Energy & Environment

Research & Impact: Report Finds New York’s Decision to Ban Fracking Had Serious Economic Consequences for Shale Counties

By

A Special Report released by the Heritage Foundation in April 2025 has found that New York’s decision to ban the process of hydraulic fracturing (commonly known as “fracking”) for natural gas in 2010 has had serious economic consequences for the residents of the Empire State living above the Marcellus Shale. It has resulted in a decade and a half of lost opportunity for rural economic development.

“Hydraulic Fracturing and Economic Outcomes: A Study of Marcellus Shale Counties in Pennsylvania and New York” looks at the 14 “Twin Tiers” counties straddling the New York-Pennsylvania border, each sitting on rich natural gas deposits in the Marcellus Shale to examine the economic impact of New York’s 2010 fracking moratorium and 2014 fracking ban.

The report found that the New York counties where fracking was banned (Allegany, Broome, Cattaraugus, Chemung, Delaware, Steuben, Tioga) experienced significantly lower economic growth than their neighboring counties across the border in Pennsylvania (Bradford, McKean, Potter, Sullivan, Susquehanna, Tioga, Wyoming). Over the study period, these Quaker State counties had a $11,000 higher per person gross domestic product (GDP) and a $27,000 higher GDP per household.

Further, the report authors used a difference-in-differences regression analysis to show that the divergence in economic outcomes in these counties only began after New York’s fracking ban. Prior to this, the Twin Tiers counties tracked similarly in both GDP and employment, with the New York counties generally slightly ahead. After the Pennsylvania Twin Tiers counties began to participate in the fracking revolution, at the same time as their sister counties across the state line were prohibited from doing so, the Quaker State counties saw a surge in local income, job growth, and GDP, while the Empire State counties stagnated or saw weaker growth.

These economic gains were not limited to extraction. Construction, hospitality, and retail in these Pennsylvania counties also saw growth, indicating that fracking catalyzed a broad economic uplift.

“That Pennsylvania only surpasses New York counties in GDP per capita when mining is included underscores how crucial hydraulic fracturing has been to Pennsylvania’s economic growth,” the report notes. “It directly ties the increase in GDP to the shale revolution, as these sectors are at the core of fracking activities. Without the economic surge from these industries, Pennsylvania’s economy in the Twin Tiers would have remained below New York’s in terms of GDP per capita, highlighting the transformative role that fracking played in reshaping the economic landscape of Pennsylvania’s Twin Tier counties. These results serve as compelling evidence that hydraulic fracturing was the primary driver of Pennsylvania’s relative economic success during this period.”

“Based on these results the authors conclude that New York lawmakers did not act in the best interests of their constituents by banning hydrofracturing,” the report concludes. “By overestimating the risk associated with the practice…they stripped their constituents of lucrative income associated with hydraulic fracturing. Furthermore, the research presented here shows that jobs increased significantly in Pennsylvania counties which fully embraced the practice. Therefore, New Yorkers living in Marcellus Shale counties should urge their lawmakers to lift the ban. Lawmakers in other areas of the United States with fracking bans should also reconsider these unnecessary and economically harmful bans.”

The natural gas deposits found in New York, Pennsylvania and throughout the United States are abundant, affordable, and environmentally safe. Moreover, they can ensure the United States is the world’s largest energy producer well beyond the 21st century. Therefore, as the Heritage authors conclude, policymakers should refrain from placing unnecessary burdens on the natural gas and oil industries which positively impact state economies and are committed to safe, environmentally responsible extraction.

Heartland Impact can send an expert to your state to testify or brief your caucus; host an event in your state; or send you further information on a topic. Please don’t hesitate to contact us if we can be of assistance! If you have any questions or comments, contact Cameron Sholty, at csholty@heartlandimpact.org or 312/377- 4000.

  • Tim Benson

    Tim Benson joined The Heartland Institute in 2015 as a policy analyst in the Government Relations Department. He is also the host of the Heartland Institute Podcast Ill Literacy: Books with Benson.