Abstract
ABSTRACT The World Bank, World Trade Organization and others promote integration into global markets as a certain path towards economic development. Some researchers share this optimism, arguing that development is the record of how one thing leads to another, once peripheral locations have plugged into global networks. Comparing resource peripheries in South America, Southeast Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa with regard to the upstream oil and gas sector, we call for a more nuanced assessment. Against the backdrop of 38 narrative, open-ended interviews, we show that there is spatial polarization between ‘gateways’ and peripheral sites in Southeast Asia. Argentinean and Ghanaian case studies reveal that local firms usually provide generic services, with little prospects of venturing into higher value-adding activities. We conclude that at least the oil and gas sector is not suitable for fulfilling very optimistic expectations on development.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
