Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Public Servants and Regulator Capture in Energy and Environmental Governance

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant

Abstract

The rapid pace of change, uncertainty, and social contest associated with emerging regulatory spaces create challenges for public servants. In particular, their capacity to act in the public interest may be constrained as contesting interests vie for influence in nascent regulatory environs. This chapter explores these issues and the potential for regulatory capture in the context of unconventional gas and its regulation. Empirically based case studies of regulators in Texas and Colorado in the USA and Queensland, Australia, are relied on. The existing regulatory frameworks governing unconventional gas in each state are considered to enable a thorough examination of the landscape of which public servants and their regulatory agencies are a part. The chapter demonstrates that the speed at which unconventional gas exploration is taking place creates challenges for public servants and regulatory agencies, as laws may not be aligned to practice. The chapter draws on its findings to reflect on the specific regulatory practices that are needed to ensure the accountability and legitimacy of the public sector in such contested spaces, including reforming state regulatory systems and pursuing alternative governance pathways in which relationships between industry, government, and society might be reconfigured.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ashford, N.A., and R.P. Hall. 2018. Achieving global climate and environmental goals by governmental regulatory targeting. Ecological Economics 152: 246–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayres, I., and J. Braithwaite. 1991. Tripartism: Regulatory capture and empowerment. Law & Social Inquiry 16: 435–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. 1992. Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, J., and C. Shearing. 2018. Governing-through-harm and public goods policing. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 679: 72–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohman, J. 2013. Democratic experimentalism. Social Philosophy Today 29: 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, D., and D.A. Moss. 2014. Introduction. In Preventing regulatory capture: Special interest influence and how to limit it, ed. D. Carpenter and D.A. Moss, 1–22. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, R.M., and R.K. Morgan. 2018. Regulatory trust and failure – A case study of coal seam gas in New South Wales, Australia. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 61 (10): 1789–1804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, D. 2011. Explainer: Coal seam gas, shale gas and fracking in Australia. The Conversation, 16 August 2011. https://theconversation.com/explainer-coal-seam-gas-shale-gas-and-fracking-in-australia-2585. Accessed 5 Apr 2018.

  • Drahos, P., ed. 2017. Regulatory theory foundations and applications. Canberra: Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farber, D.A. 1992. Politics and procedure in environmental law. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 8: 59–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A., and E. Wright. 2003. Countervailing power in empowered participatory governance. In Deepening democracy: Institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance, ed. A. Fung and E. Wright, 259–289. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, A. 2015. Are we on the edge of a global energy transformation? World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/04/are-we-on-the-edge-of-a-global-energy-transformation/. Accessed 10 June 2019.

  • Giridharadas, A. 2018. Winners take all: The elite charade of changing the world. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gormley, W. 1979. A test of the revolving door hypothesis at the FCC. American Journal of Political Science 23 (4): 665–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grubert, E. 2018. The Eagle Ford and Bakken shale regions of the United States: A comparative case study. The Extractive Industries and Society 5 (4): 570–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunningham, N. 2013. Managing the energy trilemma: The case of Indonesia. Energy Policy 54: 184–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, N., J. Lacey, S. Carr-Cornish, and A.-M. Dowd. 2015. Social licence to operate: Understanding how a concept has been translated into practice in energy industries. Journal of Cleaner Production 86: 301–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Héritier, A. 2002. New modes of governance in Europe: Policy making without legislating? Political Science Series Paper 81, Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holley, C., C. Shearing, C. Harrington, A. Kennedy, and T. Mutongwizo. 2018. Environmental security and the anthropocene: Law, criminology and international relations. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 14 (1): 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holley, C., T. Mutongwizo, C. Shearing, and A. Kennedy. 2019. Shaping unconventional gas regulation: Industry influence and risks of agency capture in Texas, Colorado and Queensland. Environmental and Planning Law Journal 36 (5): 510–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holley, C., T. Mutongwizo, and C. Shearing. 2020. Conceptualizing policing and security: New harmscapes, the anthropocene and technology. Annual Review of Criminology 3 (forthcoming).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussey, K., J. Pittock, and S. Dovers. 2015. Justifying, extending and applying “nexus” thinking in the quest for sustainable development. In Climate, energy & water, ed. J. Pittock, K. Hussey, and S. Dovers, 1–5. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutton, D. 2012. Lessons from the Lock the Gate movement. Social Alternatives 31 (1): 15–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA. 2016. Energy and air pollution. Paris: International Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. World energy outlook 2018. https://www.iea.org/weo2018/. Accessed 12 Jan 2019.

  • Kelly, B., C. Iverach, D. Lowry, R. Fisher, J. France, and E. Nisbet. 2015. Fugitive methane emissions from natural, urban, agricultural, and energy-production landscapes of eastern Australia. Geophysical Research Abstracts 17: EGU2015–EGU5135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, A. 2017. Environmental justice and land use conflict: The governance of mineral and gas resource development. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kotzé, L., ed. 2017. Environmental law and governance for the anthropocene. Oxford: Hart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kourula, A., M. Paukku, A. Peterman, and M. Koria. 2018. Intermediary roles in regulatory programs: Toward a role-based framework. Regulation & Governance 13 (2): 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroepsch, A.C. 2018. Horizontal drilling, changing patterns of extraction, and piecemeal participation: Urban hydrocarbon governance in Colorado. Energy Policy 120: 469–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layder, D. 1998. Sociological practice linking theory and social research. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, M., C. Kuzemko, C. Mitchell, and R. Hoggett. 2017. Historical institutionalism and the politics of sustainable energy transitions: A research agenda. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space 35 (2): 312–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loorbach, D., N. Frantzeskaki, and F. Avelino. 2017. Sustainability transitions research: Transforming science and practice for societal change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 42: 599–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano-Maya, J.R. 2016. Looking through the prism of shale gas development: Towards a holistic framework for analysis. Energy Research and Social Science 20: 63–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Water Commission. 2012. Coal seam gas and water position statement. Canberra: National Water Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, W. 2013. A revisionist history of regulatory capture. In Preventing regulatory capture: Special interest influence and how to limit it, ed. D. Carpenter and D. Moss, 25–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, C. 2002. The open corporation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M., and M. Kramer. 2011. Creating shared value: How to reinvent capitalism – And unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review 89 (1/2): 62–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockstrom, J., W. Steffen, K. Noone, A. Persson, S. Chapin, E. Lambin, et al. 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461: 472–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, S.A. 2012. The complexity of regulatory capture: Diagnosis, causality and remediation. Roger Williams University Law Review 102 (1): 101–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shearing, C. 1993. A constitutive conception of regulation. In Business regulation and Australia’s future, ed. J. Braithwaite and P. Grabosky, 67–79. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smil, V. 2015. Natural gas: Fuel for the 21st century. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. 2003. Transforming technological regimes for sustainable development: A role for alternative technology niches? Science and Public Policy 30 (2): 127–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, G. 1971. The theory of economic regulation. Bell Journal of Economics 2 (1): 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • STRONGER. 2019. State review. https://www.strongerinc.org/state-reviews/. Accessed 11 June 2019.

  • The Scientific Inquiry into Hydraulic Fracturing in the Northern Territory. 2018. Final report of the scientific inquiry into hydraulic fracturing in the Northern Territory. https://frackinginquiry.nt.gov.au/inquiry-reports/final-report. Accessed 13 June 2019.

  • Thornton, D., R.A. Kagan, and N. Gunningham. 2008. Compliance costs, regulation, and environmental performance: Controlling truck emissions in the US. Regulation & Governance 2: 275–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, W. 1980. Environmentalism: The newest Toryism. Policy Review 14: 141–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Heijden, J. 2015. Regulatory failures, split-incentives, conflicting interests and a vicious circle of blame: The new environmental governance to the rescue? Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 58 (6): 1034–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace-Wells, D. 2019. The uninhabitable earth: Life after warming. New York: Penguin Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, C.T. 2018. Engines, sentinels, and objects: Assessing the impacts of unconventional energy developments on animals in the Marcellus shale region. In Fractured communities: Risk, impacts, and protest against hydraulic fracking in US shale regions, ed. A. Ladd, 128–148. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Whitton, J., M. Cotton, I.M. Charnley-Parry, and K. Brasier, eds. 2018. Governing shale gas: Development, citizen participation and decision making in the US, Canada, Australia and Europe. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Economic Forum (WEF). 2019. The global risks report 2019. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Global_Risks_Report_2019.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2019.

  • World Energy Council (WEC). 2016. World energy resources, unconventional gas, a global phenomenon. London: World Energy Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zedner, L. 2007. Pre-crime and post-criminology? Theoretical Criminology 11 (2): 261–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zilliox, S., and J.M. Smith. 2017. Supraregulatory agreements and unconventional energy development: Learning from citizen concerns, enforceability and participation in Colorado. The Extractive Industries and Society 4: 69–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holley, C. and A. Kennedy. 2019. Governing the Energy-Water-Food Nexus: Regulating Unconventional Gas Development in Queensland, Australia. Jurimetrics 59: 233-266

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron Holley, Tariro Mutongwizo, Clifford Shearing, (2020) Conceptualizing Policing and Security: New Harmscapes, the Anthropocene, and Technology. Annual Review of Criminology 3 (1)

    Google Scholar 

  • KARKKAINEN, B. C., FUNG, A., & SABEL, C. F. (2000). After Backyard Environmentalism: Toward a Performance-Based Regime of Environmental Regulation. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(4), 692–711

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Elaine Atkins, Louise du Toit and Ricky Rontsch for their assistance in the preparation of this chapter. This research was supported by two Australian Research Council Discovery Project grants (project numbers DP170100281 and DP190101584). Parts of this chapter draw on work that originally appeared in Cameron Holley et al. (2019) which was first published by Thomson Reuters in the Environmental and Planning Law Journal and should be cited as Cameron Holley, Tariro Mutongwizo, Clifford Shearing and Amanada Kennedy, 'Shaping Unconventional Gas Regulation: Industry Influence and Risks of Agency Capture in Texas, Colorado and Queensland' (2019) 36(5) EPLJ 510 - 530. For all subscription inquiries please phone, fromAustralia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately fromThomson Reuters at Using Private Regulation for the Public Good.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Cameron Holley, Tariro Mutongwizo & Clifford Shearing

  2. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Amanda Kennedy

  3. Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Clifford Shearing

  4. University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa

    Clifford Shearing

  5. University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Clifford Shearing

Authors
  1. Cameron Holley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amanda Kennedy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tariro Mutongwizo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Clifford Shearing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cameron Holley .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Acton, ACT, Australia

    Helen Sullivan

  2. UNSW Australia, Campbell, ACT, Australia

    Helen Dickinson

  3. College of Asia and the Pacific, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Hayley Henderson

Section Editor information

  1. School of Government, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, ACT, New Zealand

    Jeroen van der Heijden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Holley, C., Kennedy, A., Mutongwizo, T., Shearing, C. (2019). Public Servants and Regulator Capture in Energy and Environmental Governance. In: Sullivan, H., Dickinson, H., Henderson, H. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_7-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_7-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03008-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03008-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Political Science and International StudiesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation