Jason J. McSparren
The EITI (www.eiti.org) – The global standard for the good governance of oil, gas and mineral resources – is arguably the most prominent global governance intervention applied to the extractive sectors. Since its inception in 2002, the EITI has targeted official corruption and fiscal mismanagement in the extractive sectors by reinforcing democratic norms and strengthening transparency-based procedures to inform civil society about the value of the sector and how that revenue is allocated. As stated in the 2013 EITI Standard,
The objective of the EITI Association is to make the EITI Principles and the EITI Requirements the internationally accepted standard for transparency in the oil, gas and mining sectors, recognising that strengthened transparency of natural resource revenues can reduce corruption, and the revenue from extractive industries can transform economies, reduce poverty, and raise the living standards of entire populations in resource-rich countries.(EITI International Secretariat 2016)
The EITI has been implemented to various degrees across multiple aspects of the mineral value chain with varying levels of success from country to country. Nonetheless, a country’s experience implementing the EITI Standard (https://eiti.org/document/eiti-standard-2019) has produced insight into how the sector operates and where the gaps in governance exist. The EITI can be a valuable tool for decision-makers in host-countries to combat the resource curse, yet it is insufficient to address all of the gaps in regulatory governance across several areas: revenue transfers and allocation, value chain processes, environmental protection, stakeholder relations, and human rights protection. Therefore, linking the EITI with the AMV is a strategy that mutually reinforce the good governance norms embedded in the two policies as well as increases the levels of policy transfer across states and sub-national governing bodies.
The underlying principle of the Africa Mining Vision (www.AfricaMiningVision.org) is to encourage a developmental state in Africa. Theoretically, as Mkandawire (2001) notes, there is space for an African ‘variety’ of developmental state. Several differences exist between the Asian variety of developmental state and the African one. This paper highlights one major difference, which is also identified as a major challenge. The developmental state in Africa cannot industrialize along the same path as any other state, or region, has in the history of development since the industrial revolution. African development cannot employ hydrocarbon fuels as the ‘rest’ of the developed and advanced-developing states have. Africa’s future development demands a new path, an eco-friendly one built on clean energy, ecological preservation and conservation.
Table 2. depicts a 2017 list of states and regional economic communities (RECs) that are advancing the AMV to some degree. The table also indicates that a majority of the AMV states are also EITI member states.
|Angola (non EITI)||Burkina Faso||Central African Republic (suspended from EITI)|
|Chad||Republic of Congo||Cote d’Ivoire|
|Democratic Republic of Congo||Ethiopia||Equatorial Guinea (non-EITI)|
|Kenya (non-EITI)||Lesotho (non-EITI)||Malawi|
|Nigeria||Rwanda (non-EITI)||Sierra Leone|
|Regional Economic Communities|
|Common Market for East and Southern Africa (COMESA)||East African Community (EAC)||Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)|
|Southern Africa Development Community (SADC)||International Conference of the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR)|
Map 1 depicts a near contiguous group of African states which make up 26 of the 52-member countries of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI 2019). This fact calls to mind the idea of ‘new regionalisms’ (Shaw, Grant, and Cornelissen 2011; Falk and Jessop 2003) and possibly more relevant, ‘developmental regionalisms’ (Adejumobi and Kreiter 2016; Shaw 2012; Shaw, Cooper, and Chin 2009).
Map 1: EITI Member States (source: http://www.eiti.org/countries)
Innovative analysis of varieties of new regionalisms is important to this study because in addition to African states having a regional membership majority in the EITI, Map 2 further promotes the idea by advancing prospective new development corridors across the continent that demand regional partnerships as well as, public-private partnerships (PPPs) and civil society cooperation.
Map 2: Potential Resource-based African Development Corridors
(Source: AMV, Annex 2, AU, Addis Ababa 2009 in United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) 2010, 133)
The EITI and the AMV contribute to a future vision of a regionally integrated and technologically advanced African continent.
Adejumobi, Said, and Zebulun Kreiter. 2016. “The Theory & Discourse of Developmental Regionalism.” Lusaka.
EITI. 2019. “EITI Progress Report 2019: Opening Data, Building Trust.” Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, 1–32. https://eiti.org/document/eiti-progress-report-2019.
EITI International Secretariat. 2016. “The EITI Standard 2016,” no. July: 1–60. https://eiti.org/files/English_EITI STANDARD_11July_0.pdf.
Falk, Richard, and Bob Jessop. 2003. “Theories of New Regionalism.” Theories of New Regionalism, no. January 2014. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403938794.
Mkandawire, Thandika. 2001. “Thinking about Developmental States in Africa.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 25 (3): 289–314.
Oxfam. 2017. “From Aspiration to Reality: Unpacking the Africa Mining Vision.” Oxfam Briefing Paper. http://www.oxfam.org.
Shaw, Timothy M., Andrew F. Cooper, and Gregory T. Chin. 2009. “Emerging Powers and Africa: Implications for/from Global Governance?” Politikon 36 (1): 27–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/02589340903155385.
Shaw, Timothy M., J. Andrew Grant, and Scarlett Cornelissen, eds. 2011. The Ashgate Research Companion to Regionalisms. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=KuihAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=AF+Cooper+and+TIM+Shaw,+Regionalism&ots=I7G7BdG5sR&sig=76wqKpqmYTTWK1gQ3g6OtPHJMUc#v=onepage&q&f=false.
Shaw, Timothy M. 2012. “Africa’s Quest for Developmental States: ‘Renaissance’ for Whom?” Third World Quarterly 33 (5): 837–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2012.681967.
United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA). 2010. “Minerals and Africa’s Development The International Study Group Report on Africa’s Mineral Regimes,” 1–230.