Abstract
The use of the curse or cure dichotomy to frame a discussion around the impacts of mining is an oversimplification, not least in the emphasis on one or the other (as opposed to curse and cure). It is, however, a potent trope for engaging critically with the consequences of mining not only in narrow economic terms but also in regard to political, social and environmental costs and benefits. Further, as Goodman and Worth (2008: 201) point out, to engage with the resource curse or cure question is to also engage more broadly with "the internal contradictions of capitalist development" as evident, for example, in divisions "between those who benefit from and those who bear the costs of accumulation" and the many conflicts-political, social, economic, environmental-attending resource extraction. It is in this sense that this volume mobilises the 'resource curse or cure?' motif.