"How do social movements, business interests and states' social and material environments influence the regulation of innovative industrial activities that bring not only transformative economic benefits but also significant social disruption and environmental risk? How can we adjudicate between these influences across states and over time? Analyzing a longitudinal dataset of 34 American states at risk of ‘fracking' from 2009 to 2016, I find that environmental movement organizational capacity and economic health are the strongest predictors of states' decisions to intervene and regulate fracking. In addition, although higher resource-dependence on the fossil-fuel industry does not directly predict less regulation, that effect is mediated by increased physical potential for fracking (i.e., shale resources) within the state's natural environment. I argue that the effects of non-state actors and institutional context on how new markets are regulated depend, in part, on the extent of potential economic benefits and societal risks posed by the economic activity."

Support: Digital