public Views of Eight Energy Sources in North America’s Pacific Northwest," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    13. Christenson, Dino P. & Goldfarb, Jillian L. & Kriner, Douglas L., 2017. "Costs, benefits, and the malleability of public support for “Fracking”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 407-417.
    14. Mayer, Adam, 2017. "Political identity and paradox in oil and gas policy: A study of regulatory exaggeration in Colorado, US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 452-459.
    15. Mark Heuer & Shan Yan, 2017. "Marcellus Shale Fracking and Susquehanna River Stakeholder Attitudes: A Five-Year Update," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-19, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:publus:v:43:y:2013:i:3:p:474-496. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    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.