We examine the SEC's Modernization of Oil and Gas Reserve Reporting project (SEC, 2007) to ask the question who is involved and how in the evolution of oil and gas reserve reporting rules? We use this examination to map the regulatory ecology of the various entities involved, and ask further what does it suggest for similar regulatory reform in other jurisdictions in order to support international standardization? We find that the regulatory ecology is split into two linked professional regulatory ecologies: accounting/securities and engineering/geoscience. These two ecologies include professionals, professional bodies, standard setters, and other securities commissions. We also find that there is a gap in these regulatory ecologies, isolating the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). This leads us to offer three propositions for regulators. First, continued revision is required to achieve international comparability in standards. Second, connecting accountancy and engineering practices serves global harmonization by helping securities regulators leverage these practices as regulations converge globally. And, third, such global harmonization has implications for policymakers concerned with energy policy, as political and practical divergences of reserve calculations can create incomparable oil reserve forecasts.

我们研究了SEC的“石油和天然气储备报告现代化”项目（SEC，2007年），以询问谁参与其中以及石油和天然气储备报告规则的发展如何？我们使用这项检查来绘制所涉及的各个实体的监管生态，并进一步询问它对支持国际标准化的其他司法管辖区的类似监管改革有何建议？我们发现，监管生态被分为两个相关的专业监管生态：会计/证券和工程/地质科学。这两种生态包括专业人员，专业团体，标准制定者和其他证券委员会。我们还发现，在这些监管生态方面存在差距，孤立了国际会计准则理事会（IASB）。因此，我们为监管机构提出了三个主张。首先，需要不断修订以实现标准的国际可比性。其次，将会计和工程实践联系起来，可以通过在全球监管融合时帮助证券监管机构利用这些实践，从而实现全球统一。第三，这种全球统一对能源政策相关的决策者有影响，因为储量计算的政治和实际分歧可能会产生无与伦比的石油储量预测。