Book Review: Making and Breaking Settler Space: Five Centuries of Colonization in North America

market value constantly adds layers of conflict. As academics and other commentators have noted, many companies also perceived themselves, or were perceived, as “unpunishable.” Emulating political patronage structures, mine sites may present themselves as positive and beneficial while they are exploitative and dangerous to many. More challenging in this globally competitive industry is the influence of China’s foreign policy objectives, addressed by several authors in this section. China takes no issue with the sometimes-weak governance of African states and is content to disregard corruption, conflict, or other local social abuses in order to access mines. While not immune to similar charges, Western companies are held to international standards that China is not. INGOs are forcing cleaner definitions, standards, and expectations. Slowly, both local and host investor politics are producing “more nuanced agreements.” Finally, in their concluding chapter, Andrews, Edward Akuffo, and Grant observe that none of the included case studies point to an ideal mode of natural resources development. Each actor (state, corporation, community, NGO, IGO, INGO) presents various opportunities and drawbacks. Conflicting expectations, intentions, and understandings continue to grossly impede meaningful progress for people across the continent. The Global North’s increasing penchant toward the development of industrywide norms for mining sites around the world, while laudable, is still at its core imbued with colonialism and colonial superiority over the resource-rich countries of Africa. Whether natural resource development is a panacea or a Pandora’s box remains inconclusive.