Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ROUTLEDGE - The Political Economy of Extractivism
ROUTLEDGE - The Political Economy of Extractivism
For many countries, primarily in the Global South, extractivism – the exploiting
and exporting of natural resources – is big business. For those exporting countries,
natural resource rents create hope and promise for development which can be a
seductive force.
This book explores the depth of extractivism in economies around the world.
The contributions to this book investigate the connection between the political
economy of extractivism and its impact on the sociopolitical fabric of natural
resource exporting societies in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Eastern Europe.
The book engages with a comparative perspective on the persistence of extrac-
tivism in these four different world regions. The book focuses on the formative
power of rents and argues that rents are seductive. The individual contributions
flesh out this seductive force of rents on different political scales and how this
seduction affects a variety of actors. The book investigates how these actors react
to the prevalence of rent, how they align or break with specific political and eco-
nomic strategies, and how myths of resource-driven development play out on the
ground. The book, therefore, underlines that rent theory bridges current debates
in different area communities and offers fresh insights into extractivist societies’
social, economic, and political dynamics.
This book will be of significant interest to readers in political economy, political
science, development studies, and area studies.
PART I
Global Configurations 15
PART II
Actors, Strategies, and the Politics of Rent 65
PART III
Rent and Societies: Legacies, Trajectories, and Inertias 137
Index 223
Contributors
Extractivism is big business. The extraction and export of natural resources1 con-
tinue to shape the lives of a substantial share of the world population. Today, more
than 100 economies in the international division of labor have specialized in
exporting raw materials, minerals, fossil fuels, and agricultural products (United
Nations Commission on Trade and Development 2019). However, extractivism is
not only connected to the production and export of natural resources but also
linked to issues of distribution. Flows of raw materials reflect the North-South
divide: energy transitions in the Global North and efforts to industrialize and catch
up in economies like China or India lead to a rising global raw material demand.
This demand tends to amplify and deepen existing patterns of extractivism while
also opening spaces for new extractivist practices (Warnecke-Berger, Burchardt,
and Ouaissa 2022). Thus, extractivism is continuing its own history.
After 1945 and during decolonization, many political leaders have begun associ-
ating increasing revenues from raw material exports with enormous hopes for eco-
nomic and social development. Because natural resource exports promise windfall
gains, they have become synonymous with national progress. Thus, a development
myth based on natural resources has emerged, nourishing the drive toward national
self-determination over raw material deposits. This myth materialized in claims
initially discussed at the Havana and the Bandung Conferences in 1948 and 1955,
laying the ground for United Nations (UN) resolution 1803 in 1962 regarding the
permanent sovereignty over natural resources. The myth also led to intense discus-
sion over a New International Economic Order during the 1970s. Since then, this
myth has repeatedly been linked to the idea that the international transfer of money
from rich to poor countries would propel development.
Consequently, the call for better prices for natural resources on the world mar-
ket has become a central political claim.2 Better prices also regularly stir up expec-
tations to eventually overcome the dependence on natural resources by using
windfall gains for development policies. A diverse array of political couleurs from
left to right and authors ranging from Neoclassic over Neoliberalism to orthodox
Marxism have fallen prey to this myth of development. Nevertheless, extractivism
has turned out to be a very persistent phenomenon.
This persistence is surprising due to a number of reasons. First, extractivism is
risky. Prices for raw materials are highly volatile. Intense boom periods with
DOI: 10.4324/9781003303268-1
2 Hannes Warnecke-Berger and Jan Ickler
increasing world market prices and revenues from natural resource exports – as the
world experienced in the decade after 2003 – are followed by dramatic busts due
to decreasing export earnings and shrinking quantities sold when prices fall sharply
(Williamson 2012; van der Ploeg and Poelhekke 2009). International price volatil-
ities also translate into recurrent domestic crises, threatening to wipe out achieve-
ments of high-price periods. Second, extractivism is dirty. Natural resource
exploitation and processing deeply intervene in nature (Bardi 2014; Carter and
Wynn 2020; Dunlap and Jakobsen 2020). Deforestation, oil spills, and a remarka-
ble carbon footprint are the main concerns of a growing body of literature on the
topic. In addition to ecological threats, extractivism has serious social and health
effects on the local populace. This discussion has grown further and taken on more
importance as it links resource extraction to socio-ecologic conflicts and civil wars
(Conrad et al. 2019; Billon and Philippe 2001). Third, extractivism is contested.
Governments, often together with transnational corporations (TNCs), push for
deepening and expanding extraction (Kirsch 2014; Welker 2014). Social move-
ments, in contrast, are engaged in changing the course of extractivism. The result-
ing social conflicts over extractivism can disrupt entire societies and often threaten
to erupt into violence (Kröger 2021a; Menton and Le Billon 2021; Neville 2021;
Shapiro and McNeish 2021; Dietz and Engels 2017). These contrasting approaches
underline that extractivism is prone to crises, suggesting that it should collapse one
day because of its political and economic contradictions, environmental barriers,
or being overcome through intelligent policies.
Why has extractivism been such a persistent phenomenon despite these negative
consequences? The literature provides two different sets of answers to this ques-
tion. The first set focuses on the external conditions that force countries to adapt
to extractivism. As the demand for raw materials stems from only a few countries –
the Global North, China, and India, precisely where the mining companies have
their headquarters – many authors relate extractivism to imperialism (Veltmeyer
and Petras 2014; Brand and Wissen 2013). In resemblance to discussions of the
dependency theory, this view contends that global capitalism forces societies of the
Global South3 to provide raw materials for the centers of industrial production in
the Global North. Capitalism would create dependent social structures and class
configurations in resource-exporting countries (Dunlap and Jakobsen 2020; Amin
1973; Cardoso and Faletto 1979; Palestini and Madariaga 2021). This reasoning
also highlights the colonial legacies of raw material exports (Acosta 2013), stressing
global power hierarchies and linking natural resource exploitation to neocolonial
practices (Joseph 2019; Kröger 2021b). These approaches mostly point to exoge-
nous causes for the rise, the dynamics, and the persistence of extractivism in coun-
tries of the Global South. The second set of answers focuses more on the domestic
roots of extractivism. Neoclassical and institutionalist approaches highlight endog-
enous factors that led to the rise, demise, and/or overcoming of extractivism (Auty
and Furlonge 2019; Ross 2012; Auty 2001). This answer relates the persistence of
extractivism to weak institutions (Acemoglu and Robinson 2013), to the behavior
of elites (Pritchett, Sen and Werker 2018; Amsden, DiCaprio, and Robinson
2012), or to malfunctioning markets that allow rent-seeking in the first place (Kadt
and Simkins 2013). Whereas the first answer focuses primarily on international
Introduction 3
relations of power and exploitation and tends to ignore internal causation, the
second is precisely the opposite. Here, domestic structural features are seen as
general explanatory factors, but exogenous factors, i.e., external to the cases, are
ignored.
This book aims at rebalancing these opposing approaches. In doing so, it draws
a nuanced picture of the persistence of extractivism. It takes up the need for ana-
lyzing the interplay between international factors and domestic conditions in
countries of the Global South. In doing so, this book pursues three concrete
objectives that the remainder of this introduction will present:
• First, we bring together case studies from different world regions to offer a
genuinely global perspective on the topic. This perspective allows us to create
discussions among area specialists and contribute to a trans-regional and global
debate.
• Second, going beyond the regionalized literature, we want to create a common
ground for future discussions. We propose a political economy approach to
extractivism and discuss the concept of rent. Although the literature on
extractivism often mentions this concept (Vergara-Camus and Kay 2017;
Rosales 2016; Tetreault 2020; Gudynas 2020), the role of rents is still
underestimated.
• Third, this allows us to elaborate on a shared understanding and definition of
extractivism and to take a closer look at the internal working of extractivism
as a persistent development model in the current world economy, in which
the seductive power of rents is crucial.
In pursuing these three objectives, we lastly want to shed light on the following
dilemma that posits a challenge to many countries of the Global South: creating a
sustainable future necessarily means overcoming extractivism. Thus, at one point,
windfall earnings from resource exports have to be used to eradicate extractivism
and enable alternative development strategies (Addison and Roe 2018). However,
intensifying extractivism to make the necessary financial resources for this endeavor
available tends to reinforce existing structures. As extractivism and the underlying
economic rents remain seductive, intensifying extractivism might not lead to alter-
native development models. More often than not, and despite numerous efforts,
history shows that extractivism persists.
Notes
1 There is no finally shared definition of natural resources, raw materials, and primary
commodities. The following definition, therefore, servers as a starting point: natural
resources are unprocessed materials that potentially serve living beings to manage their
existence and livelihood. Raw materials are part of natural resources that are further
processed to enter production and consumption eventually. Primary commodities, in
turn, are raw materials that are (internationally) traded and therefore commodified.
10 Hannes Warnecke-Berger and Jan Ickler
2 This line of argument, focusing on unfavorable price developments for primary com-
modities and declining terms of trade, was discussed relatively early (Singer 1950;
Prebisch 1962). A large body of empirical literature has since attempted not only to
research the evolution of the terms of trade but also to explain the causes for their
volatility, as well as their deterioration. Furthermore, these arguments played a crucial
role in development strategies such as import substitution (Ahmed 1989).
3 In this introduction, the meaning of “Global South“ is guided by the considerations of
Dados and Connell (2012).
4 At the same time, rents appear as a particular form of income following standard text-
book descriptions on the micro-level: those who control rents can freely use them. This
might lead to economic sectors and parts of the population being dependent on rent
transfers, often imprecisely described as market distortion.
5 The connection between rent and social reproduction links to the debates put into the
discussion by the feminist political economy (Bakker 2007).
6 However, we cannot deduce actual development strategies, relevant actor constella-
tions, and their choices from the existence of rents. As rents do not automatically
end up in the pockets of the powerful, actors need to appropriate rents to use them.
Thus, the mode of appropriation is crucial and can be specific to different
countries.
7 On the one hand, this discussion revolves around the surplus structure of entire socie-
ties. This includes the income of individuals but further points to the need for analyz-
ing the market process, including the market’s mechanisms to exploit, use, and reinvest
surplus. On the other hand, it has to focus on the non-market sphere and mechanisms
that allow for appropriating economic surplus by circumventing, uncoupling, block-
ing, or even abolishing the market (Warnecke-Berger 2022). The approach then opens
the debate for the detailed experiences that area studies have and still produce on the
topic.
References
Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson. 2013. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power,
Prosperity, and Poverty. London: Profile Books.
Acosta, Alberto. 2013. “Extractivism and Neoextractivism: Two Sides of the Same Curse.”
In Beyond Development: Alternative Visions from Latin America, edited by Miriam Lang,
Lyda Fernando, and Nick Buxton, 61–86. Quito, Amsterdam: Rosa Luxemburg
Foundation; Transnational Institute.
Addison, Tony, and Alan Roe. 2018. Extractive Industries. The Management of Resources as a
Driver of Sustainable Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ahmed, Abdelkader S. 1989. Economie De L’industrialisation À Partir Des Ressources Naturelles:
Tome 1: Faits, Pratique Et Théories. Paris: Publisud.
Amin, Samir. 1973. Le développement inégal: Essai sur les formations sociales du capitalisme
périphérique. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit.
Amsden, Alice H., Alisa DiCaprio, and James A. Robinson. 2012. The Role of Elites in
Economic Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Auty, Richard M. 2001. “The Political Economy of Resource-Driven Growth.” European
Economic Review 45 (4/6): 839–46.
Auty, Richard M., and Haydn I. Furlonge. 2019. The Rent Curse: Natural Resources, Policy
Choice, and Economic Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bakker, Isabella. 2007. “Social Reproduction and the Constitution of a Gendered Political
Economy.” New Political Economy 12 (4): 541–56.
Bardi, Ugo. 2014. Extracted: How the Quest for Mineral Wealth Is Plundering the Planet. White
River Junction: Chelsea Green.
Introduction 11
Bebbington, Anthony, Abdul-Gafaru Abdulai, Denise H. Bebbington, Marja Hinfelaar, and
Cynthia Sanborn, eds. 2018. Governing Extractive Industries: Politics, Histories, Ideas.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Beblawi, Hazem, and Giacomo Luciani, eds. 1987. The Rentier State. London: Croom
Helm.
Le Billon, Philippe. 2001. “The Political Ecology of War: Natural Resources and Armed
Conflicts.” Political Geography 20 (5): 561–84.
Brand, Ulrich, and Markus Wissen. 2013. “Crisis and Continuity of Capitalist Society-
Nature Relationships: The Imperial Mode of Living and the Limits to Environmental
Governance.” Review of International Political Economy 20 (4): 687–711.
Burchardt, Hans-Jürgen, and Kristina Dietz. 2014. “(Neo-)Extractivism – a New Challenge
for Development Theory from Latin America.” Third World Quarterly 35 (3): 468–86.
Burchardt, Hans-Jürgen, Kristina Dietz, and Hannes Warnecke-Berger. 2021. “Dependency,
Rent, and the Failure of Neo-Extractivism.” In Dependent Capitalisms in Contemporary
Latin America and Europe, edited by Stefano Palestini and Aldo Madariaga, 207–29.
London, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cardoso, Fernando H., and Enzo Faletto. 1979. Dependency and Development in Latin
America. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Carter, Angela V., and Graeme Wynn. 2020. Fossilized: Environmental Policy in Canada’s
Petro-Provinces. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Conrad, Justin M., Kevin T. Greene, James I. Walsh, and Beth E. Whitaker. 2019. “Rebel
Natural Resource Exploitation and Conflict Duration.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 63
(3): 591–616.
Cypher, James M. 2009. “¿Vuelta Al Siglo XIX? El Auge De Las Materias Primas Y El
Proceso De ‘Primarización’ En América Latina.” Foro Internacional 49 (195): 119–62.
Dados, Nour, and Raewyn Connell. 2012. “The Global South.” Contexts 11 (1): 12–13.
Deonandan, Kalowatie, and Michael L. Dougherty, eds. 2019. Mining in Latin America:
Critical Approaches to the New Extraction. London: Routledge.
Dietz, Kristina, and Bettina Engels. 2017. “Contested Extractivism, Society and the State:
An Introduction.” In Contested Extractivism, Society and the State: Struggles over Mining and
Land, edited by Bettina Engels and Kristina Dietz, 1–19. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dunlap, Alexander, and Jostein Jakobsen. 2020. The Violent Technologies of Extraction: Political
Ecology, Critical Agrarian Studies and the Capitalist Worldeater. Cham: Springer International
Publishing.
Elsenhans, Hartmut. 1996. State, Class and Development. New Delhi: Radiant Publishers.
Erdmann, Gero, and Ulf Engel. 2007. “Neopatrimonialism Reconsidered: Critical Review
and Elaboration of an Elusive Concept.” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 45 (1):
95–119.
Ericsson, Magnus, and Olof Löf. 2018. “Mining’s Contribution to Low- and Middle-
Income Economies.” In Extractive Industries: The Management of Resources as a Driver of
Sustainable Development, edited by Tony Addison and Alan Roe, 51–70. Oxford, London:
Oxford University Press.
Gudynas, Eduardo. 2016. “Beyond Varieties of Development: Disputes and Alternatives.”
Third World Quarterly 37 (4): 721–32.
———. 2020. Extractivisms: Politics, Economy and Ecology. Black Point: Fernwood Publishing.
Haggard, Stephan. 2018. Developmental States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heinrich, Andreas, and Heiko Pleines. 2015. “Mixing Geopolitics and Business: How
Ruling Elites in the Caspian States Justify Their Choice of Export Pipelines.” Journal of
Eurasian Studies 6 (2): 107–13.
12 Hannes Warnecke-Berger and Jan Ickler
Joseph, Sabrina, ed. 2019. Commodity Frontiers and Global Capitalist Expansion: Social,
Ecological and Political Implications from the Nineteenth Century to the Present Day. London,
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kirsch, Stuart. 2014. Mining Capitalism: The Relationship Between Corporations and Their
Critics. Oakland: University of California Press.
Kröger, Markus. 2021a. Iron Will: Global Extractivism and Mining Resistance in Brazil and
India. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
———. 2021b. Extractivisms, Existences and Extinctions: Monoculture Plantations and Amazon
Deforestation. London, New York: Routledge.
Mahdavy, Hussein. 1970. “The Patterns and Problems of Economic Development in
Rentier States: The Case of Iran.” In Studies in the Economic History of the Middle East,
edited by M. A. Cook, 428–67. Oxford, London: Oxford University Press.
Menton, Mary, and Philippe Le Billon, eds. 2021. Environmental Defenders: Deadly Struggles
for Life and Territory. London, New York: Routledge.
Mezzadra, Sandro, and Brett Neilson. 2017. “On the Multiple Frontiers of Extraction:
Excavating Contemporary Capitalism.” Cultural Studies 31 (2–3): 185–204.
Mkandawire, Thandika. 2015. “Neopatrimonialism and the Political Economy of Economic
Performance in Africa: Critical Reflections.” World Politics 67 (3): 563–612.
Neville, Kate J. 2021. Fueling Resistance: The Contentious Political Economy of Biofuels and
Fracking. New York: Oxford University Press.
North, Liisa L., and Ricardo Grinspun. 2016. “Neo-Extractivism and the New Latin
American Developmentalism: The Missing Piece of Rural Transformation.” Third World
Quarterly 37 (8): 1483–504.
Ouaissa, Rachid. 2014. Die Rolle der Mittelschichten im Arabischen Frühling: Ein Überblick.
Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Palestini, Stefano, and Aldo Madariaga, eds. 2021. Dependent Capitalisms in Contemporary
Latin America and Europe. London, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Prebisch, Raúl. 1962. “The Economic Development of Latin America and Its Principal
Problems.” Economic Bulletin for Latin America 7 (1): 1–22.
Pritchett, Lant, Kunal Sen, and Eric Werker. 2018. Deals and Development: The Political
Dynamics of Growth Episodes. New York: Oxford University Press.
Robinson, Neil. 2011. “Russian Patrimonial Capitalism and the International Financial
Crisis.” Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 27 (3–4): 434–55.
Rosales, Antulio. 2016. “Deepening Extractivism and Rentierism: China’s Role in
Venezuela’s Bolivarian Developmental Model.” Canadian Journal of Development Studies/
Revue canadienne d’études du développement 37 (4): 560–77.
Ross, Michael L. 2012. The Oil Curse: How Petroleum Wealth Shapes the Development of
Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Sanghera, Balihar, and Elmira Satybaldieva. 2021. Rentier Capitalism and Its Discontents:
Power, Morality and Resistance in Central Asia. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Saunders, Richard, and Alexander Caramento. 2018. “An Extractive Developmental State
in Southern Africa? The Cases of Zambia and Zimbabwe.” Third World Quarterly 39 (6):
1166–90.
Schlumberger, Oliver. 2008. “Structural Reform, Economic Order, and Development:
Patrimonial Capitalism.” Review of International Political Economy 15 (4): 622–49.
Shapiro, Judith, and John-Andrew McNeish, eds. 2021. Our Extractive Age: Expressions of
Violence and Resistance. New York: Routledge.
Kadt, Raphael de, and Charles Simkins. 2013. “The Political Economy of Pervasive Rent-
Seeking.” Thesis Eleven 115 (1): 112–26.
Introduction 13
Singer, H. W. 1950. “U.S. Foreign Investment in Underdeveloped Areas. The Distribution
of Gains Between Investing and Borrowing Countries.” American Economic Review 40 (2):
473–85.
Svampa, Maristella. 2015. “Commodities Consensus: Neoextractivism and Enclosure of the
Commons in Latin America.” South Atlantic Quarterly 114 (1): 65–82.
Tetreault, Darcy. 2020. “The New Extractivism in Mexico: Rent Redistribution and
Resistance to Mining and Petroleum Activities.” World Development 126: online first.
United Nations Commission on Trade and Development. 2019. Commodity Dependence: A
Twenty-Year Perspective. Geneva: United Nations.
———. 2021. State of Commodity Dependence 2021. Geneva: United Nations Publications.
van de Walle, Nicolas. 2001. African Economies and the Politics of Permanent Crisis, 1979–
1999. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van der Ploeg, F., and S. Poelhekke. 2009. “Volatility and the Natural Resource Curse.”
Oxford Economic Papers 61 (4): 727–60.
Veltmeyer, Henry, and James F. Petras, eds. 2014. The New Extractivism: A Post-Neoliberal
Development Model or Imperialism of the Twenty-First Century? London, New York: Zed
Books.
Vergara-Camus, Leandro, and Cristóbal Kay. 2017. “The Agrarian Political Economy of
Left-Wing Governments in Latin America: Agribusiness, Peasants, and the Limits of
Neo-Developmentalism.” Journal of Agrarian Change 17 (2): 415–37.
Warnecke-Berger, Hannes. 2018. Politics and Violence in Central America and the Caribbean.
London, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
———. 2021. “Rent, Capitalism and the Challenges of Global Uneven Development.” In
Development, Capitalism, and Rent: The Political Economy of Hartmut Elsenhans, edited by
Hannes Warnecke-Berger, 1–16. London, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
———. 2022. “Rents, the Moral Economy of Remittances, and the Rise of a New
Transnational Development Model.” Revue de la régulation 31 (2): 1–22.
Warnecke-Berger, Hannes, Hans-Jürgen Burchardt, and Rachid Ouaissa. 2022. Natural
Resources, Raw Materials, and Extractivism: The Dark Side of Sustainability. Extractivism
Policy Brief 1/2022. Kassel: University of Kassel; Philipps-University of Marburg.
Welker, Marina. 2014. Enacting the Corporation: An American Mining Firm in Post-Authoritarian
Indonesia. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Williamson, Jeffrey G. 2012. “Commodity Prices over Two Centuries: Trends, Volatility,
and Impact.” Annual Review of Resource Economics 4 (1): 185–206.
Ye, Jingzhong, Jan D. van der Ploeg, Sergio Schneider, and Teodor Shanin. 2020. “The
Incursions of Extractivism: Moving from Dispersed Places to Global Capitalism.” Journal
of Peasant Studies 47 (1): 155–83.
Introduction
Acemoglu, Daron , and James A. Robinson . 2013. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power,
Prosperity, and Poverty. London: Profile Books.
Acosta, Alberto . 2013. “Extractivism and Neoextractivism: Two Sides of the Same Curse.” In
Beyond Development: Alternative Visions from Latin America, edited by Miriam Lang , Lyda
Fernando , and Nick Buxton , 61–86. Quito, Amsterdam: Rosa Luxemburg Foundation;
Transnational Institute.
Addison, Tony , and Alan Roe . 2018. Extractive Industries. The Management of Resources as
a Driver of Sustainable Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ahmed, Abdelkader S. 1989. Economie De L’industrialisation À Partir Des Ressources
Naturelles: Tome 1: Faits, Pratique Et Théories. Paris: Publisud.
Amin, Samir . 1973. Le développement inégal: Essai sur les formations sociales du capitalisme
périphérique. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit.
Amsden, Alice H. , Alisa DiCaprio , and James A. Robinson . 2012. The Role of Elites in
Economic Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Auty, Richard M. 2001. “The Political Economy of Resource-Driven Growth.” European
Economic Review 45 (4/6): 839–846.
Auty, Richard M. , and Haydn I. Furlonge . 2019. The Rent Curse: Natural Resources, Policy
Choice, and Economic Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bakker, Isabella . 2007. “Social Reproduction and the Constitution of a Gendered Political
Economy.” New Political Economy 12 (4): 541–556.
Bardi, Ugo . 2014. Extracted: How the Quest for Mineral Wealth Is Plundering the Planet. White
River Junction: Chelsea Green.
Bebbington, Anthony , Abdul-Gafaru Abdulai , Denise H. Bebbington , Marja Hinfelaar , and
Cynthia Sanborn , eds. 2018. Governing Extractive Industries: Politics, Histories, Ideas. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Beblawi, Hazem , and Giacomo Luciani , eds. 1987. The Rentier State. London: Croom Helm.
Le Billon , Philippe . 2001. “The Political Ecology of War: Natural Resources and Armed
Conflicts.” Political Geography 20 (5): 561–584.
Brand, Ulrich , and Markus Wissen . 2013. “Crisis and Continuity of Capitalist Society-Nature
Relationships: The Imperial Mode of Living and the Limits to Environmental Governance.”
Review of International Political Economy 20 (4): 687–711.
Burchardt, Hans-Jürgen , and Kristina Dietz . 2014. “(Neo-)Extractivism – a New Challenge for
Development Theory from Latin America.” Third World Quarterly 35 (3): 468–486.
Burchardt, Hans-Jürgen , Kristina Dietz , and Hannes Warnecke-Berger . 2021. “Dependency,
Rent, and the Failure of Neo-Extractivism.” In Dependent Capitalisms in Contemporary Latin
America and Europe, edited by Stefano Palestini and Aldo Madariaga , 207–229. London, New
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cardoso, Fernando H. , and Enzo Faletto . 1979. Dependency and Development in Latin
America. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Carter, Angela V. , and Graeme Wynn . 2020. Fossilized: Environmental Policy in Canada’s
Petro-Provinces. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Conrad, Justin M. , Kevin T. Greene , James I. Walsh , and Beth E. Whitaker . 2019. “Rebel
Natural Resource Exploitation and Conflict Duration.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 63 (3):
591–616.
Cypher, James M. 2009. “¿Vuelta Al Siglo XIX? El Auge De Las Materias Primas Y El Proceso
De ‘Primarización’ En América Latina.” Foro Internacional 49 (195): 119–162.
Dados, Nour , and Raewyn Connell . 2012. “The Global South.” Contexts 11 (1): 12–13.
Deonandan, Kalowatie , and Michael L. Dougherty , eds. 2019. Mining in Latin America: Critical
Approaches to the New Extraction. London: Routledge.
Dietz, Kristina , and Bettina Engels . 2017. “Contested Extractivism, Society and the State: An
Introduction.” In Contested Extractivism, Society and the State: Struggles over Mining and Land,
edited by Bettina Engels and Kristina Dietz , 1–19. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dunlap, Alexander , and Jostein Jakobsen . 2020. The Violent Technologies of Extraction:
Political Ecology, Critical Agrarian Studies and the Capitalist Worldeater. Cham: Springer
International Publishing.
Elsenhans, Hartmut . 1996. State, Class and Development. New Delhi: Radiant Publishers.
Erdmann, Gero , and Ulf Engel . 2007. “Neopatrimonialism Reconsidered: Critical Review and
Elaboration of an Elusive Concept.” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 45 (1): 95–119.
Ericsson, Magnus , and Olof Löf . 2018. “Mining’s Contribution to Low- and Middle-Income
Economies.” In Extractive Industries: The Management of Resources as a Driver of Sustainable
Development, edited by Tony Addison and Alan Roe , 51–70. Oxford, London: Oxford
University Press.
Gudynas, Eduardo . 2016. “Beyond Varieties of Development: Disputes and Alternatives.” Third
World Quarterly 37 (4): 721–732.
Gudynas, Eduardo . 2020. Extractivisms: Politics, Economy and Ecology. Black Point:
Fernwood Publishing.
Haggard, Stephan . 2018. Developmental States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heinrich, Andreas , and Heiko Pleines . 2015. “Mixing Geopolitics and Business: How Ruling
Elites in the Caspian States Justify Their Choice of Export Pipelines.” Journal of Eurasian
Studies 6 (2): 107–113.
Joseph, Sabrina , ed. 2019. Commodity Frontiers and Global Capitalist Expansion: Social,
Ecological and Political Implications from the Nineteenth Century to the Present Day. London,
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kirsch, Stuart . 2014. Mining Capitalism: The Relationship Between Corporations and Their
Critics. Oakland: University of California Press.
Kröger, Markus . 2021a. Iron Will: Global Extractivism and Mining Resistance in Brazil and
India. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Kröger, Markus . 2021b. Extractivisms, Existences and Extinctions: Monoculture Plantations
and Amazon Deforestation. London, New York: Routledge.
Mahdavy, Hussein . 1970. “The Patterns and Problems of Economic Development in Rentier
States: The Case of Iran.” In Studies in the Economic History of the Middle East, edited by M. A.
Cook , 428–467. Oxford, London: Oxford University Press.
Menton, Mary , and Philippe Le Billon , eds. 2021. Environmental Defenders: Deadly Struggles
for Life and Territory. London, New York: Routledge.
Mezzadra, Sandro , and Brett Neilson . 2017. “On the Multiple Frontiers of Extraction:
Excavating Contemporary Capitalism.” Cultural Studies 31 (2–3): 185–204.
Mkandawire, Thandika . 2015. “Neopatrimonialism and the Political Economy of Economic
Performance in Africa: Critical Reflections.” World Politics 67 (3): 563–612.
Neville, Kate J. 2021. Fueling Resistance: The Contentious Political Economy of Biofuels and
Fracking. New York: Oxford University Press.
North, Liisa L. , and Ricardo Grinspun . 2016. “Neo-Extractivism and the New Latin American
Developmentalism: The Missing Piece of Rural Transformation.” Third World Quarterly 37 (8):
1483–1504.
Ouaissa, Rachid . 2014. Die Rolle der Mittelschichten im Arabischen Frühling: Ein Überblick.
Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Palestini, Stefano , and Aldo Madariaga , eds. 2021. Dependent Capitalisms in Contemporary
Latin America and Europe. London, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Prebisch, Raúl . 1962. “The Economic Development of Latin America and Its Principal
Problems.” Economic Bulletin for Latin America 7 (1): 1–22.
Pritchett, Lant , Kunal Sen , and Eric Werker . 2018. Deals and Development: The Political
Dynamics of Growth Episodes. New York: Oxford University Press.
Robinson, Neil . 2011. “Russian Patrimonial Capitalism and the International Financial Crisis.”
Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 27 (3–4): 434–455.
Rosales, Antulio . 2016. “Deepening Extractivism and Rentierism: China’s Role in Venezuela’s
Bolivarian Developmental Model.” Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue
canadienne d’études du développement 37 (4): 560–577.
Ross, Michael L. 2012. The Oil Curse: How Petroleum Wealth Shapes the Development of
Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Sanghera, Balihar , and Elmira Satybaldieva . 2021. Rentier Capitalism and Its Discontents:
Power, Morality and Resistance in Central Asia. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Saunders, Richard , and Alexander Caramento . 2018. “An Extractive Developmental State in
Southern Africa? The Cases of Zambia and Zimbabwe.” Third World Quarterly 39 (6):
1166–1190.
Schlumberger, Oliver . 2008. “Structural Reform, Economic Order, and Development:
Patrimonial Capitalism.” Review of International Political Economy 15 (4): 622–649.
Shapiro, Judith , and John-Andrew McNeish , eds. 2021. Our Extractive Age: Expressions of
Violence and Resistance. New York: Routledge.
Kadt, Raphael de , and Charles Simkins . 2013. “The Political Economy of Pervasive Rent-
Seeking.” Thesis Eleven 115 (1): 112–126.
Singer, H. W. 1950. “U.S. Foreign Investment in Underdeveloped Areas. The Distribution of
Gains Between Investing and Borrowing Countries.” American Economic Review 40 (2):
473–485.
Svampa, Maristella . 2015. “Commodities Consensus: Neoextractivism and Enclosure of the
Commons in Latin America.” South Atlantic Quarterly 114 (1): 65–82.
Tetreault, Darcy . 2020. “The New Extractivism in Mexico: Rent Redistribution and Resistance
to Mining and Petroleum Activities.” World Development 126: online first.
United Nations Commission on Trade and Development . 2019. Commodity Dependence: A
Twenty-Year Perspective. Geneva: United Nations.
United Nations Commission on Trade and Development . 2021. State of Commodity
Dependence 2021. Geneva: United Nations Publications.
van de Walle, Nicolas . 2001. African Economies and the Politics of Permanent Crisis,
1979–1999. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van der Ploeg, F. , and S. Poelhekke . 2009. “Volatility and the Natural Resource Curse.” Oxford
Economic Papers 61 (4): 727–760.
Veltmeyer, Henry , and James F. Petras , eds. 2014. The New Extractivism: A Post-Neoliberal
Development Model or Imperialism of the Twenty-First Century? London, New York: Zed Books.
Vergara-Camus, Leandro , and Cristóbal Kay . 2017. “The Agrarian Political Economy of Left-
Wing Governments in Latin America: Agribusiness, Peasants, and the Limits of Neo-
Developmentalism.” Journal of Agrarian Change 17 (2): 415–437.
Warnecke-Berger, Hannes . 2018. Politics and Violence in Central America and the Caribbean.
London, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Warnecke-Berger, Hannes . 2021. “Rent, Capitalism and the Challenges of Global Uneven
Development.” In Development, Capitalism, and Rent: The Political Economy of Hartmut
Elsenhans, edited by Hannes Warnecke-Berger , 1–16. London, New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Warnecke-Berger, Hannes . 2022. “Rents, the Moral Economy of Remittances, and the Rise of
a New Transnational Development Model.” Revue de la régulation 31 (2): 1–22.
Warnecke-Berger, Hannes , Hans-Jürgen Burchardt , and Rachid Ouaissa . 2022. Natural
Resources, Raw Materials, and Extractivism: The Dark Side of Sustainability. Extractivism
Policy Brief 1/2022. Kassel: University of Kassel; Philipps-University of Marburg.
Welker, Marina . 2014. Enacting the Corporation: An American Mining Firm in Post-
Authoritarian Indonesia. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Williamson, Jeffrey G. 2012. “Commodity Prices over Two Centuries: Trends, Volatility, and
Impact.” Annual Review of Resource Economics 4 (1): 185–206.
Ye, Jingzhong , Jan D. van der Ploeg , Sergio Schneider , and Teodor Shanin . 2020. “The
Incursions of Extractivism: Moving from Dispersed Places to Global Capitalism.” Journal of
Peasant Studies 47 (1): 155–183.
Conclusion
Birch, Kean . 2020. “Technoscience Rent: Toward a Theory of Rentiership for Technoscientific
Capitalism.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 45 (1): 3–33.
Blyth, Mark , and Matthias Matthijs . 2017. “Black Swans, Lame Ducks, and the Mystery of IPE’s
Missing Macroeconomy.” Review of International Political Economy 24 (2): 203–231.
BP . 2021. Statistical Review of World Energy. London: British Petrol.
Christophers, Brett . 2020. Rentier Capitalism: Who Owns the Economy, and Who Pays for It?
London: Verso.
Dean, Jodi . 2020. “Neofeudalism: The End of Capitalism?” Los Angeles Review of Books
05/12/2020 . https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/neofeudalism-the-end-of-capitalism/.
Durand, Cédric . 2020. Techno-Féodalisme: Critique De L’économie Numérique. Paris: Zones.
Elsenhans, Hartmut . 2004. “Overcoming Rent by Using Rent: The Challenge of Development.”
Intervention. Zeitschrift für Ökonomie 1 (1): 87–115.
Hertog, Steffen . 2020. “The ‘Rentier Mentality’, 30 Years on: Evidence from Survey Data.”
British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 47 (1): 6–23.
Hudson, Michael . 2021. “Finance Capitalism Versus Industrial Capitalism: The Rentier
Resurgence and Takeover.” Review of Radical Political Economics 53 (4): 557–573. DOI:
10.1177/04866134211011770.
Kuzemko, Caroline , Andrew Lawrence , and Matthew Watson . 2019. “New Directions in the
International Political Economy of Energy.” Review of International Political Economy 26 (1):
1–24.
Mazzucato, Mariana , Josh Ryan-Collins , and Giorgos Gouzoulis . 2020. Theorising and
Mapping Modern Economic Rents. UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose Working
Paper 2020–13. London: University College London.
Moreno Zacarés, Javier . 2021. “Euphoria of the Rentier?” New Left Review (129): 47–67.
Sanghera, Balihar , and Elmira Satybaldieva . 2021. Rentier Capitalism and Its Discontents:
Power, Morality and Resistance in Central Asia. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Schwartz, Herman M. , and Bent S. Tranøy . 2019. “Thinking About Thinking About
Comparative Political Economy: From Macro to Micro and Back.” Politics & Society 47 (1):
23–54.
Smith, Benjamin , and David Waldner . 2021. Rethinking the Resource Curse. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Standing, Guy . 2016. The Corruption of Capitalism: Why Rentiers Thrive and Work Does Not
Pay. London: Biteback Publishing.
Stockhammer, Engelbert . 2022. “Post-Keynesian Macroeconomic Foundations for Comparative
Political Economy.” Politics & Society 50 (1): 156–187.
Warnecke-Berger, Hannes . 2021. “Rent, Capitalism and the Challenges of Global Uneven
Development.” In Development, Capitalism, and Rent: The Political Economy of Hartmut
Elsenhans, edited by Hannes Warnecke-Berger , 1–16. London, New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Warnecke-Berger, Hannes , Hans-Jürgen Burchardt , and Rachid Ouaissa . 2022. Natural
Resources, Raw Materials, and Extractivism: The Dark Side of Sustainability. Extractivism
Policy Brief 1/2022. Kassel: University of Kassel; Philipps-University of Marburg.
Yamada, Makio , and Steffen Hertog . 2020. “Introduction: Revisiting Rentierism – with a Short
Note by Giacomo Luciani.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 47 (1): 1–5.