Cited by 613Natural Resources and Economic DevelopmentMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactEconomic Growth and Development

Volatility and the natural resource curse

van der Ploeg, F., Poelhekke, S.·2009·Oxford Economic Papers

Abstract

We provide cross-country evidence that rejects the traditional interpretation of the natural resource curse. First, growth depends negatively on volatility of unanticipated output growth independent of initial income, investment, human capital, trade openness, natural resource dependence, and population growth. Second, the direct positive effect of resources on growth is swamped by the indirect negative effect through volatility. Third, with well developed financial sectors, the resource curse is less pronounced. Fourth, landlocked countries with ethnic tensions have higher volatility and lower growth. Fifth, restrictions on the current account raise volatility and depress growth whereas capital account restrictions lower volatility and boost growth. Our key message is thus that volatility is a quintessential feature of the resource curse.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oep/gpp027

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • van der Ploeg and Poelhekke (2009) decomposed the effect of resource dependence on growth into direct and volatility effects, finding the direct effect positive but often dominated by the negative indirect effect through volatility.

    “A study by van der Ploeg and Poelhekke (2009) decomposes the effect of resource dependence on growth into a direct and a volatility effect, finding that the direct effect is positive but often dominated by the negative indirect effect through volatility.”

    From Using Natural Resources for Development: Why Has It Proven So Difficult? (2016) · cites this paper as van der Ploeg and Poelhekke (2009)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van der Ploeg, F., & Poelhekke, S.
Affiliations
De Nederlandsche Bank (NL)
Venue
Oxford Economic Papers
Published
2009-07-29
Volume
61
Issue
4
Pages
727-760
ISSN
  • 0030-7653 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3812
OpenAlex
W2107766521
Cited by
613
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 57 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 36
FWCI
62.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Oxford Economic Papers (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Natural Resources and Economic Development
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Monetary Policy and Economic Impact
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Economic Growth and Development
Keywords
resource curse, output volatility, economic growth, natural resource dependence, financial development, landlocked countries, ethnic conflict, capital account restrictions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review