Institutions and the Resource Curse

Clicks: 1
ID: 290265
2006
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #127 of 264 articles by views in the economic journal

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 264 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Countries rich in natural resources constitute both growth losers and growth winners. We claim that the main reason for these diverging experiences is differences in the quality of institutions. More natural resources push aggregate income down, when institutions are grabber friendly, while more resources raise income, when institutions are producer friendly. We test this theory building on Sachs and Warner's influential works on the resource curse. Our main hypothesis – that institutions are decisive for the resource curse – is confirmed. Our results contrast the claims of Sachs and Warner that institutions do not play a role.
Reference Key
openalex_W1484474409 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Halvor Mehlum, Karl Ove Moene, Ragnar Torvik
Journal the economic journal
Year 2006
DOI
10.1111/j.1468-0297.2006.01045.x
URL
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2006.01045.x
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.