4.7 Article

Natural resource dependence and institutional quality: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa

期刊

RESOURCES POLICY
卷 79, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102967

关键词

Natural resource dependence; Institutional quality; Sub-saharan Africa; Natural resource curse; Rent seeking

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study shows a negative association between natural resource dependence and institutional quality, supporting the rent-seeking theory. Additionally, employment, education, and FDI have significant positive relationships with institutional quality. To avoid the resource curse, policy development in SSA countries should focus on encouraging economic modernization and diversification, as well as incorporating sustainable natural resource exploitation policies.
Recent development in the resource curse literature highlights that one of the channels through which the curse may occur is the tendency of resource wealth to weaken institutional quality. Using an intermediary framework, this study examines whether natural resource dependence weakens institutional quality in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) using the system dynamic general methods of moments. The results indicate that natural resource dependence is negatively associated with institutional quality. From this perspective, the study concludes that natural resource dependence weakens institutional quality in SSA which provides empirical support for the rent-seeking theory. In addition, employment, education, and FDI exhibit positive significant relationships with institutional quality. In light of this, the study recommends that policy development in SSA countries should encourage modernisation and diversification of their economies from natural resource dependence to enhance the growth of other sectors. Furthermore, policies on natural resources should incorporate sustainable exploitation to limit rent seeking and ensure the independence and quality of institutions to turn the resource curse into a blessing.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据