IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jenvss/v4y2014i1p65-77.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New York or Pennsylvania state of mind: social representations in newspaper coverage of gas development in the Marcellus Shale

Author

Listed:
  • Darrick Evensen
  • Christopher Clarke
  • Richard Stedman

Abstract

What first comes to mind when you think of natural gas development in the Marcellus Shale region? The information and ideas we hold about shale gas development can strongly influence our discussion of this issue, the impacts we associate with it, and the types of regulation we view as appropriate. Our knowledge and beliefs are based in part on social representations—common sense understandings of complex, often scientific, phenomena, generated in the public sphere and reliant on the history, culture, and social structure of the context in which they emerge. In this article, we examine social representations of environmental, economic, and social impacts of natural gas development in the Marcellus Shale, as reported by major regional newspapers. We conducted a content analysis of newspaper coverage in two newspapers in the northern tier of Pennsylvania and two in the southern tier of New York from 2007 to 2011, with a total sample of 1,037 articles. Effects on water quality were by far the most prevalent environmental representation in each newspaper. Economic representations focused on jobs, leases, and royalties, but varied substantially across geographical contexts. Representations of social impacts were relatively rare in each media outlet. We also interviewed the journalists who wrote the most articles on shale gas development at each newspaper. Their perspectives provide some explanations for why certain impacts were mentioned more frequently than others, and for differences between newspapers. We conclude with implications for communicating about impacts associated with shale gas development, and for regulating development. Copyright AESS 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Darrick Evensen & Christopher Clarke & Richard Stedman, 2014. "A New York or Pennsylvania state of mind: social representations in newspaper coverage of gas development in the Marcellus Shale," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 4(1), pages 65-77, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:4:y:2014:i:1:p:65-77
    DOI: 10.1007/s13412-013-0153-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s13412-013-0153-9
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13412-013-0153-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kinnaman, Thomas C., 2011. "The economic impact of shale gas extraction: A review of existing studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1243-1249, May.
    2. Blohm, Andrew & Peichel, Jeremy & Smith, Caroline & Kougentakis, Alexandra, 2012. "The significance of regulation and land use patterns on natural gas resource estimates in the Marcellus shale," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 358-369.
    3. Deyi Hou & Jian Luo & Abir Al-Tabbaa, 2012. "Shale gas can be a double-edged sword for climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(6), pages 385-387, June.
    4. Weber, Jeremy G., 2012. "The effects of a natural gas boom on employment and income in Colorado, Texas, and Wyoming," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1580-1588.
    5. Jenner, Steffen & Lamadrid, Alberto J., 2013. "Shale gas vs. coal: Policy implications from environmental impact comparisons of shale gas, conventional gas, and coal on air, water, and land in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 442-453.
    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. Andreas Goldthau & Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2016. "Energy Technology, Politics, and Interpretative Frames: Shale Gas Fracking in Eastern Europe," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(4), pages 50-69, November.
    2. Andrea M. Feldpausch-Parker & Morey Burnham & Maryna Melnik & Meaghan L. Callaghan & Theresa Selfa, 2015. "News Media Analysis of Carbon Capture and Storage and Biomass: Perceptions and Possibilities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Clarke, Christopher E. & Hart, Philip S. & Schuldt, Jonathon P. & Evensen, Darrick T.N. & Boudet, Hilary S. & Jacquet, Jeffrey B. & Stedman, Richard C., 2015. "Public opinion on energy development: The interplay of issue framing, top-of-mind associations, and political ideology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 131-140.
    4. Andersson-Hudson, Jessica & Knight, William & Humphrey, Mathew & O’Hara, Sarah, 2016. "Exploring support for shale gas extraction in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 582-589.
    5. Clarke, Christopher E. & Evensen, Darrick T.N., 2023. "Attention to news media coverage of unconventional oil/gas development impacts: Exploring psychological antecedents and effects on issue support," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    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. Philipp M. Richter, 2015. "From Boom to Bust? A Critical Look at US Shale Gas Projections," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    2. Yao, Liuyang & Sui, Bo, 2020. "Heterogeneous preferences for shale water management: Evidence from a choice experiment in Fuling shale gas field, southwest China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    3. Baranzelli, Claudia & Vandecasteele, Ine & Ribeiro Barranco, Ricardo & Mari i Rivero, Ines & Pelletier, Nathan & Batelaan, Okke & Lavalle, Carlo, 2015. "Scenarios for shale gas development and their related land use impacts in the Baltic Basin, Northern Poland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 80-95.
    4. Katie Jo Black & Shawn J. McCoy & Jeremy G. Weber, 2018. "When Externalities Are Taxed: The Effects and Incidence of Pennsylvania’s Impact Fee on Shale Gas Wells," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(1), pages 107-153.
    5. Burnett, J. Wesley, 2015. "FOREWORD: Unconventional Oil and Gas Development: Economic, Environmental, and Policy Analysis," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 44(2), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Timothy W. Kelsey & Mark D. Partridge & Nancy E. White, 2016. "Unconventional Gas and Oil Development in the United States: Economic Experience and Policy Issues," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 191-214.
    7. Tunstall, Thomas, 2015. "Recent Economic and Community Impact of Unconventional Oil and Gas Exploration and Production on South Texas Counties in the Eagle Ford Shale Area," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 45(1).
    8. Mayer, Adam, 2018. "The Fiscal Impacts of Energy: Perspectives from local governments in the Mountain West, USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 186-193.
    9. Susan Amiesa Fubara & Omowumi O. Iledare & Obindah Gershon & Jeremiah Ejemeyovwi, 2019. "Natural Resource Extraction and Economic Performance of the Niger Delta Region in Nigeria," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(4), pages 188-193.
    10. Gourley, Patrick & Madonia, Greg, 2018. "Resource booms and crime: Evidence from oil and gas production in Colorado," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 37-52.
    11. Tunstall, Thomas, 2015. "Iterative Bass Model forecasts for unconventional oil production in the Eagle Ford Shale," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(P1), pages 580-588.
    12. Auping, Willem L. & Pruyt, Erik & de Jong, Sijbren & Kwakkel, Jan H., 2016. "The geopolitical impact of the shale revolution: Exploring consequences on energy prices and rentier states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 390-399.
    13. Lee, Jim, 2015. "The regional economic impact of oil and gas extraction in Texas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 60-71.
    14. 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.
    15. Munasib, Abdul & Rickman, Dan S., 2015. "Regional economic impacts of the shale gas and tight oil boom: A synthetic control analysis," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1-17.
    16. Weinstein, Amanda & Partridge, Mark & Tsvetkova, Alexandra, 2017. "Follow the Money: How Does the Income Flow After an Energy Boom," MPRA Paper 77336, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Maguire, Karen & Winters, John V., 2016. "Energy Boom and Gloom? Local Effects of Oil and Natural Gas Drilling on Subjective Well-Being," IZA Discussion Papers 9811, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Evans, Neil & Jones, Calvin & Munday, Max & Song, Meng, 2019. "Economic effects in the UK periphery from unconventional gas development: Evidence from Wales," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1037-1046.
    19. Hoy, Kyle A. & Kelsey, Timothy W. & Shields, Martin, 2017. "An Economic Impact Report of Shale Gas Extraction in Pennsylvania with Stricter Assumptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 178-185.
    20. Agerton, Mark & Hartley, Peter R. & Medlock, Kenneth B. & Temzelides, Ted, 2017. "Employment impacts of upstream oil and gas investment in the United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 171-180.

    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:spr:jenvss:v:4:y:2014:i:1:p:65-77. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.