The Chatham House group on natural resources and conflict has released a new paper titled,
"The Resource Curse Revisited", available here, see also the comment on the FT, authored by Paul Stevens, Glada Lahn, and Jaakko Kooroshy.
The paper takes stock of the achievements of the 'extractives-led development agenda', where it has failed and how it should adapt to a new environment that is increasingly concerned with carbon intensity of fossil fuels and the emerging world of low commodity prices.
What I find interesting is the explicit question of the use of extra fast extraction of natural resources, and whether the option of leaving things 'under ground' may make actually more sense. A view not very often expressed indeed.
"The Resource Curse Revisited", available here, see also the comment on the FT, authored by Paul Stevens, Glada Lahn, and Jaakko Kooroshy.
The paper takes stock of the achievements of the 'extractives-led development agenda', where it has failed and how it should adapt to a new environment that is increasingly concerned with carbon intensity of fossil fuels and the emerging world of low commodity prices.
What I find interesting is the explicit question of the use of extra fast extraction of natural resources, and whether the option of leaving things 'under ground' may make actually more sense. A view not very often expressed indeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Reactions welcome! Please use your full name.