While Ireland in the mid 1950s was viewed by some indigenous geologists as a country with limited hydrocarbons, the visit of an Irish-American lawyer sparked hopes for potential oil and gas exploitation. This chapter documents the design of legal and policy frameworks to facilitate hydrocarbon exploration and production, highlighting how the Irish state implemented a licensing system (1959 Oil Agreement) which entailed the transfer of rights for all Ireland’s onshore and offshore territory to one oil company, enabling the privatisation of produced resources in exchange for some fiscal returns. Providing an historical account of the early days of the Irish petroleum industry, this chapter makes a new contribution to knowledge on Irish state hydrocarbon management, contextualised with reference to occurrences in Irish political economy. Conditions internationally also impacted on Ireland and global trends in resource nationalisation in tandem with the discovery of Kinsale gas culminated in the 1975 licensing terms (Justin Keating’s terms) which signified a fresh perspective on hydrocarbon management. Due to national and international forces, this ‘golden era’ would not last, as discussed in the next chapter.

Taking a global perspective, this chapter examines the origins of legal systems to facilitate hydrocarbon exploitation and the growth of the petroleum industry. Identifying four main approaches to state resource management, the emergence of these regimes is situated within wider socio-economic contexts which illustrates connections between a state’s approach and shifts in political economy nationally and and internationally. In doing so, the influence of processes such as imperialism, Keynesianism and neoliberalism on state resource management becomes apparent. The chapter considers power struggles between states and oil companies and discusses the formation of the Organisation for Petroleum Exporting Countries and member states’ efforts to assert ‘permanent sovereignty’ over hydrocarbon resources. Deliberating the wave of nationalisations and increases in national oil companies which occurred during the 1970s, the ideas underpinning these developments are scrutinised alongside the ‘neoliberal counter- wave’ (Ryggvik, 2010) which occurred in the 1980s. Signifying a rollback in state participation in hydrocarbon exploitation globally amidst associated ideologies, changes in the latter decade have been overturned in recent years through a growth in national oil companies and moves by states towards asserting stronger control over hydrocarbons, thus illustrating some of the dynamics and conflicts of state resource management.

Summarising the book’s contents, this chapter argues that Ireland’s approach to the management of its gas and oil is fundamentally flawed and unless modified, will continue to cause difficulties in relation to the Corrib gas conflict and other areas which face potential hydrocarbon exploration and production. Although Irish state hydrocarbon management can be interpreted as an outcome of a state functioning within neoliberal capitalism, the state’s approach has been moulded in particular ways by the specific factors outlined in chapter nine. Therefore, tangible elements of the state’s approach can be altered in order to eradicate weaknesses and maximise advantages for citizens of Ireland as the owners of the gas and oil. This book concludes with a series of empirically grounded recommendations around how the Irish model can be transformed to ensure lasting benefits for Irish society. These novel and previously unpublished recommendations are organised by three main topics which are problematic: ownership, control and production of resources; issues within the State; public debate and research. By offering informed recommendations, I outline a blueprint for an alternative framework for Irish state hydrocarbon management thereby going beyond academic considerations to outlining a possible strategy for change.

Opening with a snapshot of the Corrib gas conflict, this chapter problematises the Irish state’s management of its gas and oil and provides the rationale for this publication and associated research. Spanning the period from 1957 to 2014, this book utilises innovative and previously unpublished data to examine how and why the Irish state developed its particular approach to the management of its gas and oil. This chapter elucidates the book’s multi-level (macro, meso and micro) focus and the breadth of topics under examination which incorporate matters simultaneously empirical and ideological, historical and current, extending beyond decision-making processes within the state system to their impacts on people’s lives in communities. This chapter also outlines the data collection process and discusses the incorporation of perspectives from the range of stakeholders associated with Irish hydrocarbon management, including representatives from civil society, the state bureaucracy, politicians, oil industry, and experts with knowledge of hydrocarbon management in other countries. The chapter closes with an overview of the book’s content.

Corrib gas was discovered in 1996 and its developers and some politicians originally presented it as a panacea for the socio-economic woes of rural, west Mayo. However, the reality of the project has had an opposite effect and Corrib gas has become synonymous with social upheaval, remaining un-produced eighteen years after discovery. This chapter traces the emergence of the Corrib gas conflict (1996-2005), discussing the gas discovery and the consortium’s interactions with the community living in the area designated as a home for the onshore gas processing terminal and pipeline. As the consortium progressed their plans for the project, local people began to develop concerns about its location on health, safety and environmental grounds. Utilising interview data from the range of stakeholders associated with the development, this chapter illustrates the diversity of opinions towards the project and ascertains the basis of growing opposition. This chapter lays the foundation for the overall book, illustrating how flaws within the state and oil companies’ approach contributed to the emergence of a conflict around the onshore location of the project, the escalation of which is examined in detail in the following chapter.

The privatisation of some state infrastructural assets in 2000 signified a decisive break from the ideology underpinning the 1975 terms and the decade which followed brought further changes to the licensing system and legislative framework. Documenting such amendments and offshore and onshore exploration and production, this chapter highlights how social pressures resulting from these activities influenced the introduction of the 2007 licensing terms, a 2012 review of Ireland’s licensing regime by a cross-party Government committee, and a 2014 report by Wood Mackenzie. Summarising changes to Ireland’s licensing regime from 1959 to 2014, this chapter articulates problematic elements of the state’s model and emphasises a certain consistency despite shifts in political leadership and levels of control over state resource management. By tracing the evolution of the state’s approach, connections begin to appear between the state’s management of its resources and occurrences in Irish political economy. Global trends also appear to have had an impact with the 1975 terms reflecting a growth in resource nationalisation internationally while the 1992 terms demonstrate the influence of neoliberal ideology. Given such correlations, further insights can be gained by comparing Ireland’s experiences with those of other countries - a task which commences in the following section.

Opposition to the Corrib gas project entered a new phase in mid-2005 when five men were jailed for refusing to obey a High Court injunction taken against them by Shell. Rather than dissuade people from opposing the project, the jailing of the ‘Rossport Five’ served to escalate resistance while projecting the issue into the country’s media as a national, rather than simply local, dispute. This chapter articulates the multiplicity of issues underpinning resistance and provides historical detail on the progress of the Corrib gas project. Attention is paid to civil society reactions such as nonviolent direct action alongside the deployment of state and private actor coercive tactics to repress such dissent, juxtaposed with efforts to build consent. This chapter advances analysis of the dispute by emphasising the state’s role and illustrating how the state’s defective approach has led to emergent controversies surrounding potential onshore gas production via ‘fracking’ and possible near-shore oil production in Dublin Bay. Raising key questions around how and why the state developed such an approach to the management of its gas and oil, this chapter sets the scene for an examination of the historical development of the Irish model which occurs in subsequent chapters.

Nearly every country in the world has asserted ownership over the hydrocarbons within its territory (Easo, 2009) and Ireland is no different. Ireland’s approach to resource management, however, is dissimilar to many other countries with outcomes that include the transfer of ownership and control of state resources to private interests and one of the lowest rates of government take in the world. The Irish model has also resulted in a prolonged conflict which has engulfed the lives of many people for over a decade. In line with Karl (1997), Dunning (2009), and Di John (2010) who emphasise the value of examining interactions between political institutions and the economy to understand how states manage their resources, and responding to questions raised in the preceding chapter, this chapter follows a critical political economy path to explain how and why the Irish state manages its hydrocarbons in the manner adopted. The nine key factors identified as shaping the Irish approach illustrate how the state’s approach has been shaped by diverse and conflicting dynamics and moulded by micro, meso and macro level forces which intersect with specific ideological, political, economic and social influences to create a model of state resource management unique in comparison with other countries.

This chapter extends the analysis of models of hydrocarbon management by considering their implementation via fiscal systems as a specific strand of state policy. This chapter combines academic and industry literature to examine the four main approaches to state resource management and their association with the ‘development status’ of a country (Kaiser and Pulsipher, 2004; 2006). Attention is paid to the influence of ideology on the four approaches, particularly in relation to how the models originate from varying perspectives of state resource ownership and control. The chapter considers the utilisation of these types of fiscal systems in a range of countries and discusses their outcomes in the form of ‘rent’ or ‘government take’. Utilising secondary data from several international studies of ‘government take’, the chapter emphasises how Ireland’s model of resource management is unique both in terms of it being a licensing system (used in less than half the countries with hydrocarbon production worldwide) and its very low rates of government take (one of the lowest in the world). Thus, this chapter underscores the distinctiveness of the Irish model, raising further questions around why Ireland’s approach is quite exceptional - answers to which are provided in the following chapter.

Opening with a presentation of arguments against a comparison of the Norwegian and Irish approaches to hydrocarbon management, this chapter uncovers some of the discourses underpinning industry, political and state bureaucracy perspectives on the two models. It also reveals weaknesses in these standpoints and stresses the value of comparing both countries’ approaches as a mechanism for developing a critique of the Irish model. The resultant appraisal begins with an overview of socio-economic and historical similarities between the two countries, progressing to a summation of the political, social, economic and ideological influences which have moulded the Norwegian model. While popular opinion often holds the Norwegian model as a perfect approach, this chapter also outlines the darker side of Norway’s petroleum history. The author presents some partial explanations for divergences between Ireland and Norway, such as Ireland’s distinct developmental path, power struggles between interest groups, establishing key questions which are answered in the following chapter. Using the conceptual and empirical political, economic, social, and ideological parameters identified through the review of Norway’s model, the following chapter interrogate the factors shaping the Irish state’s model of hydrocarbon management. Lessons from this case study are also reviewed in chapter eleven which outlines recommendations to improve the Irish model.

Keating’s terms were introduced at a time when interest in North West Europe’s hydrocarbon potential was at its peak due to large discoveries in the North Sea. Consequently, some politicians, oil industry representatives and trade unions anticipated an economic boom in Ireland courtesy of oil and gas exploitation. This chapter discusses hydrocarbon activities onshore and offshore Ireland in the period from 1976 to 1999, connecting these with shifts in the Irish state’s model of hydrocarbon management and oil companies’ investment strategies. Progressing beyond empirical happenings, this chapter examines the growth in popularity of neoliberal ideology and its influence on Ireland’s approach to its gas and oil. Attention to restrictions imposed on state companies like the Irish National Petroleum Corporation, and the encapsulation of a free-market perspective in the 1992 licensing terms, illustrates the impact of prevailing ideologies and global trade on the Irish model of hydrocarbon management. This chapter also considers the oscillating power of interest groups such as the oil industry lobby and the Irish Transport and General Workers’ Union and contemplates their interactions with different political parties and the state bureaucracy.