National Resources, Resistance, and the Afterlives of the New International Economic Order in Bangladesh
Over the last two decades in Bangladesh, a well-organised resistance to coal mining in the north-west, and to onshore and offshore gas exploration, has been animated by concerns over dispossession of land, and plans to export much of the coal and gas to be extracted in the name of financial viabilit...
Salvato in:
| Pubblicato in: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/poldev, |
|---|---|
| Autore principale: | |
| Natura: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Lingua: | Anglais |
| Pubblicazione: |
International Development Policy | Revue internationale de politique de développement
2023
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Riassunto: | Over the last two decades in Bangladesh, a well-organised resistance to coal mining in the north-west, and to onshore and offshore gas exploration, has been animated by concerns over dispossession of land, and plans to export much of the coal and gas to be extracted in the name of financial viability. As such, these movements might be read as resistance to ‘extractivism’ in a ‘literal sense’. In scholarship on resistance to resource extraction in Bangladesh, significant attention has been given to the tensions that appear to arise between ‘resource nationalist’ opposition to foreign-owned or export-oriented extractive operations, and (some) supposed resource nationalists’ accommodation of fossil fuel extraction in the name of energy sovereignty and development. In this chapter, I argue that this apparent tension in understanding resistance to extractivism dissolves when the New International Economic Order (NIEO)―which centred on attempts to assert permanent sovereignty over natural resources and empower postcolonial states to negotiate with extractive corporations―is foregrounded. In Bangladesh, sovereignty over natural resources and the primacy of domestic courts in disputes over resource extraction are frequently enacted, much to the displeasure of international extractive industry corporations. Focusing on attempts to enact the spirit of the NIEO by Bangladeshi courts, and arbitrators locking horns with extractive industry corporations, I suggest that ‘resource nationalist’ mobilisation against unjust forms of resource extraction can at times be understood as resistance to the international legal architecture that frames extractive corporations’ relationships with postcolonial states, rather than to extractivism in the ‘literal sense’. |
|---|