• 1 hour Nigeria Files Suit Against JPMorgan Over Oil Field Sale
  • 8 hours Chinese Oil Ships Found Violating UN Sanctions On North Korea
  • 13 hours Oil Slick From Iranian Tanker Explosion Is Now The Size Of Paris
  • 17 hours Nigeria Approves Petroleum Industry Bill After 17 Long Years
  • 19 hours Venezuelan Output Drops To 28-Year Low In 2017
  • 21 hours OPEC Revises Up Non-OPEC Production Estimates For 2018
  • 1 day Iraq Ready To Sign Deal With BP For Kirkuk Fields
  • 1 day Kinder Morgan Delays Trans Mountain Launch Again
  • 1 day Shell Inks Another Solar Deal
  • 2 days API Reports Seventh Large Crude Draw In Seven Weeks
  • 2 days Maduro’s Advisors Recommend Selling Petro At Steep 60% Discount
  • 2 days EIA: Shale Oil Output To Rise By 1.8 Million Bpd Through Q1 2019
  • 2 days IEA: Don’t Expect Much Oil From Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Before 2030
  • 2 days Minister Says Norway Must Prepare For Arctic Oil Race With Russia
  • 2 days Eight Years Late—UK Hinkley Point C To Be In Service By 2025
  • 2 days Sunk Iranian Oil Tanker Leave Behind Two Slicks
  • 2 days Saudi Arabia Shuns UBS, BofA As Aramco IPO Coordinators
  • 2 days WCS-WTI Spread Narrows As Exports-By-Rail Pick Up
  • 3 days Norway Grants Record 75 New Offshore Exploration Leases
  • 3 days China’s Growing Appetite For Renewables
  • 3 days Chevron To Resume Drilling In Kurdistan
  • 3 days India Boosts Oil, Gas Resource Estimate Ahead Of Bidding Round
  • 3 days India’s Reliance Boosts Export Refinery Capacity By 30%
  • 3 days Nigeria Among Worst Performers In Electricity Supply
  • 3 days ELN Attacks Another Colombian Pipeline As Ceasefire Ceases
  • 4 days Shell Buys 43.8% Stake In Silicon Ranch Solar
  • 4 days Saudis To Award Nuclear Power Contracts In December
  • 4 days Shell Approves Its First North Sea Oil Project In Six Years
  • 4 days China Unlikely To Maintain Record Oil Product Exports
  • 4 days Australia Solar Power Additions Hit Record In 2017
  • 4 days Morocco Prepares $4.6B Gas Project Tender
  • 4 days Iranian Oil Tanker Sinks After Second Explosion
  • 7 days Russia To Discuss Possible Exit From OPEC Deal
  • 7 days Iranian Oil Tanker Drifts Into Japanese Waters As Fires Rage On
  • 7 days Kenya Cuts Share Of Oil Revenues To Local Communities
  • 7 days IEA: $65-70 Oil Could Cause Surge In U.S. Shale Production
  • 7 days Russia’s Lukoil May Sell 20% In Oil Trader Litasco
  • 7 days Falling Chinese Oil Imports Weigh On Prices
  • 7 days Shell Considers Buying Dutch Green Energy Supplier
  • 8 days Wind And Solar Prices Continue To Fall
Alt Text

4 Factors That Could Derail The OPEC Deal

OPEC and its Russia-led non-OPEC…

Alt Text

Will The Dollar Survive The Petro-Yuan?

The United States is no…

Alt Text

The Single Biggest Oil Price Influencer In 2018

The OPEC production cut deal…

Economywatch

Economywatch

On EconomyWatch.com, you will find a comprehensive mix of news, analysis, reference, articles, data, charts and tools. These have been provided both by our core…

More Info

Will Africa's Resource Curse Continue?

Will Africa's Resource Curse Continue?

Resources should be a blessing, not a curse; yet contrary to common sense, resource-rich countries in Africa have tended to experience less economic growth in the long run than those deprived of natural riches. The new discoveries of natural resources in several African countries – including Ghana, Uganda, Tanzania, and Mozambique – thus raises an important question: will these newly enriched countries be able to avoid the “resource curse”?

Africas Resources
Africa's Natural Resources Have More Often Been A Curse Than A Blessing
Photo Credit: neiljs - flickr

New discoveries of natural resources in several African countries – including Ghana, Uganda, Tanzania, and Mozambique – raise an important question: Will these windfalls be a blessing that brings prosperity and hope, or a political and economic curse, as has been the case in so many countries?

On average, resource-rich countries have done even more poorly than countries without resources. They have grown more slowly, and with greater inequality – just the opposite of what one would expect. After all, taxing natural resources at high rates will not cause them to disappear, which means that countries whose major source of revenue is natural resources can use them to finance education, health care, development, and redistribution.

A large literature in economics and political science has developed to explain this “resource curse,” and civil-society groups (such as Revenue Watch and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative) have been established to try to counter it. Three of the curse’s economic ingredients are well known:

•    Resource-rich countries tend to have strong currencies, which impede other exports;
•    Because resource extraction often entails little job creation, unemployment rises;
•    Volatile resource prices cause growth to be unstable, aided by international banks that rush in when commodity prices are high and rush out in the downturns (reflecting the time-honoured principle that bankers lend only to those who do not need their money).

Moreover, resource-rich countries often do not pursue sustainable growth strategies. They fail to recognize that if they do not reinvest their resource wealth into productive investments above ground, they are actually becoming poorer. Political dysfunction exacerbates the problem, as conflict over access to resource rents gives rise to corrupt and undemocratic governments.

There are well known antidotes to each of these problems: a low exchange rate, a stabilization fund, careful investment of resource revenues (including in the country’s people), a ban on borrowing, and transparency (so citizens can at least see the money coming in and going out).But there is a growing consensus that these measures, while necessary, are insufficient.Newly enriched countries need to take several more steps in order to increase the likelihood of a “resource blessing.”

 First, these countries must do more to ensure that their citizens get the full value of the resources. There is an unavoidable conflict of interest between (usually foreign) natural-resource companies and host countries: the former want to minimize what they pay, while the latter need to maximize it.Well designed, competitive, transparent auctions can generate much more revenue than sweetheart deals. Contracts, too, should be transparent, and should ensure that if prices soar – as they have repeatedly – the windfall gain does not go only to the company.

Unfortunately, many countries have already signed bad contracts that give a disproportionate share of the resources’ value to private foreign companies. But there is a simple answer: renegotiate; if that is impossible, impose a windfall-profit tax.

All over the world, countries have been doing this. Of course, natural-resource companies will push back, emphasize the sanctity of contracts, and threaten to leave. But the outcome is typically otherwise. A fair renegotiation can be the basis of a better long-term relationship.

Botswana's renegotiations of such contracts laid the foundations of its remarkable growth for the last four decades. Moreover, it is not only developing countries, such as Bolivia and Venezuela, that renegotiate; developed countries like Israel and Australia have done so as well. Even the United States has imposed a windfall-profits tax.

Equally important, the money gained through natural resources must be used to promote development. The old colonial powers regarded Africa simply as a place from which to extract resources. Some of the new purchasers have a similar attitude.

Infrastructure (roads, railroads, and ports) has been built with one goal in mind: getting the resources out of the country at as low a price as possible, with no effort to process the resources in the country, let alone to develop local industries based on them.

Real development requires exploring all possible linkages: training local workers, developing small and medium-size enterprises to provide inputs for mining operations and oil and gas companies, domestic processing, and integrating the natural resources into the country’s economic structure. Of course, today, these countries may not have a comparative advantage in many of these activities, and some will argue that countries should stick to their strengths. From this perspective, these countries’ comparative advantage is having other countries exploit their resources.

That is wrong. What matters is dynamic comparative advantage, or comparative advantage in the long run, which can be shaped. Forty years ago, South Korea had a comparative advantage in growing rice. Had it stuck to that strength, it would not be the industrial giant that it is today. It might be the world’s most efficient rice grower, but it would still be poor.

Companies will tell Ghana, Uganda, Tanzania, and Mozambique to act quickly, but there is good reason for them to move more deliberately. The resources will not disappear, and commodity prices have been rising. In the meantime, these countries can put in place the institutions, policies, and laws needed to ensure that the resources benefit all of their citizens.

Resources should be a blessing, not a curse. They can be, but it will not happen on its own. And it will not happen easily.

By.  Joseph E. Stiglitz

Source: Economywatch.com




Back to homepage


Leave a comment
  • Mike on August 10 2012 said:
    Ultimately, the problems for the 3rd world are as much sociological as they are economic. Until, there is sufficient public will to move from traditional lifestyles into modernity there will always be a tendency to revert back to the old ways.

    Stiglitz obviously is of the mindset that a resource windfall can be the catalyst to making that leap forward. However, (speaking anecdotally) when you compare this situation to that of the windfall from fracking in parts of the United States, Stiglitz has to begin to realize the improbability of success. Have Pennsylvania or North Dakota "put in place the institutions, policies, and laws needed to ensure that the resources benefit all of their citizens?" Absolutely not. It makes it tough to think that if in the world's wealthiest and most industrialized nation - a nation governed by reasonably well-educated and publicly elected officials - the mentality is "drill baby drill" that the ethos in impoverished Africa will somehow be more enlightened. If anything, the resource windfall would point to the perpetuation of traditional cultures - and that might be all that the citizenry really want.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News