IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/25712.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Relinquishing Riches: Auctions vs Informal Negotiations in Texas Oil and Gas Leasing

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas R. Covert
  • Richard L. Sweeney

Abstract

This paper compares outcomes from informally negotiated oil and gas leases to those awarded via centralized auction. We focus on Texas, where legislative decisions in the early twentieth century assigned thousands of proximate parcels to different mineral allocation mechanisms. We show that during the fracking boom, which began unexpectedly decades later, auctioned leases generated at least 40 percent larger upfront payments and 60 percent more output than negotiated leases did. These results suggest large potential gains from employing centralized, formal mechanisms in markets that traditionally allocate in an unstructured fashion, including the broader $3 trillion market for privately owned minerals.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas R. Covert & Richard L. Sweeney, 2019. "Relinquishing Riches: Auctions vs Informal Negotiations in Texas Oil and Gas Leasing," NBER Working Papers 25712, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:25712
    Note: EEE IO
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w25712.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy Fitzgerald & Randal R Rucker, 2016. "US private oil and natural gas royalties: estimates and policy relevance," OPEC Energy Review, Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, vol. 40(1), pages 3-25, March.
    2. Lucija Muehlenbachs & Elisheba Spiller & Christopher Timmins, 2015. "The Housing Market Impacts of Shale Gas Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(12), pages 3633-3659, December.
    3. Bulow, Jeremy & Klemperer, Paul, 1996. "Auctions versus Negotiations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 180-194, March.
    4. Chad Syverson, 2011. "What Determines Productivity?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 326-365, June.
    5. Gentry, Matthew & Stroup, Caleb, 2019. "Entry and competition in takeover auctions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 298-324.
    6. Myerson, Roger B. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1983. "Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-281, April.
    7. Matthew Backus & Thomas Blakee & Brad Larsen & Steven Tadelis, 2020. "Sequential Bargaining in the Field: Evidence from Millions of Online Bargaining Interactions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(3), pages 1319-1361.
    8. Hendricks, Kenneth & Porter, Robert H, 1988. "An Empirical Study of an Auction with Asymmetric Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 865-883, December.
    9. Alexander W. Bartik & Janet Currie & Michael Greenstone & Christopher R. Knittel, 2019. "The Local Economic and Welfare Consequences of Hydraulic Fracturing," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 105-155, October.
    10. Steven Tadelis, 2009. "Auctions Versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 372-399, October.
    11. James W. Roberts & Andrew Sweeting, 2013. "When Should Sellers Use Auctions?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(5), pages 1830-1861, August.
    12. Brown, Jason P. & Fitzgerald, Timothy & Weber, Jeremy G., 2016. "Capturing rents from natural resource abundance: Private royalties from U.S. onshore oil & gas production," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 23-38.
    13. Audra L. Boone & J. Harold Mulherin, 2007. "How Are Firms Sold?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(2), pages 847-875, April.
    14. Fan Li & Kari Lock Morgan & Alan M. Zaslavsky, 2018. "Balancing Covariates via Propensity Score Weighting," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(521), pages 390-400, January.
    15. Robinson, Peter M, 1988. "Root- N-Consistent Semiparametric Regression," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(4), pages 931-954, July.
    16. 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. Evan M. Herrnstadt & Ryan Kellogg & Eric Lewis, 2020. "The Economics of Time-Limited Development Options: The Case of Oil and Gas Leases," NBER Working Papers 27165, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Diego Carrasco-Novoa & Allan Hernández-Chanto, 2022. "Competing Sellers in Security-Bid Auctions under Risk-Averse Bidders," Discussion Papers Series 655, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    3. Janssen, Aljoscha, 2022. "Innovation Begets Innovation and Concentration: The Case of Upstream Oil & Gas in the North Sea," Working Paper Series 1431, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    4. Michele Fioretti & Alessandro Iaria & Aljoscha Janssen & Robert K Perrons & Clément Mazet-Sonilhac, 2022. "Innovation Begets Innovation and Concentration: the Case of Upstream Oil & Gas in the North Sea," SciencePo Working papers hal-03791971, HAL.
    5. Daniel Berkowitz, 2022. "Rational but Not Prescient: Borrowing during the Fracking Boom," Working Paper 7314, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    6. 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.

    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. 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. Keeler, Zachary T. & Stephens, Heather M., 2020. "Valuing shale gas development in resource-dependent communities," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Hess, Joshua H. & Manning, Dale T. & Iverson, Terry & Cutler, Harvey, 2019. "Uncertainty, learning, and local opposition to hydraulic fracturing," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 102-123.
    5. Yuen Leng Chow & Isa E. Hafalir & Abdullah Yavas, 2015. "Auction versus Negotiated Sale: Evidence from Real Estate Sales," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 432-470, June.
    6. Lade, Gabriel E. & Rudik, Ivan, 2020. "Costs of inefficient regulation: Evidence from the Bakken," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    7. Grant D. Jacobsen, 2019. "Who Wins In An Energy Boom? Evidence From Wage Rates And Housing," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 57(1), pages 9-32, January.
    8. Hill, Elaine L. & Ma, Lala, 2022. "Drinking water, fracking, and infant health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    9. Upton, Gregory B. & Yu, Han, 2021. "Labor demand shocks and earnings and employment differentials: Evidence from the U.S. shale oil & gas boom," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    10. 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).
    11. Gentry, Matthew & Stroup, Caleb, 2019. "Entry and competition in takeover auctions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 298-324.
    12. Kangil Lee & Brian Whitacre, 2021. "A Study on the Impact of Unconventional (and Conventional) Drilling on Housing Prices in Central Oklahoma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-17, December.
    13. Lutz Kilian & Xiaoqing Zhou, 2022. "The Propagation of Regional Shocks in Housing Markets: Evidence from Oil Price Shocks in Canada," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 54(4), pages 953-987, June.
    14. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2020. "On the Benefits of Set-Asides," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1655-1696.
    15. Jason Brown & Timothy Fitzgerald & Jeremy G. Weber, 2016. "Asset Ownership, Windfalls, and Income: Evidence from Oil and Gas Royalties," Research Working Paper RWP 16-12, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.
    16. Eife, Thomas, 2020. "The General Equilibrium Effects of the Shale Revolution," Working Papers 0694, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    17. Loertscher, Simon & Marx, Leslie M., 2019. "Merger review with intermediate buyer power," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    18. Cai, Jingjing & De Silva, Dakshina G. & Slechten, Aurelie, 2021. "Effects of oil booms on the local environment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    19. Max Harleman, 2023. "Compensating communities for industrial disamenities: The case of shale gas development," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(1), pages 10-34, January.
    20. Diemer, Andreas, 2020. "Spatial diffusion of local economic shocks in social networks: evidence from the US fracking boom," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 105868, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • Q35 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Hydrocarbon Resources

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nbr:nberwo:25712. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.