Search

Abstract: With the rapid growth of unconventional oil and natural gas development transforming the U.S. economic and physical landscape, social scientists have increasingly explored the spatial dynamics of public support for this issue—that is, whether people closer to unconventional oil and gas development are more supportive or more opposed. While theoretical frameworks like construal‐level theory and the “Not in My Backyard” (or NIMBY) moniker provide insight into these spatial dynamics, case studies in specific locations experiencing energy development reveal substantial variation in community responses. Larger‐scale studies exploring the link between proximity and support have been hampered by data quality and availability. We draw on a unique data set that includes geo‐coded data from national surveys (nine waves; n = 19,098) and high‐resolution well location data to explore the relationship between proximity and both familiarity with and support for hydraulic fracturing. We use two different measures of proximity—respondent distance to the nearest well and the density of wells within a certain radius of the respondent's location. We find that both types of proximity to new development are linked to more familiarity with hydraulic fracturing, even after controlling for various individual and contextual factors, but only distance‐based proximity is linked to more support for the practice. When significant, these relationships are similar to or exceed the effects of race, income, gender, and age. We discuss the implications of these findings for effective risk communication as well as the importance of incorporating spatial analysis into public opinion research on perceptions of energy development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The prospect of fracking in the United Kingdom has been accompanied by significant public unease. We outline how the policy debate is being framed by UK institutional actors, finding evidence of a dominant discourse in which the policy approach is defined through a deficit model of public understanding of science and in which a technical approach to feasibility and safety is deemed as sufficient grounds for good policymaking. Deploying a deliberative focus group methodology with lay publics across different sites in the north of England, we find that these institutional framings are poorly aligned with participants’ responses. We find that unease regularly overflows the focus on safety and feasibility and cannot be satisfactorily explained by a lack of understanding on the part of participants. We find that scholarship from science and technology studies productively elucidates our participants’ largely sceptical positions, and orientates strategies for responding to them more effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What drives local decisions to prohibit industrial land uses? This study examines the passage of municipal ordinances prohibiting gas development using hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in New York State. I argue that local action against fracking depended on multiple conceptions of the shale gas industry. Matching these alternative conceptions with prevailing spatial models of public response to industrial land uses—“not in my backyard,” “not in anyone’s backyard,” and “please in my backyard”—improves our understanding of where local contention might emerge and how it contributes to policy change. Results from event history and logistic regression analyses show, first, that communities lying above favorable areas of the shale did not pass anti-fracking laws because opposition to fracking was counteracted by significant local support for development. Fracking bans passed primarily in a geographic sweet spot on the periphery of targeted regions, where little or no compelling economic interest in development existed. Second, as fracking became the subject of a highly politicized national debate, local opposition increasingly reflected mobilization by political liberals. This trend is reflected in the increasing rate of ordinance adoption among Democratic-leaning communities outside the geographic sweet spot. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides an analysis of public attitudes toward fracking use and policies with an eye toward factors that help us account for differing levels of support. Using data from a national survey of American adults, we found that women and people residing in urban areas are slightly more inclined to oppose fracking and to favor more regulation in terms of drilling operations and company chemical disclosure requirements than men or people living in rural areas. Our key findings, however, are that opposition to fracking and support for current or increased levels of regulation are strongly related to Democratic Party identification and to pro-environmental policy attitudes. We conclude by suggesting that a tendency for people to view fracking as an environmental rather than an energy issue has potentially important implications for the implementation of locally based regulatory requirements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]