Dissertation Risk, Place and Oil and Gas Policy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DISSERTATION RISK, PLACE AND OIL AND GAS POLICY PREFERENCES AMONG COLORADOANS Submitted by Adam Mayer Department of Sociology In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Spring 2017 Doctoral Committee: Advisor: Tara O’Connor Shelley Stephanie Malin Mike Lacy John Loomis Copyright by Adam P. Mayer 2017 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT RISK, PLACE AND OIL AND GAS POLICY PREFERENCES AMONG COLORADOANS Unconventional oil and gas extraction, primarily via hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”), has changed the energy landscape in the United States. The policy regime currently governing fracking is a complex patchwork in which state regulators have the primary authority. Social scientists have thoroughly documented general beliefs and risk perceptions related to fracking there is a lack of policy-related research. This dissertation examined public policy preferences for fracking regulation using a survey data from a statewide sample of Coloradoans. Theoretically, it was hypothesized that policy support hinged upon factors like risk perceptions, benefit perceptions, place attachment, community economic identity and political ideology. Overall, risk perceptions and political ideology emerged as relatively consistent and powerful predictors of support for unconventional oil and gas regulatory policy. On the other hand, several possible predictors had little to no role. Benefit perceptions had little effect on any policy dependent variable. Further, community economic identity and place attachment played very little role. I discuss policy implications and directions for future research. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The research presented here would not have been possible without the support and assistance of several individuals. Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge these individuals. First, I would like to thank Dr. Tara Shelley for her seemingly never-ending support. This dissertation literally could not have happened without her, as she was essential in helping implement every stage of this project from its initial inception, to data collection, to the analysis of the results. In some ways I have been a demanding graduate student—always applying for grants, submitting manuscripts, etc.—and I am truly indebted to the enormous amount of time that Dr. Shelley has invested in my success. Moving forward, any success that I have in my social science career will be largely a result of Dr. Shelley’s mentorship and guidance. Dr. Stephanie Malin has brought a unique expertise into the social dimensions of energy development to this dissertation. She has been pivotal in clarifying key theoretical issues and keeping this research grounded in the literature. I am very fortunate to have an engaged, emerging expert on this topic on my dissertation committee. The methodological expertise of Dr. Mike Lacy has also been essential to this project. Dr. Lacy has given me dozens, if not hundreds, of hours of his time to hammer out some of the nuances of designing an effective sampling strategy, exploiting a somewhat small sample size and working through numerous other issues. In addition, Dr. Lacy’s input in other areas and his general intuition about research challenges beyond methods has been very useful. I have long had an interest in “adapting” valuation methods and related techniques from economics to sociology. A prior collaborator, Dr. Catherine Keske, suggested that I reach out to Dr. John Loomis for his methodological expertise, referring to him as a “legend”. There are few iii legends in the social sciences and I am grateful to have one as my outside member. While I had read a great deal of the technical literature on valuation techniques meeting with Dr. Loomis in person helped clarify a number of complexities that I have struggled with. His help was invaluable. My master’s thesis advisor, Dr. Jeffrey Timberlake, has also been an instrumental figure in my development as a social scientist. Looking back, I was very lucky to have such a nurturing and understanding mentor early on in graduate school. Dr. Timberlake has continued to provide valuable advice even though I have left the University of Cincinnati. Working with undergraduate research assistants to collect the data used in this dissertation was the highlight of my graduate career. This project would not have been possible without them. I send my warmest gratitude to Chloe Thome, Andrew Walz, Daniel Callahan, Ruby Castro, Marie Harding, Nolan Case, Neil Griffith, Danny Valdez, Heather Crosby, Rich Fordham, Lauren Perotti, Jose Gomez, David Strait, JD Haley, Ryan Becker, Jessie Miranda, Lauren Hartsough, Taylor Loberg, Alyssa Jansekok, Alexandra Poynter, Allison Brown and Jazmine Gonzalez. I would also like to thank my wife, Dr. Michelle Foster, for understanding all the late nights and early mornings required to complete this project. Completing this dissertation was just as demanding for her as it was for me. I greatly appreciate the financial support provided by the Rural Sociological Society (RSS) for this project, as it would not have been possible without it. RSS funds important, applied research and should be an example in this regard for other societies within sociology. The Institute for Learning at Teaching (TILT) also provided me with financial support to fund iv translation and hire Spanish language interviewers. Without this essential support, the data would not be representative of the large Spanish-speaking population in Colorado. v TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. ii 2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................................... iv 3. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................1 4. CHAPTER 2 FRACKING POLICY SUPPORT: THE ROLE OF PLACE, RISK AND TRUST .....................................................................................................................................23 5. CHAPTER 3 WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR FRACKING REGULATION AMONG COLORADOANS ...................................................................................................................65 6. CHAPTER 4 WHO SHOULD BE IN CHARGE? GOVERNANCE SCALE PREFERENCES FOR OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT...................................................107 7. CHAPTER 5 THE EXOGENEITY OF IDEOLOGY IN THE FRACKING POLICY CONTROVERSY ..................................................................................................................143 8. CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION................................................................................................179 APPENDIX A: METHODOLOGICAL APPENDIX ...........................................................194 APPENDIX B: SURVEY INSTRUMENT ...........................................................................211 vi CH. 1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this dissertation was to understand what policies the public supports to regulate hydraulic fracturing and to develop a theoretical understanding of the forces that drive people to support oil and gas policies. I used survey data to accomplish this task. The present chapter reviewed the topic of unconventional oil and gas development, introduced the theories that informed the analysis, detailed the research questions, and described the data. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The United States has recently experienced a boom in domestic oil and gas production as the combination of hydraulic fracturing and directional drilling has allowed for access to previously unreachable oil and gas deposits. Using data from the Energy Information Agency (EIA), I constructed Figures 1.1 and 1.2 to show trends in oil and gas production. Figure 1.1 shows domestic gas production since 1995, indicating a dramatic increase in which total natural gas production has nearly doubled in the past decade or so. Figure 1.2 shows that oil production has nearly doubled since 2010. Unconventional drilling technologies, like fracking, are a significant cause of this increase in domestic oil and gas production (Krupnick et. al. 2014; Yergin 2011). 1 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year Figure 1.1 Natural Gas Production 35000 25000 15000 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year Figure 1.2 Oil Production 2 The explosion in fracking holds both promise and risk. With respect to promise, oil and gas development could provide much-needed jobs and tax revenue—particularly for underdeveloped rural areas (Lee 2015 Newell and Raimi 2015; Paredes, Komarek and Loveridge 2015; Weber 2013). However, early estimates of the job growth provided by fracking— particularly estimates from industry groups—were drastically over-stated and the actual amount of jobs is likely rather modest (Kinnoman 2011; Weber 2013). In addition, few jobs actually go to local rural populations because highly specialized skills are needed to operate the machinery used in oil and gas extraction (particularly fracking) and thus, many direct jobs go to outsiders (Hardy and Kelsey 2015). While recent research examining a short time period has found a positive effect on job growth and economic development, a well-established “research curse” line of scholarship indicates that long-run specialization in extractive industries leads to economic underdevelopment (Haggerty et. al. 2014; James and Aadland 2011). Thus, the fracking boom has had some short-run positive impact on economic development