Federalism and the politics of oil and gas pipelines in Canada (Alberta) and the United States (Texas)

Abstract

AbstractIn recent years, pipeline policy has been a significant and controversial issue in Canadian politics. In the United States, pipeline projects to increase transportation capacity for Texas oil have also been high on the energy agenda, but they have not permeated national politics like in Canada. In fact, new pipelines to transport oil and gas out of Texas' Permian Basin have multiplied without generating serious national controversy or intergovernmental conflicts. This article develops an explanation for these distinct political outcomes in Canada and the United States. The article identifies three factors that have contributed to pipeline projects triggering serious intergovernmental conflicts in Canada around Alberta oil but not in the United States in relation to the transportation of Texas oil: (1) pipeline structures and the regulatory framework for oil and gas; (2) the ideological and political support for, or opposition to, oil and gas development; and (3) the level of Indigenous opposition to pipeline projects.Related ArticlesAsh, John S. 2011. “Radiation or Riots: Risk Perception in Nuclear Power Decision Making and Deliberative Approaches to Resolving Stakeholder Conflict.” Politics & Policy 39(2): 317–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2010.00237.x.Mahafza, Zachary, Jonathan M. Fisk, and David P. Adams. 2021. “Crude Contempt: Examining Local Pushback to Oil and Gas Development in California.” Politics & Policy 49(2): 479–501. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12401.Neill, Katharine A., and John C. Morris. 2012. “A Tangled Web of Principals and Agents: Examining the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill through a Principal‐Agent Lens.” Politics & Policy 40(4): 629–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2012.00371.x.