IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v137y2020ics0301421519307499.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic impacts of U.S. energy development on agricultural land use

Author

Listed:
  • Fitzgerald, Timothy
  • Kuwayama, Yusuke
  • Olmstead, Sheila
  • Thompson, Alexandra

Abstract

The land-use impacts of the rapid expansion of U.S. oil and gas infrastructure since the early 2000s are a focus of local, state, and federal policymakers. Agriculture is the dominant land use in many areas with active energy development. Prior studies find that energy development displaces agriculture and assume that this effect is both permanent and homogeneous. We take a novel approach, analyzing landowners' capacity to both anticipate displaced production prior to the drilling of oil and gas wells, and reclaim some land once wells are in production. Using North Dakota's Bakken Shale as a case study, we merge agricultural land-use data from 2006 to 2014 with locations and drilling dates of oil and gas wells. We then use panel fixed-effects models to estimate the spatially- and intertemporally-heterogeneous effects of additional wells on agricultural land. We find that drilling is associated with reduced surrounding crop cover and increased fallow acreage. Importantly, the duration of these effects differs across agricultural land covers, and effects are in some cases temporary. Our analysis suggests that overlooking dynamic land use impacts may overestimate the cumulative net impact of oil and gas development on agricultural land uses by up to a factor of two.

Suggested Citation

  • Fitzgerald, Timothy & Kuwayama, Yusuke & Olmstead, Sheila & Thompson, Alexandra, 2020. "Dynamic impacts of U.S. energy development on agricultural land use," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:137:y:2020:i:c:s0301421519307499
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111163
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519307499
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111163?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. Jason P. Brown & Timothy Fitzgerald & Jeremy G. Weber, 2019. "Does Resource Ownership Matter? Oil and Gas Royalties and the Income Effect of Extraction," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(6), pages 1039-1064.
    2. James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 2008. "Heteroskedasticity-Robust Standard Errors for Fixed Effects Panel Data Regression," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(1), pages 155-174, January.
    3. Hoy, Kyle A. & Xiarchos, Irene M. & Kelsey, Timothy W. & Brasier, Kathryn J. & Glenna, Leland L., 2018. "Marcellus Shale Gas Development and Farming," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(3), pages 634-664, December.
    4. Gaudet, Gerard & Moreaux, Michel & Withagen, Cees, 2006. "The Alberta dilemma: Optimal sharing of a water resource by an agricultural and an oil sector," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 548-566, September.
    5. Hitaj, Claudia & Boslett, Andrew & Weber, Jeremy G., 2014. "Shale Development and Agriculture," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4), pages 1-7.
    6. James Feyrer & Erin T. Mansur & Bruce Sacerdote, 2017. "Geographic Dispersion of Economic Shocks: Evidence from the Fracking Revolution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1313-1334, April.
    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. Hitaj, Claudia & Boslett, Andrew J. & Weber, Jeremy G., 2020. "Fracking, farming, and water," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    2. Haoyu Wang & Shanghua Wu & Yuxiu Zhang & Tsing Bohu & Zhihui Bai & Xuliang Zhuang, 2022. "Understanding the Implications of Predicted Function for Assessment of Rapid Bioremediation in a Farmland-Oilfield Mixed Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-14, February.

    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. Hitaj, Claudia & Boslett, Andrew J. & Weber, Jeremy G., 2020. "Fracking, farming, and water," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    2. Unel, Bulent & Upton, Gregory B., 2023. "Oil & gas induced economic fluctuations and self-employment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    3. Gibbons, Stephen & Heblich, Stephan & Timmins, Christopher, 2021. "Market tremors: Shale gas exploration, earthquakes, and their impact on house prices," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    4. Jessica A. Crowe, 2019. "The impact of shale development on crop farmers: how the size and location of farms matter," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(1), pages 17-33, March.
    5. Jason P. Brown, 2021. "Response of Consumer Debt to Income Shocks: The Case of Energy Booms and Busts," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 53(7), pages 1629-1675, October.
    6. Daniel Berkowitz, 2022. "Rational but Not Prescient: Borrowing during the Fracking Boom," Working Paper 7314, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    7. Daniel Berkowitz & Andrew J. dup Boslett & Jason Brown & Jeremy G. Weber, 2022. "Rational but Not Prescient: Borrowing during the Fracking Boom," Research Working Paper RWP 2022-05, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.
    8. Kuan‐Ming Huang & Xiaoli Etienne, 2021. "Impact of Marcellus and Utica shale exploitation on Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia Regional Economies: A synthetic control analysis," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(6), pages 1449-1479, December.
    9. Joseph Marchand & Jeremy G. Weber, 2020. "How Local Economic Conditions Affect School Finances, Teacher Quality, and Student Achievement: Evidence from the Texas Shale Boom," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(1), pages 36-63, January.
    10. Watson, Brett & Reimer, Matthew N. & Guettabi, Mouhcine & Haynie, Alan, 2021. "Commercial fisheries & local economies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    11. Loujaina Abdelwahed & Cole Campbell, 2024. "Unequal ground: oil booms and income inequality in the USA," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 91(363), pages 880-910, July.
    12. Vakulenko, Elena, 2019. "Motives for internal migration in Russia: what has changed in recent years?," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 55, pages 113-138.
    13. Reischmann, Markus, 2016. "Creative accounting and electoral motives: Evidence from OECD countries," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 243-257.
    14. Ferdinando Monte & Stephen J. Redding & Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, 2018. "Commuting, Migration, and Local Employment Elasticities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(12), pages 3855-3890, December.
    15. Karlsson, Martin & Nilsson, Therese & Pichler, Stefan, 2014. "The impact of the 1918 Spanish flu epidemic on economic performance in Sweden," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 1-19.
    16. Potrafke, Niklas, 2019. "Electoral cycles in perceived corruption: International empirical evidence," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 215-224.
    17. Ming, Yaxin & Deng, Huixin & Wu, Xiaoyue, 2022. "The negative effect of air pollution on people's pro-environmental behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 72-87.
    18. David Roodman & James G. MacKinnon & Morten Ørregaard Nielsen & Matthew D. Webb, 2019. "Fast and wild: Bootstrap inference in Stata using boottest," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 19(1), pages 4-60, March.
    19. Bazhanov, Andrei, 2011. "Investment and current utility change in dynamically inefficient economies," MPRA Paper 35487, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Riccardo D'Adamo, 2018. "Cluster-Robust Standard Errors for Linear Regression Models with Many Controls," Papers 1806.07314, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2019.

    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:137:y:2020:i:c:s0301421519307499. 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.