By: Rebecca Kim
In environmental politics, many
scholars argue that abundance of resources leads to conflict and, at times,
poor economic development. One form of abundance that scholars are keen on is
the natural resource curse. The
natural resource curse refers to a theory that countries with abundance of
resources, especially nonrenewable resources (e.g., oil, minerals), result in
worse development outcomes than countries that do not have such resources. In
other words, because many of the nonrenewable resources that are abundant are
high in demand, countries that possess such nonrenewable resources tend to
solely depend on them to drive their economy. Furthermore, since nonrenewable
resources’ prices can be volatile in the world market, such dependence exposes
the host countries to experience economic instability.
Unfortunately, the problem is exacerbated by the fact
that many of the nonrenewable are controlled by the elites; the disproportional
distribution of wealth, therefore, increases economic grievances from the mass
that do not benefit from the resources, which increase the chances of an
uprising to occur. Given the many economic and political implications from
abundance, one of the main questions to ask is: what can be done to eliminate
the political and economic instability that stems from abundance of resources?
One of the major mechanisms that links abundance of
resources to conflict and poor economic development is corruption. Due to the
poor institutions (e.g., taxation) in many of the developing countries that
possess abundance of nonrenewable resources, politicians in those countries
able to hide the wealth that they have gained from such resources. Therefore,
increasing governmental transparency could be one of the solutions that can, at
least, alleviate the detrimental effect that abundance of resources can have on
countries’ economy and politics.
There couple of ways that scholars have suggested in
trying to increase many corrupt countries’ transparency. One possibility that
could increase transparency is an international economic embargo. An economic
embargo could eliminate the source of the many corruption; without the wealth
that the corrupt leaders gain from trading the nonrenewable resources with many
powerful states, those leaders will be less incentivized to continue with their
corruption. On the other hand, the economic embargo could backfire on the
powerful states since the nonrenewable resources are so high in demand;
limiting access to oil, for instance, could drastically affect the United
State’s economy since most of its energy is fueled by oil.
Given that an economic embargo cannot work because of the
high dependency from developed countries, such situation suggests that another
energy market must be made. To explain, theoretically, an economic embargo will
be an effective solution to end political elites’ corruption from the
nonrenewable resources because powerful states will no longer provide the
wealth that they will be hiding. By creating another energy market (e.g., solar
energy), the developed countries will be less dependent on nonrenewable
resources, making an economic embargo possible.
Yes, enlarging alternative energy resource market to
reduce the oil industry seems very unlikely, given the great amount of
political influence that oil companies have in many developed countries.
However, many developed countries have the funds and technology that could
enlarge the alternative energy sector. Thus, citizens from developed should be
educated in the implications that oil dependency can have in world politics and
world economy. By educating the citizens, the government from developed
countries will be more incentivized to support alternative energy companies,
decreasing their dependence on nonrenewable resources as sources of energy.
Although enlarging alternative energy resource market is
highly improbable, it is not impossible. Educating the citizens regularly by
incorporating environmental politics in high school curriculums is the first
step towards incentivizing developed countries to support alternative energy.
The shift towards alternative energy will then allow an economic embargo
against developing countries for the many corrupt acts committed by their
leaders. The embargo will hopefully eliminate the corruption and alleviate the political
instability that is triggered by the abundance of nonrenewable resources.
You mention educating citizens in developed nations on alternative energy and the negative impacts that the oil industry has, do you think the same should be done for those in developing nations so that they too can benefit from switching to alternative energy?
ReplyDeleteI agree that education is definitely a great start towards switching to renewable energy, but there are a lot of other challenges as well. It seems many people are already educated on it, but still resist the switch to renewables. In terms of Renee's comment, I feel convincing developing countries to switch to alternative energy will be much more difficult. As we have discussed many times this semester, developing countries have many other problems to worry about, so climate change is probably pretty far down their list. Education on alternative energy in developing countries would be a great start though, but it may take awhile to see results.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you, Linnea, about your thoughts on the possible inefficiencies on teaching developing countries about alternative energy. Also, since most developing countries do not have the fiscal means to fund alternative energy resources, they would be even more hesitant towards adopting alternative energy. I also understand your point about how educating people may not be effective considering the political power that major oil companies have (as I have pointed out in my blog) and how people tend to think of consequences in the short term rather than in the long term. Because people are reactive rather than proactive, convincing people to drastically change their lifestyles based on evidences that is highly likely to happen in the future is difficult. However, I do not think that people's reactive tendencies indicate that we should stop educating them. Changing the public's perception about alternative energy is key if we want to change the energy market's and leaders's opinions about alternative energy.
ReplyDelete