Abstract
Pogge (2008) and Wenar (2008) have recently argued that we are responsible for the persistence of the so-called ‘resource curse’. But their analyses are limited in important ways. I trace these limitations to their undue focus on the ways in which the international rules governing resource transactions undermine government accountability. To overcome the shortcomings of Pogge’s and Wenar’s analyses, I propose a normative framework organized around the social value of government responsiveness and discuss the implications of adopting this framework for future normative assessment of the resource curse and our relationships to it.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 84-105 |
| Number of pages | 22 |
| Journal | Politics, Philosophy and Economics |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 6 Feb 2015 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Natural resources and government responsiveness'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver