Fracking Fortunes: Economic Well‐being and Oil and Gas Development along the Urban‐Rural Continuum

Mayer, Adam; Hazboun, Shawn Olson; Malin, Stephanie A.

doi:10.1111/ruso.12198

Cited by 40 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a growing literature on fracking, but oil and gas drilling have different economic and political dynamics. Fracking creates economic benefits for landowners, and decisions about development are often by individual landowners (Eaton and Kinchy 2016; Mayer, Olson‐Hazboun, and Malin 2018; Sica and Huber 2017). Hardrock mines on the other hand are large‐scale projects requiring extensive infrastructure and public land.…”

Section: Research Site—the Minnesota Iron Rangementioning

confidence: 99%

Who Speaks for the Place? Cultural Dynamics of Conflicts Over Hazardous Industrial Development

Kojola

2020

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research in environmental sociology typically focuses on how communities mobilize against polluting industries in “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) reactions or accept industrial pollution. Instead, I explore how different groups react to the same proposed development with divergent NIMBY and “place it in my backyard” (PIMBY) demands. I use the emblematic case of controversial proposed copper mines in the rural Iron Range region of Minnesota to examine how different social actors use cultural repertoires to interpret development and assert legitimacy in making decisions about the place. Through interviews, ethnographic observation, and discourse analysis, I find that decisions about mining development become controversial because of how the projects resonate, or conflict, with people’s emotional meanings of place, not simply material benefits or scientific assessments of pollution. Pro‐mining mobilization from rural, white, and working‐class residents is justified by the right to defend a way of life. Opposition from environmentalists is framed as protecting a cherished place understood through experiences of outdoor recreation and wilderness that is now threatened by development. I advance environmental sociology by using concepts of cultural repertoires and place to examine cultural dynamics of environmental conflicts and how groups construct meanings of justice and assert legitimacy.

show abstract

Section: Research Site—the Minnesota Iron Rangementioning

confidence: 99%

Who Speaks for the Place? Cultural Dynamics of Conflicts Over Hazardous Industrial Development

Kojola

2020

Sociological Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The state’s institutional context and (lack of) transparency here is key, given the US’s federal regulatory vacuum. The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) is the main regulatory body in Colorado, overseeing and permitting UOG production in a state that considers itself a regulatory leader [ [5] , [18] , [19] ]. Historically, the COGCC has an intrinsic conflict of interest because its dual mission has required it to encourage oil and gas production, while also protecting Colorado residents and ecosystems from risks of UOG production [ 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Depressed democracy, environmental injustice: Exploring the negative mental health implications of unconventional oil and gas production in the United States

Malin

2020

Energy Research & Social Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights U.S. unconventional oil and gas production has proliferated, moving into neighborhoods. Institutional contexts and procedural equity matter for mental health. Interviewees experienced inaccessible information as significant institutional barrier. Interviewees experienced powerlessness to decide how, when, & where production takes place. These 2 institutional barriers structure procedural inequity, amplify negative mental health impacts.

show abstract

“…For exceptions see Betz et al (2015), Deller and Schreiber (2012), Lobao et al (2016), Mayer et al (2018), and Weber (2012).…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural Resource Dependence and Rural American Economic Prosperity from 2000 to 2015

Mueller¹

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research suggests dependence upon natural resource development leads to decreases in per capita income, increases in inequality, and elevated poverty. Natural resource development generally takes two forms, extractive (e.g. oil and gas, mining, timber) and non-extractive (e.g. tourism, recreation, real estate). However, research has rarely examined both in-tandem. Drawing on the concept of dependence (i.e. over-specialization), I test the hypothesis that increasing levels of both forms of development resulted in diminishing returns to economic prosperity—operationalized as per capita income, inequality, and poverty—in rural America over the period of 2000 to 2015. Extractive development exhibited diminishing returns to all outcomes at high levels of specialization. Non-extractive development had a generally negative relationship with per capita income and no relationship with poverty or inequality. Support for the overall hypothesis was mixed, with the returns of non-extractive development being more negative than expected.

show abstract

Fracking Fortunes: Economic Well‐being and Oil and Gas Development along the Urban‐Rural Continuum

Cited by 40 publications

References 73 publications

Who Speaks for the Place? Cultural Dynamics of Conflicts Over Hazardous Industrial Development

Who Speaks for the Place? Cultural Dynamics of Conflicts Over Hazardous Industrial Development

Depressed democracy, environmental injustice: Exploring the negative mental health implications of unconventional oil and gas production in the United States

Natural Resource Dependence and Rural American Economic Prosperity from 2000 to 2015

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About