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 » 2016 » Volume 5 » Number 1 » The Effect of Community Reinvestment Funds on Local Acceptance of Unconventional Gas Development

The Effect of Community Reinvestment Funds on Local Acceptance of Unconventional Gas Development

Posted on February 4, 2026February 9, 2026 by admin

A survey with an embedded experimental design is employed to determine whether local public support for an unconventional gas development (UGD) project is influenced by a policy that commits a portion of private revenues from UGD to the state or local government. The public opinion survey (N = 2,700) oversamples residents living in counties of six states where UGD is technically feasible or underway: New York, Illinois, California, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Texas. We found that proposing a hypothetical UGD site about two miles from where the resident lives decreases support for local UGD, but this effect is attenuated when residents are informed that their community or state will receive benefits from “reinvestment” of a portion of the revenues generated by a developer. Further, the level of government receiving the reinvestment funds influences the level of local public support for UGD, such that reinvestment in local government is a much stronger predictor of public support than reinvestment in state government. Our findings have implications for understanding the social feasibility of UGD and can have implications for how reinvestment policies should be designed to influence local community attitudes.

Authors: Naveed Paydar, Olga Schenk, Ashley Bowers, Sanya Carley, John Rupp and John D. Graham
DOI: 10.5547/2160-5890.5.1.npay
Keywords: community acceptance, revenue reinvestment, unconventional gas development
🔐 Download PDF🔐 Executive Summary 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