Hasn't it been shown that countries without natural resources - like many of those in East Asia - have been more successful economically than those with natural resources?

Yes, some people argue this. And it is true that the performance of some countries in exploiting their mineral resources has been disappointing (although this is not generally the case with gold). But the research that appeared to demonstrate that exploiting natural resources is not a good route for developing countries has been challenged in a number of quarters.

Importantly it is based on only one period of history (1970 to 1990) and ignores the fuller historical record when there is clear evidence, starting with the UK at the time of the industrial revolution, that exploiting mineral resources helps development. Gold mining was of major importance in the development of California and other parts of the American West, Australia and, of course, South Africa.

More recently countries such as Chile, Malaysia and Botswana have used mineral resources successfully to stimulate more general growth. We do not know all the answers but it seems that quality of governance is a key factor in ensuring that resources are exploited successfully.

• Back to the questions