Navigating the Resource Paradox: A Comparative Analysis of Neocolonial Structures and Domestic Agency in Resource-Rich Africa

Abstract

This paper novelly reframes the resource curse thesis as a product of enduring neocolonial legacies and contemporary governance failures, rather than an inevitable outcome of resource abundance itself, while uniquely integrating an analysis of international governance frameworks. It challenges the deterministic framing of the resource curse by examining how underdevelopment and environmental degradation in resource-rich African states are shaped more by historical, structural, and neocolonial dynamics than by the presence of natural wealth per se. Using a comparative qualitative methodology, the study draws on academic literature, policy documents, and case studies from Nigeria, Sierra Leone, the DRC, Liberia, and Botswana. Key findings present strong arguments that (1) Natural resource abundance is not inherently a curse; it becomes a developmental liability when managed through weak institutions, neocolonial financial arrangements, and global structural inequities (i.e correlation does not equate causation). (2) International governance frameworks such as the Kimberley Process (KP) and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), while improving transparency, adopt technocratic and depoliticized approaches that fail to address deeper power asymmetries and systemic injustices. (3) National sovereignty, political agency, and institutional autonomy are critical in shaping whether resource wealth fosters development or deepens dependency. Botswana’s relative success exemplifies how sovereign control, transparent fiscal management, and inclusive governance can transform resource abundance into sustainable development despite global structural pressures. (4) As the "green" energy transition accelerates, there is a risk of replicating existing patterns of exploitation unless global governance structures are reformed to empower the Global South, protect ecological systems, and democratise benefit-sharing. The paper concludes by calling for a shift toward regionally anchored, justice-oriented governance that centres the Global South in defining sustainable, equitable futures.