FUEL FOR DEBATE: THREE STUDIES OF THE POLITICAL MOBILIZATION FOR AND AGAINST HYDRAULIC FRACTURING IN NEW YORK STATE

This dissertation uses the context of the unfolding boom in oil and gas production enabled by hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) technology to ask several interrelated questions: What motivates people to oppose or support industrial development? How do material interests interact with political identities to shape political mobilization? What consequences does this political contestation have for policymaking? Three stand-alone articles, each using unique data and methods, provide new evidence for answering these questions. The three studies place a common emphasis on the multiple meanings that fracking has for opponents and supporters of proposed development as well as the alternative structural conditions that give rise to the divergent beliefs and the social networks that facilitate mobilization. The first article, examines the passage of local zoning ordinances prohibiting fracking and identifies spatial and temporal processes that influenced the pattern of ordinance adoption. The second article, looks more closely at political mobilization for and against hydraulic fracturing by examining individual-level data collected from one town’s debate over a proposed ban on oil and gas development. The third article uses a large set of public comments to directly examine the meanings that the public attached to hydraulic fracturing and whether residents who live in close proximity to proposed development understood the industry in systematically different terms than individuals who participated in the debate despite facing little or no direct impact from fracking