Origins and Consequences of State-Level Variation in Shale Regulation: The Cases of Pennsylvania and New York

Murtazashvili, Ilia

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11499-6_8

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the national congress has declined to “federalize” UOGE regulation, and since USEPA—partly due to restrictions in existing federal statutes (Rabe & Borick, )—has adopted the role of secondary overseer, states have assumed primary regulatory authority over UOGE. Hence, a patchwork of mainly state regulations governs most aspects of UOGE in the United States (Murtazashvili, ; Richardson, Gottlieb, Krupnick, & Wiseman, ). Within this patchwork system of decentralized and overlapping authority, critics maintain that some states are careening ahead with UOGE without fully understanding the concomitant costs, while other states take a more cautious route (Wiseman, ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing Unconventional Oil and Gas Extraction: The Case of Pennsylvania

Chalfant

Corrigan

2018

Review of Policy Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decade, directional drilling and hydraulic fracturing enabled an unconventional oil and gas extraction (UOGE) boom in many regions of the United States, including parts of Pennsylvania. This revolution has created serious concerns about the capability of existing institutions to govern important societal outcomes associated with UOGE. We present a conceptual framework for assessing key societal outcomes influenced by UOGE governance. In applying this framework to Pennsylvania, we discern certain institutional strengths that have allowed the Commonwealth to reap appreciable short‐term economic growth from rich resource endowments. We also find, however, that several institutional weaknesses have allowed costs externalized to the environment, public health, and community integrity to offset some proportion of those economic benefits. Likewise, we find that governance of UOGE in Pennsylvania has contributed to a bifurcated sociopolitical landscape wherein adversarial coalitions dispute the legitimacy of the industry and its governance.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing Unconventional Oil and Gas Extraction: The Case of Pennsylvania

Chalfant

Corrigan

2018

Review of Policy Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This sharp increase follows the adoption of aggressive RPS targets of “50% by 2030” and “12.50% by 2021” in New Jersey and North Carolina, respectively. A steady increase of FBNG capacity between 2008 and 2018 in North Carolina, Delaware, New Jersey, and Virginia characterized the start of the shale boom in the Marcellus Shale formation which extends across most of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, parts of Western Maryland, eastern Ohio, western Virginia, and southern New York (Hefley & Wang, 2015; Murtazashvili, 2015).…”

Section: Data and Descriptive Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating the impacts of natural gas power generation growth on solar electricity development: PJM's evolving resource mix and ramping capability

Nyangon

Byrne

2022

WIREs Energy & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expansion of distributed solar photovoltaic (PV) and natural gas-fired generation capacity in the United States has put a renewed spotlight on methods and tools for power system planning and grid modernization. This article investigates the impact of increasing natural gas-fired electricity generation assets on installed distributed solar PV systems in the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland (PJM) Interconnection in the United States over the period 2008-2018. We developed an empirical dynamic panel data model using the systemgeneralized method of moments (system-GMM) estimation approach. The model accounts for the impact of past and current technical, market and policy changes over time, forecasting errors, and business cycles by controlling for PJM jurisdictions-level effects and year fixed effects. Using an instrumental variable to control for endogeneity, we concluded that natural gas does not crowd out renewables like solar PV in the PJM capacity market; however, we also found considerable heterogeneity. Such heterogeneity was displayed in the relationship between solar PV systems and electricity prices. More interestingly, we found no evidence suggesting any relationship between distributed solar PV development and nuclear, coal, hydro, or electricity consumption. In addition, considering policy effects of state renewable portfolio standards, net energy metering, differences in the PJM market structure, and other demand and cost-related factors proved important in assessing their impacts on solar PV generation capacity, including energy storage as a non-wire alternative policy technique.

show abstract

“…As greater policymaking responsibility is devolved to states (Sapat, 2004) and rulemaking is an increasingly important avenue for policymaking (Kerwin & Furlong, 1992; Yackee, 2006), it is no surprise that state‐level rulemaking venues have become a critical site of policy action. However, policymaking research has only recently begun to focus on these venues (Cook, 2014a, 2015; Murtazashvili, 2015; Rinfret, Cook, & Pautz, 2014; Yackee, 2013). This study contributes to the growing body of scholarship on state‐level rulemaking by analyzing the influence of stakeholder participation on rulemaking—an area of study that has received significant attention in the legislative realm at both the state and federal levels (see for example Andrews & Edwards, 2004; Austen‐Smith, 1993; Hojnacki & Kimball, 1998; Sabatier, 1988), but less attention in state‐level rulemaking contexts (Kelleher & Yackee, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Stakeholder Participation and Influence on State‐Level Rulemaking

Crow¹,

Albright²,

Koebele³

2019

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite sustained attention to the role of stakeholders in policymaking—both in legislative and regulatory venues—we lack a systematic understanding of whether and when stakeholders wield influence over decisions. This is particularly true regarding state‐level rulemaking in the United States, which has become an important venue of policy action as federal policymaking is increasingly stymied. Although the specifics of the rulemaking process vary to some degree across states, determining whether common patterns of stakeholder influence exist across states and issue areas can advance our understanding of regulatory institutions more broadly. This study contributes to the growing body of scholarship on state‐level rulemaking by analyzing the ways in which stakeholders participate in rulemaking processes and the effects on rulemaking decisions of such participation in three policy domains across five states. We find that while industry may be influential during rulemaking across cases, consequential opportunities for non‐industry stakeholders to influence regulatory decisions also exist.

show abstract

Origins and Consequences of State-Level Variation in Shale Regulation: The Cases of Pennsylvania and New York

Cited by 8 publications

References 46 publications

Governing Unconventional Oil and Gas Extraction: The Case of Pennsylvania

Governing Unconventional Oil and Gas Extraction: The Case of Pennsylvania

Estimating the impacts of natural gas power generation growth on solar electricity development: PJM's evolving resource mix and ramping capability

Evaluating Stakeholder Participation and Influence on State‐Level Rulemaking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About