diff --git a/.nojekyll b/.nojekyll index 1609d03..7d2fa2d 100644 --- a/.nojekyll +++ b/.nojekyll @@ -1 +1 @@ -49c57b5f \ No newline at end of file +02221f10 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/index.html b/index.html index a17c4e6..35c5a91 100644 --- a/index.html +++ b/index.html @@ -4963,8 +4963,8 @@

On this page

  • References
    • @@ -5040,7 +5040,7 @@

    Hypotheses

  • Revenue from non-renewable resources is high but fluctuates

    • @@ -5090,16 +5090,16 @@

    Results

    -
    +
    -

    +

    -
    +
    @@ -5108,7 +5108,7 @@

    Results

    -
    +
    @@ -5156,21 +5156,18 @@

    Key Insights
  • Offshore resources, including both renewable and non-renewable, show little revenue impact, with offshore renewable resources contributing especially low values.

    • -
    -

    Limitations (**Laura can complete**)

    - +
    +

    Limitations

    +

    Greater granularity of our analyses extending to Indigenous-owned natural resources was not achievable due to national-level data as opposed to state- and county-level data being reported for Indigenous-owned resources to protect sensitive and private information. The original data also grouped resources as being sourced from either onshore or offshore land types; drilling down further to sub-categorize these land types could reveal greater insights than what these two major groups showed. Additonally, given the collaboration among the five government and non-profit organizations to create the dataset for this study, it was surprising that data for state-owned natural resources could not be incorporated as well. Having data for both federally-owned and state-owned resources would provide even more observations from which potential trends could be identified.

    +

    Regarding the validity and reliability of the data, it was not clear how exactly the organizations collected the data. The author of the Kaggle dataset cited these organizations as original sources, but because there were no specific details about the way data was captured, we are limited in our ability to confirm the validity of their methodology and reliability of their measurements. Finally, in terms of analyses, given the large imbalance of non-renewable resource observations compared to renewable resource data, statistical testing for significance in differences between the groups may not be valid without power analyses to confirm that sample requirements for both groups could be met.

    -
    -

    Future Work (**Laura will flesh out**)

    +
    +

    Future Work

    +

    Some ideas for future related studies include:

      -
    • Include ideas for future work.
      • -
    • Consider long-term sustainability and transition to alternate revenue streams for high producing states of non-renewable resources is suggested to prevent a lapse in economic growth and resource utilization.
      • -
    • Conduct regressive time-series analyses for future economic activity would provide benefit to institutions for impacts such as employment and infrastructure requirements.
      • +
    • Considering long-term sustainability by exploring transitions to alternate revenue streams for high producing states of non-renewable resources to prevent lapses in economic growth and resource utilization
      • +
    • Conducting regressive time-series analyses for future economic planning to benefit institutions that could be impacted by resource extraction-adjacent factors such as employment and infrastructure requirements
      • +
    • Assessing revenue trends in natural resources by assessing sources by U.S.-specific land biomes such as forest, desert, and grassland in addition to geographic region instead of onshore/offshore land types; more granular categorizations could potentially reveal instances of Simpson’s paradox
    @@ -5857,7 +5854,7 @@

    References

    4. Revenue from non-renewable resources is high but fluctuates - - $H_0$ : Revenue from non-renewable resources is high but steady or low + - $H_0$ : Revenue from non-renewable resources is either 1) high and steady or 2) low - $H_1$ : Revenue from non-renewable resources is high but fluctuates ## Data @@ -6013,28 +6010,31 @@

    References

    - Non-renewable onshore resources continue to lead in terms of revenue generation, reflecting significant growth but also volatility due to market fluctuations. - Offshore resources, including both renewable and non-renewable, show little revenue impact, with offshore renewable resources contributing especially low values. -### Limitations (\*\****Laura can complete***\*\*) +### Limitations -- Discuss the limitations of your analysis and provide suggestions on ways the analysis could be improved. - - Any potential issues pertaining to the reliability and validity of your data and appropriateness of the statistical analysis should also be discussed here. - -### Future Work (\*\****Laura will flesh out***\*\*) - -- Include ideas for future work. -- Consider long-term sustainability and transition to alternate revenue streams for high producing states of non-renewable resources is suggested to prevent a lapse in economic growth and resource utilization. -- Conduct regressive time-series analyses for future economic activity would provide benefit to institutions for impacts such as employment and infrastructure requirements. - -## References - -- Badole, S. (2024). *U.S. Natural Resources Revenue (2003-2023)*. Kaggle. https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/saurabhbadole/u-s-natural-resources-revenue-2003-2023 - -- Bhattacharyya, S., & Collier, P. (2014). Public capital in resource rich economies: Is there a curse? *Oxford Economic Papers, 66*(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gps073 - -- Cockburn, J., Henseler, M., Maisonnave, H., & Tiberti, L. (2018). Vulnerability and policy responses in the face of natural resource discoveries and climate change: Introduction. *Environment and Development Economics, 23*(5), 517-526. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X18000347 - -- Fu, R., & Liu, J. (2023). Revenue sources of natural resources rents and its impact on sustainable development: Evidence from global data. *Resources Policy, 80*. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.103226 - -- Smělá, M. & Sejkora, J. (2022). Natural resource revenue management: Which institutional factors matter? *Review of Economic Perspectives, 22*(1), 2-23. https://doi.org/10.2478/revecp-2022-0001 +Greater granularity of our analyses extending to Indigenous-owned natural resources was not achievable due to national-level data as opposed to state- and county-level data being reported for Indigenous-owned resources to protect sensitive and private information. The original data also grouped resources as being sourced from either onshore or offshore land types; drilling down further to sub-categorize these land types could reveal greater insights than what these two major groups showed. Additonally, given the collaboration among the five government and non-profit organizations to create the dataset for this study, it was surprising that data for state-owned natural resources could not be incorporated as well. Having data for both federally-owned and state-owned resources would provide even more observations from which potential trends could be identified. + +Regarding the validity and reliability of the data, it was not clear how exactly the organizations collected the data. The author of the Kaggle dataset cited these organizations as original sources, but because there were no specific details about the way data was captured, we are limited in our ability to confirm the validity of their methodology and reliability of their measurements. Finally, in terms of analyses, given the large imbalance of non-renewable resource observations compared to renewable resource data, statistical testing for significance in differences between the groups may not be valid without power analyses to confirm that sample requirements for both groups could be met. + +### Future Work + +Some ideas for future related studies include: + +- Considering long-term sustainability by exploring transitions to alternate revenue streams for high producing states of non-renewable resources to prevent lapses in economic growth and resource utilization +- Conducting regressive time-series analyses for future economic planning to benefit institutions that could be impacted by resource extraction-adjacent factors such as employment and infrastructure requirements +- Assessing revenue trends in natural resources by assessing sources by U.S.-specific land biomes such as forest, desert, and grassland in addition to geographic region instead of onshore/offshore land types; more granular categorizations could potentially reveal instances of Simpson's paradox + +## References + +- Badole, S. (2024). *U.S. Natural Resources Revenue (2003-2023)*. Kaggle. https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/saurabhbadole/u-s-natural-resources-revenue-2003-2023 + +- Bhattacharyya, S., & Collier, P. (2014). Public capital in resource rich economies: Is there a curse? *Oxford Economic Papers, 66*(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gps073 + +- Cockburn, J., Henseler, M., Maisonnave, H., & Tiberti, L. (2018). Vulnerability and policy responses in the face of natural resource discoveries and climate change: Introduction. *Environment and Development Economics, 23*(5), 517-526. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X18000347 + +- Fu, R., & Liu, J. (2023). Revenue sources of natural resources rents and its impact on sustainable development: Evidence from global data. *Resources Policy, 80*. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.103226 + +- Smělá, M. & Sejkora, J. (2022). Natural resource revenue management: Which institutional factors matter? *Review of Economic Perspectives, 22*(1), 2-23. https://doi.org/10.2478/revecp-2022-0001 diff --git a/search.json b/search.json index d23c6c8..cbb7a91 100644 --- a/search.json +++ b/search.json @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ "href": "index.html#introduction-laura-will-rewrite-this-section-with-citations", "title": "Revenue Trends in US Natural Resources", "section": "Introduction (**Laura will rewrite this section with citations**)", - "text": "Introduction (**Laura will rewrite this section with citations**)\n[Topic intro/research motivation]-The objective of the project to analyze valuable resource for analyzing trends in natural resource revenues and understanding economic contributions from various types of land and resource extractions. -The main pupose of this research is to provided relevant perspective on economics of sustainable energy and explore long-term trends in both resource types, regional land types, and revenues from resource extraction\n\nResearch Questions\n\nIn what ways have revenue patterns from renewable versus non-renewable resource extraction (e.g., geothermal, oil, and gas) evolved over the past two decades?\nHow does the interaction between resource type and land category (onshore versus offshore) influence these revenue trends across different regions?\n\n\n\nHypotheses\n\nRevenue from renewable resources has increased over time\n\n\\(H_0\\) : Renewable resource revenue has decreased or stayed stagnant over time\n\\(H_1\\) : Renewable resource revenue has increased over time\n\nOffshore lands generate higher revenue from non-renewable resources\n\n\\(H_0\\) : Offshore lands generate lower or the same amount of revenue from non-renewable resources compared to renewable resources\n\\(H_1\\) : Offshore lands generate higher revenue from non-renewable resources\n\nMore revenue from renewable resources comes from onshore lands\n\n\\(H_0\\) : Less or the same amount of revenue from renewable resources comes from onshore lands compared to offshore lands\n\\(H_1\\) : More revenue from renewable resources comes from onshore lands\n\nRevenue from non-renewable resources is high but fluctuates\n\n\\(H_0\\) : Revenue from non-renewable resources is high but steady or low\n\\(H_1\\) : Revenue from non-renewable resources is high but fluctuates" + "text": "Introduction (**Laura will rewrite this section with citations**)\n[Topic intro/research motivation]-The objective of the project to analyze valuable resource for analyzing trends in natural resource revenues and understanding economic contributions from various types of land and resource extractions. -The main pupose of this research is to provided relevant perspective on economics of sustainable energy and explore long-term trends in both resource types, regional land types, and revenues from resource extraction\n\nResearch Questions\n\nIn what ways have revenue patterns from renewable versus non-renewable resource extraction (e.g., geothermal, oil, and gas) evolved over the past two decades?\nHow does the interaction between resource type and land category (onshore versus offshore) influence these revenue trends across different regions?\n\n\n\nHypotheses\n\nRevenue from renewable resources has increased over time\n\n\\(H_0\\) : Renewable resource revenue has decreased or stayed stagnant over time\n\\(H_1\\) : Renewable resource revenue has increased over time\n\nOffshore lands generate higher revenue from non-renewable resources\n\n\\(H_0\\) : Offshore lands generate lower or the same amount of revenue from non-renewable resources compared to renewable resources\n\\(H_1\\) : Offshore lands generate higher revenue from non-renewable resources\n\nMore revenue from renewable resources comes from onshore lands\n\n\\(H_0\\) : Less or the same amount of revenue from renewable resources comes from onshore lands compared to offshore lands\n\\(H_1\\) : More revenue from renewable resources comes from onshore lands\n\nRevenue from non-renewable resources is high but fluctuates\n\n\\(H_0\\) : Revenue from non-renewable resources is either 1) high and steady or 2) low\n\\(H_1\\) : Revenue from non-renewable resources is high but fluctuates" }, { "objectID": "index.html#data", @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ "href": "index.html#discussion", "title": "Revenue Trends in US Natural Resources", "section": "Discussion", - "text": "Discussion\n\nOverall Findings\nOur analysis explored how revenue patterns from renewable versus non-renewable resource extraction have evolved over the past two decades and examined how the interaction between resource type (renewable vs. non-renewable) and land category (onshore vs. offshore) influences these trends across different regions.\n\n\nKey Insights\n\nNon-renewable onshore resources continue to lead in terms of revenue generation, reflecting significant growth but also volatility due to market fluctuations.\nOffshore resources, including both renewable and non-renewable, show little revenue impact, with offshore renewable resources contributing especially low values.\n\n\n\nLimitations (**Laura can complete**)\n\nDiscuss the limitations of your analysis and provide suggestions on ways the analysis could be improved.\n\nAny potential issues pertaining to the reliability and validity of your data and appropriateness of the statistical analysis should also be discussed here.\n\n\n\n\nFuture Work (**Laura will flesh out**)\n\nInclude ideas for future work.\nConsider long-term sustainability and transition to alternate revenue streams for high producing states of non-renewable resources is suggested to prevent a lapse in economic growth and resource utilization.\nConduct regressive time-series analyses for future economic activity would provide benefit to institutions for impacts such as employment and infrastructure requirements." + "text": "Discussion\n\nOverall Findings\nOur analysis explored how revenue patterns from renewable versus non-renewable resource extraction have evolved over the past two decades and examined how the interaction between resource type (renewable vs. non-renewable) and land category (onshore vs. offshore) influences these trends across different regions.\n\n\nKey Insights\n\nNon-renewable onshore resources continue to lead in terms of revenue generation, reflecting significant growth but also volatility due to market fluctuations.\nOffshore resources, including both renewable and non-renewable, show little revenue impact, with offshore renewable resources contributing especially low values.\n\n\n\nLimitations\nGreater granularity of our analyses extending to Indigenous-owned natural resources was not achievable due to national-level data as opposed to state- and county-level data being reported for Indigenous-owned resources to protect sensitive and private information. The original data also grouped resources as being sourced from either onshore or offshore land types; drilling down further to sub-categorize these land types could reveal greater insights than what these two major groups showed. Additonally, given the collaboration among the five government and non-profit organizations to create the dataset for this study, it was surprising that data for state-owned natural resources could not be incorporated as well. Having data for both federally-owned and state-owned resources would provide even more observations from which potential trends could be identified.\nRegarding the validity and reliability of the data, it was not clear how exactly the organizations collected the data. The author of the Kaggle dataset cited these organizations as original sources, but because there were no specific details about the way data was captured, we are limited in our ability to confirm the validity of their methodology and reliability of their measurements. Finally, in terms of analyses, given the large imbalance of non-renewable resource observations compared to renewable resource data, statistical testing for significance in differences between the groups may not be valid without power analyses to confirm that sample requirements for both groups could be met.\n\n\nFuture Work\nSome ideas for future related studies include:\n\nConsidering long-term sustainability by exploring transitions to alternate revenue streams for high producing states of non-renewable resources to prevent lapses in economic growth and resource utilization\nConducting regressive time-series analyses for future economic planning to benefit institutions that could be impacted by resource extraction-adjacent factors such as employment and infrastructure requirements\nAssessing revenue trends in natural resources by assessing sources by U.S.-specific land biomes such as forest, desert, and grassland in addition to geographic region instead of onshore/offshore land types; more granular categorizations could potentially reveal instances of Simpson’s paradox" }, { "objectID": "index.html#references", diff --git a/sitemap.xml b/sitemap.xml index 72e4a1c..1920ea6 100644 --- a/sitemap.xml +++ b/sitemap.xml @@ -18,6 +18,6 @@ https://INFO-511-F24.github.io/final-project-IndecisionScientists/index.html - 2024-12-20T03:40:53.208Z + 2024-12-20T04:19:23.067Z