Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Regulating Hydraulic Fracturing: The Effects of Issue Redefinition

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Energy Policy Making in the EU

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Energy ((LNEN,volume 28))

Abstract

The possibility of extracting shale gas using hydraulic fracturing on a large scale has invoked a public and political debate about the creation of an appropriate regulatory regime for such activities at the European level. The issues of shale gas extraction and the use of hydraulic fracturing were brought onto the EU policy agenda by the European Council. The policy image created by the European Council was a positive one, which linked shale gas production with the security of energy supply. The resulting policy process developed around a different policy image that highlighted the uncertain risks related to hydraulic fracturing in regard to human health and the environment. This redefinition of the policy image was primarily the result of the European Parliament’s involvement in the policy process as well as the expansion of the political conflict over this issue. While the potential risks of hydraulic fracturing dominated the policy process, the overall outcome of the policy process was a mild reform of the existing legal basis. From this, it follows that issue redefinition certainly resulted in changes in the dynamics of the policy process but had limited effects on the outcome of this process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Information retrieved from http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=13491 (accessed on 26 April 2014).

  2. 2.

    The following website is dedicated to the controversy surrounding shale gas and fracking in France and illustrates the web search of the term “shale gas” until May 2012: http://controverses.sciences-po.fr/climateblogs/shalegas/timeline/ (accessed on 5 July 2014).

  3. 3.

    For the sake of completeness, it should be noted that Engeli et al. (2012b) introduce another element—that is, institutional venues—, which, however, for the case at hand is deemed irrelevant.

  4. 4.

    For an empirical assessment of how the European Commission uses scientific expertise, see Rimkutė and Haverland (2014).

  5. 5.

    Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

  6. 6.

    Information retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/energy/uff_event_7june2013_en.htm (accessed on 26 April 2014).

  7. 7.

    Following Reh et al. (2013) EU policy makers tend to choose this informal arena when redistributive and salient acts are concerned.

  8. 8.

    Information retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/energy/unconventional_en.htm (accessed on 26 April 2014).

References

  • Alemanno, A. (2007). The shaping of the precautionary principle by European Courts: From scientific uncertainty to legal certainty. Bocconi legal studies research paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aalto, P., & Korkmaz Temel, D. (2014). European energy security: Natural gas and the integration process. Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(4), 758–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aven, T., & Renn, O. (2010). Risk management and governance. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • BIO Intelligence Service. (2013). Analysis and presentation of the results of the public consultation unconventional fossil fuels (e.g. shale gas) in Europe. Final report prepared for European Commission DG environment. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bomberg, E. (2013). The comparative politics of fracking: Networks and framing in the US and Europe. APSA 2013 Annual meeting paper, American political science association 2013 annual meeting. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2301196.

  • Bomberg, E. (2014). Shale governance in the European Union: Principles and practice. Issues in Energy and Environmental Policy, 15. http://closup.umich.edu.

  • Caduff, L., & Bernauer, T. (2006). Managing risk and regulation in European food safety governance. Review of Policy Research, 23(1), 153–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Committee of the Regions. (2013). Fracking: Local and regional authorities call for compulsory environmental impact assessments. Press Release CoR/13/93.en.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cournil, C. (2013). Adoption of legislation on shale gas in france: Hesitation and/or progress? European Energy and Environmental Law Review, 22(4), 141–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, C. (2012). The politics of “fracking”: Regulating natural gas drilling practices in Colorado and Texas. Review of Policy Research, 29(2), 177–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Sadeleer, N. (2006). The precautionary principle in EC health and environmental law. European Law Journal, 12(2), 139–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckley, N., & Selin, H. (2004). All talk, little action: Precaution and its effects on European chemicals regulation. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(1), 78–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ederli, L. (2014). Die Novellierung der europäischen Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfungs-Richtlinie [The reform of the European environmental impact assessment directive]. Heidelberg (Unpublished Manuscript).

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeli, I., Green-Pedersen, C., & Larsen, L. T. (Eds.). (2012a). Morality politics in Western Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeli, I., Green-Pedersen, C., & Larsen, L. T. (2012b). Theoretical perspectives on morality politics. In I. Engeli, C. Green-Pedersen & L. T. Larsen (Eds.), Morality politics in Western Europe (pp. 5–26). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2000). Communication from the commission on the precautionary principle. Brussels, 2 February 2000. Commission of the European Communities. COM(2000) 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011). A Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050. Ref. COM (2011) 112 final. Brussels, 8 March 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2012a). Roadmap: Environmental assessment framework to enable a safe and secure unconventional hydrocarbon (e.g. shale gas) extraction. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2012b). Midday express of 2012-09-07 news from the European Commission’s midday briefing.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council. (2011). Conclusions of the Presidency. EUCO 2/11. Brussels: European Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2012a). European Parliament resolution of 21 November 2012 on the environmental impacts of shale gas and shale oil extraction activities. 2011/2308(INI). Strasbourg: European Parliament.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2012b). Shale gas: Member states need robust rules on fracking, say MEPs. Press release energy 21 November 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2013). Shale gas: New fracking projects must pass environmental test. Press release environment 9 October 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, E., Jones, J., & von Schomberg, R. (Eds.). (2006). Implementing the precautionary principle: Perspectives and prospects. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greens/European Green (2012). Open letter. http://www.greens-efa.eu/fileadmin/dam/Images/Topics/Energy_and_transport/Letter%20to%20Commissioner%20Oettinger.pdf. Accessed 26 April 2014.

  • Häge, F. M., & Kaeding, M. (2007). Reconsidering the European Parliament’s legislative influence: Formal vs. informal procedures. Journal of European Integration, 29(3), 341–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C., & Boersma, T. (2013). Energy (in) security in Poland the case of shale gas. Energy Policy, 53(1), 389–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joskow, P. L. (2013). Natural gas: From shortages to abundance in the United States. The American Economic Review, 103(3), 338–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knill, C., & Tosun, J. (2012). Public policy: A new introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lechtenböhmer, S., Altmann, M., Capito, S., Matra, Z., Weindrorf, W., & Zittel, W. (2011). Impacts of shale gas and shale oil extraction on the environment and on human health. Brussels: European Parliament.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löfstedt, R. (2004). The swing of the regulatory pendulum in Europe: From precautionary principle to (regulatory) impact analysis. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 28(3), 237–260.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Maor, M. (2014). Policy bubbles: Policy overreaction and positive feedback. Governance, 27(3), 469–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milieu Ltd. (2013). Regulatory provisions governing key aspects of unconventional gas extraction in selected member states—final report. Brussels: Milieu Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGowan, F. (2014). Regulating innovation: European responses to shale gas development. Environmental Politics, 23(1), 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie, L. M., Witter, R. Z., Newman, L. S., & Adgate, J. L. (2012). Human health risk assessment of air emissions from development of unconventional natural gas resources. Science of the Total Environment, 424(1), 79–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mühlböck, M. (2012). National versus European: Party control over members of the European Parliament. West European Politics, 35(3), 607–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Riordan, T., & Jordan, A. (1995). The precautionary principle in contemporary environmental politics. Environmental Values, 4(3), 191–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philippe & Partners. (2011). Final report on unconventional gas in Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Princen, S. (2011). Agenda-setting strategies in EU policy processes. Journal of European Public Policy, 18(7), 927–943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Princen, S., & Rhinard, M. (2006). Crashing and creeping: Agenda-setting dynamics in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 13(7), 1119–1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahm, D. (2011). Regulating hydraulic fracturing in shale gas plays: The case of Texas. Energy Policy, 39(5), 2974–2981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reh, C., Héritier, A., Bressanelli, E., & Koop, C. (2013). The informal politics of legislation explaining secluded decision making in the European Union. Comparative Political Studies, 46(9), 1112–1142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rimkutė, D., & Haverland, M. (2014). How does the European Commission use scientific expertise—results from a survey of scientific members of the commission’s expert committees. Comparative European Politics,. doi:10.1057/cep.2013.32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semisovereign people: A realist’s view of democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schirrmeister, M. (2014). Controversial futures—discourse analysis on utilizing the “fracking” technology in Germany. European Journal of Futures Research, 2(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. A. (1989). Causal stories and the formation of policy agendas. Political Science Quarterly, 104(2), 281–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. (2005). Laws of fear: Beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tosun, J. (2013a). Risk regulation in Europe: Assessing the application of the precautionary principle. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tosun, J. (2013b). How the EU handles uncertain risks: Understanding the role of the precautionary principle. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(10), 1517–1528.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Tosun, J., & Solorio, I. (2011). Exploring the energy-environment relationship in the EU: Perspectives and challenges for theorizing and empirical analysis. In J. Tosun & I. Solorio (eds.) Energy and environment in Europe: Assessing a complex relationship (Vol. 15, Issue 7). European Integration online Papers, Special Mini-Issue No 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, G. (2002). Veto players: How political institutions work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uliasz-Misiak, B., Przybycin, A., & Winid, B. (2014). Shale and tight gas in Poland—legal and environmental issues. Energy Policy, 65(1), 68–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Aelst, P., & Walgrave, S. (2011). Minimal or massive? The political agenda-setting power of the mass media according to different methods. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 16(3), 295–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Asselt, M. B. A., & Vos, E. (2008). Wrestling with uncertain risks: EU regulation of gmos and the uncertainty paradox. Journal of Risk Research, 11(1/2), 281–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walgrave, S., Soroka, S., & Nuytemans, M. (2008). The mass media’s political agenda-setting power a longitudinal analysis of media, parliament, and government in Belgium (1993 to 2000). Comparative Political Studies, 41(6), 814–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weile, R. (2014). Beyond the fracking ban in France. Journal of European Management & Public Affairs Studies, 1(2), 11–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weijermars, R., Drijkoningen, G., Heimovaara, T. J., Rudolph, E. S. J., Weltje, G. J., & Wolf, K. H. A. A. (2011). Unconventional gas research initiative for clean energy transition in Europe. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 3(2), 402–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zander, J. (2010). The application of the precautionary principle in practice comparative dimensions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research leading to this chapter has received funding from the project entitled “Agenda Setting in European Energy Policy: Actors, Preferences and Strategies” funded by the Fritz Thyssen Foundation (Grant Number: Az. 10.13.2.141).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Political Science, Heidelberg University, Bergheimer Strasse 58, 69115, Heidelberg, Germany

    Jale Tosun

Authors
  1. Jale Tosun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jale Tosun .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Political Science, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany

    Jale Tosun

  2. Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Berlin, Germany

    Sophie Biesenbender

  3. Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

    Kai Schulze

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tosun, J. (2015). Regulating Hydraulic Fracturing: The Effects of Issue Redefinition. In: Tosun, J., Biesenbender, S., Schulze, K. (eds) Energy Policy Making in the EU. Lecture Notes in Energy, vol 28. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6645-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6645-0_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-6644-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-6645-0

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation