We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter analyses how the American Petroleum Institute (API) adapted to the post-Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill era despite the criticisms from investigation reports that brought into question its role as private standard-setter in the oil and gas industry and the reliance of federal regulations on the API’s standards. Grounded on the theory of regulation, investigation reports, and documents from the Bureau for Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) and the Center for Offshore Safety (COS), this chapter examines the organizational response of the API and how BSEE, as the federal regulator, endorsed it. It proposes a definition of what a regulatory crisis is, and argues that despite the regulatory crisis created by the DWH accident, the API increased its influence in offshore oil and gas regulations in the US not only as rule-maker but also as supervisor. The chapter identifies the gaps in transparency and regulatory practices that may undermine the effectiveness of the new regulatory scheme. By presenting a case from the oil and gas industry, this research aims to contribute to the broader scholarship on the responses of transnational private regulators in times of crisis.
The expansion of offshore drilling to deeper waters in the Gulf of Mexico and to more remote waters in the Arctic, as well as more intense hurricanes induced by climate change, have heightened risks of major well blowouts and oil spills. The Trump administration worsened these risks by rolling back regulations that had been enacted in response to the 2010 BP oil spill, the largest unintentional spill in the world (as of 2020), and to near misses during the 2013 Shell Arctic expedition. These rollbacks, plus poor government oversight of companies and scant attention to companies’ safety culture, risk a repeat of past oil spill disasters that devastated coastal communities. Members of the bipartisan commission that had investigated the spill reiterated its warnings in 2020 that another major oil spill is simply a matter of time and called for stronger laws governing offshore drilling. A number of congressional members did propose legislation to improve safety in offshore drilling. Unfortunately, despite the shifting tide against offshore drilling in coastal states, the majority of Republicans and those Democrats from states reliant on oil extraction failed to support these initiatives, putting at risk Americans’ lives, livelihoods, coasts and oceans.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.