Natural Resources and International Development

1964 ◽  
Vol 130 (4) ◽  
pp. 564
Author(s):  
J. David Wood ◽  
Marion Clawson
Author(s):  
Joanna Buckley ◽  
Neil McCulloch ◽  
Nicholas Travis

Donor interest in the natural resources extractives sector is based upon the premise that it represents an opportunity to improve a country’s development prospects. However, in many cases the presence of extractive resources is associated with poor economic performance. As a result, some donors are trying a radically different approach. This chapter explores one such programme funded by the UK Department for International Development: the Facility for Oil Sector Transparency and Reform in Nigeria. The chapter outlines five lessons learned from this example. First, continual analysis is essential to understand the underlying incentives of key actors. Second, interventions need to be locally led in order to provide legitimacy for reform. Third, interventions need to be flexible and adaptive. Fourth, acceptance of an element of risk is necessary. Fifth, donors need to develop a new way of measuring impact.


1966 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 185
Author(s):  
Donald J. Volk ◽  
Marion Clawson

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-11
Author(s):  
V. Babanov

The article considers the role of material resources as a productive factor in the system of national and international development goals and ensuring the life and well-being of the population. Material resources, as a substance derived from natural resources, have a unique property of accumulating all the components of utility, the primary source of which is nature and which is further transformed in productive processes into products useful to people, necessary for their life and growth of well-being.


1965 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 477
Author(s):  
W. W. McPherson ◽  
Marion Clawson

1998 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 5-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Freeland

This paper uses the United Kingdom (UK) government's Department for International Development (DFID) centrally funded renewable natural resources research strategy (RNRRS) programme as an example to answer the key questions of: (i) what research; (ii) why conduct research; and (iii) why set an agenda?Donor research organizations may fund research through various channels. DFID funds research through its multilateral programmes (e.g. to the system of International Agricultural Research Centres which constitute the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research); as components of its bilateral development programmes with individual countries (e.g. assistance to the development of the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) and the Kenyan National Agricultural Research Programme) and sometimes through projects with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), as part of the Joint Funding Scheme. Research funded through these avenues is, however, part of a larger agenda to which the DFID has agreed but not necessarily set. In the interests of pursuing strategic and wider research objectives, the outputs of which may later be applied through development programmes, DFID also has a centrally controlled fund for research, which is not specific to any one country or organization. The part of that research programme relevant to natural resources is called the RNRRS (Research Task Group, 1994). Other donors have similar centrally funded research programmes and it is these to which the title refers and for which it is appropriate that the donor organization sets its own agenda.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennie Barron ◽  
Susanne Skyllerstedt ◽  
Meredith Giordano ◽  
Zenebe Adimassu

Rainfed smallholder farming is particularly vulnerable to climate change, which can greatly exacerbate existing poverty and livelihood challenges. Understanding the complexity of the systems that connect the environment, society and people can help us to reduce this vulnerability and increase the resilience of communities and households to climate perturbations. In recent years, resilience theory has proven a useful approach for exploring the complexity of development challenges. As a result, there has been an increase in the development of tools and frameworks for assessing resilience. Despite this increased focus, there is no consistent use of the resilience concept in development practice and little evidence as to the benefits of using the tools. This paper aims to bridge theory and practice by coupling research on resilience with its application in the international development field. The specific hypothesis we explore is if and how rural livelihoods build resilience toward increased climatic variability in already degraded agro-ecological landscapes? We present a resilience framework with indicators to assess the extent of community resilience to climate change through improved local agricultural production and natural resources management. Primary and secondary landscape and community data, together with development of participatory watershed action plans were used to populate 16 indicators in a resilience framework baseline for the two rainfed dominated watersheds in Ethiopia and Ghana respectively. Given community awareness of the challenges related to the watershed natural resources, local agriculture and extreme weather, the communities were very willing to develop action plans to improve their management of natural resources and build climate resilience. Nevertheless, our analysis of the watershed action plans revealed that strengthening resilience through local action alone, would likely not be sufficient to meet all climate -livelihood challenges identified. To address severity and recurrence of climate change related disturbances, such as droughts, floods and disease in poverty-affected rural communities, the capacity to improve resilience will depend on external factors, in addition to inherent action. New knowledge, infrastructure and social security mechanisms, including insurance and emergency assistance need to added to build resilience for poverty-affected communities in degraded watersheds. We conclude there are also challenges in the use of resilience framework for development and climate-action related to rural poverty affected and degraded livelihood systems. Populating complex social–environmental systems will also need further development, to understand progress in resilience building under changing climate. Special attention to systemic indicators that describe the coupling and interdependencies of social-ecosystem factors will be critical to take action.


Author(s):  
Dr. Matthew Enya Nwocha

This work came up against the background of the contentious question and multiplicity of claims of ownership of natural resources located within a given state territory. The paper has addressed the question whether this claim legitimately inheres in the state as a sovereign or in the native inhabitants of the land area where the mineral resources are domiciled pursuant to the international right to self-determination. It is the finding that, among other things, the right to permanent sovereignty over natural resources is a legitimate one in international law. Notwithstanding, as the paper has concluded, only the legislature and the courts in any particular domestic jurisdiction can determine with finality the specific entity, institution, or unit within a state sovereign in whom this ultimate ownership resides.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document