Last week Americans sat down to celebrate Thanksgiving, an homage to core American values — of which personal freedom is one of the foremost. As some European countries rush to emulate what the U.S. "shale revolution" has achieved, I suggest that it is the very foundations of America that allowed it to happen at all. Even if the geology is right, those foundations will not be easily imitated in other parts of the world.

One of the most commonly cited of the conditions that allowed the shale revolution to happen is the mineral rights regime enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The United States is one of few countries globally where the rights to minerals underneath the soil belong not to the nation or the crown with the government as caretaker, but to the landowners themselves. These legal foundations, absent in Europe, helpfully engage the self-interest of the locals.

A partner at a major American law firm pointed out during a recent panel discussion in London that the federal system in the U.S. has an important role in engaging the interest of what he calls "Farmer Fudd." Each state has significant regulatory power and is arguably more in touch with the interests and voting of local residents, including those that want to monetize what they find at the bottom of their garden.

A farmer in North Dakota would be gleeful at finding shale under his property as he plans how he will spend his cut of the revenues. In contrast, a farmer in northern England — let's call him "Farmer Hogget" — can only look forward to the disruption, noise and environmental damage that comes with drilling, while the government pockets the royalties.

Certain other characteristics of the U.S. have an major influence. Foremost is the simple fact that there is more space in the U.S. Population density in France is more than three times that of the United States. Germany is six times more populous, and the U.K. is almost eight times more populous. In North Dakota, one of the states most dramatically transformed by hydraulic fracturing, that ratio leaps to 66 compared to the U.K.

The significance of this for environmental issues is that, as Elisabeth Rosenthal points out, "in the U.S., open space is abundant and often regarded as something to be developed. In Europe, you cohabit with it."

But the truth is that technicalities such as subsoil rights are built on the foundation of a nation that is not only vast and underpopulated, but also is a haven for the entrepreneur. The U.S. has long been fertile ground for wildcatters. In fact, the term "wildcatter" was invented by Americans for those who drill risky "wildcat wells" in frontier locations, named after the Wildcat Hollow oil field in Pennsylvania.

For those who believe in private wealth for the common good, it is state ownership of the subsurface that disincentivizes this risk-taking and technological innovation. Tom Slick, the "King of the Wildcatters" who made his fortune in the oil fields of Texas in the 1920s after several dry holes and great perseverance, became an American hero and the embodiment of the American Dream. He was also a boundless adventurer who, perhaps fittingly, died in a plane crash on his way to a hunting expedition.

Europeans have their own adventurer heroes, but European societies are traditionally more collectivist and identify more with membership of a group than the "winner takes all" mentality more prevalent across the Atlantic. When was the last time you heard of a gold rush in Europe? The prospect of the individual who will migrate from state to state, free of the heavy hand of state intervention and willing to take risks to make their fortune on the frontier is a particularly American concept.

Although even within Europe there is a spectrum of attitudes, ranging from France — which retains a strong trade union movement and outright said "non" to fracking — to the U.K., where the unions were long ago tempered and a strong fracking lobby is emerging.

It is in the U.K., in fact, where one European shale explorer last month made an interesting move to try to simulate the conditions found in the U.S. The British CEO of Ineos, a Swiss-based company, is trying to woo British residents in regions it wishes to frack by offering 6 percent of revenues to local communities and as much as two-thirds directly to landowners.

The key difference in the U.K. is that this remunerative mechanism was quickly branded as a "transparent attempt to bribe communities."

I will not pass judgement on the merits or otherwise of the U.S. legal and political structures that helped the shale boom flourish. The progress of fracking has been damned as much as it has been celebrated, and any conclusion on its worth cuts to the very heart of a citizen's political beliefs. However there are clear lessons to be learned from the U.S. experience, in either case.

Amid charges of bribery, Europeans will continue to try their best to simulate the American "wildcatting" environment in a quest to turn energy dependence into energy superpower-dom as America has in recent years. But they are missing the very foundations of a society of risk-takers.