Skip to main content
  • News
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Search

Natural Resource Governance Institute

  • Topics
    Beneficial ownership
    Economic diversification
    Mandatory payment disclosure
    Revenue sharing
    Civic space
    Energy transition
    Measurement of environmental and social impacts
    Sovereign wealth funds
    Commodity prices
    Gender
    Measurement of governance
    State-owned enterprises
    Contract transparency and monitoring
    Global initiatives
    Open data
    Subnational governance
    Coronavirus
    Legislation and regulation
    Revenue management
    Tax policy and revenue collection
    Corruption
    Licensing and negotiation
  • Approach
    • Stakeholders
      • Civil society actors
      • Government officials
      • Journalists and media
      • Parliaments and political parties
      • Private sector
    • Natural Resource Charter
    • Regional knowledge hubs
  • Countries
    NRGI Priority Countries
    Colombia
    Guinea
    Nigeria
    Tanzania
    Dem. Rep. of Congo
    Mexico
    Peru
    Tunisia
    Ghana
    Mongolia
    Senegal
    Uganda
    OTHER COUNTRIES
  • Learning
    • Training
      • Residential training courses
        • Executive
        • Anglophone Africa
        • Francophone Africa
        • Asia-Pacific
        • Eurasia
        • Latin America
        • Middle East and North Africa
      • Online training courses
        • Advanced
        • Negotiating Contracts
        • Massive open online course (MOOC)
        • Interactive course: Petronia
      • Trainers' modules
        • (empty)
    • Primers
    • Glossary
  • Analysis & Tools
    • Publications
    • Tools
    • Economic models
  • About Us
    • What we do
      • 2020-2025 Strategy
      • Country prioritization
    • NRGI impact
    • Board of Directors
    • Emeritus Board Members
    • Advisory Council
    • Leadership team
    • Experts and staff
    • Careers and opportunities
    • Grant-making
    • Financials
    • Privacy policy
    • Contact us
  • News
  • Events
  • Blog

You are here

  1. Home
  2. Blog

Three Proposals for Mineral-Dependent Countries During the Coronavirus Pandemic

1 May 2020
Author
Andrew Bauer
Topics
CoronavirusCommodity pricesRevenue managementTax policy and revenue collectionMeasurement of environmental and social impacts
Countries
AustraliaBoliviaBotswanaBurkina FasoChileDem. Rep. of CongoGhanaGuineaKyrgyz RepublicMongoliaMozambiqueNigerPapua New GuineaPeruSierra LeoneSouth AfricaTanzaniaZambia
Stakeholders
Civil society actorsGovernment officialsJournalists and mediaParliaments and political partiesPrivate sector
Precepts
P4 P7 P8 P12 What are Natural Resource Charter precepts?
Social Sharing

Coronavirus containment measures have hit economies hard—and with them, government revenues. Most natural resource-dependent countries are experiencing a double shock as their main source of foreign currency has crashed along with fiscal revenues. The situation is most severe in oil-dependent countries; oil prices have declined by more than 60 percent on average since the start of the year, and occasionally dropped below $0 a barrel. Mineral-dependent countries have been affected too, but in more surprising ways.

Gold and uranium prices have climbed, driven by a combination of safe-haven buying and production cuts. As one senior mining official from a gold-producing country said on a webinar recently, “[The companies] are making money!” Governments dependent on these minerals, such as in Burkina Faso, Guyana, Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Niger and Suriname, will be able to offset some of the revenue lost in other sectors through increased mining receipts. How much of a buffer gold or uranium revenues will provide depends largely on these countries’ fiscal terms and how well they negotiated their mining contracts to integrate a progressive tax regime to take advantage of more profitable periods.

However, prices of the other most widely traded minerals have collapsed by 8 to 18 percent since the start of the year. While there was a slight recovery in April, in general prices remain low by historical standards but unpredictable.

Selected mineral price changes since coronavirus outbreak (spot markets as of late April)

Sources: London Metals Exchange; Ziminsky Global Rough Diamond Price Index; Trading Economics

Mine shutdowns are, in some cases, doing worse damage to public finances than low prices. Production is being cut as mines suspend operations or reduce output to prevent spread of the virus, even where prices are high enough keep a mine profitable. For instance, Peru’s enormous Antamina copper and zinc mine is being suspended to contain the outbreak. Mexico has suspended production at all mines. Malaysia and Mozambique suspended their bauxite mines. South Africa has reduced mining production by 50 percent following a full shutdown. Further disruptions, whether to prevent the spread of the virus or in response to infections at mine sites, are likely, despite some governments’ efforts to keep production going by declaring mining an essential service.

Shutdowns and weak prices are hitting certain countries harder than others. In 2016, 27 percent of Guinea’s fiscal revenues, 26 percent of Zambia’s and 24 percent of the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s (DRC) were paid by mining companies. Even these high numbers underestimate the governments’ dependence on the mining sector, as they do not include income taxes from mine workers and taxes from mine suppliers. The longer the containment measures persist, pushing down demand and increasing stockpiles, the greater the pain for mineral producers will be.

Still, the main worry for many mineral-dependent countries is not just the decline in fiscal revenues. Rather, it is that many will face balance-of-payments crises, meaning they will not have enough foreign currency to pay for imports or service external debts. Mineral exports are the primary source of foreign currency for more than 20 countries, including Eritrea, Mongolia and Tajikistan.

In a handful of countries with small foreign reserve buffers and limited access to foreign capital, sovereign debt crises may coincide with balance-of-payments crises. As the export dependence, foreign reserve and credit default swap (CDS) spread (an indicator default probability) figures in the table below indicate, several African countries, including DRC, Guinea, Mauritania, Sierra Leone and Zambia, are at high risk of these dual crises.

Mineral-dependent countries’ risk of sovereign debt and balance-of-payments crises

Country Main mineral exports Mineral exports as a percentage of total exports (2017 or most recent) Risk of debt distress (based on CDS spreads, IMF DSAs and govt reports) CDS spread on sovereign debt (as of April 1, 2020) Reserves by months of imports (2018 or most recent)
Australia Iron, coal, gold 62% Low 0.0% 2
Bolivia Zinc, gold, lead 49% Low 6.7% 8
Botswana Diamonds 91% Low 1.3% 9
Chile Copper 56% Low 1.0% 4
Namibia Diamonds, copper 61% Low 4.5% 4
Peru Copper, gold, zinc 63% Low 1.8% 11
South Africa Gold, diamonds, platinum, iron 60% Low 3.7% 5
Tanzania Gold 43% Low 6.7% 6
 
Burkina Faso Gold 85% Moderate 8.2% -
Ghana Gold 53% Moderate 9.6% 3
Guyana Gold, aluminum 51% Moderate 9.7% 2
Kyrgyzstan Gold 57% Moderate 8.2% 4
Mali Gold 63% Moderate 9.7% -
Mongolia Copper, coal 91% Moderate 9.7% 4
Niger Uranium 60% Moderate 9.7% -
Papua New Guinea Gold, copper 45% Moderate 8.2% 4
Suriname Gold 80% Moderate 8.2% 3
Tajikistan Aluminum, gold, zinc, lead 78% Moderate 9.7% 4
 
Congo, DR of Cobalt, copper 90% High 11.1% 0
Eritrea Zinc, copper 97% High n/a 1
Guinea Aluminum, gold 81% High 14.8% 3
Mauritania Iron, gold, copper 53% High n/a 3
Mozambique Coal, aluminum 69% High 13.4% 4
Nauru Phosphates 74% High n/a 4
Sierra Leone Iron, titanium, diamonds 67% High 14.8% 3
Zambia Copper 84% High 15.00% 2

What can officials do, bearing in mind that each country faces its own challenges and no single policy would be applicable in every context?

1. Support mine workers and foreign exchange generation rather than shareholders

The mining sector produces fewer jobs per dollar of revenue generated and has smaller economic spillovers than almost any sector. But mining is a major employer in some countries and localities. In many countries, it is also an important generator of much-needed foreign currency.

Authorities should design financial relief measures for mines to meet specific policy goals, and only apply them to mining projects that are suffering from historically low commodity prices. If the goal is to keep workers employed, it is better for governments to pay a portion of workers’ salaries as long as they are kept on the payroll or defer payroll taxes, rather than bail out companies and their shareholders. If the goal is to maintain operations, governments can provide logistical support to mines, for instance through virus testing and keeping key trade routes open.

2. Resist impulsive tax relief and subsidy measures

Mineral prices are likely to trend toward their medium-term averages, though it is difficult to know when, given global uncertainty around demand and coronavirus containment. In the meantime, mining companies, employees and business associations are pressuring officials for tax relief and subsidies as compensation for shutdowns, sometimes successfully.

There are serious risks associated with renegotiating mining contracts or changing tax regimes in a manner that fails to capture future profit increases. Past experience shows that governments often fail to cancel tax relief after prices have risen again. Further, asset owners are in weak negotiating positions when prices are low.

Introducing sliding royalties might be one approach to providing temporary relief while automatically responding to a price rise. Sliding royalty rates automatically fall when prices fall, providing some relief in the current context, and rise when prices recover.

3. Distinguish between public sector liquidity and solvency crises

In some mineral-dependent countries, the drop in fiscal revenues will generate significant burdens on public finances. Many governments will need to further indebt themselves to overcome a temporary shock to fiscal revenues. However, in a handful of countries, the twin shocks are likely to push them over the edge into insolvency.

Countries in liquidity crises must find sources of financing to withstand the next couple of years. While the G20 have offered support, more will be needed. Temporary debt relief is part of the solution. Additional borrowing from institutional investors and the central bank may also be necessary. Debt monetization is an option worth considering during a contractionary spiral, especially in countries with shallow financial sectors and limited access to international capital, but with adequate foreign reserves to prevent a major depreciation. Where governments are insolvent, debts must be restructured immediately to create the fiscal space to respond to the coronavirus crisis and set themselves up for growth once the crisis is over.

Andrew Bauer is a consultant to the Natural Resource Governance Institute (NRGI).

Related content

Countries Struggling with Governance Manage $1.2 Trillion in Resource Wealth

David MihalyiAnna Fleming
8 September 2017

Resource Governance Index: Sub-Saharan Africa Highlights

31 January 2019

Resource Governance Index: From Legal Reform to Implementation in Sub-Saharan Africa

Report
15 April 2019

How Did Fiscal Rules Hold Up in the Commodity Price Crash?

Report
21 June 2018
David MihalyiLiliana Fernández

Les règles budgétaires face à la baisse du prix des matières premières

21 November 2018
David MihalyiLiliana Fernández
Helping people to realize the benefits of their countries’ endowments of oil, gas and minerals.
Follow on Facebook Follow on Twitter Subscribe to Updates
  • Topics
    Beneficial ownership
    Civic space
    Commodity prices
    Contract transparency and monitoring
    Coronavirus
    Corruption
    Economic diversification
    Energy transition
    Gender
    Global initiatives
    Legislation and regulation
    Licensing and negotiation
    Mandatory payment disclosure
    Measurement of environmental and social impacts
    Measurement of governance
    Open data
    Revenue management
    Revenue sharing
    Sovereign wealth funds
    State-owned enterprises
    Subnational governance
    Tax policy and revenue collection
  • Approach
    • Stakeholders
    • Natural Resource Charter
    • Regional knowledge hubs
  • Priority
    Countries
    • Colombia
    • Dem. Rep. of Congo
    • Ghana
    • Guinea
    • Mexico
    • Mongolia
    • Nigeria
    • Peru
    • Senegal
    • Tanzania
    • Tunisia
    • Uganda
  • Learning
    • Training
    • Primers
  • Analysis & Tools
    • Publications
    • Tools
    • Economic models
  • About Us
    • What we do
    • NRGI impact
    • Board of Directors
    • Emeritus Board Members
    • Advisory Council
    • Leadership team
    • Experts and staff
    • Careers and opportunities
    • Grant-making
    • Financials
    • Privacy policy
    • Contact us
  • News
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Search