Why is it so hard? Can it really be that hard?
PNGns turned away from entering Australia

LNG: Chilean success or Nigerian disaster?


In 2014, ExxonMobil is scheduled to start shipping natural gas through a 450-mile pipeline, then on to Japan, China and other markets in East Asia. But the flood of revenue, which is expected to bring PNG $30 billion over three decades and to more than double its gross domestic product, will force a country already beset by state corruption and bedevilled by a complex land tenure system to grapple with the kind of windfall that has paradoxically entrenched other poor, resource-rich nations in deeper poverty [The New York Times].

WILL PNG’s SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS harness these revenues to grow economically and reduce poverty, joining the ranks of natural resource success stories like Chile and Botswana?

Or will it instead follow in the path of Nigeria’s Niger Delta, where frustration over lost livelihoods and environmental devastation flares up into kidnappings, oil theft and sabotage?

Or the Chad-Cameroon pipeline, a failed World Bank project that has become a cautionary tale against investing in extractive industries in a weak institutional environment?

The New York Times article doesn’t provide much cause for optimism:

While the West’s richest companies are used to seeking natural resources in the world’s poorest corners, few places on earth seem as ill prepared as the Southern Highlands to rub shoulders with ExxonMobil. The most impoverished region in one of the world’s poorest countries, it went unexplored by Westerners until the 1930s…

Local leaders worry about the continuing inflow of guns into an area with almost no government presence, and no paved roads, electricity, running water, banks or post offices. They worry that the benefits of the gas project will fall short of expectations, begetting a generation of young men who will train their anger on ExxonMobil.

PNG’s finance minister says that gas revenues will be invested in sovereign wealth funds, a strategy advocated by the OECD and used by Norway and Abu Dhabi to guard their oil revenues for the future, smooth volatility, and protect against Dutch Disease.

If there were a template for a country that could beat the odds and defeat the resource curse, it might look something like this:

Strong institutions. A functioning democracy. An independent judiciary and a free press. A demographically homogenous society. A diversified economy, with some strong, non-resource constituency that will fight to protect itself against resource distortions.

Unfortunately, this isn’t PNG. The largely rural, fantastically diverse island nation, home to hundreds of different ethnic groups and one-tenth of the world’s languages, is saddled with a weak, ineffective and corrupt government.

Comparing perceptions of corruption, ease of doing business, and measures of freedom, PNG ranks a lot closer to Chad and Nigeria than it does to Botswana and Chile.

Source: Aid Watch



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Norm Richardson

The Exxon LNG project is an interesting "poverty trap v development" conundrum for PNG.

It is the same issue that faced so many other developing nations in their post colonial periods.

If we take notice of the Rio Tinto disasters of the 1970's and 1980's, it becomes clear that spreading the benefits down to the village level is essential for any long term investment to be stable.

The major capital investors have a vested interest in seeing the population in the area of operation being placated, involved and favorably impressed with the relationship with the investors.

Clearly, the failure of the ruling administration needs to be circumvented by the investor to win the hearts and minds of the people.

So why not have the security of the investment insured by putting some money directly into the schools, aid posts, roads and self support projects that will mitigate the potential for disaffection among the population?

After all, the people who live there just want to have a reasonably secure and comfortable life. They do not need to have 60 inch flat screen TV's, Range Rovers and holidays in the south of France.

It will work more effectively than employing battalion strength armed guards. It works for me.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)