Local Impacts of Unconventional Gas Development within Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale Region: Gauging Boomtown Development through the Perspectives of Educational Administrators

Governing Unconventional Oil and Gas Extraction: The Case of Pennsylvania

“…In Pennsylvania, some UOGE companies have entered into agreements with local governments to repair roads damaged by company operations (Raimi & Newell, ), thus internalizing—at least partially—a potentially significant source of cost externalization. Research in Pennsylvania has also documented more general concerns about the community impacts of UOGE such as unequal distribution of associated costs and benefits, changes in community social structures, effects on long‐term livability or quality of life, including changes to local environments and ecosystems, especially in highly rural communities experiencing increased industrialization (Brasier et al, ; Schafft & Biddle, ; Schafft, Glenna, Green, & Borlu, ).…”

Advocacy Coalition Resources and Strategies in Colorado Hydraulic Fracturing Politics

“…In contrast, hydraulic fracking opponents focus on the repercussions on the environment, public health, and local communities (Jackson et al 2011;Hughes 2013). Understanding coalitions' resources and strategies is important for state (Warner and Shapiro 2013) and local government regulators (Boudet and Ortolano 2010), community stakeholders (Schafft et al 2014), and for researchers and advocates (Heikkila et al 2014).…”

The structural underpinnings impacting rapid growth in resource regions

“…Debates in Australia, Canada, and the US have pointed to some structural underpinnings such as policy ambiguity and indifference; unclear roles and responsibilities for industry, community, and various levels of government; limited structures to support coordination across various levels of government; and a lack of accurate information about the scale and scope of industry projects that shape demands for infrastructure and services in nearby communities (Brueckner et al, 2013;Haslam McKenzie and Rowley, 2013;Rolfe and Kinnear, 2013;Schafft et al, 2014). At the same time, neo-liberal policies have been withdrawing government intervention in community development and moving towards localism or 'responsibilising communities' without flexible and supportive policies and resources for communities and regions undergoing rapid change (Dufty-Jones and Wray, 2013).…”

“…Rapid growth can pose intense pressures and demands for infrastructure and services in resource regions. The socio-economic impacts and disruptions from economic upswings are well described in the 'boomtown' literature (Ennis et al, 2013;Lawrie et al, 2011;Ruddell, 2011;Schafft et al, 2014). Some of the identified issues include inadequate and aging physical infrastructure; increased demand for physical and mental health supports; limited daycare; intense competition for housing; increased demand for community supports; recruitment and retention challenges for a broad range of stakeholders; and increased demand for literacy, basic job skills, and specialized training programs.…”