Skip to content
EEEP
Menu
  • 2012
    • Volume 1
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
      • Number 3
  • 2013
    • Volume 2
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2014
    • Volume 3
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2015
    • Volume 4
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2016
    • Volume 5
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2017
    • Volume 6
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2018
    • Volume 7
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2019
    • Volume 8
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2020
    • Volume 9
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2021
    • Volume 10
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
    • Volume 9
      • Number 2
  • 2022
    • Volume 10
      • Number 2
    • Volume 11
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2023
    • Volume 11
      • Number 2
    • Volume 12
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2024
    • Volume 13
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2025
    • Volume 14
      • Number 1
  • 2026
    • Volume 15
      • Number 1
Menu

EEEP » 2015 » Volume 4 » Number 1 » Heterogeneity of State Shale Gas Regulations

Heterogeneity of State Shale Gas Regulations

Posted on February 4, 2026February 11, 2026 by admin

The rapid rise in shale gas production has affected the role and importance of regulatory policy at all levels of government. As the primary regulator in this area, state level regulatory changes are particularly significant. As shale gas production increases, some states are updating their regulations, while others maintain dated rules, put in place prior to hydraulic fracturing that may or may not address environmental issues specific to modern shale gas development or recent concerns about environmental impacts. Our research finds that state regulation is remarkably heterogeneous. Regulatory heterogeneity includes heterogeneity in the stringency of state regulations. Though heterogeneity in state regulation is not inherently good or bad, our limited data suggests that the heterogeneity is neither explained by differences in state conditions, nor does it necessarily reflect indicators of regulatory capture. The paper also compares the use of regulations to use of liability law, voluntary practices, and information provision. In addition, it identifies new activities being regulated and areas where additional regulation may be needed.

Authors: Alan Krupnick, Nathan Richardson, and Madeline Gottlieb
DOI: 10.5547/2160-5890.4.1.akru
Keywords: Liability law, Regulation, Shale gas
🔐 Download PDF

Account

  • Log in

Tags

Air pollution carbon emissions Carbon tax China Climate change Climate change mitigation Climate policy Coal computable general equilibrium Cost of Debt Decentralized energy governance Demand side difference-­in-­differences Electricity generation Electricity market design Electricity markets Energy Energy efficiency Energy Policy Energy R&D Energy security Energy transition environmental regulation Europe evaluation Geopolitics Introduction Investment Long-term contracts Middle East Natural gas Oil prices Regional markets Regulation Renewable energy Renewables Resilience Resource adequacy Scenario analysis Scenarios Sustainability sustainable development Techno-bias Transmission benefits willingness-to-pay

Archives

  • March 2026
  • February 2026
© 2026 EEEP | Powered by Minimalist Blog WordPress Theme