Abstract
Public concern about the health and environmental risks from oil and gas operations has grown in recent years. However, scholarly attention is just beginning to unpack the differences in how states are regulating oil and gas development. For some states, a laissez faire approach is preferable because of the substantial economic benefits that accompany natural resource development. Others prefer a more activist state government that is more willing to use its oversight and regulatory powers to balance environmental protection with oil and gas development. Using data drawn from a variety of political, economic, regulatory, and energy sources, we find that litigation, state level liberalism, and the number of wells are most helpful in accounting for why some states have stricter regulatory standards as compared to others.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
