Natural Resources Governance Institute

Natural Resources Governance Institute
Name	Natural Resources Governance Institute
Formation	2013
Type	Nonprofit organization
Headquarters	New York City
Region served	Global
Leader title	Executive Director

Natural Resources Governance Institute is an international nonprofit organization focused on improving the management of extractive resources and commodity wealth in producing countries. Founded with a mandate to advise on transparency, contract negotiation, and revenue management, the institute operates across Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the Pacific to support reform efforts. It engages with national ministries, multilateral institutions, sovereign wealth funds, and civil society to influence policy and practice in oil, gas, mining, and forestry sectors.

History

The institute was established in the context of debates following the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and the Publish What You Pay campaign, responding to high-profile cases such as the Nigeria oil scandal and the Angolan oil controversies. Early engagements drew on precedents from Norwegian Petroleum Directorate reforms and learning from the Fiscal Responsibility Act debates in countries like Gabon and Equatorial Guinea. It expanded amid global attention after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill and policy shifts following the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals. Founding staff included former advisors with experience at the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and the African Development Bank, and the institute established regional offices modeled on structures used by Oxfam International and Transparency International.

Mission and Objectives

The institute's mission emphasizes accountable stewardship of natural-resource wealth, drawing on normative frameworks such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative standards and principles advanced by the Natural Resource Charter. Objectives include improving negotiation capacity for states engaging with firms like ExxonMobil, Rio Tinto, and Glencore; promoting fiscal regimes influenced by the Ghana Petroleum Revenue Management Act and the Chile mining law; and strengthening public financial management inspired by the Santiago Principles for sovereign wealth funds. It seeks to support legislative reforms akin to the Norway Petroleum Act, anti-corruption measures reflected in the United Nations Convention against Corruption, and participatory processes resembling those of Public Participation Frameworks used in South Africa and Brazil.

Programs and Activities

Programming spans capacity building, policy advisory, and research. Capacity initiatives train negotiators using case studies from Norway, Brazil, Indonesia, and Timor-Leste; advisory work assists ministries and parliaments similar to engagements seen with the Ghanaian Parliament and the Mozambique Ministry of Mineral Resources; and research produces analyses comparable to reports by the International Energy Agency and the Revenue Watch Institute. Activities include drafting model contracts referencing templates like the Model Production Sharing Agreement and offering guidance on revenue stabilization mechanisms such as those in Chile and Botswana. The institute also facilitates dialogues among stakeholders comparable to forums like the World Economic Forum and the UN General Assembly special sessions on extractives.

Governance and Organizational Structure

Governance combines a board of directors with an executive team patterned after nonprofit governance norms used by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. The board has included former officials with backgrounds at the World Bank Group, International Monetary Fund, and national ministries from Norway and Ghana. Regional offices coordinate field teams modeled on structures used by Mercy Corps and Care International. The organization partners with research centers like Chatham House, universities such as Columbia University and University of Oxford, and think tanks including Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Brookings Institution.

Funding and Partnerships

Funding sources encompass bilateral donors such as United Kingdom Department for International Development, multilateral funders like the European Commission and the World Bank, and philanthropic foundations including the Open Society Foundations and the Ford Foundation. Partnerships extend to industry actors for convening purposes, including BP, Shell, and BHP, and to civil society networks like Global Witness and Publish What You Pay for advocacy coordination. Collaborative projects have been undertaken with the African Union, the Economic Community of West African States, and regional development banks such as the African Development Bank.

Impact and Criticism

Supporters cite contributions to stronger contracts, improved fiscal regimes in countries such as Ghana and Sierra Leone, and enhanced transparency in line with EITI outcomes. Evaluations note influence on the establishment of mechanisms resembling sovereign wealth funds and stabilization accounts like those in Norway and Chile. Critics argue that engagement with corporate stakeholders risks regulatory capture similar to controversies seen with Chevron and Glencore in high-profile disputes, and that technocratic advice can marginalize grassroots movements exemplified by tensions involving Friends of the Earth and local activist coalitions. Other critiques refer to debates over donor influence, echoing concerns raised about World Bank conditionality and civil society independence in contexts like Mozambique and Angola.

Category:Non-profit organizations Category:Natural resources management Category:International development organizations