Monday, April 21, 2014

Alternative Energy: A Possible End to the Natural Resource Curse

   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.  

3 comments:

  1. 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?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I 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.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I 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