Study: States need economic freedom to benefit from natural resources

Dec 18, 2009 by Jill Elish

( -- States with small governments, low taxes and labor market freedom enjoy greater benefits from natural resource development than states with large and intrusive government policies, according to a new study by a Florida State University researcher.

"The size of government and level of regulation are two of the cornerstones of ," said Joab Corey, the study's author and a lecturer in Florida State's Department of Economics and the Gus A. Stavros Center for the Advancement of Free Enterprise and Economic Education. "When it comes to resource development, research shows that states with higher levels of economic freedom enjoy greater benefits from resource development."

Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming are singled out as states with high levels of economic freedom that have benefited from resource development. On the other hand, Alaska, Montana and West Virginia have failed to fully benefit from their natural resources, due in part to government policies that limit economic freedom, according to Corey's peer-reviewed study, "Development in U.S. States, Economic Freedom, and the 'Resource Curse.' " The Fraser Institute, a leading think tank, released the study, which can be accessed at

The study offers an empirical analysis weighing the economic growth rates of resource-dependent states against the Economic Freedom of North America index to determine the level of economic freedom required for states to benefit from natural resource development. Research suggests that in regions lacking policies consistent with free markets, private-property rights and a stable and fair legal system, natural resource dependence can weaken economic growth — a phenomenon known as the "resource curse."

The study points out that resource-rich states with low levels of economic freedom may suffer from the "resource curse." Of the eight most resource-dependent states, Alaska, Montana and West Virginia have an economic freedom rating below 6.22, the critical level necessary to benefit from natural resource development. Conversely, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming all have an economic freedom rating above the 6.22 threshold, and each state averages a growth rate 0.84 percentage points higher than Alaska, Montana and West Virginia for the period 1986-2005. The economic freedom index operates on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the freest.

"Compounded annually over many years, this gap in growth rates will create a significant difference between living standards in the states with a higher level of economic freedom and those with a lower level," said Fred McMahon, director of the Fraser Institute's Center for Global Mining Studies.

A comparison of Wyoming and West Virginia, the nation's top producers of coal, best illustrates this dichotomy. While both states are among the nation's most resource dependent, Wyoming is much more so, with coal accounting for nearly 34 percent of gross state product (GSP) compared to West Virginia's 14 percent. However, Wyoming boasts an economic freedom rating of 6.5, which puts it above the critical threshold to overcome the "resource curse." As a result of its higher level of economic freedom, Wyoming enjoys a per-capita GSP more than $24,000 higher than that of West Virginia, where the economic freedom score is only 5.3.

"Sound economic institutions are indispensable to , and this rings especially true in resource-rich states," Corey said. "These states need less government involvement in the economy, lower taxes, and freer labor markets to truly benefit from natural resource development."

Explore further: Outside CEOs could rejuvenate struggling businesses

Related Stories

Water: More Valuable than Diamonds

Nov 07, 2006

A new study by University of Arkansas economists shows a strong relationship between economic freedom and access to water. David Gay and Charles Britton, economics professors in the Sam M. Walton College of Business, and ...

Why conservation efforts often fail

Sep 18, 2007

Modern conservation techniques have brought us the resurgence of American bald eagles, sustainable forest harvests and the rescue of prized lobster fisheries. So how can modern conservation strategies also have wrought such ...

Recommended for you

Outside CEOs could rejuvenate struggling businesses

6 hours ago

CEOs hired from outside a company tend to spend more money on research and development, while CEOs hired from within are likely to make large, strategic acquisitions, new research from the University of Missouri ...

Do government technology investments pay off?

Mar 30, 2015

Studies confirm that IT investments in companies improve productivity and efficiency. University of Michigan professor M.S. Krishnan wondered if the same was true for government.

Study finds assisted housing works, but it could be improved

Mar 30, 2015

Two researchers from the University of Kansas Department of Urban Planning have just completed a study on the locations of assisted housing units and assisted households across the nation. It examines one of the key issues ...

Economist probes the high cost of health care

Mar 27, 2015

When Zack Cooper arrived at Yale as assistant professor of public health and economics, he gained access to a first-of-its-kind dataset. Working with the non-profit Health Care Cost Institute, Cooper and ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

not rated yet Dec 19, 2009
I have to scratch my head at a study that says: "Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming are singled out as states with high levels of economic freedom that have benefited from resource development" and implys they are economic powerhouses.

As well, I have to question who get the benefits for all this 'development'? Certainly not the residents of these states - Louisiana is one of the poorest, least educated states in the nation. Freedom in these states seems to be freedom for companies to lay waste to the environment and underpay their workers but does not include the freedom for its' workers to organize.

No wonder (the horrid) Frazer Institute (a corporation funded entity) loves it.
not rated yet Jan 03, 2010
If a democracy chooses to regulate coal-industries, then this decisions is not an irrational decision that lies outside the scope of economy, since this is a decisions aiming to satisfy certain needs; needs that have an effect on scarce resources not necessary measurable in money, benefits like a non-poluted environment.
The only way to gain freedom is to reduce scarcity: this can be done by 'wanting less' (haha), reduce population (nahhh), or it can be done by INNOVATION.
The above mentioned 'research' is the 1000.000th variant of how to divide available freedom (like taking resources out of the ground at the expense of future generations), overall there is no gain in freedom.
This 'research' is not economic but political, since it states that "to truly benefit from natural resources" they need "less government involvement in the economy, lower taxes, and freer labor markets."

How does Corey know that these people will “benefit”? Did he ASK them? And... What did they vote for?!!!

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.