Beyond Greed and Curses: Understanding the Links Between Natural Resources and Conflict in Melanesia
This policy brief, by Glenn Banks, was prepared in conjunction with a symposium held April 9, 2004 in Sydney, Australia, to discuss how far economic concerns are implicated in internal strife within the countries of the region, and what sorts of strategies might offer promise for bringing about peaceful resolution of these problems. As well as a focus on economic issues, an important theme running through the symposium was the role of the media in reporting on conflict and in playing a constructive role in processes of conflict resolution.
It is available as a PDF.
Background
There is now over two decades of evidence linking the abundance of natural resources with poor economic performance. Economists have tested the relationship in various ways, with various figures and definitions, and for various time periods. Although not unanimous, the vast majority show that, in effect, resources are bad for the development prospects of a country. More recently, in work originating from the World Bank, a link between a country’s dependence on natural resources and the likelihood of civil conflict has also been made. This is clearly an argument that resonates with recent events in the Asia-Pacific region and represents a worrying trend, with several countries exhibiting a continuing high level of dependence on natural resources for economic growth and development.
In this policy brief I outline why, although the statistical evidence from economists about the links between natural resources and conflict is compelling, their explanations of the links are not always fully applicable in the Asia-Pacific region. Something different appears to be at work. The brief discusses these differences, providing an Asia-Pacific case study of the links between natural resources and conflict from which more general inferences about the resource-conflict relationship can be drawn. It opens with a review of the evidence and arguments linking resources and poor economic performance. Then a more Melanesian-centric explanation of the links between resources and conflict is proposed, one that has at its core the intimately linked notions of land and identity. My perspective is unashamedly local — my work for the past 12 years has been with large-scale resource projects and the communities around them in Melanesia. In this sense I take for granted many of the arguments made by political scientists and economists about states and natural resources in the region, and instead seek explanations for these resource conflicts in the detail and complexities at the local level. I conclude by suggesting possible pathways for solutions and remedies.