IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ala/wpaper/2018-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Geographic Dispersion of Economic Shocks: Evidence from the Fracking Revolution: Comment

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander James

    () (Department of Economics and Public Policy, University of Alaska Anchorage)

  • Brock Smith

    () (Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Montana State University)

Abstract

In the mid 2000s, shale-energy-rich U.S. counties experienced a sudden and significant economic shock resulting from energy extraction. While the resulting localized economic effects are relatively well understood, less is known about the geographic dispersion of the effects. We build upon an existing literature, most notably Feyrer, Mansur, and Sacerdote (2017), by examining the conditional economic effects of nearby energy production. Because energy-producing counties tend to be located near each other, producing counties experience inward economic spillovers from other nearby producing counties and this inflates the estimated effect of own-county production. Accounting for this, we identify smaller income effects of hydrocarbon production than Feyrer, Mansur, and Sacerdote (2017), limited to counties within 60-80 miles of the source of production. The proposed estimation strategy can be applied more generally to estimate the dispersion of multiple, simultaneously occurring economic shocks.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander James & Brock Smith, 2018. "The Geographic Dispersion of Economic Shocks: Evidence from the Fracking Revolution: Comment," Working Papers 2018-02, University of Alaska Anchorage, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ala:wpaper:2018-02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econpapers.uaa.alaska.edu/RePEC/ala/wpaper/ALA201802.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Dan Black & Terra McKinnish & Seth Sanders, 2005. "The Economic Impact Of The Coal Boom And Bust," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(503), pages 449-476, April.
    4. James Feyrer & Erin T. Mansur & Bruce Sacerdote, 2017. "Geographic Dispersion of Economic Shocks: Evidence from the Fracking Revolution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1313-1334, April.
    5. Guy Michaels, 2011. "The Long Term Consequences of Resourceā€Based Specialisation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(551), pages 31-57, March.
    6. Jason Brown & Timothy Fitzgerald & Jeremy G. Weber, 2016. "Asset Ownership, Windfalls, and Income: Evidence from Oil and Gas Royalties," Research Working Paper RWP 16-12, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, revised 08 Dec 2016.
    7. Weinstein, Amanda L. & Partridge, Mark D. & Tsvetkova, Alexandra, 2018. "Follow the money: Aggregate, sectoral and spatial effects of an energy boom on local earnings," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 196-209.
    8. Johanna Richter & Alliana Salanguit & Alexander James, 2018. "The (Uneven) Spatial Distribution of the Bakken Oil Boom," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(4), pages 577-592.
    9. Weber, Jeremy G., 2014. "A decade of natural gas development: The makings of a resource curse?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 168-183.
    10. Maniloff, Peter & Mastromonaco, Ralph, 2017. "The local employment impacts of fracking: A national study," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 62-85.
    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. Guettabi, Mouhcine & James, Alexander, 2020. "Who benefits from an oil boom? Evidence from a unique Alaskan data set," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    2. Eife, Thomas, 2020. "The General Equilibrium Effects of the Shale Revolution," Working Papers 0694, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    3. Michael Pollmann, 2020. "Causal Inference for Spatial Treatments," Papers 2011.00373, arXiv.org.
    4. Kevin Berry & Alexander James & Brock Smith & Brett Watson, 2019. "Geography, Geology, and Regional Economic Development," Working Papers 2019-03, University of Alaska Anchorage, Department of Economics.
    5. Rickman, Dan & Wang, Hongbo, 2020. "What goes up must come down? The recent economic cycles of the four most oil and gas dominated states in the US," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    6. Cunningham, Scott & DeAngelo, Gregory & Smith, Brock, 2020. "Fracking and risky sexual activity," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    7. Diemer, Andreas, 2020. "Spatial diffusion of local economic shocks in social networks: evidence from the US fracking boom," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 105868, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economic Shocks; Regional Development; Economic Propagation;

    JEL classification:

    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • L81 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Retail and Wholesale Trade; e-Commerce
    • Q33 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Resource Booms (Dutch Disease)

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ala:wpaper:2018-02. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jonathan Alevy). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ecuaaus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.