Global and Regional Mechanisms for Governing the Resource Curse in Africa

Abstract

International norms around natural resource governance have proliferated in the face of civil wars and feeble state institutions in Africa. These norms have been captured in institutions such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS), and the African Mining Vision (AMV). But have these institutions reversed the purported resource curse? This article seeks answers to this key question by challenging the assumptions around the prevailing international regimes of restraint which have privileged transparency and accountability at the expense of participation. Through an analysis of the experiences of these institutions, I suggest that there should be more focus on alternative regimes of responsibility in which natural resource-rich countries combine the process of building institutions of participation with those of transparency and accountability.

Acknowledgements

This article is part of an earlier collaborative project between the Centre for African International Relations (CAIR) at Wits University and the Southern African Resource Watch (SARW) on the Governance of Africa's Natural Resources in Africa. I wish to acknowledge the support from SARW under the leadership of Dr Claude Kabemba, the research assistance of Divine Munje, and the critical and informative comments from two anonymous reviewers.

Notes

1 The Kimberly Process is an international initiative to stop trade in conflict or blood diamonds that fund rebel movements who perpetuate violent conflict on the African continent. The Kimberly Process is open to any international actor and offers a certification scheme as well as guidelines and requirements to control the rough diamond trade (www.kimberlyprocess.com).