Variation in beliefs about 'fracking' between the UK and US

In decision-making on the politically-contentious issue of unconventional gas development, the UK Government and European Commission are attempting to learn from the US experience. Although economic, environmental, and health impacts and regulatory contexts have been compared cross-nationally, public perceptions and their antecedents have not. We conducted similar online panel surveys of national samples of UK and US residents simultaneously in September 2014 to compare public perceptions and beliefs affecting such perceptions. The US sample was more likely to associate positive impacts with development (i.e., production of clean energy, cheap energy, and advancing national energy security). The UK sample was more likely to associate negative impacts (i.e., water contamination, higher carbon emissions, and earthquakes). Multivariate analyses reveal divergence cross-nationally in the relationship between beliefs about impacts and support/opposition – especially for beliefs about energy security. People who associated shale gas development with increased energy security in the UK were over three times more likely to support development than people in the US with this same belief. We conclude with implications for policy and communication, discussing communication approaches that could be successful cross-nationally and policy foci to which the UK might need to afford more attention in its continually evolving regulatory environment

'Fracking':Promoter and destroyer of 'the good life'

When discussing the effects of resource extraction in rural communities, academics commonly focus on specific and concrete impacts that fall nicely into the categories of environmental, economic, and social – for example, effects on water quality, jobs, and roads. A less common way of conceptualising effects of extractive industries, but more akin to way in which rural residents discuss and experience the complex set of effects, is changes to way of life. A growing literature explores effects on ‘wellbeing’ and ‘the good life’ as important determinants of responses to development projects, and as necessary considerations for policies regulating such development. One approach to conceptualising the good life – Aristotle’s ideas of eudaimonia (human flourishing) and the pursuit of eudaimonia (perfectionism) – remains underdeveloped as a means for characterising how rural residents respond to natural resource extraction. We use the example of unconventional gas development (UGD) to illustrate how definitions of human flourishing – and perfectionist pursuit of that flourishing – strongly motivate support for and opposition to a contentious extractive industry in the rural communities where development is occurring or is likely to occur (e.g., through commitments to: a rural way of life, retaining local population, beauty, peace, and/or quiet). Approximately fifty interviews across six US and three Canadian communities support this vital role for conceptions of human flourishing. The import of human flourishing to members of the public, and of them pursuing that flourishing through perfectionism, has crucial implications for communication and policy related to extractive development. Policy makers need to consider how the public’s definitions for flourishing shape their support/opposition, and not just to focus on the economic and environmental impacts commonly discussed in policy discourse

The Local Economic Impact of Shale Gas Extraction

Advocates of UK shale gas expansion have focused upon predicted national economic benefits, but local and/or regional impact has been largely neglected. This paper seeks to address this deficit by creating a unique dataset, combining industry data with consumer and supply chain surveys, thereby overcoming the current absence of suitable secondary data. Local economic impact in the Bowland field is estimated via a simple Keynesian local income multiplier model. Results emphasize the importance of facilitating local employment opportunities, through skills initiatives, and development of regional supply chain clusters, to anchor economic benefits within the local economy. Policy implications are discussed