MSc Development Finance

The course introduces students to the social and economic challenges faced by countries whose exports (or imports) are almost exclusively composed of raw materials (primary commodities and natural resources) with little or no processing.

The course aims to: 

• Introduce students to different forms of commodity dependency and how these dependencies have evolved historically.
• Provide students with an in-depth understanding of the complex social, economic, and political challenges faced by commodity dependent economies and the problems these entail for economic development, commonly referred to as resource curse.
• Enable students to critically evaluate different explanations and policy solutions for the resource curse proposed by orthodox and heterodox scholars in development and development economics.

The following topics are covered during ten weekly lectures and seminars:

Topic 1. The state of commodity dependence - Historical perspective and stylised facts

Topic 2. Resource curse I - External balances, Dutch disease, and terms of trade
Topic 3. Resource curse II - Internal balances, Dutch disease and crowding out hypothesis
Topic 4. Resource curse III - Financialisation, crises and pro-cyclical funding

Topic 5. Resource curse IV – Good-governance, political settlement, and rent seeking

Topic 6. Dependency, colonialism, and the structuralist perspective
Topic 7. Managing the resource curse I - ICAs, and commodity-financed industrialization

Topic 8. Managing the resource curse II - GVCs, and commodity-based industrialization

Topic 9. Managing the resource curse III – Macro-management and structural transformation
Topic 10. Managing the resource curse IV – Anti-corruption, resource nationalism, and risk hedging

The teaching material for this course draws on a mix of theoretical literature and country case studies. Country case studies are introduced using different media including peerreviewed academic papers, short videos, podcasts, and policy reports.
Core theoretical debates are introduced during weekly lectures. The theoretical discussions are complemented by country cases studies which are discussed during weekly seminars. In preparation for the weekly seminars, students are required to go through guided readings and additional media references and review the theories covered during the lecture.

Seminar discussions are facilitated by questions or hypotheses students are asked to evaluate. Emphasis is placed on students' ability to discuss and apply complex theories to real world examples and critically evaluate theoretical propositions against case study evidence.

Teaching will occasionally and where appropriate draw on expertise from development practitioners based at relevant international organisations.

The module is assessed by an end of semester exam accounting for 60 per cent of the overall grade, a 1,500-word coursework accounting for 40 per cent of the overall grade. In addition, students are asked to deliver a group presentation as a formative assessment. Before submitting the coursework, students are asked to exchange their drafts with peers and prepare a group presentation which compares their work.
The formative assessment is designed to strengthen students' presentation and group working skills and provides them with an opportunity to present and receive feedback on their coursework before submission. Presentations and subsequent discussions are delivered in a dedicated workshop.

• Explain and evaluate complementing and competing explanations for the resource curse put forward by different schools of thought.
• Identify and evaluate the efficacy of different policies devised to manage the resource curse by referencing contemporary economic and social theories and case study evidence.
• Understand and appraise internal and external constraints commodity dependent economies face.

• Critically engage with different sets of orthodox and heterodox literature discussing the resource curse and evaluate core contemporary debates.

• Formulate concise arguments drawing on a diverse set of literature.
• Use country case studies to critically evaluate and test competing research hypotheses.
• Understand and analyse key economic and social indicators related to commodity dependency.

• Conduct research independently and as part of a team.
• Present complex theories and case studies in front of an audience.
• Write high quality country case studies and formulate evidence-based policy advice.

via Blackboard

Students are asked to read the latest 'State of Commodity Dependence' report published
by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UCTAD) in preparation for
the course.

• UNCTAD (various years) State of Commodity Dependence. https://www.un-ilibrary.
org/content/periodicals/2663712x

Students will also benefit from accessing 'Petronia', an interactive simulation designed by the Natural Resource Governance Institute (NRGI) that explores the various policy
challenges of a fictional country at the outset of oil production.

NRGI (2018) Petronia. https://petronia.games/

Topic-specific readings will be made available before each lecture. The following

references provide a useful introduction to relevant debates..

 Deaton, A. (1999). Commodity Prices and Growth in Africa. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(3):23–40.

 Frankel, J. A. (2012). The Natural Resource Curse: A Survey of Diagnoses and Some Prescriptions. Harvard Kennedy Faculty Research Working Paper 31.

 Gilberthorpe, E., and Papyrakis, E. (2015). The extractive industries and development: The resource curse at the micro, meso and macro levels. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2(2):381–390. DOI: 10.1016/j.exis.2015.02.008.

 Nissanke, M., and G. Mavrotas (2010) Commodities, Governance and Economic

Development under Globalization. Palgrave Macmillan UK. Available via the library.

 van der Ploeg, F. (2011). Natural resources: curse or blessing? Journal of Economic Literature, 49(2):366-420.

 Venables, A. J. (2016) Using Natural Resources for Development: Why Has It Proven So Difficult? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(1):161–184.