The struggle for a legitimate expertise in the shale gas controversy in France and Quebec (original) (raw)
Related papers
ShaleXenvironmenT - D11.1 - Regulatory framework on environmental impacts V1.0 2018-05-24 (1).pdf
This report commences by offering a summary of the EU’s works on the regulatory environment for the shale gas industry (s 1.1), and is divided into following parts (i) ‘Background’ (s 2), (ii), ‘Legislative Level’ (s 3), (iii) ‘Plans and Programmes: SEA’ (s 4), (iv) ‘Project Level: EIA’ (s 5), and (v) ‘Public Participation in other EU Legislation’ (s 6). Section 2 offers a necessary background of this report by discussing (i) the case for the shale gas in the EU (s 2.1), (ii) the spectrum of shale gas related problems (s 2.2), (iii) public views on fracking and the shale gas industry throughout the EU (s 2.3), and (iv) the concept of the SLO (s 2.4). Section 3 discusses problems of public participation, access to information and access to justice in shale gas related law-making at the EU-level (s 3.1) and Member States level (s 3.2). Section 4 discusses the same problems in developing environmental plans and programmes (strategic environmental impact assessment process) at the level of EU institutions (s 4.2) and at the level of national authorities responsible for the preparation of such plans and programmes (s 4.3 and s 4.4). Section 5 discusses the same problems in the realisation of specific shale gas related projects (in the course of the environmental impact assessment) including EU legislation (s 5.2) and its implementation in Member States (s 5.3). Finally, section 6 briefly discusses the same problems in a number of more specific environment related acts including (i) Habitats Directive (s 6.2), (ii) Birds Directive (s 6.3), (iii) Water Framework Directive (s 6.4), (iv) Industrial Emission Directive (s 6.5) and (v) selected other acts (s 6.6).
What the frack: heated arguments and contested facts in decision making on shale gas extraction
The transition to a carbon free society poses "wicked problems" to decision makers as controversial technologies are being developed to meet energy demands. On the one hand, these new technologies such as hydraulic fracturing (HF) for shale gas, are considered a way to produce clean 'bridge fuels'. On the other hand, there might be negative impacts on health, the environment, and on a transition to a carbon free society. Decision-makers have to decide about fracking in a context of high scientific uncertainty and emotionally charged public conflict. This requires a mode of governance that takes into account these uncertainties and disagreement.
Social License to Operate (SLO) in the Shale Sector: A Contextual Study of the European Union
Oil Gas and Energy Law (OGEL) special issue on the Social Licence to operate (SLO) , 2020
This article commences by offering a summary of the EU’s works on the regulatory environment for the shale gas industry (s 1.1), and is divided into following parts (i) ‘Background’ (s 2), (ii), ‘Legislative Level’ (s 3), (iii) ‘Plans and Programmes: SEA’ (s 4), (iv) ‘Project Level: EIA’ (s 5), and (v) ‘Public Participation in other EU Legislation’ (s 6). Section 2 offers a necessary background of this article by discussing (i) the case for the shale gas in the EU (s 2.1), (ii) the spectrum of shale gas related problems (s 2.2), (iii) public views on fracking and the shale gas industry throughout the EU (s 2.3), and (iv) the concept of the SLO (s 2.4). Section 3 discusses problems of public participation, access to information and access to justice in shale gas related lawmaking at the EU-level (s 3.1) and Member States level (s 3.2). Section 4 discusses the same problems in developing environmental plans and programmes (strategic environmental impact assessment process) at the level of EU institutions (s 4.2) and at the level of national authorities responsible for the preparation of such plans and programmes (s 4.3 and s 4.4). Section 5 discusses the same problems in the realisation of specific shale gas related projects (in the course of the environmental impact assessment) including EU legislation (s 5.2) and its implementation in Member States (s 5.3). Finally, section 6 briefly discusses the same problems in a number of more specific environment related acts including (i) Habitats Directive (s 6.2), (ii) Birds Directive (s 6.3), (iii) Water Framework Directive (s 6.4), (iv) Industrial Emissions Directive (s 6.5) and (v) selected other acts (s 6.6).
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 2007
In spite of almost two decades of experience, Strategic Environmental Assessment's (SEA) foundations remain unclear to the point that the case for needing an instrument called ‘SEA’ could be questioned. The aim is to ask: what problems was SEA meant to solve, and what needs was it meant to address, by reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of SEA thinking to date. I do so by organising the reasons and arguments offered by scholars and practitioners under three ‘lines of argumentation’ related to the strategic dimension of SEA, its methods and purpose. I explore how each line of argumentation affects the concept of (the purpose and role) and approach to (the procedures, methods and tools) SEA. The problematisation of these arguments and their evolution makes a case for the urgent acknowledgment of misleading simplifications. From this analysis I propose a number of promising fields of inquiry that could help respond to the growing expectations attached to SEA and strengthen its ‘strategic’ dimension: revisiting the concept of assessment in SEA, promoting strategies for the introduction of SEA, and strengthening the contribution of theory to SEA practice. © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Uncertainty in the Shale Gas Debate: Views From the Science–Policymaking Interface
2015
Shale gas involves a technology which is a controversial method of energy production mainly because there are uncertainties about the possible environmental and human health impacts. The article aims to identify the level of knowledge in relation to the impact of environmental risks attached to shale gas exploitation in the academic and scientifi c community. It does so by employing the expert elicitation approach which has the benefi t of quantifying the judgment of individual experts. We have revealed a consistency among researchers in assessing the level of uncertainty of the main environmental risks and a preferred policy option in dealing with uncertainty, a vow for improved transparency, openness and ease of access to information. Shale gas policy-making in Europe needs a science- based approach as science informs policy by delivering objective and reliable knowledge. The article concludes that developing a comprehensive approach based on scientifi c data and an appropriate re...
The meaning of hydraulic fracturing for shale gas is contested worldwide: is it an energy game changer, a transition fuel, or a technology that poses severe environmental problems? In the Netherlands, a policy controversy developed in which fracturing was reframed from ‘business as usual’ to a potential environmental risk. This article theoretically and empirically describes this shift by arguing that the technology of hydraulic fracturing for shale gas is a boundary object that created a sphere of engagement for all sorts of actors. In this sphere, they negotiated a common but soft meaning of this technology. These negotiations consisted of frame contests. As part of those contests, the discursive strategies of framing and boundary work enabled opponents to create uncertainty about economic benefits and environmental impact. The shift in meaning transformed the issue from an economic one with standard governmental rules and regulations into a planning issue that needs more precaution.
Executive Summary ‘Fracking’, as a method of extracting shale oil and gas from the ground has come under serious public opposition in the UK. The discovery of large shale deposits in the North West of England and parts of Scotland has created huge media coverage. The prospects of vast amounts of the gas resource being exploited potentially making the UK self sufficient in its energy requirements whilst creating thousands of jobs has kick-started what the onshore oil and gas industry hopes to be another oil and gas ‘revolution’. The government, as a key stakeholder has made efforts to enable exploration companies to frack by lifting a countrywide moratorium in 2012. There has however been very little progress in the awarding of fracking licenses in the form of an accelerated exploration programme due to complex legislation/policy in the licensing regime. This report explores the different driving forces and resisting forces that influence legislation and policies and how this ultimately shapes the decision making process of awarding these licenses. The structure of the report is a design process exploring the choice of effective research methods opted for in order to get a better understanding of the situation. A mixed method research approach was opted for which enabled the researcher to gather various types of data through the use of national and online qualitative data source, a research survey/questionnaire and an interview. The research details ways in which this data was collected, collated and analysed to come up with findings. The collection of both qualitative and quantitative data highlighted many areas of contention between the public and the direction the government’s policies are taking. The government’s stance on fracking is that the country could be rid of relying on Russian gas imports, create jobs, and improve the balance of payment through tax revenue thus promoting economic prosperity. On the other hand we see fierce public opposition through demonstrations by the mobilising of the communities in question. This opposition is driven by fear of the potential environmental impacts, the feeling of being left out in the decision making process resulting in lack of trust and to a large extent a lack of knowledge on the subject matter. The research goes further into analysing all the data collected through the use of a force field analysis which seeks to identify the key driving or resisting forces at play. The research findings indicate an imbalance between government’s sustainable energy strategy and the social benefits. This is due to the inability of the decision makers to address public concerns and perceptions of the potential damage fracking is perceived to cause on the environment. The recommendations therefore are for a framework and strategy that closely looks at all the sustainable dimensions paying close attention to the social aspect as this is where all the resistors influencing the decision making process in awarding 'fracking' licenses in the UK lie.