Natural Resources¶
van der Ploeg, F. (2011). Natural Resources: Curse or Blessing?. Journal of Economic Literature, 49(2), 366-420.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Paradox of Plenty (Resource Curse)
- The paradox of plenty — standardly called the resource curse — is the empirical regularity that countries endowed with abundant non-renewable natural resources, especially oil and gas but also hard minerals and diamonds, tend on average to grow more slowly, develop weaker non-resource sectors, and exhibit worse governance and institutional quality than otherwise comparable resource-poor peers
This sourceVan der Ploeg's survey is the standard synthesis of the mechanisms - real exchange-rate appreciation, deindustrialization, rent grabbing, conflict, and failure to convert exhaustible wealth into other assets - and of the evidence that resource-rich economies underperform; its own headline verdict is conditional rather than flat, that 'either outcome is possible' depending on institutions, volatility and financial development.
Supported in partVerified against the source
- The paradox of plenty — standardly called the resource curse — is the empirical regularity that countries endowed with abundant non-renewable natural resources, especially oil and gas but also hard minerals and diamonds, tend on average to grow more slowly, develop weaker non-resource sectors, and exhibit worse governance and institutional quality than otherwise comparable resource-poor peers
Mechanisms¶
- Sovereign or Stabilization Fund Rule
- The named hazard it exists to counter is the resource curse — windfalls that are not ring-fenced tend to crowd out diversified earning and weaken the institutions that produced past strength.
This sourceReviews the resource curse as the risk that natural-resource abundance can produce disappointing economic performance rather than prosperity.
- The named hazard it exists to counter is the resource curse — windfalls that are not ring-fenced tend to crowd out diversified earning and weaken the institutions that produced past strength.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 2 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:b77a431ec4c3 · see in the full table