Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AND DEVELOPMENT
Copyright 2016
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES FOR
FRACKING: THE CASE OF THE TUSCALOOSA
MARINE SHALE PLAY
Introduction
T echnological advances in oil and gas extraction have increased welfare for
consumers and producers by $48 billion per year, but the environmental and
societal costs are not well understood.1 Improved drilling and hydraulic fracturing
(fracking) techniques have opened up new energy reserves in places like the
Bakken Basin in North Dakota, the Marcellus Shale area of upper Appalachia, and
the Barnett Shale and the Eagle Ford Shale plays in Texas. These communities
have experienced economic booms in the last 10 years and, more recently, busts as
world oil prices have declined. Stories abound in these communities of fast food
*Chad R. Miller is an Associate Professor and Graduate Coordinator of the Master’s of Science
of Economic Development program in The University of Southern Mississippi College of Business.
He teaches in the economic development program and coordinates the International Economic
Development Council (IEDC)-accredited True South basic economic development course. He has
a Ph.D. from the Virginia Tech Center for Public Administration & Policy, a M.B.A. from Boston
University, and a B.A. in Government from the College of William & Mary. The author’s articles
have appeared in such publications as Public Works Management & Policy, Regional Science Policy
& Practice, State and Local Government Review, Administration Theory & Praxis, and Adminis-
tration & Society. This research was supported through funding from the National Center for Freight
and Infrastructure Research and Education (CFIRE) consortium.
Joel F. Bolton is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Management and International
Business at The University of Southern Mississippi. He earned a Ph.D. at Oklahoma State
University, a M.B.A. at Sam Houston State University, and a B.A. at Texas A&M University. His
research areas are corporate governance, managerial cognition, and the external environment of
business. His articles have appeared in publications such as the Journal of Management Studies.
restaurants like Burger King offering $5,000 employee retention bonuses and
truck drivers earning over $100,000.2 However, all the new money flowing into
these regions has led to inflation in the cost of living, housing shortages, and
increased crime rates.3 There are also indications of environmental consequences
such as contaminated water, oil spills, and earthquakes. This has led to challenges
for public administrators in these regions as they work to make the shale revo-
lution a blessing and not a curse.
Fracking is not a new technique, but recent refinements, along with increases in
oil prices to over $100 per barrel, have allowed previously unattainable reserves of
fossil fuels to be exploited. Wells can now be drilled thousands of feet down and
then drilled thousands of feet horizontally to reach the desired rock layer. Then
millions of gallons of water, sand, and chemicals are pumped underground to
break apart the rock and release the fossil fuels. In some plays such as the Mar-
cellus basin, this is mostly natural gas and in other regions (e.g., the Bakkens) the
output is mostly oil. Once the fracking is done, a typical well producing crude oil
generates around 2,000 barrels per day (about the capacity of a tanker truck per
day) with the yield declining slightly for a 20 year period.4 Each well needs
hundreds of trucks to bring in equipment, chemicals, water (if piping is not fea-
sible) and frac sand, much of which comes from Wisconsin. The so-called “salt
water” used to fracture the wells needs to be transported for disposal. The oil and
gas then needs to be trucked or piped to refineries. This creates tremendous strain
on the transportation system as exemplified by the regular rail tanker car accidents
and damage to the roads.
Numerous aspects of state and local public administration are responsible for
oil and gas production and its externalities. There is typically a state agency re-
sponsible for overall stewardship of natural resource extraction such as the
Railroad Commission of Texas or the Mississippi State Oil & Gas Board. Envi-
ronmental agencies and water authorities are involved with monitoring and per-
mitting. Transportation and public works departments become involved with
infrastructure issues. Planners get involved with land use. Revenue services collect
oil and gas severance taxes, royalties, etc. Local government administrators have
to deal with many of the problems from fracking (e.g., noise nuisance, traffic
hazards, impacts on property values), but are not seeing revenue increases to
match their additional costs.5 There are a plethora of public administration con-
cerns with fracking, but this research will focus on economic developers. These
are the state, regional, and local organizations involved with creating and retaining
jobs, increasing the tax base, and improving the quality-of-life of a region.6
The economic development profession has been trying to sort out how they can
create sustainable economic development from the shale energy industry and
avoid the boom-bust cycle. Generally, economic developers understand that direct
local job creation from shale gas and oil extraction will be modest, as most jobs
come from processing and manufacturing to serve the industry.7 Thus, there is
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES & FRACKING 203
There are contested findings with regard to the economic development con-
sequences related to local economies involved in fracking shale plays. Significant
anecdotal information indicates that fracking creates jobs and wealth, but it also
causes environmental damage. The social science research on the implications is
204 THE JOURNAL OF ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT
Second, operators need to hire people to drill and produce from the well. This
can bring in money to the community if the workers spend their money locally.
J. Jacquet found that fracking can provide thousands of short-term and long-term
jobs, but without work force training for locals, much of the benefit of these new
employment arrangements will leak out of the community to outsiders who come
in to work on the rigs and then leave the community to spend the money.24 Tra-
ditionally, the goals and work efforts of economic developers and work force
administrators have not been aligned, but the linkages between the two fields are
becoming stronger.25 Developing the workers who do the fracking, encouraging
operators to hire locally, and getting these workers to spend money locally is an
economic development responsibility.
There are indirect economic benefits from the suppliers and services and inputs
for fracking if these are sourced locally. This supplier activity creates more sup-
plier activity and induced activity. B. Weinstein and T. Clower estimate that 2,000
wells generate $7.6 billion in supplier activity for the state of New York.26
J. Phillips found that maintenance and repair construction of non-residential
structures, architectural, and engineering were the main local suppliers to oil and
gas operations in Mississippi.27 Input/output (I/O) tables show the linkages and
production and what industries supply oil and gas extraction. These tables are the
basis for most industrial attraction targeting.28
Table 1 shows the I/O table suppliers related to the fracking activities in the
TMS region of Wilkinson County, Amite County, and Pike County, which are all
in Mississippi. It includes all local purchases that create economic activity and the
percentages of purchases from outside the region. Economic developers use these
I/O tables to determine what industries they should target for attraction or de-
velopment. The local supply chain for fracking is a major economic development
focus, but many of these companies are already firmly established in traditional oil
and gas regions such as Houston.
The major attraction for economic developers from shale plays is the potential
to recruit energy-based manufacturing that utilize the oil and gas as a major input.
Manufacturing is often energy intensive and natural gas is commonly used as
a fuel and a feedstock. The cost of energy to manufacturing industries averages
about 4 percent of production costs, but around 15 percent for energy-based
manufacturers such as metals, chemicals, and pulp and paper, and even higher for
industries such as cement and fertilizers.29 A PricewaterhouseCoopers report
found that manufacturing could hire a million more workers and may reduce
energy expenses by as much as $11.6 billion annually because of shale gas.30 This
could mean 930,000 new manufacturing jobs by 2030 and 1.41 million by 2040.31
The chemical industry has projected 225 new chemical plants by 2023 because of
shale gas with $138 billion in investment and 383,000 new jobs.32 Louisiana has
been particularly successful at attracting energy-based manufacturing including
Sasol’s announcement of a $14-billion gas-to-liquids project and CF Industries’
206 THE JOURNAL OF ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT
Table 1
INDUSTRY SUPPLY CHAIN FOR OIL & GAS EXTRACTION IN TUSCALOOSA
MARINE SHALE REGION
In Out of
NAICS Industry Amount Region Region
213112 Support activities for oil and gas operations $188,892 18.80% 81.20%
541110 Offices of lawyers $108,951 13.00% 87.00%
486210 Pipeline transportation of natural gas $97,921 0.00% 100.00%
324110 Petroleum refineries $82,547 0.00% 100.00%
331110 Iron and steel mills and ferroalloy manufacturing $67,248 0.10% 99.90%
533110 Lessors of nonfinancial intangible assets $62,160 0.00% 100.00%
333132 Oil and gas field machinery manufacturing $58,977 0.00% 100.00%
532412 Equipment rental and leasing $50,629 11.30% 88.70%
541512 Computer systems design services $46,281 2.20% 97.80%
522110 Commercial banking $43,127 32.60% 67.40%
532490 Other equipment rental and leasing $42,462 19.30% 80.70%
541330 Engineering services $35,247 5.40% 94.60%
333515 Machine tool accessory manufacturing $32,678 0.00% 100.00%
486110 Pipeline transportation of crude oil $31,725 0.00% 100.00%
221210 Natural gas distribution $30,937 0.00% 100.00%
425120 Wholesale trade agents and brokers $23,244 7.30% 92.70%
238220 Plumbing, heating, and AC contractors $22,745 34.30% 65.70%
332912 Fluid power valve and hose fitting manufacturing $22,058 0.00% 100.00%
238210 Electrical contractors $20,951 22.10% 77.90%
541511 Custom computer programming services $20,522 2.00% 98.00%
Methodology
This research will take a case study approach based on key informant in-
terviews, site visits, and examination of the secondary data. The TMS region of
Mississippi, which is centered on Wilkinson County, Amite County, and Pike
County in southwest Mississippi, was selected because of data availability and it is
a relatively new, large, emerging shale play. Because of rural distress, it is the
main focus of economic developers in the region. It is a region with a declining
population and one of the highest unemployment rates in Mississippi. (The re-
gional population has declined 2.4 percent from 2010-2015, and unemployment is
up to 9 percent in some counties.) Before the shale boom, large job losses were
experienced in the region’s main industries: sawmills and poultry processing. In
addition to energy production, the regional economic development organization is
now targeting food processing, call centers, metal fabrication, and plastics.35 As
a result of the poor employment opportunities, the working-age population is
abandoning the area to find employment. Given these trends and the fact that the
sparsely populated region is heavily forested with moderate livestock production,
it is certainly a region desperate for economic development.
The TMS play situated in the southwestern Mississippi and the eastern part of
Louisiana is one of the emerging shale plays in the United States. TMS is the
eastern edge of a geologic formation that parallels the Gulf of Mexico through
Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. This includes the established Eagle Ford Shale
play in Texas so the TMS is sometimes referred to as the Louisiana Eagle Ford.
According to a Louisiana State University study, the region contains more than
7 billion barrels of recoverable crude oil.36 This is more than the most recent Bakken
assessment. The most promising production zone in the TMS is at a depth of 10,000
to 15,000 feet (compared to depths of 5,000 to 7,000 feet for the Eagle Ford).
By all standards, the TMS play is still in its infancy. Leasing activities began in
earnest in the area only from 2011-2012. The first well excavation began at the end
of 2012. A few pioneering firms have moved into the area and began exploration.
208 THE JOURNAL OF ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT
The business model of these pioneer operators seems to be to establish the prof-
itability of the play so that they can sell their leasehold to large integrated energy
companies (e.g., Chevron). Thus, the investments of these firms could be con-
sidered as mainly “demonstrative” and aimed at showing the value of the play.
Most of the efforts in the area are geared toward finding the right formulas leading
to maximum production and durability of the play. The initial wells dug in the area
have begun to show results demonstrating that the shale play is essentially an oil
play with production ranging from 92 to 98 percent of oil. The output is coupled
with “wet gas” having a high concentration of propane and other natural gas liquids
(NGLs) that are desired by producers.
The Mississippi Oil and Gas Board recently reported that 40 wells had been
drilled in the Mississippi portion of the TMS.37 Operators expect their wells will
produce 600,000 to 800,000 barrels of oil over a 40-year production life. The total
production in the Mississippi portion of the TMS since 2011, when the first well began
to produce, is about 2.4 million barrels, but production is expected to drop off in 2016
once the operators’ hedges expire due to lower oil prices. According to the operators,
the test wells have shown that the oil can be extracted and the challenges overcome.
The primary challenge is geological, which leads to expensive well costs and
the need to find ways to optimize production. The operators have learned tech-
niques for effectively drilling in the TMS, but they need to ensure this codified and
tacit knowledge is not lost as rigs are laid down. Schlumberger Ltd. helped form
a consortium of the region’s major operators including Goodrich, Amelia Resources,
Sanchez Resources, Halcon, and Comstock Resources to serve as a platform for data
sharing to overcome the region’s challenging geology. Industry-wide, cooperation
among operators is cordial, but can be secretive in some plays. In contrast, the TMS
operators are working together to achieve a shared goal. In addition to technical
problem solving, the operators are looking to standardize unit size and layouts.
Despite these collaborative efforts, production is still expensive in the TMS
compared to elsewhere in the United States. The current cost for a well is about
$15 million, down from $20 million for wells that produce from 300 barrels per
day (bbl/d) to 500 bbl/d according to oil companies operating in the area.38 This
can be compared to the Bakken wells that produce around 275 bbl/d with an $8.5
million to $10 million capital cost per well.39 In Eagle Ford, the same estimate puts
the average crude oil production at about 219 bbl/d. The well cost of the Bakken is
between $5.5 million to $7.5 million per well. With improved production tech-
niques in the TMS, some operators have been getting the cost down to near $10
million per well and drilling times to under 30 days.40
The price for oil has dropped from over $100 per barrel in August 2013 to less
than $50 per barrel average in 2015, making many question the economics of
fracking. Traditionally, experts have said that U.S. tight oil needs to sell at $85 or
$90 a barrel for fracking to be profitable, but producers have become more effi-
cient at fracking, so they can still maintain profitability with prices between $50 and
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES & FRACKING 209
$70 a barrel.41 The breakeven analysis varies between shale plays and operators.
Based on a 20-pecent pre-tax return in table 2, Baird Ltd. estimates a range from $50
to $83 for breakeven with the TMS play operators needing $79.42 However, Goodrich
Petroleum claims it can breakeven in the TMS at $44 with a 10-percent return if
optimization continues and well prices get to $10 million.43 The actual breakeven
numbers are debatable, but productivity gains and the growth imperative support
eventual future growth. The result is that the shale economy is hitting a bust cycle.
The expensive nature of operation in the play is due to several factors. The first
factor relates to the depth of the play. The depth of the TMS play is up to 15,000 feet
compared to some other plays in Texas where the depth is about 7,000 to 8,000 feet.
Second, another factor driving prices up is that the play is not yet operating at
a maximum economy of scale. Many of the service providers that play key roles in
the development of the areas are not yet familiar with the TMS and not situated in
close proximity. However, some companies have announced that they would be
establishing a branch in Mississippi to serve an operating TMS play. Other factors
include that producing wells are not operating efficiently. For example, digging
multiple wells in a single spacing unit at a time improves efficiencies.
Desperate for economic development and seeing a large potential, the local
economic development organizations have come together to market and develop
the TMS. They have designated the economic developer from Pike County as the
Director of TMS to lead the combined efforts. This organization has visited other
fracking regions, lobbied in Mississippi’s capital of Jackson for the TMS, spon-
sored the annual Tuscaloosa Marine Shale Development Summit & Exhibit, been
active on social media, hosted site visits, commissioned studies, and developed
a coordinated economic development strategy. The regional economic develop-
ment group has been aggressive in trying to develop the work force, attract sup-
pliers, and monitor the extraction. They see the TMS as having the potential to
economically save the region. Thus, even though the play is new, and currently
stalled, there have been considerable economic development efforts that present
a useful case study of how shale development is practiced.
Table 2
SHALE REGIONS’ BREAKEVEN ANALYSIS
Source: E. Bellamy, “Energy Markets & the TMS,” presentation at the 3rd Annual Tuscaloosa
Marine Shale Development Summit, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 4–5, 2015.
210 THE JOURNAL OF ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT
Incentives for Oil and Gas Production: To compete with Louisiana, Mis-
sissippi reduced the oil and gas severance tax in 2013 from 6 percent to 1.3 percent
for oil and gas extracted from horizontally drilled wells for a period of 30 months
or until the payout of the well. This reduces costs $700,000 to $800,000 per well.44
The legislation applies to all qualified wells until 2018. In Louisiana there is
a standard severance tax of 12.5 percent, but this is rebated for horizontal drillers
for two years or until the payout of the well cost is achieved. According to a recent
report, this rebate cost the state $239 million in revenue.45 Industry argues that
these breaks are needed to keep the exploration going, while critics contend the
incentives merely affect which part of the TMS play is tapped first.
The counties rely on the severance tax revenue to help maintain the roads
where the drilling is occurring. Before the new legislation, two-thirds of the
revenue went to the state and the remaining one-third to the county, but until 2018
the counties will just receive the 1.3 percent severance. This resulted in about
$225,307 in foregone revenue annually for the region (see table 3).
The economic developers interviewed were supportive of the reduced in-
centives to encourage initial production in the region, but were amenable to the
incentives “sun setting.” They saw the need for severance revenues to support
public services such as the roads. They did want to be able to offer economic
development incentives for the oil and gas supply chain. However, most of the
state incentives are geared toward manufacturing so did not apply to much of the
oil and gas extraction supply chain (see table 1).
Table 3
OIL AND GAS SEVERANCE FOR AMITE COUNTY, PIKE COUNTY,
a
AND WILKINSON COUNTY
Tax Year Oil Payments Gas Payments Total Payments Estimated Revenue*
a
* = estimated revenue without rate reduction.
Source: Mississippi Department of Revenue, Annual Report Fiscal Year 2014 (Jackson,
Mississippi: Mississippi Department of Revenue, 2015).
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES & FRACKING 211
Table 4
PROJECTED COUNTY ROAD COSTS IN THE TUSCALOOSA MARINE
SHALE REGION FOR 2016-2021
the region.50 With only around 18,000 workers in the three-county region, this was an
admittedly high goal to reach. The region was expected to replicate the direct, in-
direct, and induced job growth experienced in other shale regions such as North
Dakota. They were going to learn from the mistakes of these other regions to create
extensive jobs for local workers and mitigate the inflow of oil migrant workers.
However, an analysis of the secondary employment data for the TMS region
from 2010 to 2015 shows surprisingly little influence from fracking. The largest
job gains were in support of animal production (155 jobs added) and higher ed-
ucation (105 jobs added). Of the top 20 job-gaining industries, only pipe fitting (81
jobs added) was possibly a direct consequence of fracking (see table 5). “Support
activities for oil and gas operations” was the only industry directly related to
fracking that added jobs (table 5). The other fracking-related industries showed no
appreciable gains even with trucking included. Job growth across the board was
Table 5
TOP 20 INDUSTRIES FOR JOB GROWTH IN THE TUSCALOOSA
a
MARINE SHALE REGION, 2010-2015
a
gov. = government; mfg. = manufacturing; and schs. = schools.
Source: Economic Modeling Systems, Inc., “EMSI Developer,” available at http://www.
economicmodeling.com/
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES & FRACKING 215
Table 6
OIL- AND GAS-RELATED INDUSTRIES’ EMPLOYMENT IN THE COMPARATIVE SHALE
a
REGIONS DURING THE FIVE-YEAR START-UP PHASE
211111 Crude petroleum & natural gas extraction –21 1,481 1,088
213111 Drilling oil & gas wells 0 5,618 1,229
213112 Support activities for oil & gas operations 10 14,759 2,030
237120 Oil & gas pipeline & related structures const. 0 2,015 229
333132 Oil & gas field machinery & equip. mfg. 0 38 11
486110 Pipeline transportation of crude oil 0 100 14
486210 Pipeline transportation of natural gas 0 161 89
238910 Site preparation contractors 4 1,712 788
484 General freight trucking 29 271 –724
721110 Hotels and motels 9 1,173 –185
Total jobs 17,978 171,860 2,510,135
Total change in jobs –552 61,561 –11,070
a
const. = construction; equip. = equipment; mfg. = manufacturing; and TMS = Tuscaloosa
Marine Shale.
Source: Economic Modeling Systems, Inc., “EMSI Developer,” available at http://www.
economicmodeling.com/
less than in other shale plays at similar stages of development as can be seen from
table 6. Secondary data collected by Economic Modeling Systems, Inc. from the
Mississippi Department of Employment Security is often prone to reporting issues,
but it does indicate that direct job creation from fracking in the TMS is limited and
the employment impacts, if any, are predominately from indirect jobs.
The economic developers, as well, did not claim large direct job claims from
drilling, but did report indirect job claims. These new jobs came from suppliers
and the induced impact on hotels, restaurants, and other related industries. De-
spite the drillers originating from places as far away as Texas, one economic
developer noted a number of these oil field workers were originally from Mis-
sissippi and this was a chance for them to return to their state of origin. Examples
of suppliers being attracted to the region include Newpark Drilling Fluids, which
opened a warehouse and a potential drilling-fluids manufacturing facility that
will create 40 jobs, and Anchor Drilling Fluids, which is planning an oil-based
mud plant. The economic developers are aggressively trying to attract more of
the fracking supply chain to the region, but the job gains are not great given that
the drilling activities are primarily exploratory in nature. Further, there has not
been success in attracting the penultimate job creator, an energy-intensive
216 THE JOURNAL OF ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT
that they examined the problems faced in other shale regions during their fact-
finding tours and, generally, they tended to trust that the local industry would
abide by environmental standards and that these standards were sufficient. Many
developers are satisfied with the current regulatory environment. The industry is
tightly regulated at the state level by the Mississippi Oil & Gas Board and Mis-
sissippi Department of Environmental Quality and at the federal level by the Clean
Water Act, Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Superfund law, and other
regulations. Although environmental integrity is considered to be a shared goal
among the developers, the common refrain was, to paraphrase, “60+ years of
drilling and the water’s fine.”53
Although water management policies that are environmentally friendly are
portrayed as a competitive advantage of the region, there is a considerable amount
of water in the region that borders the Mississippi River, and the options related to
water access have not yet been optimized for best results. Although the growing
problem of water access could evolve into a competitive disadvantage, several ef-
forts have been undertaken to alleviate the problem. Amite County and Wilkinson
County have planned a two-county water district, funded by a surcharge on water
usage, to control the use of water that will be needed for fracking, and this will be
the nation’s first public water management district created only for fracking. There
is also a plan to build a pipeline to move treated sewage daily from McComb,
Liberty, Gloster, and other Southwest Mississippi communities for use in the
completion of wells.54 Currently, water is being pulled from surface sources (e.g.,
ponds and streams), but in the longer term, an aquifer below the drinking water
aquifer might need to be tapped. The region’s geography has injection zones sep-
arated from drinking water so waste water can be injected into old vertical wells
below the drinking water aquifer. This wastewater is heavier than freshwater and not
likely to migrate upward. The transportation of water will be within the region.
Non-water waste can also be disposed of within the region. Waste Management
out of its Madison (Mississippi) office has set up a one-stop-shop solution for the
handling, transporting, and disposing of soils, drill cuttings, and other solids
generated during the production of oil and gas in the TMS. They have built the
Plantation Oaks landfill in nearby Sibley to handle solid waste from the TMS.
Given that the general feeling among economic developers is that environmental
issues are being handled properly with no significant spills or other adverse events
to report, there is a low likelihood that their collective perspective will soon
change. However, the need to be proactive managers of shifting business cycles
requires policy positions and organizational cultures that enhance revenues and
minimize costs whether the local shale economy is in expansion or recession. To
that end, a strategic focus which minimizes long-term externalities in the natural
environment, regardless of how challenging it may be in the short-term, will likely
be advantageous for all stakeholders.
218 THE JOURNAL OF ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT
Conclusion
Industries and firms of all kinds face periods of expansion and recession, and
a number of management principles have been developed to reduce the potentially
negative effects of these booms and busts. We contend that these principles of
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES & FRACKING 219
NOTES
1
C. Hausman and R. Kellogg, “Welfare and Distributional Implications of Shale Gas,”
Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute, 2015).
2
“McDonald’s Signing Bonuses: North Dakota Outlet Offering $300 to Potential Hires,” Huf-
fington Post, January 21, 2012, p. B1.
3
R. Holeywell, “North Dakota’s Oil Boom is a Blessing and a Curse,” Governing, August 2011.
4
S. Tully, “The Shale Oil Revolution is in Danger,” Fortune, January 9, 2015.
5
F. Shafroth, “Fracking’s Financial Losers: Local Governments,” Governing, September 2014.
6
M. Warner and L. Zheng, “Economic Development Strategies for Recessionary Times: Survey
Results from 2009,” ICMA Municipal Yearbook 2011 (Washington, D.C.: International City/
Country Management Association, 2011), pp. 33–42.
7
E. Dile, “Shale Energy: States’ Varied Approaches, Plus Lessons for Economic Developers,”
ED Now, April 30, 2015.
8
T. Kurtz, “Fracking’s Downstream Impact: Balancing a Resurging Southwest Louisiana with
Community Modeling and Strategic Site,” presentation delivered to the International Economic
Development Conference, Fort Worth, Texas, October 19, 2014.
9
M. Barbash, “Earth Day 2015: Lessons from the Shale Oil Economy,” Blog Post, April 20, 2015.
10
Ibid.
11
J. M. Barth, “The Economic Impact of Shale Gas Development on State and Local Economies:
Benefits, Costs, and Uncertainties,” New Solutions: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational
Health Policy, vol. 23, no. 1 (2013), pp. 85–101.
12
D. Kay, “The Economic Impact of Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling What Have We Learned?
What Are the Limitations?” in Working Paper Series: A Comprehensive Economic Impact
Analysis of Natural Gas Extraction in the Marcellus Shale (State College, Pennsylvania: The
Pennsylvania State University, 2011); T. C. Kinnaman, “The Economic Impact of Shale Gas
Extraction: A Review of Existing Studies,” Ecological Economics, vol. 70, no. 7 (2011),
pp. 1243–249; and M. C. Rousu, D. Ramsaran, and D. Furlano, “Guidelines for Conducting
Economic Impact Studies on Fracking,” International Advances in Economic Research, vol. 21,
no. 2 (2015), pp. 213–25.
13
B. L. Weinstein, and T. L. Clower, The Economic and Fiscal Impacts of Devon Energy in
Denton, Tarrant, and Wise Counties (Dallas, Texas: University of North Texas, 2004).
14
B. J. Anderson, and G. L. Theodori, “Local Leaders’ Perceptions of Energy Development in
the Barnett Shale,” Southern Rural Sociology, vol. 24, no. 1 (2009), pp. 113–29, and T. Kelsey and
M. Ward, “Natural Gas Drilling Effects on Municipal Governments Throughout Pennsylvania’s
Marcellus Shale Region,” in Marcellus Education Fact Sheet (State College, Pennsylvania: Penn
State Cooperative Extension, 2011).
15
B. Weinstein and T. L. Clower, Potential Economic and Fiscal Impacts from Natural Gas
Production in Broome County, New York (Denton, Texas: University of North Texas, 2009), and B.
Hefley and S. Seydor, The Economic Impact of the Value Chain of a Marcellus Shale Well
(Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: University of Pittsburgh, 2011).
16
J. M. Barth, Unanswered Questions About the Economic Impact of Gas Drilling in the
Marcellus Shale: Don’t Jump to Conclusions (Hudson, New York: JM Barth & Associates, Inc.,
2010), and F. Mauro, M. Wood, M. Mattingly, M. Price, S. Herzenberg, and S. Ward, Exaggerating
the Employment Impacts of Shale Drilling: How and Why (Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Multi-State
Shale Research Collaborative, 2013).
17
R. Grunewald and D. Batbold, Bakken Activity: How Wide Is the Ripple Effect? (Minneapolis,
Minnesota: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, 2013).
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES & FRACKING 221
18
S. Deller and A. Schreiber, “Mining and Community Economic Growth,” The Review of
Regional Studies, vol. 42, no. 3 (2013), pp. 121–41.
19
W. H. Fruth, Flow of Money and Its Impact on Local Economies (Palm City, Florida: Policom
Corporation, 2015).
20
L. C. Scott and J. Huang, The Economic Impact of the Haynesville Shale on the Louisiana
Economy in 2008 (Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Loren C. Scott & Associates, 2009).
21
T. C. Kinnaman, op. cit.
22
T. Kelsey, M. Shield, J. Ladlee, and M. Ward, Economic Impacts of Marcellus Shale in
Pennsylvania: Employment and Income in 2009 (Williamsport, Pennslyvania: Marcellus Shale
Education & Training Center, 2011).
23
T. W. Kelsey, A. Metcalf, and R. Salcedo, Marcellus Shale: Land Ownership, Local Voice,
and the Distribution of Lease and Royalty Dollars (University Park, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania
State University Center for Economic and Community Development, 2012).
24
J. Jacquet, “Workforce Development Challenges in the Natural Gas Industry,” working
paper series for A Comprehensive Economic Impact Analysis of Natural Gas Extraction in the
Marcellus Shale (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University, Department of City and Regional
Planning, 2011).
25
E. Harper-Anderson, “Measuring the Connection between Workforce Development and
Economic Development: Examining the Role of Sectors for Local Outcomes,” Economic Devel-
opment Quarterly, vol. 22, no. 2 (2008), pp. 119–35.
26
B. Weinstein, and T. L. Clower, “Potential Economic and Fiscal Impacts from Natural Gas
Production in Broome County, New York.”
27
J. Phillips, A Basic Overview of the Oil & Gas Industry in Mississippi (Starkville, Mississippi:
John C. Stennis Institute for Government, 2013).
28
S. Goetz, S. Deller, and T. Harris, eds., Targeting Regional Economic Development (London:
Routledge Press, 2009).
29
Natural Resources Canada, Improving Energy Performance in Canada (Gatineau, Quebec:
Office of Energy Efficiency, 2005).
30
PricewaterhouseCooper LLP, Shale Gas: A Renaissance in US Manufacturing? (Washington,
D.C.: PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2012).
31
PricewaterhouseCooper LLP, Shale Gas: Still a Boon to US Manufacturing? (New York:
PricewaterhouseCooper LLP, 2014).
32
American Chemistry Council, “Shale Gas and New Chemical Industry Investment:
$138 Billion and Counting,” available at http://www.americanchemistry.com/Policy/Energy/
Shale-Gas/Slides-Shale-Gas-and-New-US-Chemical-Industry-Investment138-Billion-and-
Counting.
33
F. Mauro et al., op. cit.
34
M. Barbash, op. cit.
35
Southwest Mississippi Partnership, “It’s All About Accessibility,” available at http://www.
southwest-mississippi.com/index.php.
36
J. Chacko, B. Jones, J. Moncreif, R. Bourgeois, and B. Harder, An Unproven Unconventional
Seven Billion Barrel Oil Resource - the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale (Baton Rouge, Louisiana:
Louisiana State University, 1997).
37
Mississippi State Oil & Gas Board, “TMS Development,” available at http://www.ogb.state.
ms.us/TMSDevelopment.php.
38
R. Turnham, “Goodrich Petroleum Corporation,” presentation at the 3rd Annual Tuscaloosa
Marine Shale Development Summit, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 4–5, 2015.
222 THE JOURNAL OF ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT
39
L. Maugeri, The Shale Oil Boom: A U.S. Phenomenon the Geopolitics of Energy Project
(Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, John F. Kennedy
School of Government, Harvard University, 2013).
40
R. Turnham, op. cit.
41
J. Burkhard, “Tight Oil Test: US Output at Lower Oil Prices,” IHS Markit Energy Blog,
November 25, 2014.
42
E. Bellamy, “Energy Markets & the TMS,” presentation at the 3rd Annual Tuscaloosa Marine
Shale Development Summit, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 4–5, 2015.
43
R. Turnham, op. cit.
44
Natural Gas Intelligence (NGI), “Tuscaloosa Operators Get Severance Tax Break in Mis-
sissippi,” NGI’s Shale Daily, April 25, 2013.
45
Pew Center on the States, Avoiding Blank Checks: Creating Fiscally Sound State Tax In-
centives (Washington, D.C.: The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2012).
46
A. Driver and T. Wade, “U.S. Oil Output Slide Looms as Shale Firms Hit Productivity Wall,” Reuters
Business, October 21, 2015, and U.S. Energy Information Administration, Drilling Productivity Report for
Key Tight Oil and Shale Gas Regions (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2015).
47
Institute of Transportation Engineers, “The Ahead Four-Lane Highway Program in Mis-
sissippi: 1986-1998 and Beyond,” ITE Journal, vol. 68, no. 9 (1999), pp. 52–3, and Mississippi
Department of Transportation, Mississippi Looking Ahead (Jackson, Mississippi: Mississippi De-
partment of Transportation, 2012).
48
T. Carter, “Counties ‘Hoping to Get It Right’ as They Await Tuscaloosa Marine Shale Boom,”
Mississippi Business Journal, May 23, 2013.
49
S. Buchanan, “Lodges to Be Built for Tuscaloosa Marine Shale Workers as Hotels Fill,” The
Louisiana Weekly, September 8, 2014, p. B1.
50
J, Vicory, “Expo Attendees See Oil Boom on the Way,” Brookhaven Daily Leader, October
18, 2013, p. 1.
51
K. Stickney, “Schlumberger Announces Layoffs to 11,000 Employees,” The Advertiser, April
16, 2015.
52
Blane Canada Ltd., The Missing Link: A Vision for R&E (Wheaton, Illinois: Blane Canada
Ltd., 2002).
53
C. Batson, “Entrepreneurship in Oil & Gas and the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale,” Spring 2015
Lecture Series, Economic Development and Entrepreneurship in Mississippi’s Energy Sector, The
University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, Mississippi, 2014.
54
T. Carter, “Amite, Wilkinson Plan to Use Treated Sewage to Spur Fracking Operations,”
Mississippi Business Journal, November 7, 2014.
55
B. L. Allen, “Cradle of a Revolution? The Industrial Transformation of Louisiana’s Lower
Mississippi River,” Technology and Culture, vol. 47, no. 1 (2006), pp. 112–19.
56
P. Navarro, “Principles of the Master Cyclist,” MIT Sloan Management Review, vol. 45, no. 2
(2004), pp. 20–4, and The Well-Timed Strategy: Managing the Business Cycle for Competitive
Advantage (Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006).
57
P. Bromiley, P. Navarro, and P. Sottile, “Strategic Business Cycle Management and Orga-
nizational Performance: A Great Unexplored Research Stream,” Strategic Organization, vol. 6, no.
2 (2008), pp. 207–19.