In the face of an industry push to develop North America’s shale gas deposits and in the context of prolonged economic hardship in much of the advanced industrialized world, drilling for unconventional natural gas through a process known as “fracking” has emerged as an important public policy issue in Canada and the U.S. While proponents of these new methods herald the promise of lower energy costs, greater investment, jobs and energy security for jurisdictions across North America, opponents argue these benefits are more limited, especially when compared to the substantive risks associated with “fracking” for the environment and for the prospects of global climate change. Complicating such debate is the fact that many uncertainties remain (the scientific jury is still out regarding the risks of fracking) and much of the public remains ill-informed. As fracking operations increase in number and scope, understanding public opinion on this issue is increasingly important. In this context, the following paper asks, what explains differences in risk perceptions and policy preferences regarding shale gas extraction at the level of US states and Canadian provinces? Using original data from three representative state and province-wide telephone surveys conducted in the Fall of 2012, this research seeks to explain differing risk perceptions and policy preferences of the adult population in three jurisdictions that vary substantially in the level of fracking activity that has occurred so far, and in the type and stringency of legislation passed to regulate the industry to date. Specifically, the paper examines public perceptions of fracking in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Quebec and tests insights from Douglas and Wildavsky’s (1982) Culutral Theory (CT) of Risk. The predictive power of CT is compared to other factors commonly examined in studies of mass opinion, including political ideology, party identification, and in this case, “NIMBY” type reactions.
