The effect of mining on local economic well-being depends on who controls the mines. Different control-rights regimes shape whether extractive industries generate local income: domestic mineral production tends to stimulate local economies, while internationally controlled extraction often does not.

🔎 What the Study Tests

• Tests the micro-foundations of the resource curse by linking mine ownership to local economic outcomes.
• Argues domestic mining companies create stronger backward linkages and have greater incentives for local capacity building than multinational firms, producing more local income gains.

🗺️ Data on Local Economies and Mine Ownership (1997–2015)

• District-level measures of economic well-being and individual assessments of personal economic situation.
• A newly assembled dataset on control rights for copper, gold, and diamond mines.
• Geographic coverage: sub-Saharan Africa, 1997–2015.

⚙️ Research Design and Estimation

• Analyses conducted at both district and individual levels.
• Identification relies on instrumental-variable estimations and fixed-effects models to account for confounders and unobserved heterogeneity.

📌 Key Findings

• Presence of domestic mining companies is associated with increased local wealth.
• Multinational firms are linked to higher regional unemployment and largely fail to improve subnational economic well-being.
• The ownership mechanism—domestic firms fostering backward economic linkages and local capacity building—is central to these divergent outcomes.

💡 Why This Matters

• Shows the resource curse is not uniform: ownership and control rights help explain when mining yields local development versus when it does not.
• Findings inform debates on national ownership, local-content policies, and governance reforms aimed at translating extractive activity into subnational prosperity.