Public Servants and Regulator Capture in Energy and Environmental Governance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid pace of change, uncertainty, and social contest associated with emerging regulatory spaces create challenges for public servants. In particular, their capacity to act in the public interest may be constrained as contesting interests vie for influence in nascent regulatory environs. This chapter explores these issues and the potential for regulatory capture in the context of unconventional gas and its regulation. Empirically based case studies of regulators in Texas and Colorado in the USA and Queensland, Australia, are relied on. The existing regulatory frameworks governing unconventional gas in each state are considered to enable a thorough examination of the landscape of which public servants and their regulatory agencies are a part. The chapter demonstrates that the speed at which unconventional gas exploration is taking place creates challenges for public servants and regulatory agencies, as laws may not be aligned to practice. The chapter draws on its findings to reflect on the specific regulatory practices that are needed to ensure the accountability and legitimacy of the public sector in such contested spaces, including reforming state regulatory systems and pursuing alternative governance pathways in which relationships between industry, government, and society might be reconfigured.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".