Poverty, Inequality, and the Local Natural Resource Curse

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. www.econstor.eu The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in Bonn is a local and virtual international research center and a place of communication between science, politics and business. IZA is an independent nonprofit organization supported by Deutsche Post Foundation. The center is associated with the University of Bonn and offers a stimulating research environment through its international network, workshops and conferences, data service, project support, research visits and doctoral program. IZA engages in (i) original and internationally competitive research in all fields of labor economics, (ii) development of policy concepts, and (iii) dissemination of research results and concepts to the interested public. Terms of use: Documents in D I S C U S S I O N P A P E R S E R I E SIZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author. The extent to which local communities benefit from commodity booms has been subject to wide but inconclusive investigations. This paper draws from a new district-level database to investigate the local impact on socioeconomic outcomes of mining activity in Peru, which grew almost twentyfold in the last two decades. We find evidence that producing districts have better average living standards than otherwise similar districts: larger household consumption, lower poverty rate, and higher literacy. However, the positive impacts from mining decrease significantly with administrative and geographic distance from the mine, while district-level consumption inequality increases in all districts belonging to a producing province. The inequalizing impact of mining activity, both across and within districts, may explain part of the current social discontent with mining activities in the country, even despite its enormous revenues.JEL Classification: D7, H7, O1, Q3

The distributional impacts of an energy boom in Western Canada

“…Caselli and Michaels (2009) found that oil may have reduced poverty in Brazil, but the results were not robust. In Peru, Loayza et al (2013) showed that consumption inequality increased and poverty decreased across districts of a mining province during a boom, while Aragon and Rud (2013) found a significant poverty reduction due to gold mining. Most recently, Howie and Atakhanova (2014) showed that a resource boom in Kazakhstan lowered inequality.…”

The Explosive Combination of Inefficient Local Bureaucracies and Mining Production: Evidence from Localized Societal Protests in Peru

“…However, scholarly work on the local impact of natural resource extraction is relatively scarce. Some studies focus on the social and economic effects of natural resource extraction and find, overall, that the impact of natural resource extraction on key indicators of human welfare has been modest (Barrantes 2005;Loayza et al 2013). Other studies observe that social conflict arises mostly in areas where natural resource extraction occurs and aim to explain why (Arellano-Yanguas 2011a, b).…”

Fiscal Policy and Inequality in Latin America, 1960–2012

“…Thus, we consider the logarithm of GDP per capita (lnGDPpc), as considered by González and Martner (2012) (2010); unemployment rate (Unemp) as used in González and Martner (2012); dependency rate (Depend) as deployed in Cornia (2012) and Lee et al (2013); logarithm of population (lnPop) as used by Roine et al (2009); trade openness (Open) as used in Lee et al (2013) and Roine et al (2009); terms of international trade (ToT) by Cornia (2012), Montecino (2011), andMcLeod andLustig (2011); investments (Invest) as found in Lee et al (2013); inflation (Inf) as used in González and Martner (2012), Montecino (2011), andMcLeod andLustig (2011); democratic institutions (Dem) as used in Cornia (2012) and Huber et al (2006); and natural resource rents (NatRes) as utilized in Loayza et al (2013).…”