IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v118y2018icp109-120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Monitoring of unconventional oil and gas extraction and its policy implications: A case study from South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Esterhuyse, Surina
  • Avenant, Marinda
  • Redelinghuys, Nola
  • Kijko, Andrzej
  • Glazewski, Jan
  • Plit, Lisa
  • Kemp, Marthie
  • Smit, Ansie
  • Vos, A. Tascha

Abstract

Biophysical and socio-economic monitoring during unconventional oil and gas (UOG) extraction is important to assess change and to have reference conditions against which to identify UOG extraction activity impacts. The large-scale cumulative impacts of UOG extraction makes standardised monitoring across geographic and socio-political regions important. This article emphasises the importance of a robust monitoring framework that must serve as a guideline for planning monitoring activities during UOG extraction. A case study from South Africa is presented to illustrate important aspects to address during the development of a UOG extraction monitoring framework. The South African case is critically assessed and resultant policy implications are discussed. Important policy considerations include performing baseline monitoring during UOG extraction, performing UOG extraction monitoring in an integrated, systematic, and standardised manner, ensuring that proper resources are available to perform the monitoring and implementing an adaptive management plan that is linked to UOG extraction monitoring.

Suggested Citation

  • Esterhuyse, Surina & Avenant, Marinda & Redelinghuys, Nola & Kijko, Andrzej & Glazewski, Jan & Plit, Lisa & Kemp, Marthie & Smit, Ansie & Vos, A. Tascha, 2018. "Monitoring of unconventional oil and gas extraction and its policy implications: A case study from South Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 109-120.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:118:y:2018:i:c:p:109-120
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.03.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421518301265
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.03.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles F. Mason & Lucija A. Muehlenbachs & Sheila M. Olmstead, 2015. "The Economics of Shale Gas Development," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 269-289, October.
    2. Kotilainen, Juha & Prokhorova, Evgenia & Sairinen, Rauno & Tiainen, Heidi, 2015. "Corporate social responsibility of mining companies in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 202-209.
    3. Abby Kinchy & Sarah Parks & Kirk Jalbert, 2016. "Fractured knowledge: Mapping the gaps in public and private water monitoring efforts in areas affected by shale gas development," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(5), pages 879-899, August.
    4. Krupnick, Alan & Wang, Zhongmin & Wang, Yushuang, 2014. "Environmental risks of shale gas development in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 117-125.
    5. Agerton, Mark & Hartley, Peter R. & Medlock, Kenneth B. & Temzelides, Ted, 2017. "Employment impacts of upstream oil and gas investment in the United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 171-180.
    6. Scott, Christopher A. & Pierce, Suzanne A. & Pasqualetti, Martin J. & Jones, Alice L. & Montz, Burrell E. & Hoover, Joseph H., 2011. "Policy and institutional dimensions of the water-energy nexus," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6622-6630, October.
    7. Barbara Warner & Jennifer Shapiro, 2013. "Fractured, Fragmented Federalism: A Study in Fracking Regulatory Policy," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 43(3), pages 474-496, July.
    8. Konschnik, Katherine & Dayalu, Archana, 2016. "Hydraulic fracturing chemicals reporting: Analysis of available data and recommendations for policymakers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 504-514.
    9. Poh-Ling Tan & David George & Maria Comino, 2015. "Cumulative risk management, coal seam gas, sustainable water, and agriculture in Australia," International Journal of Water Resources Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 682-700, December.
    10. Boutilier, Robert G. & Black, Leeora, 2013. "Legitimizing industry and multi-sectoral regulation of cumulative impacts: A comparison of mining and energy development in Athabasca, Canada and the Hunter Valley, Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 696-703.
    11. Dundon, Leah A. & Abkowitz, Mark & Camp, Janey, 2015. "The real value of FracFocus as a regulatory tool: A national survey of state regulators," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 496-504.
    12. Curran, Giorel, 2017. "Social licence, corporate social responsibility and coal seam gas: framing the new political dynamics of contestation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 427-435.
    13. Surina Esterhuyse & Marthie Kemp & Nola Redelinghuys, 2013. "Assessing the existing knowledge base and opinions of decision makers on the regulation and monitoring of unconventional gas mining in South Africa," Water International, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(6), pages 687-700, October.
    14. Esteves, A.M., 2008. "Mining and social development: Refocusing community investment using multi-criteria decision analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 39-47, March.
    15. Thurber, Mark C. & Hults, David R. & Heller, Patrick R.P., 2011. "Exporting the "Norwegian Model": The effect of administrative design on oil sector performance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5366-5378, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Yue & Zhang, Zhenke & Xu, Minghui, 2023. "Evolution pattern of African countries' oil trade under the changing in the global oil market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 284(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fry, Matthew & Brannstrom, Christian, 2017. "Emergent patterns and processes in urban hydrocarbon governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 383-393.
    2. Walsh, Bríd & van der Plank, Sien & Behrens, Paul, 2017. "The effect of community consultation on perceptions of a proposed mine: A case study from southeast Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 163-171.
    3. Catherine Hausman & Ryan Kellogg, 2015. "Welfare and Distributional Implications of Shale Gas," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 46(1 (Spring), pages 71-139.
    4. Liuyang Yao & Dangchen Sui & Xiaotong Liu & Hui Fan, 2020. "The Psychological Process of Residents’ Acceptance of Local Shale Gas Exploitation in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-20, September.
    5. Rickman, Dan & Wang, Hongbo, 2020. "What goes up must come down? The recent economic cycles of the four most oil and gas dominated states in the US," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    6. Jack Pegram & Gioia Falcone & Athanasios Kolios, 2018. "A Review of Job Role Localization in the Oil and Gas Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, October.
    7. Rickman, Dan S. & Wang, Hongbo, 2018. "What Goes Up Must Come Down? A Case Study of the Recent Oil and Gas Employment Cycle in Louisiana, North Dakota and Oklahoma," MPRA Paper 87252, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Yao, Liuyang & Sui, Bo, 2020. "Heterogeneous preferences for shale water management: Evidence from a choice experiment in Fuling shale gas field, southwest China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    9. Joseph Marchand & Jeremy Weber, 2018. "Local Labor Markets And Natural Resources: A Synthesis Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 469-490, April.
    10. Miron Avidan & Dror Etzion & Joel Gehman, 2019. "Opaque transparency: How material affordances shape intermediary work," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 197-219, June.
    11. LaPlue, Lawrence D., 2022. "Environmental consequences of natural gas wellhead pricing deregulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    12. Steven Nelson & Jonathan M. Fisk, 2021. "End of the (Pipe)Line? Understanding how States Manage the Risks of Oil and Gas Wells," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(2), pages 203-221, March.
    13. Zhou, Yuanchun & Ma, Mengdie & Gao, Peiqi & Xu, Qiming & Bi, Jun & Naren, Tuya, 2019. "Managing water resources from the energy - water nexus perspective under a changing climate: A case study of Jiangsu province, China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 380-390.
    14. Altayib, Khalid & Dincer, Ibrahim, 2022. "Development of an integrated hydropower system with hydrogen and methanol production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    15. Ingrid Boas & Frank Biermann & Norichika Kanie, 2016. "Cross-sectoral strategies in global sustainability governance: towards a nexus approach," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 449-464, June.
    16. Arezki, Rabah & Fetzer, Thiemo & Pisch, Frank, 2017. "On the comparative advantage of U.S. manufacturing: Evidence from the shale gas revolution," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 34-59.
    17. Hennessey, Ryan & Pittman, Jeremy & Morand, Annette & Douglas, Allan, 2017. "Co-benefits of integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation in the Canadian energy sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 214-221.
    18. Fanny Henriet & Katheline Schubert, 2015. "Should we extract the European shale gas? The effect of climate and financial constraints," Post-Print halshs-01169310, HAL.
    19. Veronica Devenin & Constanza Bianchi, 2018. "Soccer fields? What for? Effectiveness of corporate social responsibility initiatives in the mining industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 866-879, September.
    20. Franks, Daniel M. & Brereton, David & Moran, Chris J., 2013. "The cumulative dimensions of impact in resource regions," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 640-647.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:118:y:2018:i:c:p:109-120. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.