ASSESSMENT OF HOW RESOURCE-POOR NATIONS ACHIEVE GLOBAL INFLUENCE ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS BEYOND MINERALS

ASSESSMENT OF HOW RESOURCE-POOR NATIONS ACHIEVE GLOBAL

INFLUENCE ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS BEYOND MINERALS

Arizona State University

SUMMER 2024

Nations Thriving Without Natural Resources

Since most of these countries lack large natural resources, they are compelled to rely on

other management strategies for purposes of sustaining the economic growth and enhanced

authority in the global society. That is why Singapore might be cited as one of the best examples

of the nation which has managed to overcome the difficulties which are inherent in the nature of

the natural resources through becoming one of the most significant nodes of the global finance

and business, as well as concentrating the information-communicational infrastructure.

Singapore at a crucial position and well-stabilized government have created an environment

suitable for global investment and technology advancement (Jones, 2020). This is so because

while Singapore is a country that has limited land frontage and do not possess enough of natural

resources. And although the environment of this country is limited to the borders of a city-state,

due to the high indicators of performance, this city squeezed into the ranks of the most successful

ones because of education, infrastructure, and governance (Cheong, 2021). Moreover, the

governmental policy in Singapore is modernized, which has fostered skills and led to the

appearance of a qualified personnel able to respond to changes in the economic environment

(Tan, 2019). For this reason, Singapore is abreast of the fact that strategic planning and policy

can effectively replace natural resources hence promoting development that leads to exerting

economic power that is far way ahead of its size and resource endowment.

Same as China, Japan is also one of the few countries that have scarce natural resources

but have achieved significant global presence. Due to limited availability of natural resources

Japan has been compelled to adopt the development model that hinges on technology. After

World War II Japan continued the policy of industrialization and affirmed her specialty on

technological grounds from where the nation experienced an economic wonder in the second half

of the twentieth century. Japanese companies like Toyota and Sony provide good examples of

Japan’s systematic approach to accuracy in production and innovation in the technical area

which are critical to brand growth across the globe (Okazaki, 2022). Saito (2019) opines that,

due to the friendly and stable market, Japanese government policies that aimed at nurturing

research, technical skills, high quality education may have played a role in making Japan a

strong economic powerhouse in the world. Such method adopted by Japan proves the theory that

if one puts an emphasize in technical advancement and education, a country should be able to

attain its economic independency in addition to earning a place among the leading influential

countries today even if it lacks essential natural resources. Japan remains in a leadership capacity

now in both technology and finance to illustrate how proactively capital investment in human

capital is extremely advantageous for any resource-deficient country that seeks to upgrade its

status in the global context (Yoshida, 2021).

The events that happened in South Korea provide yet another example to those

governments which having a tight money supply left on their balance but willing to gain a place

in the global world arena. The Miracle on the Han River of South Korea is a good example of a

fast rate of economic transformation that was done through applying technical improvements and

wise strategies on international partnership. South Korea in the 1960s was faced with significant

resource constraints and prudent economic stresses and yet, it looked to heavy industries,

manufacturing and, eventually, technology and communications. Export-oriented

industrialization policies of the government helped South Korea to achieve the fast growth of the

economy, and create companies like Samsung and Hyundai, which are now famous all over the

world (Kim & Lee, 2020). Besides, education has also been an important investment in South

Korean which has made the country one of the most educated countries in the globe and the

ability to produce a qualified and flexible workforce that is able to meet the dynamic nature of

technologies (Choi, 2021). Culture power status of the country has expanded significantly during

the past few decades, for example through the Korean Wave. This shows that how cultural

exports can boost the visibility of a country in the global level more (Park, 2019). The model that

has been proposed to South Korea shows that no matter how little of the natural resources they

may possess, such nations can still develop key economic and cultural sectors that significantly

enhance their status within global society.

Lack of resources, human capital development, diplomacy without force, and strategic

policy making are some of the examples that reveal that the idea of having alternate roads to

influence is not only logical but is possible. Switzerland can be described as an example of how

wise decision to remain neutral, build a sound financial base and invest into quality educational

system positively affects the world for many years. Switzerland is one of the countries that have

few deposits of various resources, which are native to them. It has earned the reputation of an

important global financial center, global diplomacy, innovation, and technical development

country (Muller, 2020). Switzerland can be said to be stable and known to have good quality of

life and this has making it famous. Thanks to the consistent commitment of the nation to research

and development, the strength of its schools backed with federal funding, there are considerable

advances made across the range of industries such as the pharmaceutical market, biotechnology,

or the financial industry (Schmidt, 2019). Currently, the Switzerland has been establishing itself

as the location for diplomatic discourse all over the globe; this has rationalized the enhanced soft

power of the country (Meier, 2021). Diplomacy is also engulfed by the presence of the

Switzerland motivated by their international status in the global market. As a benign neighbor,

Switzerland has tried to become a mediator between nations in most international matters. It is a

good example to illustrate the way that the states which have a limited purchase of the natural

resources can negotiate stability and international accreditation without the natural resources. It

does this by ensuring EU presidency does not lean to one side by maintaining sound

governmental structures and by demonstrating high levels of creativity.

Global Conflicts Over Resource Control

When competition over energy, minerals, and water underlying causes of conflict and key

to diplomacy strategies, international competition for resource ownership intensified in recent

years. These wars have always been driven by the justification by competition for these natural

resources. In matters concerning foreign exchange for the procurement of essential imports and

import-competed stability, countries that are endowed with few bankable natural resources are

usually placed at a disadvantaged position. To do this they have to navigate complex geopolitical

landscapes and structures. Japan and South Korea that are industrial economies rely heavily on

energy imports to survive. Like most developed countries, both countries can be described as

being short of resources. Due to this, they are prone to price fluctuation and supply disruption;

therefore, have forged partnerships and invested in areas rich in the resources necessary to

guarantee them energy (Lee & Chang, 2020). Meanwhile what is happening, countries which are

abundant in raw material like, Russia and Saudi Arabia because they hold very important

resources like oil and natural gas can exert a considerable amount of pressure. Energy exports is

used as a political tool by these states, which gives them considerable power over international

relations and trade with the latter states that are-energy scarce states (Muller, 2021). The

possession of power translates into dominance of material resources, and control of those

resources does not only have economic implications, but impacts on balance of power in the

world as well. Therefore, countries that have little access to supply of resources have no option

than fashioning out ways on how to minimize importation of resources from other countries.

Regional wars have also been fueled due to competition in resource in areas that includes

natural reserves which are comprised as regional reserves. Such nations and such regions are

often forced to go to war because they need access to resources in order to improve their

economy. For instance, in East Africa, the two resources; water and arable land has been a

reason for conflict among the Nile Basin countries especially between Egypt, Ethiopia, and the

Sudan (Johnson & Richards, 2019). Egypt has had an uneasy relation with Ethiopia due to the

latter’s construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, which will generate power. Egypt

relies on the Nile water for about 99% of its freshwater resource needs. This conflict can be a

perfect illustration of a confrontation over the valuable resource deficit and control over

transboundary resources that may negatively influence diplomatic interactions and destabilize the

region particularly for the nations with scarce access to the adequate supply of the alternative

resource (Elasha, 2020). In South Asia where cooperation over water has been particularly

strained where India and Pakistan have areas of tension, such conflicts of this nature have

emerged. These disagreement influences attainments of agriculture and safety of the territory.

Perhaps one may foresee that control issues could degenerate to regional wars and though this

posed great risks to the Relatively resource poor countries who do not bear much leverage. Some

light to this possibility is shed by these examples.

Apart from the local conflicts, power over the resources is extending its influence on

central relations and strategic initiatives of the representatives of the states. This is because

resource scarce countries are in search of partners in an effort to secure availability of basic

inputs. A rather frequent type of strategic partnership is cooperation between countries having

demands that are complementary to each other. In such agreements, the former can deliver

materials, whereas the latter – monetary or military support in return. For instance, the Belt and

Road Initiative (BRI) is a strategy that would show how resource-deficit states can increase their

access to infrastructure and investment deals by partnering with a resource-scarce nation. Aidoo

(2021) has pointed out that many African countries signed deals with China as part of the BRI

which helps China to secure the needed raw commodities in exchange for funding in

infrastructure development which includes trains and ports. But this structure cause concern

about dependency on foreign countries and lack of control of the local resources (Graham, 2022).

The above system may be beneficial to the nations that are less endowed with natural resources

because they present an option for development. Thus, several countries are considering the

possibility of committing Regional Integrated Supply Systems with the purpose of relying less

on foreign forces; but, the issue of achieving an optimal need and self-sufficiency is still a key

concern. Regarding the resource-poor countries, the works show the readiness on coming up

with fancy strategies in a view of being afforded a chance to grab the resources as well as

portraying some intricate geopolitical realities in form of these alliances.

Besides, there are new kinds of a war, which can be seen in attempts of cyber and trade

attacks that attempt to block access to some necessary supply or technology since resources are

rare. The nations lacking the means to employ are getting even weaker to the protectionist

processes and hacking attacks on essential supply chains. This type of assaults may very much

depend to a large extent on influencing the economies of these states. For example, the global

semiconductor shortage in 2021 exposed the vulnerability of countries with limited abilities to

supply high-tech products disruption of their supply chains. South Korea, one of the leading

semiconductor producers with little endowment in natural resources was under much pressure to

source raw materials needed in semiconductor production including rare earth metals as the

demand for semiconductors rose globally (Park & Lim, 2021). This was of course because at the

time, South Korea was one of the premier manufacturers of semiconductors, globally. The USA

and China which are urgently striving towards achieving supremacy in technology have imposed

export caps on these critical components, this has caused tension with countries which largely

depend on semiconductor imports Nations that are resource deficient are actively searching how

to protect against such shock. Some of these nations are providing for local industries and

expanding its suppliers’ pool to reduce its reliance to the larger powers. These conflicts evidence

new frontier of resource control, and due to these conflicts resource poor states are challenged by

fast changing global market circumstances. The geopolitical conflict that they still remain in the

crossover of some levels of technical and supply chain risks remains an issue.

Conflict Minerals Driving Regional Wars

When it comes to what resource riches might mean in terms of fueling poverty, violence

and persistent warfare, rather than development, conflict minerals especially those in Africa,

have emerged as a major factor. Conflict minerals namely coltan, tungsten, tin and gold used in

the production electronics are sourced and traded by armed groups in politically instable

countries such as the DRC (Roessler, 2011). These minerals are mined in areas where the

manufacture of electronics is central. Because these minerals are exploited along with violence

and other forms of exploitation, which lead to the prolongation of conflict and offer local militias

a greater benefit than the general public (Bashwira et al., 2021), they have been referred to as

conflict minerals. The eastern region of the Democratic Republic of the Congo for instance

notable armed groups have exploited minerals revenue as capital to purchase arms, finance

activities, and exercise control over individuals within the region. This continues to perpetrate a

culture of violence that leads to forced evictions of communities and compromise the stability of

a nation (Stearns, 2020). Opposed to being an opportunity for development as envisaged when

these mineral resources were discovered, they have turned out to be a source of the systemized

violence and conflicts as depicted in this dynamism of how resource richness fuels instability

especially in nations with institutional frailty.

As mentioned earlier, the value of these conflict minerals has further risen due to the

escalating international appetite for electronics and technology which has linked the consumer

market to regional conflict in the resource-rich but the weak governance regions. Seay (2015)

notes that Western and Asian countries in particular depend on mineral which are sourced from

conflict areas. This need has given rise to a demand that fuels exploitation and killings. But even

if there is awareness of such concerns, supply chain control remains a challenge due to the

complex structures of intermediaries through which minerals are concealed before they get into

manufacturers in different parts of the globe (Nest, 2011). Trying to regulate the use of conflict

minerals remain a challenge, for instance through the Dodd Frank Act in America. This is partly

because these efforts are not legally binding, including the operation for cross-border actions and

most of the time meet the resistance from industries and governments that are worried about

loss-making impacts due to implementation of these actions (Cuvelier et al., 2021).

Consequently, the trend of the global electronics market perpetuates these configurations

involuntarily by keeping up the market prices of these essential commodities high. The

confirmation of consumer demand and regional instability is the rationale for further stringent as

well as enforced international rules so as not to extend the persistence of violence in areas that

are endow with resources but infested with conflict.

This complicates the search for a solution to these problems because MNCs are involved

in trading minerals at the center of conflicts. While some companies have achieved much in

auditing their supply chains to ensure they do not source raw materials from conflict regions,

others remain in the uncontrolled mineral supply chain from places that are not experiencing

violence today. Due to the complexity of undertaking a trail on origin of raw materials through

multiple layers of suppliers for instance, IT firms that use minerals for production have struggled

to guarantee their product do not contain minerals that are used in armed conflict (Gettleman,

2016). In this way, the penetration of businesses into mineral-rich but politically unstable

territories inadvertently contributes to the eruption of local power-struggle dynamics as regards

the control of resources; armed actors in mining areas struggle for dominance, (Blore, 2017).

Worse still, firms have started extending operations into these regions and this has also adopted

the trend. Due to intricacies that characterize relationships between business supply networks

and war theaters, multinational businesses have challenges ethically and functionally. Such

problems prove that good and thorough legislation is not enough to ensure the actual

responsibility and that the third-party control should be in force. According to Eichstaedt (2011)

Multinational corporations tend to put their business needs before those of the rights of the

people. In fact, some of these corporations even rely on legal ambiguities or areas of limited

disclosure in order to skirt constraints, thereby continuing to fuel and perpetuate exploitative and

violent practices not only in territories infested with war. Therefore, even if new stricter rules are

not introduced, more and more MNCs will carry an important responsibility of preserving the

demand for conflict minerals that inadvertently fosters the militias to capitalize on some unstable

regions.

The efforts of demilitarizing these violent economies are hampered more by the fact that

regional and international efforts to counter the flow of conflict minerals also experience

numerous headaches and sometimes stiff resistance. Although regional organizations, for

instance African Union have developed measures to try and stop the export of minerals that are

smuggled, a challenge that arises is that the capacity to enforce such measures is wanting

(Lemarchand, 2020). Due to criticism from the international community regarding the improper

management of natural resource, some African states have initiated change. These reforms,

however, have not been supported by effective enforceable mechanisms and corruption at the

local and national level (Ndikumana & Boyce, 2018). Moreover, international systems such as

the Kimberley Process, designed to prevent blood diamonds from getting to legal markets have

been challenging to scale for other minerals, leaving a large hole in the regulation of conflict

minerals globally (Smillie, 2010). Especially where central state power is relatively limited and

subnational government structures are dispersed, the challenges of managing violence driven by

resources are shown by problems in addressing conflict minerals at the both the meso and macro-

levels. Due to these challenges, thus the world has recognized the problem but the solutions’

implementation seems to be far from reality. Thus, the stakeholders on the regional and a global

level must combine efforts to design frameworks requiring enforcement.

Arctic Resources- Next Economic Frontier

More and more people are starting to feel that Arctic area is the next economic Eldorado.

This is basically because of the large endowments and reserves of oil and natural gas, and

valuable minerals that it holds. Gautier et al, (2021) opine that the arctic region provides the most

focus in terms of energy development due to an estimated resource potential of about 13% of

global undiscovered oil and approximately 30% of undiscovered natural gas. However, it is

important to note that there are much more problems connected with extraction of these

resources which are logistical and environmental. This is due to the factor that a huge region of

the Arctic continues to be frozen for many of the year. Emmerson and Lahn (2020) demonstrate

that energy firms and the Arctic nations face significant difficulties when trying to develop

resources in this distant and inhospitable location. This effort requires the application of specific

technologies and significant amounts of money. These challenges are gradually being overlooked

by governments and businesses because of the opportunities which the Arctic region provides in

terms of economic gains. These countries as Russia, Norway and Canada actively developing

offshore drilling and mining in the Arctic zone. Arctic retained its significance to the

international energy market to the extent that resource-endowed countries strive to position

themselves for business on still yet unproven energy resources. Which only goes to show that the

Arctic is experiencing a growing significance in this regard.

Over the last few years, Russia in particular has emerged as a powerful player in the

competitive business of resource search and utilization in the Arctic region. Russia has invested

in Arctic infrastructure in an attempt to stay among the key producers of oil and natural gas in

the world. Such investments include icebreaker fleets and drilling platforms to operate in what is

assume to be contingency (Laruelle, 2020). Moreover, there are laws adopted by the Kremlin

providing for the enhancement of Arctics as the strategic area for the country in terms of its

further economic development and as its priority in the endeavor to strengthen Russia’s positions

in the sphere of energy. In the recent past, Russia has upped efforts to ensure that it as a stronger

foothold in the Arctic region. As established by the United Nations Convention on the Law of

the Sea, Russia has taken over vast geographical portions of the continental shelf (Conley &

Melino, 2021). Due to such territorial disputes, relations with other Arctic countries have also

become rather strained especially because global warming has led to the opening up of new

opportunities for extracting natural resources that were earlier not possible because of the ice.

Russia’s behavior on the Arctic resources has been quite assertive showing the country’s

predatory intent on controlling these resources. In its efforts to achieve this goal, Russia

frequently puts economic interest before the environment.

Despite the fact that its policy in the region may be affected by the general foreign policy

agenda of the United States, the country has recently displayed more attention to the resources

available in the Arctic. From the information highlight from Huebert (2019), the United States

government has taken steps towards the formation of its institution in the area through the

provision of the Department of Defence’s Arctic strategy that also entails the development of

resource deposits and security. New actions that were undertaken in the recent years have been

directed to improve America’s powers in the Arctic some of which was proposals to develop the

icebreaker fleet and mending relations with Canada and other partners (Holroyd & Retter, 2021).

This happened even though the United States lags behind Russia in terms of the infrastructure

that is already in the Arctic. On equal thin, US government has been trying to put rules by which

oil and gas can be produced in some regions of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

(ANWR), although meeting a lot of opposition from environmental group and native population

who are afraid of the destructive impact from such move on the region’s ecology. This may well

explain the cautious balancing of economic interests and the need to protect the environment that

defines cooperation of the United States in the Arctic, which in general can be regarded as a

fairly accurate characterization of the administration’s many-faceted approach in the region

where the issues of national security, environmental conservation and the fate of indigenous

peoples are closely intertwined.

It would be incorrect to deem both countries’ battleships of the Arctic since they actively

contribute into the shelf development, being less aggressive in this aspect than reference Russia

and the USA. This is because they have been pushing to find the middle ground between

commerce and ecology. Thus, the Canadian strategy pays special attention to proper

development of the Arctic area as an economically promising region to retrieve mineral and

hydrocarbon resources, as well as respecting indigenous peoples; all that capturing Canada’s

commitment to preserve northern ecosystems (Lackenbauer, 2019). As Offerdal indicated in his

research work, Norwegian government has placed strict environmental regulation on the oil and

gas companies venturing into the exploration of the Barents Sea. These laws are part of an

attempt to promote the sustainable development in Norwegian Arctic regions. Secondly, both

nations are keen participants in programs aimed at coping with climate change. That is why they

have understood that taking the natural resources of the Arctic requires careful regulation to

avoid aggravation in global warming and its consequences to sensitive area of Arctic. The

commitment of Canada and Norway towards environmental protection is evident from their

respective policies; however, by embarking on the development of the Arctic resources tell much

more than face value about the multiple trade-offs that contain the Arctic in terms of economic

development and ecological conservation.

With increase in the number of activities and competition for resources in the Arctic there

is also increased efforts by the international community in the management of the resources in

the Arctic through legal and diplomatic instruments. The continental shelf boundary may be

pushed forward contingent upon the topographical structure beneath the UN Law of the Sea

which established the legal justification to demarcate claims over the Arctic region (Byers,

2020). Since, countries are demanding more space, debate over the continental shelves and

probable ‘resource laden’ areas can be said to trigger war. They have, therefore, shifted up the

probability of probabilities of moving up conflict. As will be explained below, it can be argued

that the aspiration for cooperation and sustainable development has been brought to some degree

through the Arctic Council, which has already mentioned is an international cooperative body of

the eight Arctic states, as well as incorporated Indigenous organizations. Kapyla and Mikkola

(2019) conclude that the Council possesses almost no agency in the enforcement of contractual

obligations, regardless of the nature of these obligations, regarding resource extraction.

Nevertheless, the Council has its shortcomings despite the fact that it has been quite important in

establishing speech and partnership. With no overall International Law framework governing the

exploitation of Arctic resources there are issues not only in terms of the Arctic states’

cooperation of interests, but also the indigenous people and the environment.

Environmental concerns are highly sensitive in the Arctic region due to the prevalence of

easily degradable ecosystems caused primarily by resource extraction. Polar bears, walrus, and

the artic fox species found in this region; are under a serious threat due to climate change and

industrial endeavor (Post et al., 2019). Oil spills are particularly a calamitous threat to the

biogeographical area of the Arctic region; due to difficult terrain and severe climatic conditions,

the effort and cost of countering the oil spills is an enormous challenge (Carmack et al., 2021).

The thawing of permafrost presents challenges since its negative impact to infrastructure and

may contribute to natural disasters. Civilized people have very little appreciation of the risks

which hunters and fishers who are members of indigenous Third World communities face

because of unbridled development and destruction in the Arctic region essential to their means of

livelihood and cultural practice. These types of groups have raised concerns over the social and

environmental impacts of resource extraction and have particularly sought higher level of

protection of their ancestral territories. Hence there is a difficulty of resource exploitation due to

the tremendous potential of the Arctic for this kind of activity while the environmental

repercussions that come with it raise ethical and realistic questions on the viability of such

steams in the vulnerable Arctic environment.

A Look at the Economic Impacts of Deep-Sea Mining

Deep-sea mining is a potential but hotly debated frontier in the extraction of natural

resources which is as a frontier activity as they have economic prospects and potential

environmental risks at the same time. In their study conducted in 2020, Hein and colleagues

pointed out that the seabed contains valuable resources that can be exploited to advance the

sustainable technology. This is because the global consumption of special metals that are used in

the electronics industry and renewable energy markets is increasing. If it is cobalt, nickel,

manganese ores, or rare earth elements, they are rich in polymetallic nodules and hydrothermal

vents, resources located several hundreds of meters deep in the ocean (Boschen, Simboura, &

Stratigaki, 2019). These minerals are required in batteries applied in electric cars, wind power

systems among other applications. These sources contain a much greater level of yet unrealized

potential because the ideas are being discussed as a possibility for expanding the mineral supply

from sources other than land, the majority of which are situated in politically volatile areas.

Since the economic potential derived from deep-sea mining is so huge, Seabed mineral deposits

are gradually perceived as an ideal alternative to meet the demands of a new era green economy.

This is because the access to the land base resources is reducing as explained by the high GLE 2

index.

Technologies for deep sea mine which is still missing is very rapidly and efficiently

evolving. This is being done with the intention of the possibilities and a particular condition that

can be found at the bottom of the sea. Because mining at depths up to 4,000 meters cannot be

done with normal mining equipment, underwater marine autonomous vehicles (AUVs) and

remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) have been created. Likewise, there are corporate players such

as DeepGreen and Lockheed Martin that used their venture capital in robotic procurement and

other technologies that can train with the pressure, temperature, and fluctuating vision that are

encountered at these subterranean extents (Gjerde et al., 2016). Because of such technologies, it

is not impossible to imagine that large scale deep sea mining exists in the fairly near future. This

would state that there is potential for many corporate interests to capture large amounts of

beneficial rents if only they will lead development of this new industry. But because of the high

costs and specifications which define operation in the deep sea, only the world’s most

technologically sophisticated firms and states will be able to succeed. This ultimately results in

what is believed to be a unique view of the sector competition environment map.

While otherwise being an extremely lucrative business proposition, deep-sea mining has

attracted a considerable level of concern with regards to the impact which it has on the

ecosystem that it operates in. It is notable that researchers and conservationists see the potential

risks and could harm marine life environments. It is one of the most unmapped locations and, at

the same time, the most biologically diverse place on our planet with numerous endemic

organisms that have adapted to the conditions which are unprecedented in other locations (Van

Dover et al., 2018). Deep ocean is one of the habitats that support the greatest level of

diversification. The impacts related to disturbance like the mining of polymetallic nodules,

associated disturbance of hydrothermal vents may lead to complete destruction of habitats, loss

of operational biodiversity, alterations in geochemical cycles (Levin et al., 2020). If such mining

activities lead to production of plumes, these plumes could spread fine sediments over vast

distances and thus smother benthic animals as well as inhibit feeding systems that support deep

sea and pelagic life forms. No one knows all the ecological consequences that come with deep

sea mining and many people believe that deep sea mining might be destructive to the deep sea

ecosystem if people have no adequate understanding of the deep sea ecosystem. There is no

question that more tender methods are needed in order to preserve such animadvert sensitive

environments; still, how to reach a highly desirable middle ground between this degree of

circumspection on one side and the equally laudable attempt to receive the maximum possible

return on the other side is a huge issue.

As global and national ever struggling to regulate this new sector the laws that regulate

deep-sea mining are multiple and with each passing day becoming more so. As stated by Lodge

(2017), the ISA who was established under the UNCLOS is directly responsible for handling the

opportunities of the mineral rich area which comprises the seabed as well as the seafloor beyond

the jurisdiction of sovereign states. Alongside, the awarding of exploration permits to businesses

and nations interested in deep-sea mining, the ISA is in the process of developing Industry

Standards to ensure mining is conducted in a sustainable manner (Jaeckel et al., 2019). On the

other hand, there are many who opine that the existing ISA regulation does not adequately

protect deep-sea environment as it is claimed. Critics in the ecological non-governmental

organizations opine that its structure does not consider the environmental aspect but rather the

industrial aspect. Additionally, China, Japan and South Korea, for instance, are countries that

have advanced mining technology, and these have started showing their intention in regards to

deep sea resources. This brings question as to what is right justice and right entitlement to profit

that can be accrued from these resources. Concerning the efficiency of the deeper mining and its

sustainability, the applicability of using international solutions in obtaining the combination of

an optimal number of the economic and environmental factors will play the decisive role. It can

be always presumed that regulations will on go on changing.

Apart from the utilization of the metal that constitutes the major component of sea-bed-

ores, deep sea mining has profound economic and geopolitical consequences. Such implications

may require an effect on international business or require changes that can affect the whole

context of intergovernmental relationship and international policies towards environment. They

are rather well positioned to handle this sector that will put them into a commanding position

over the conduits of minerals in the global market (Levin & Le Bris, 2019). This structure

indicates that some of the countries that have relatively better technical skills in this area, such as

USA, Japan and China occupy a relatively better position in this field. The availability of the

mineral resources finds in the area of the high seas may change the global economy in a certain

way. This is because, the governments and businesses will end up accessing minerals that are

vital for the production of new technologies. For instance, China has supplied most of the

demand for rare earth elements forcing other countries to seek new sources hence they turn to

deep sea mining (Haugan, 2021). This rivalry may promote potential conflicts between states,

which compete in becoming leaders in the management of such resources, at the same time

encouraging the emergence of innovative complexes and cooperation. Consequently, non-

interference, which will be an important component of International Environmental Law, will

require mutual cooperation and understanding of legislation as deep sea mining becomes

progressively feasible. Equally important and deserving further rigorous research are social and

ethical implications which may ensue from deep-sea mining more so in light of the fact that this

business is starting to move into areas beyond national jurisdictions. If deep-sea resources have

the potential of financially enriching the economy, there are many questions that have not yet

been asked about who will benefit from these natural resources, and who will bear the

responsibility of the damage on the deep sea resources. Mengerink et al., (2019) indicate that

indigenous and coastal people for example may suffer indirect impacts in case marine systems

are altered by deep-see mining and discarded as Gearry (2018) notes these mining impacts affect

social, economic and political systems of indigenous and coastal people. Further, where private

businesses and governments with the technological skills secure rights to deep-sea resources,

there is likely to be an increased inequality outcome. And this is because the income generated

from such activities may not get to the people most affected by these mining undertakings. The

principle of common heritage of mankind means to the United States Convention on Law of the

Sea that the benefits of the Area’s resources must be shared among all the state parties. It is still

challenging to apply this principle (Kim, 2020). Issues of ethical concern with regard to fairness,

accessibility, and distribution of the resource show increasing policy formulation to ensure that

resources are fairly and inclusively shared.

Strategic Port Construction for a Maritime Nation

Under these conditions, the strategic ports are seen as an element of the new geometry of

relations at the international level and of the new spatial organization of the world economy. This

is so especially to weak states that are wishing to obtain marine commerce for their growth;

which will also enable them to compete in the international politics. The use of the ports,

therefore, enables countries with the ability to carry out international trades, acquire crucial

resources all in one shot while at the same time signaling naval strength through the ports as the

doorways to world markets. To this effect, Rodrigue et al. (2017) posited that indeed, strategic

ports allow governments who formally lack resourcefulness the best chance to turn geographical

weaknesses into strengths and vice versa hence enabling those that lack resourcefulness turn

these geographical weaknesses into strengths and end up create what they call Strategic Ports for

regional and global exchange of commodities in their regions. Cooperation may also be

enhanced through ensuring the security of certain seaways, thereby utilizing a strategic control,

dominating maritime choke points, unhinging international commercial passages and economic

interactions with adjacent nations. The expansion of ports is not only beneficial in the

improvement of the transportation of products, but it also improves the rankings of the country in

the global market. The problems of port strategic development in relation to its role in the

balance of international trade are emerging to the foreground, particularly as the pace of the

world’s marine connectivity is steadily intensifying. This is because there is a shift to

performance and reliability of supply chains as announced in this article.

Enhancing an embedded connectedness of worldwide markets through development of

efficient and well-situated ports may enhance the influence capacity of a given nation

significantly. Since they enable the flow of goods through areas, ports located at main channels

of transport or at the heart of trading zones may place a country at the center of supply chain

interfaces. For instance, the ports that are located at strategic shipping lanes. For instance, the

construction of Suez Canal in Egypt has made the country one foreign policy hub of commerce

of the world today. This canal is natural seawater and joins the Mediterranean Sea to the Red

Sea, thus being a bypass for most routes between Europe and Asia (Henderson & Venables,

2020). Like those mentioned above, ports in Singapore and Hong Kong are now virtually

inseparable from the Southeast Asian economy and the global economic system. Not only these

ports used for anchoring the regional trade, however, they are also bear a huge importance of

transshipment terminals, which have the responsibility of handling a number of commodities that

are in transit between different parts of the global market. That is where the positioning of a port

as the commercial hub may encourage foreign investor to invest in the country, creates

employment opportunities hence economic development is a pillar of national development. This

is particularly so especially if the country is a less developed country or is devoid of the requite

resources.

Apart from the economic returns, optimum ports can help in offering geopolitical aspects

especially if the area of location of these ports plays a major geopolitical significance. A lot of a

nation’s strategic power can be added if it controls several strategic Strait, that are actually

narrow channels through which pass large quantity of intercontinental trade. A case in point is

the Malacca canal, which is actually a narrow stretch of water that joins the Pacific and the

Indian realms. The need for global products that is transported through this waterway is nearly a

quarter of the total sales recorded in the world market (Schott, 2019). The nations who have such

access to or control of these chokepoints hold leverage over globalization’s lifeblood for any

reason, including commerce and warfare. The creation of ports at these strategic locations gives

the comparatively poorly funded governments a unique opportunity to assert dominance in the

marine trade and security of the area. It means that the fact that many ports have military and

naval facilities inside their territorial waters may even enhance the capability of the nation to

express its power over the region thus improving the geopolitical leverage of the nation.

Besides increasing the nations’ navy and security, these vital ports subsequent expansion

would help the escalation of the marine force. Capabilities and readiness of naval forces which

countries require for control of sea lines of communications for the purpose of resource supply,

protection of assets or defense Naval forces are in this case essential assets for this naval force.

To a higher level mayer for support in the growth of naval power an advanced port. The rationale

behind this is because it allows construction complex military facilities, deployment of ships and

support of naval property. For instance, enormous sunk costs in new South China Sea ports

especially in the Spratly Islands gives China sovereignty over the disputed area and infuse its

neighbors with much fear (Kaplan 2019). By deploying military equipment on these structures

especially through construction of ports and placing military equipment on man-made features,

China has aimed at boosting its military influence in a region that holds central position to

commerce and ocean security. The actions have provided China with a great starting point in this

area. The navigation processes with naval infrastructure are tightly connected with the

significantly greater defense and the potential to influence the security conditions of a particular

region. This is quite useful especially to the government which seeks to have enhanced political

leverage but which has nearly no capital.

It has also changed the characteristic of strategic port development that had improved

operation and communication and national capability of managing International business. The

above change has been made possible by incorporation of the current technological advancement

in the construction of ports. Reflecting the growing multifaceted nature of contemporary ports

which has quickly turned into automation and digitalization as activities that are useful in

improving the flow rate of goods, increasing throughput and decreasing expenditures. This is

especially cases with places that are one of the largest such as Rotterdam which has integrated

high tech solutions like smart cranes, block chain logistics and artificial intelligence in managing

the traffic of ships (Niemann & Andresen, 2018). Such enhancements not only enhance the port

operations but also enable a nation to connect it to the digital global village without much effort.

The above technical advancement must be adopted by the RPCs since they need to break the

cyclical domination by accessing the international markets. This will help these nations build

ports which are suitable for handling such literally tones of goods. It is because it enhances the

ability to manage supply chain in real-time manner, improves cargo throughput and augments the

controllability of marine trade logistics networks against disruptions that the digitization of port

operations extends the strategic importance of these actions.

Strategic ports are not only a chance for the states with the scarcity of resources to

improve their cooperation with world and regional counterparts but also a tool to develop and

strengthen this cooperation. Since the benefits are often realized after related investments in ports

most times outflows involve transactions with the international hat, extra organizations and other

governments. These partnerships are expecting business and expecting money and possibility

knowledge resources. For instance, big-ticket items that China has agreed to invest in such as the

development of the port of Gwadar in Pakistan under the framework of the China-Pakistan

Economic Corrido (CPEC), port development may emerge as a central feature of the China-

Pakistan bilateral relations (Hussain 2021). These infrastructure projects can by resource scarce

governments for example used to instill diplomacy and assure long term business relations. This

is done by linking development of the ports with the outside investments expected in Nigeria.

These are the alliances that boost the geopolitical status of the country and as result makes nation

a preferred area for inter alia the commercial activity and investments.

Establishing strategic ports may also assist with the other broader goals of regional and global

development together with such economic military, and diplomatic benefits associated with the

construction of those constructions. Consequently it is imperative that the ports are efficient to

improve supply chain performance in an effort to meet the global challenge. This is because

international trade and sea traffic are increasing. Today when there is growing tendencies

towards globalization and liberalization of trade where free movement of goods is critical

towards the growth of, and stability of the economy this is of paramount importance. While it

may be difficult for the resource poor country to be part of regional and global commodity

circulation system there is opportunity to upgrade their economy status given they have the

capacity to develop big ports capable of handling very large amounts of goods. In addition, the

ports assist in the reorganization of commodities across different regions, and assist in the

integration of the overall global economy (Rodrigue et al., 2017). This is because ports are

transshipment centers. In this regard they recognized the possibility of the strategic development

of ports as a way to unlock value and unlock limited resource countries into the global system as

an inevitable and crucial player in the global supply chain.

Passage for the Knowledge Economy from Resource Dominance

With the global standard shifting to sustainable diversified growth model developing

countries which are scarce in resources are now embracing value based businesses. From

conventional extractive economy to knowledge-based economy, information technology,

biotechnology, finance and education, this is a significant deviation from the previous strategies

of exploitative economy. Knowledge based economies are thus defined by the importance given

to creation, transfer and application of knowledge as the main tool to build competitiveness,

innovation and growth. Gassmann et al. (2018) stated that countries without ample resources can

choose to align with this shift, as it offers them the opportunity to leapfrog traditional processes

of industrialization, closely linked with long term successive economic stability. The integrating

characteristic of the knowledge economy is high levels of investment in research and

development (R & D), innovation, human capital and technical factors. These are all issues that

bear the capacity to push the economic growth forward without necessarily the exploitation of

natural resources.

Education, on enhancing human resource, were the foundations on which an effective

knowledge-based economy rested. Developing countries have today the chance to make

investment in educational systems that will stress on entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial digital

literacy and scientific abilities in STEM field. Brynjolfsson and McAfee (2017) note that relying

on a highly trained workforce, governments may create domestic sectors that rely on rather than

physical capital stock, other resources. This enables countries to allure international investors,

boost on innovation and development of the domestic Industries by their own accord. For

example, Singapore has made itself into a global hub of technology and invention but for this

country, no natural resources are available whatsoever. This has been made possible through the

input given to education and induction of knowledge based economy. Singapore has a skilled

population and transformed itself into a powerhouse of several sectors, with focus sectors like

bio-tech, IT and banking sectors (Chia & Lee, 2019). This has been done through targeted capital

expenditure to university education, research entities, and public private partnership (Chia &

Lee, 2019). It has been able to augur economic development and create market competitiveness

for the nation credited to the information creation and utilization capacity of the country.

In addition to deploying education in the promotion of knowledge based economy,

technological infrastructure is a critical factor in this process. The economically less developed

countries can improve their economic potential by building reliable capabilities to support such

technologies as data storage, mobile networks, and high-speed Internet communication.

According to Jones (2021), it becomes possible to create different types of businesses, to have an

opportunity to develop the existing business, and to create new solutions which can handle

different problems, both local, and global. While Rwanda possesses scarce natural resources,

technology has been received as an economic enabler particularly in the agricultural, health and

education pillars. The government of the nation has been committed to providing the relevant

support especially in areas of constructing information communication technology infrastructure

in the country in support of programs like Smart Rwanda. This program caters for the use of

technology in a number of sectors with an aim of enhancing its efficiency and efficiency in

service delivery (Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2019). The Rwandan government through embracing

information communication technologies has come a long way in the development of a post-

resources based economy.

The fourth area of operation in the knowledge economy is to foster an atmosphere that

will facilitate entrepreneurial initiatives and creativity. Less developed nations can help build an

environment that supports formation of new entrepreneurial firms, new firms or new businesses

that are being powered by technology. This means that if nations are willing to back such

ventures through supplying capital, legal protection and contacts then innovation, employment

and dependency on raw materials could be reduced. In this particular regard, Israel becomes

rather illustrative. Israel has turnovers primarily in the high-tech sectors even though the nation

lacks the richness of natural products. This is true today especially in technology consist of

cybersecurity, Artificial Intelligence and medical technology. Government support in satisfying

its requirement of incentives, cooperation between academia, the business world, and military,

research and development industry of Israel and its powerful culture of innovation. It is for this

reason that the nation has had an era of success in establishing the knowledge-based economy as

indicated by Klein and Jaffe (2018) when identifying the importance of creating an environment

that supports innovation to make it easy to transform ideas into commodities.

The shift to the knowledge economy requires organization, mobilization and exchange of

information at the international levels. Actually, this means that partners from industrialized

economies therefore research institutes and MNEs may form a favorable solution for resource

poor countries since they provide them with experience, technological and financial resource.

Such opportunities might assist to enhance a country’s capacity to operate on the global level as

well as contribute to the stimulation of inventions’ development and the enlargement of market

access. For instance, India has positioned it to be among world leaders in software production

and information technology hours through cooperation that is evident between India and MNEs

operating in the field of information technology. According to Arora et al., (2018), through the

new employment in the knowledge economy, India has emerged as one of the global largest

exporter as well as service providers in information technology. This was accomplished through

barter of knowledge and development of IT parks together with business incubation centers. As

part of these relations holds a function of offering the so called ‘resource poor’ countries the

necessary resources and links they need in order to implement a wide ranging mandate of export

diversification from the commodities.

Notwithstanding the fact that potentials related to knowledge economies are opening up,

to accomplish this there are various barriers that have to be surmounted. The creation of a

sustainable knowledge economy requires raising amounts of physical, human, and financial

capital as well as intangible capital for developing nations which lacks these resources. For more

details, it is noteworthy that, the transformation of a growth trajectory of a competitive

Knowledge economy may involve complex amendments in business, IP & innovation Laws and

regulations. Following the lines of Julius (1997) success of knowledge economies is an affection

that cannot be guaranteed and is a function of all factors synchronizing to the right. These factors

include; government policies in the country, participation of individuals’ private business sector,

and attitude or culture adopted by the people towards innovation and venture. Conversely,

acquiring a knowledge based economy implies a long term approach toward the construction of

coherent and sustainable growth strategy; and less vulnerability to fluctuations in the world’s

prices of goods. This is more so where the country has shortages of natural resources, or where it

has plenty of the wrong sort.

International Education Partnerships- Constructing World-Wide Influence

International education relationships are now an important part of soft power given

today’s increasingly interconnected world. These partnerships assist the decentralized states that

may lacking sufficient revenue collection to attain a worldwide foothold and develop sustainable

diplomatic and economic partnerships and connections. In this way, the nations can employ the

educational systems as tools of invention, cultural sharing and intelligence cooperation which in

consequence leads to improved status of nations in the worldwide perspective. Since education is

a powerful and universal tool for social change and mobility, it plays a huge role in promoting

international cooperation, eliminating cultural barriers to building sustainable relationships that

are not limited to economic ones (Altbach & Knight, 2018). Even as the internationalization of

education promises peer cooperation and membership in such may provide resource-starved

nations with access to key information, innovation technologies, as well as global networks for

sustainable development beyond natural commodities.

Another advantage which international education partners receive is the promotion of

information sharing. Thus, it is easier for countries possessing scarce funds to obtain professional

knowledge, as well as the latest research data, which may be easily adapted to the conditions of

the countries under consideration. In fact, these countries are in a position to have a similar

fronted by the formation of partnerships to developing strong scientific, technical and Education

system where these partnerships with the leading universities, research institutes and think tanks

of the worldwide nations have the abilities to provoke scientific and the quality of domestic

education in their countries by inviting scientists and lectures from other countries, exchange

with students, etc. The cooperation in higher education learning foreign has been a key element

in enabling transforming the south Korean economy into a technological oriented. Korea south

has a complex innovation system that has nurtured its progress in sectors such as electronics,

robot and biotechnology among others (Kim & Lee, 2019). It has been developed in cooperation

with the universities and research institutes all over the world (Kim & Lee, 2019). It means that

they may get some benefits of education exchanges to improve local research and development

skills so as to help the emergence of new resources for the diversification of the economic base

in the longer run.

The improvement of mutual understanding between countries is another of the ways that

the international education links which we are discussing help to make the cultural diplomacy a

whole lot easier to achieve. It means that such collaborations create cross-cultural interactions

between people and create opportunities for the cooperation in fields, which are not related to

technology, for instance, arts, political sciences, etc. Using academic relationships together with

cultural diplomacy can help to fine tune a nation’s perception in the eyes of other nations and to

cultivate long-term productive cooperation based on similar goals and ideologies. For instance,

the United States of America has enhancing its diplomacy foreign nations of the world by using

the broad network of the educational exchange programs like the Fulbright program. Through

doing so, the United States apart from founding its principles has succeeded in establishing

positive sentiments and soft power which has empowered it to expand its authority globally

(Kuh, 2018). It is also very probable for the states with less amounts of money to pursue the

similar tactics in order to foster the cultural and diplomatic relations. Some of the methods of

internationalization of higher education at Kazakh contingency include; importing students in

other countries, hosting scholars from other countries, and undertaking collaborative research

that promotes togetherness and fellow feeling.

According to Cummings and Pankhurst (2020), international corporate agreements do not

only increase the subjects’ mobility, but also contribute to the development of human capital.

When students attend the other nations’ higher education institutions, the nations will able to

boast of skilled labor force that is able to propel necessary innovation and actual economic

improvements and growth through the offering of scholarships to foreign students. From those

various international education programs students are able to acquire new knowledge, learn new

cultures and make contacts, which are important in the ever increasing global economy. For

example, India, China, and Brazil have gained enormously from students who study in colleges

in the western world where they gain better education in science technology and business. Those

students who move back to the origin countries of their nationality become input to the force

multiplier of technocrats and thus contribute heavily to the technical and economic development

of their countries. For this reason, education yields a return on investment which is two how it

bolsters local competence, and secondly how it bolsters foreign relations through alumni

linkages (Cummings & Pankhurst, 2020).

According to Jones (2022), the lack of resources may help developing nations upgrade

the education sector, strengthen its home research base, and foster economic development by

ensuring international students willing to study in the country. The monies thus obtained from

charging tuition fees, accommodation and other living costs, and the circulation within the

economy of the host country, does count for something by international students. An example is

Malaysia which after investing heavily in enhancing the quality of the Country’s higher learning

institutions is now leasing accommodation to thousands of foreign students from many

Countries. He was able to emphasize that these students also contribute to the diversification of

the local economy apart from being part of raising the quality of the institutions of learning and

therefore making the institutions more competitive in the global market. In order to transform

their education systems into key contributing machinery to the growth of their economies and

their global image, the resource deficit nations may need to alter the delivery systems of

education by employing the act of exchange.

References

Aidoo, R. (2021). China's Belt and Road Initiative: Implications for Africa’s resource control

and economic dependency. African Development Review, 33(4), 324-340.

Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2018). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations

and realities. International Higher Education, 51, 1–3.

Arora, A., Gambardella, A., & Gann, D. M. (2018). Creating value through innovation: A

knowledge-based approach to global competitiveness. Harvard Business Review Press.

Autesserre, S. (2019). The Trouble with the Congo: Local Violence and the Failure of

International Peacebuilding. Cambridge University Press.

Bashwira, M. R., Cuvelier, J., Hilhorst, D., & van der Haar, G. (2021). Women and conflict

minerals in eastern Congo: From exclusion to inclusion. The Extractive Industries and

Society, 8(3), 1002-1010.

Bertelsmann Stiftung. (2019). Smart Rwanda: How ICT is transforming the Rwandan economy.

Bertelsmann Stiftung.

Blore, S. (2017). Conflict minerals and the role of multinational corporations: Ethical supply

chain management in the electronics industry. In J. G. Frynas & K. Mellahi (Eds.),

Global Corporate Social Responsibility (pp. 219-238). Oxford University Press.

Boschen, R. E., Rowden, A. A., Clark, M. R., & Gardner, J. P. A. (2019). Mining of deep-sea

seafloor massive sulfides: A review of the deposits, their benthic communities, impacts

from mining, regulatory frameworks and management strategies. Ocean & Coastal

Management, 84, 54–67.

Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2017). The second machine age: Work, progress, and

prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. W.W. Norton & Company.

Byers, M. (2020). International Law and the Arctic. Cambridge University Press.

Carmack, E., Polyakov, I., & Wassmann, P. (2021). Climate change and the Arctic:

Environmental impacts and future prospects. Arctic Science Review, 9(3), 183-198.

Cheong, C. (2021). Economic strategies in Singapore: A study on growth without resources.

Asian Economic Journal, 25(3), 120-134.

Chia, Y. M., & Lee, H. L. (2019). The role of human capital and innovation in Singapore’s

knowledge economy. Singapore Economic Review, 64(3), 533–552.

Choi, J. (2021). Education and industrialization in South Korea: Lessons for developing nations.

Journal of Development Economics, 38(2), 208-219.

Conley, H., & Melino, M. (2021). Arctic Economics in the 21st Century: A Strategic Overview.

Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Cummings, W. K., & Pankhurst, R. J. (2020). International student mobility and global

economic development. International Journal of Educational Development, 74, 87–98.

Cuvelier, J., Vlassenroot, K., & Olin, N. (2021). Politics of Peace in the Democratic Republic of

the Congo: War and Resource Exploitation. Polity Press.

Cuyvers, L., Berry, W., Gjerde, K., Thiele, T., & Wilhem, C. (2018). Deep Seabed Mining: A

Rising Environmental Challenge. IUCN.

Eichstaedt, P. (2011). Consuming the Congo: War and Conflict Minerals in the World's

Deadliest Place. Lawrence Hill Books.

Elasha, B. O. (2020). Water conflicts in the Nile Basin: The impact of dam projects on regional

stability. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 36(2), 132-148.

Emmerson, C., & Lahn, G. (2019). Arctic Opening: Insecurity and Opportunity. Lloyd’s.

Gassmann, O., Frankenberger, K., & Csik, M. (2018). The innovation game: Strategic

innovation, creativity, and entrepreneurship. Springer.

Gautier, D. L., et al. (2021). Arctic oil and gas reserves: Implications for the energy landscape.

Journal of Energy Exploration, 56(4), 234-251.

Gettleman, J. (2016). How the mineral trade fuels conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Journal of Conflict Resolution, 60(2), 305-329.

Gjerde, K. M., Currie, D., Wowk, K., & Sack, K. (2016). An update on the status of the

negotiations regarding a new agreement for the conservation and sustainable use of

marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Marine Policy, 74, 231–238.

Graham, C. (2022). Resource dependency and strategic partnerships in the global economy: The

case of the Belt and Road Initiative. Journal of International Economics, 45(1), 78-96.

Haugan, P. (2021). The role of marine minerals in the transition to a sustainable economy.

Marine Policy Journal, 128, 101-115.

Hein, J. R., Mizell, K., Koschinsky, A., & Conrad, T. A. (2020). Deep-ocean mineral deposits as

a source of critical metals for high- and green-technology applications: Comparison with

land-based resources. Geological Society of America, 5(3), 181–193.

Henderson, D. J., & Venables, A. J. (2020). The geography of global trade and the implications

of economic integration. Geography Journal, 184(1), 26–42.

Holroyd, C., & Retter, M. (2021). US Arctic strategy: Security and resource management.

Global Policy, 12(2), 168-179.

Huebert, R. (2019). Canada and the Changing Arctic: Sovereignty, Security, and Stewardship.

Dundurn.

Hussain, S. (2021). The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and its impact on regional

geopolitics. Journal of South Asian Politics, 13(2), 113–130.

Jaeckel, A., Gjerde, K. M., & Ardron, J. A. (2019). Conserving the common heritage of

humankind: Options for the deep-seabed mining regime. Marine Policy, 78, 80–89.

Johnson, T., & Richards, S. (2019). The geopolitics of water scarcity: East Africa and the Nile

conflict. Global Environmental Politics, 19(3), 116-132.

Jones, A. (2020). Singapore’s model of development in the global economy. International

Business Review, 41(1), 45-67.

Kaplan, R. D. (2019). The South China Sea: The Struggle for Power in Asia. Random House.

Käpylä, J., & Mikkola, H. (2019). Geopolitics of the Arctic: Competing visions and strategies.

International Studies Review, 21(1), 1-22.

Kim, H., & Lee, D. (2020). The economic transformation of South Korea: Industrial policies and

export-led growth. Global Economic Perspectives, 47(4), 312-328.

Kim, M. H., & Lee, S. Y. (2019). Higher education and innovation in South Korea: Policies,

achievements, and challenges. Asia Pacific Education Review, 20(2), 179–193.

Kim, R. E. (2020). Is a new treaty for conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in

the high seas possible? An exploration of the EU’s proposal for an international ocean

governance framework. Environmental Science & Policy, 102, 45-54.

Klein, G. K., & Jaffe, P. D. (2018). Israel's innovation economy: Entrepreneurship, technology,

and growth. World Scientific Publishing.

Kuh, G. D. (2018). The importance of educational exchange in U.S. foreign policy. International

Journal of Education Policy, 44(1), 45–58.

Lackenbauer, P. W. (2019). Arctic Sovereignty and Security in an Era of Climate Change.

University of Manitoba Press.

Laruelle, M. (2020). Russia’s Arctic strategy: Geopolitical ambitions and resource development.

Post-Soviet Affairs, 36(4), 395-411.

Lee, S., & Chang, K. (2020). Energy security and import dependency in resource-poor countries:

Japan and South Korea in perspective. Asian Journal of International Relations, 24(5),

203-218.

Lemarchand, R. (2020). The Dynamics of Violence in Central Africa. University of

Pennsylvania Press.

Levin, L. A., Le Bris, N., & Smith, C. R. (2019). Deep-sea mining and the marine environment:

Future challenges for biodiversity research and ocean governance. Oceanography, 32(3),

16-25.

Lodge, M. W. (2017). The role of the International Seabed Authority in deep seabed mining

beyond national jurisdiction: Past, present and future. The International Journal of

Marine and Coastal Law, 32(4), 744-775.

Meier, T. (2021). Switzerland's role in global diplomacy: A study of soft power without

resources. Journal of International Relations, 33(5), 142-160.

Müller, A. (2021). Oil diplomacy and resource control: How energy exporters shape global

relations. Global Affairs, 37(1), 145-162.

Müller, P. (2020). Financial stability and innovation in resource-scarce Switzerland. European

Economic Review, 39(6), 377-392.

Ndikumana, L., & Boyce, J. K. (2018). Africa’s Odious Debts: How Foreign Loans and Capital

Flight Bled a Continent. Zed Books.

Nest, M. (2011). Coltan. Polity Press.

Niemann, W., & Andresen, M. (2018). Technological innovation and automation in container

ports: A review of trends and perspectives. Transport Policy, 62, 4–13.

Offerdal, K. (2020). Environmental sustainability in Norway’s Arctic policy. Nordic

Environmental Journal, 41(3), 287-309.

Okazaki, H. (2022). Japan's innovation-driven growth: Post-war economic recovery and

technological advancement. Japan Economic Journal, 53(1), 78-94.

Park, D., & Lim, H. (2021). The semiconductor supply chain and resource vulnerability in East

Asia. Asian Business Review, 52(3), 201-217.

Park, S. (2019). The Korean Wave as a soft power strategy. Cultural Diplomacy Journal, 12(3),

101-115.

Post, E., Bhatt, U. S., & Bitz, C. M. (2019). The impacts of climate change on Arctic

biodiversity. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 44, 47-72.

Rodrigue, J. P., Comtois, C., & Slack, B. (2017). The Geography of Transport Systems (5th ed.).

Routledge.

Saito, K. (2019). Japan's education system and technological innovation. Educational Research

Review, 27(2), 97-116.

Schmidt, R. (2019). Pharmaceutical and biotech advancements in Switzerland: A case of

resourceful innovation. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 15(4), 239-254.

Schott, D. (2019). The geopolitical significance of the Strait of Malacca. Asian Maritime Affairs,

33(4), 17-30.

Seay, L. (2015). The Logic of Humanitarian Relief and the Politics of Stability in Eastern Congo.

International Crisis Group.

Smillie, I. (2010). Blood on the Stone: Greed, Corruption, and War in the Global Diamond

Trade. Anthem Press.

Stearns, J. K. (2020). Dancing in the Glory of Monsters: The Collapse of the Congo and the

Great War of Africa. PublicAffairs.

Tan, L. (2019). Skilled labor development in Singapore's innovation-driven economy. Asian

Labour Journal, 10(3), 98-111.

Yoshida, T. (2021). Technological leadership and economic power: Japan’s model of influence

without resources. Asian Economic Studies, 31(7), 302-322.

ASSESSMENT OF HOW RESOURCE-POOR NATIONS ACHIEVE GLOBAL INFLUENCE ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS BEYOND MINERALS

Students also viewed