The resource curse revisited and revised: A tale of paradoxes and red herrings

Christa Brunnschweiler and Erwin Bulte

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2008, vol. 55, issue 3, 248-264

Abstract: We critically evaluate the empirical basis for the so-called resource curse and find that, despite the topic's popularity in economics and political science research, this apparent paradox may be a red herring. The most commonly used measure of "resource abundance" can be more usefully interpreted as a proxy for "resource dependence"--endogenous to underlying structural factors. In multiple estimations that combine resource abundance and dependence, institutional, and constitutional variables, we find that (i) resource abundance, constitutions, and institutions determine resource dependence, (ii) resource dependence does not affect growth, and (iii) resource abundance positively affects growth and institutional quality.

Date: 2008
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (647)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095-0696(08)00019-3
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
Working Paper: The Resource Curse Revisited and Revised: A Tale of Paradoxes and Red Herrings (2006)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:55:y:2008:i:3:p:248-264

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management is currently edited by M.A. Cole, A. Lange, D.J. Phaneuf, D. Popp, M.J. Roberts, M.D. Smith, C. Timmins, Q. Weninger and A.J. Yates

More articles in Journal of Environmental Economics and Management from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().