The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

The Extractive Industries and Society

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/exis

Original article

“The economic impact of tin mining in Indonesia during an era of

decentralisation, 2001–2015: A case study of Kepulauan Bangka
Belitung Province”
Sulista Sulista a, b, *, Fadhila Achmadi Rosyid c
a
Faculty of Mining and Petroleum Engineering, Bandung Institute of Technology, Indonesia
b
Bappeda of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province, Research and Development Division, Indonesia
c
Department of Mining Engineering, Faculty of Mining and Petroleum Engineering, Bandung Institute of Technology, Indonesia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper examines the economic impacts of tin mining activities in Indonesia during the country’s decen­
Resource curse tralisation period, 2001–2015, focusing on the case of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province. Here, the evidence
Decentralisation points to tin mining contributing significantly to Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP) and, through cata­
Input-output model
lysing backward linkages, having fuelled growth in local construction and manufacturing trades. In addition, the
Mining multiplier impacts
Tin mining
multiplier effects of tin mining have significantly affected household income across the province. From an
economic standpoint, therefore, tin mining has not caused a resource curse in Kepulauan Bangka Belitung
Province, although production has been associated with a series of adverse social and environmental impacts.

1. Introduction
Indonesia is a country richly endowed with mineral resources such as
nickel, copper, and tin that are essential for modern technologies. After
China, Indonesia is the world’s second-largest producer of tin account­
ing for 26% of global production in 2019 (USGS, 2021). Resource
governance and management are critical factors in determining whether
the country’s wealth in tin and other mineral resources translates into
sustainable economic development or entails risks for the so-called
‘resource curse’ observed in some resource-rich countries. The
resource curse may comprise different factors such as reduced compet­
itiveness of domestic sectors not related to raw materials, commodity
price volatility translating into national budget risks, economic
mismanagement, weak institutions, rent-seeking, and corruption (e.g.,
Badeeb et al., 2017; Hilmawan and Clark, 2019). Some authors have
expanded the term resource curse to include the larger sustainability
impacts related to previous issues, such as insufficient protection of local
communities and the environment for the benefit of the elite (e.g.,
Rosyida et al., 2018).
Indonesia’s tin mining sector has been subject to different gover­
nance approaches through the years. Three tin mining companies
operating in Indonesia under Dutch ownership from 1953 to 1958 were
nationalised and merged to form the Tin Mining State Company in 1968.
Since then, the central government has been responsible for managing
Indonesia’s tin resources for approximately 30 years. The government’s
initiative in tin mining deregulation in 1998 stated that tin was no
longer one of the goods exported that was regulated and supervised by
the central government. The Law on Local Government in 1999 then
shifted the responsibility to the regional governments to regulate the
exploitation of tin in their respective regions (Erman, 2004). In January
2001, the government began implementing a decentralisation policy in
managing mineral and coal mining to facilitate the economic prosperity
of the mineral-producing regions. This regional approach was only
recently adjusted: in 2016, the central government adopted a policy to
delegate the mining authority from the district to the provincial level.
This policy ended in 2020. Since then, the work of these institutions has
been re-assigned to fall under the authority of the central government.
The major production area of tin in Indonesia, Kepulauan Bangka
Belitung Province (Fig. 1), holds 99% of national tin resources (Ministry
of ESDM, 2016). During the first five years of implementing the de­
centralisation policy of 2001, there were 75 mining concessions, 37 tin
smelters, and 6507 artisanal tin mining units that together drove a sig­
nificant increase in tin production (Yunianto, 2009a). This led to a sig­
nificant contribution to local revenues as well as increasing income for

* Corresponding author at: Bappeda of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province, The Integrated Office Complex for the Provincial Government of Kepulauan Bangka
Belitung, Air Itam, Pangkalpinang, 33149, Indonesia.
E-mail addresses: sulista.litbang@babelprov.go.id (S. Sulista), fadhila@mining.itb.ac.id (F.A. Rosyid).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2022.101069
Received 30 April 2021; Received in revised form 8 March 2022; Accepted 9 March 2022
Available online 1 April 2022
2214-790X/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid
Fig. 1. Distribution of raw materials in Southeast Asia and location of the study area (Kepulauan Bangka Belitung). Source: (Ministry of ESDM, 2021).
the people of artisanal mining communities (Erman, 2004).
In an investigation of district-level income in Indonesia from 2005 to
2015, Hilmawan & Clark (2019) found a positive association between
per capita income and extractive activities focusing on energy resources
(oil, gas, and coal). Nevertheless, there are concerns that poor man­
agement and governance of mining businesses in the long term will lead
to regional economic dependence on natural resources such as tin. This
might bring about negative economic effects and, potentially, the
manifestation of a resource curse phenomenon at the subnational
(province) or meso‑level, such as slower economic growth, reduced
social welfare, and environmental damage (Benghida, 2017; Frankel,
2010; Gilberthorpe and Papyrakis, 2015; Manzano and Gutiérrez, 2019;
Poncian, 2019; Syahrir et al., 2020; Ushie, 2012).
Various parties have voiced public concerns that tin extraction and
the management of post-mining activities if conducted poorly, will
transform Bangka and Belitung into ‘dead islands’. Tin mining activities,
especially informal activities, are often associated with environmental
damage such as landform deformation, soil and other environmental
degradation, and inconsistent spatial planning (Bidayani, 2009; Erman,
2010; Ibrahim et al., 2018; Yunianto, 2009a). Similar adverse environ­
mental and socio-economic impacts were associated with tin mining
activities and an unexpected mine closure on Singkep island, an
important historical tin mining location in Indonesia until 1992 (Syahrir
et al., 2020). The fact that 79.9% of the Kepulauan Bangka Belitung area
is in coastal waters and 50.6% of Mining Business Licenses were issued
for offshore mining (Bappeda of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province,
2017), have motivated various parties to urge the regional government
to compile and ratify a so-called Zoning Plan for Coastal Areas and Small
Islands, the substance of which is still creating arguments, especially in
the matter of reducing offshore tin mining license areas (interview of a
government official, Fr, related to this fact).
Another illustration of adverse economic impacts in the province is
the case of Lampur Village, a tin mining community that experienced
economic paralysis after the formal tin mining license holder (PT. Timah
Tbk) had left the village because tin reserves were no longer sufficient to
enable profitable mining activities (Indra, 2013). In 2012–2013,
termination of PT. Koba Tin’s contract of work resulted in a decline in
royalty and land rent in the Bangka Tengah district by 35.2%, which
resulted in a 9.7% decrease in the revenue-sharing funds (Dana Bagi
Hasil, or “DBH”) received by the Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province
2
The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069
(Bappeda of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province, 2017). Field surveys
performed in association with the present research show that after the
termination of the formal mining contract of work, the local community
started conducting illegal tin mining that caused the region to lose
revenue.
Public concerns have sparked great interest amongst researchers to
study the Kepulauan Bangka Belitung case and many of these have
confirmed that the decentralisation policy of 2001 did entail a range of
sustainability problems. Apart from environmental issues, there are
horizontal and vertical conflicts (Erman, 2004; Ibrahim et al., 2019b;
Sulista et al., 2019; Zulkarnain et al., 2005), the existence of illegal
artisanal ‘people mining’ (Erman, 2008; Indra, 2013; Rosyida et al.,
2018; Yunianto, 2009a), weak institutions (Erman, 2004, 2008, 2010),
and disproportionate fiscal impact (Arkam et al., 2017). These studies
found that tin mining impacts in Kepulauan Bangka Belitung are rela­
tively close to the definition of the ‘resource curse’ (Erman, 2014; Sur­
yadi, 2016).
The present study expands and builds on these earlier studies by
analysing the record of economic data associated with the imple­
mentation of the decentralisation policy in Indonesia’s tin mining sector
from 2001 to 2015. Because most empirical studies were dominated by
descriptive-qualitative approaches, our study fills a gap from the
perspective of economic analysis that will explore its relevance to the
resource curse literature. The basis of our view is that the contribution of
the mining sector provides not only a fiscal impact but also further
economic impacts that will produce inputs and outputs amongst sectors
(Hirschman, 1982).
2. The beginning and end of the mineral and coal mining
decentralisation policy in Indonesia
Decentralisation resulted in a fundamental change in the control of
mineral and coal resources by regional governments. This was marked
by the enactment of Law No.22 of 1999 on Local Government, stating
that the regions were authorised to manage the resources within their
territory and were responsible for preserving the environment. This
included the authority to manage tin mining, following the issuance of
the Regulation of Minister of Trade (MoT) No.558/MPP/Kep/12/1998
on General Provisions in Export as amended by the Regulation of MoT
No.146/MPP/Kep/4/1999. This excluded several mineral commodities
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid
including tin from the list of strategic commodities that had to be
regulated and supervised by the central government. This became an
important basis for many mineral resource-producing regions to form
new provinces. One of these was Kepulauan Bangka Belitung, formerly a
part of South Sumatera Province, which separated from the latter based
on Law No. 27 of 2000 establishing Kepulauan Bangka Belitung
Province.
Five years later, the central government enacted a new law for local
government, Law No. 32 of 2004, regulating the division of authorities
between the provincial and district/city governments fully implemented
in 2005. Erb (2016) stated that the new law gave local governments
more power to make financial decisions about investment in their re­
gions, especially in the mining sector, which in turn would provide DBH
for producing regions. In the case of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung, Erman
(2004) mentioned the emergence of a local shadow state that caused
business and power conflicts. Tin mining businesses were protected by
the police and there were indications of collusion in issuing mining
business licences. Under Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal Mining
(Mining Law) that specifically regulated the issuance of mining business
licences by district government (regent) and by provincial government
(governor), the division of authority caused overlaps in mining business
areas that inflicted trouble in identifying mining business holders,
increasing the risk of unpaid taxes (Hamidi, 2015). Consequently, the
governor took over the regent’s authority to issue mining business li­
cences, as regulated in Law No. 2 of 2014 on Local Government, with the
implementation set for a maximum of two years (Erb et al., 2021).
On June 10, 2020, the central government passed the new mining
law, Law No. 3 of 2020, which came into force six months after its
enactment. It states that all mining policies are determined by the cen­
tral government, except for people’s mining licences. This means that
regional governments, including provincial and district governments, no
longer have the authority to grant mining business licences. This law has
been an important milestone marking the end of Indonesia’s minerals
and coal mining decentralisation era.
3. Literature review
The economic literature, in general, comprises a large body of in­
vestigations into the contribution of natural resource wealth to regional
economic development as well as into possible adverse impacts on the
context of the resource curse debate. Within the framework of these
general and country case studies, we consider the following three ap­
proaches to be particularly applicable for evaluating the economic im­
pacts of tin mining in Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province.
First, a general input-output approach as done, for example, by Lei
et al. (2013) evaluates the mining industry’s contribution to fixed asset
investment and Gross Domestic Product (GDP), creation of jobs, and
promotion of technology investment. Furthermore, Olvera & Foster-­
McGregor (2018) explore the implications of inter-sector linkages in
extractive industry-based countries with regards to the manifestation of
resource curse phenomena. Similarly, Bontadini & Savona (2017)
analyse backward linkages as a potential driver of export diversification
of the manufacturing sector. Finally, Sabiroglu & Bashirli (2012) eval­
uate the development of the trade sector and the diversification of
economic sectors resulting from mining activities. Such economic ap­
proaches allowed these authors to evaluate arguments in favour of or
against the resource curse in certain countries.
The next analytical approach to consider is an econometric approach
using time series data. This approach may evaluate the long-term re­
lationships between indicators representing extractive industries (the
economic development of the mining sector, revenue allocation, and
natural resource exports) and regional economic development (Dubiń­
ski, 2013; Ericsson and Löf, 2019; Jalloh, 2013). In many cases, this
approach also reveals the phenomenon of the resource curse which is
characterised by a negative or opposite relationship between these in­
dicators and economic growth (Alpha and Ding, 2016; Awolusi, 2015;
3
The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069
Bahar and Santos, 2018; Yang et al., 2021).
Meanwhile, the combination of quantitative and qualitative evi­
dence may be used to evaluate whether the development of extractive
resources in the long term negatively affects regional economic devel­
opment reflected by relatively slower economic development, which
may be indicative of the resource curse (Elbra, 2013). In the short term,
on the other hand, extractive industry projects often generate a positive
impact on the local economy and create jobs that bring economic
well-being (Cust and Poelhekke, 2015).
In Indonesia, studies of economic impacts have shown the significant
economic contribution of the mining sector. The development of mineral
resources has given sectoral economic value to the national income and
regional economic value in the form of corporate social responsibility
(Soelistijo, 2013). Suciyanti et al. (2018) carried out an input-output
multiplier analysis, the result of which suggested that the copper min­
ing business in the producing area had significant impacts on the in­
crease of output, income, and employment opportunities in the region.
Regarding the resource curse, Hilmawan and Clark (2019) conducted
a regression analysis linking the Gross Regional Domestic Product
(GRDP) indicator, land rents and royalties for coal, oil, and gas, and
mining and quarrying activities to observe the economic dependence of
390 districts in Indonesia during the period from 2006 to 2015, finding
no evidence of a resource curse. By contrast, Martawardaya et al. (2016)
suggested that the six regions receiving DBH were the poorest in
Indonesia. These funds were not found to generate a significant impact
on economic growth because they were not used in sectors providing a
multiplier effect such as education and health. A field survey conducted
by Suharto et al. (2015) in the coal mining districts of East Kalimantan
found further evidence for negative socio-economic effects of natural
resource abundance in Indonesia. Adverse impacts detected by these
authors included a decline in the quality of welfare of local commu­
nities, resulting in a decrease of local agricultural land to make room for
coal mining. Few local workers were recruited by mining companies
because of low education and skill levels, while local communities were
not empowered but their living costs increased. Mining-related emis­
sions also impacted local air quality, resulting in respiratory tract in­
fections amongst people. Based on a historical socio-economic impact
assessment expanded to the post-mining situation, tin mining impacts on
Singkep island have also been evaluated against sustainability and
governance parameters, detecting a range of socio-environmental
problems (Syahrir et al., 2020). These studies demonstrate the rele­
vance and broad methodological scope of research approaches applied
to evaluate resource curse phenomena, both in Indonesia as well as
internationally.
4. Methodology and data
Based on the economic analysis methods applied to studies on the
resource curse as illustrated in chapter 3, the following research steps
were implemented. First, we used GDP and GRDP data at 2010 constant
market prices from 2001 to 2015 to examine the level of specialisation of
the provincial (tin) mining sector using the Location Quotient (LQ)
(Statistics Indonesia, 2015; Statistics of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung,
2012, 2022). The LQ method is the most commonly used method to
analyse the leading sector of a given region, despite the debate about the
weaknesses of this analysis (Kiser, 1992; Mack and Jacobson, 1996;
Strotebeck, 2010). The description of the model formulation is presented
in Appendix A.
Secondly, we observed the contribution of the tin mining sector to
the structure of the regional economy using GRDP analysis, using the
GRDP at 2010 constant market prices from 2001 to 2015. We used the
GRDP approach because there was a wide range of resource curse
literature related to the economic contribution, either positive or
negative, of the mining sector to the total economy. Three economic
proxies are commonly used to reflect the abundance of mineral re­
sources in a given region, namely the share of mineral exports (Alpha
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid
Fig. 2. LQ value of economic sectors in Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province from 2001 to 2015.
and Ding, 2016; Bahar and Santos, 2018; Jalloh, 2013; Mahonye and
Mandishara, 2015), th revenue allocation from mining activities (Car­
rillo Hoyos, 2019; Yang et al., 2021) and the economic development of
the mining sector (Elbra, 2013; Ericsson and Löf, 2019; Mahonye and
Mandishara, 2015). In this study, we used the economic development of
the mining sector as an indicator of the abundance of mineral resources.
The mining sector GRDP of the Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province
illustrates the overall economic benefits, both direct and indirect, from
tin mining activities carried out by companies and artisanal and
small-scale ‘people miners’. Besides formal activities, it also captures the
impacts of informal mining activities, as most of the extracted tin ore is
eventually sold to formal local producers. The results of the LQ analysis
and GRDP analysis may be used as the basis for the statement of the
importance of the role of (tin) mining in stimulating the regional
economy.
Thirdly, we analysed the further economic impact of the mining
sector using an input-output model and its relationship to the resource
curse literature. Input-output models are commonly used to describe
regional economic impacts (e.g., Lei et al., 2013; Suciyanti et al., 2018).
However, some scholars have begun using input-output models to
measure the economic impact associated with the resource curse. Olvera
& Foster-McGregor (2018) used input-output analysis to observe the
value of inter-industry linkages, both backward and forward. In this
case, the authors observed a trend of reducing or smaller inter-industry
linkages interpreted as a resource curse manifestation. Furthermore,
Bontadini & Savona (2017) used value-added flows of mining and
quarrying to capture their relationship with downstream industries to
examine the resource curse. Sabiroglu & Bashirli (2012) also used the
input-output model framework to explain the resource curse measured
by the output of mining and quarrying on total outputs and inputs. This
was relatively low due to its limited capacity to directly generate wealth
and employment on a large scale. In addition, the value of the highest
multiplier on the trade sector score was not a characteristic of the
resource curse condition.
Based on the perspective of the input-output analysis presented in
these studies, three factors are noteworthy: namely the proportion of the
mining sector to the total outputs and inputs, the strength of inter-
sectoral backward and forward linkages, and the significance of the
multiplier impact of sectors attracted by mining activities. Therefore,
three analyses were carried out in this study within the framework of the
I-O model, namely linkage analysis, the degrees of dispersion and
sensitivity, and multiplier analysis. A more detailed description of the
applied method is described in Appendix B.
4
The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069
The IO table is a statistical description compiled by the statistics
office and the regional governments every five years using data from the
previous year (n-1). As the region was formed in 2000, the first available
input-output table is for 2005 with the base year 2000 so that the table
will represent the conditions before the division of authorities to grant
mining business licences (before the enactment of Law Number 32 of
2004). The absence of an annual input-output table prevents an analysis
of the developments in economic sectors for 2000–2004. The input-
output table for 2010 with the base year 2010 captures the relation­
ship between economic sectors after the division of authorities to grant
mining business licences by the districts and provincial government
(after the enactment of Law Number 32 of 2004). Furthermore, the
input-output table for 2015 with the base year 2010 is used to analyse
economic developments after the division of authorities which was
confirmed by the Mining Law and at the same time represents the last
period that can be analysed, because after that half the authority of the
regional governments was transferred back to the central government. It
is important to note that the difference in the base year has caused the
data to be incomparable in monetary terms.
5. Results of economic analysis
5.1. Analysis of location quotient (LQ)
Between 2001 and 2009, the provincial economic structure consisted
of nine sectors which were formally reclassified into 17 economic sectors
in 2010. To generate uniform and comparable data, particularly to
adjust in terms of GDP, we reclassified the 17 economic sectors back into
the nine original economic sectors while further subdividing the mining
and quarrying sector into (1) other mining and quarrying and (2) metal
ore mining, so that the final data structure refers to ten economic
sectors.
The calculation of LQ values for the economic sectors is presented in
Fig. 2. Three economic sectors show an LQ value >1 over 15 years, all of
which are natural resource sectors. The metal ore mining sector (tin
mining) shows an LQ value >2. This illustrates that tin mining was a
leading sector in the period investigated as its relative GRDP contribu­
tion in the province was greater than the GDP’s national average.
5.2. Gross regional domestic product (GRDP) analysis
The total GRDP of all economic units in the Kepulauan Bangka
Belitung Province for the period from 2001 to 2015 was IDR 32.6 trillion
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069

Fig. 3. The GRDP at 2010 constant market prices by industrial origin from 2001 to 2015 (in billion rupiahs).

Table 1
Matrix of priority economic sector of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province,
2005–2015.
Power of High (IBL > 1) Low (IBL < 1)
dispersion
Degree of
sensitivity

High Priority I Priority II

(IFL>1) Industries of manufacturing of other Agriculture, forestry, and
than base, precious, and other non- fishing (3)
ferrous metals (5) Other mining and
Transportation and storage (8) quarrying (2)
Construction, wholesale and retail Metal ore mining (1)
trade (7)
Low (IFL<1) Priority III Priority IV
Food and beverage service activities Information and
(9) communication(10)
Fig. 4. Total input-output of economic sectors in the Kepulauan Bangka Beli­
Electricity, gas and water supply (6) Financial and insurance
tung in 2005, 2010, 2015 (in billion rupiahs).
The manufacturing of base metals (11)
sector (tin smelting) (4) Real estate activities (12)
(US$ 3217.5 million) annually (Fig. 3). Meanwhile, the total GRDP from Business activities, rentals,
and other agents (13)
the mining and quarrying sector grew by an average of IDR 5.9 trillion
Public administration and
(US$ 578.5 million) annually, of which tin mining contributed about compulsory social security
IDR 4.2 trillion (US$ 418 million) or 73%. During that period, there was (14)
an increase in the GRDP of the tin mining sector from IDR 2.9 trillion (US Education (15)
$ 285.6 million) in 2001 to IDR 4.5 trillion (US$ 328.5 million) in 2015 Human health and social
work activities (16)
or 3.2% annually.
Culture, entertainment, and
The average contribution of tin mining activities to the total GRDP of recreation (17)
the Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province was 13.4% annually. This Individual services serving
contribution has declined over the past 15 years, from 14.3% in 2001 to households (18)
10% in 2015, corresponding to an average annual decrease of 2.4%. The Note: Priority 1 shows strong forward and backward linkages (IFL > 1 & IBL >
data also showed that if the GRDP of (tin) mining was removed from the 1); Priority II shows strong forward linkage (IFL > 1) but weak backward linkage
economic structure, the total GRDP would still have experienced (IBL < 1); Priority III shows weak forward linkage (IFL < 1) but strong backward
growth, although at a reduced number. The average growth of the GRDP linkage (IBL > 1), Priority IV shows weak forward and backward linkages (IFL <
of (tin) mining was 5.8% annually while GRDP non (tin) mining grew at 1 and IBL < 1).
6.1%. These data indicate that other economic sectors in the province
experienced stronger growth than the mining sector. 5.3. Input and output analysis

The input-output of each economic sector is shown in Fig. 4. The

metal ore mining sector (tin mining) was the 5th largest of the 18

5
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069

Fig. 5. The average multiplier impacts of 18 economic sectors in the input-output Table 2005, 2010, 2015.

(2.8%), and inventories (0.1%). Inter-sectoral transactions indicate that

Table B.1
the manufacturing of base metals (i.e., tin smelting) benefited the most
Input-output matrix has the order of 3 × 3.
from the tin mining sector by 94.4%. Manufacturing of base metals itself
Output allocation Intermediate demand Final Total produced the largest output in the economic structure in 2005 and 2010
Input allocation Sector Sector sector demand outputs
and created the second largest output in 2015.
1 2 3

Intermediate sector Quadrant I Quadrant

input 1 II 5.4. Linkage analysis and priority sectors in I-O model
X11 X12 X13 Y1 X1
sector X21 X22 X23 Y2 X2
Details of the performed linkage analysis are presented in
2
sector X31 X32 X33 Y3 X3 Appendix C. The average direct and indirect forward linkages (FLDN)
3 value for the tin mining sector was higher than the direct and indirect
Primary input Quadrant III Quadrant IV backward linkages (BLDN) value. This indicates that the tin mining
V1 V2 V3 sector had a closer linkage to the final demand than to its raw materials.
Total inputs X1 X2 X3
Compared to many others, tin mining is amongst the top five sectors
Source: Firmansyah, 2006. having strong driving forces. In 2015, the FLDN value was 2.1, meaning
that every IDR 1 million increase in the final demand of the mining
economic sectors of the Kepulauan Bangka Belitung, in which the value sector would foster an increase in total output by IDR 2.1 million. This
is above the average of the entire economic sector. From this figure, it figure was larger than those of 2005 and 2010 when the FLDN stood at
can be seen that the input-output value of the sector was ranked 2nd in 1.7 and 1.4, respectively.
2005, contributing 16.5%. However, its contribution decreased to 9.0% On the other hand, the average BLDN value of the tin mining sector
(5th rank) in 2010 and continued to decline to 6.0% (5th rank) in 2015. was 1.3 in 2015, which was ranked 12th out of 18 economic sectors. This
On average, from the total input structure, the tin mining sector was means that total output of IDR 1.26 million is needed for every IDR 1
ranked 5th, consisting of primary inputs of 7.2% and gross value added million increase in the tin mining sector. The BLDN value of the tin
(Nilai Tambah Bruto, or “NTB”) of 12.9%. Meanwhile, from the total mining sector in 2015 was lower than in 2005 (1.9) and 2010 (1.3),
output structure, the tin mining sector was ranked 2nd with the inter­ indicating that its dependence on the upstream sector was lower as well.
mediate demand contribution of 22.2% and final demand of 7.0%. The combined value of the degrees of dispersion and sensitivity put
Despite having an above-average rating, Table 2 describes the decline in the tin mining sector at 7th out of the province’s 18 economic sectors.
both input and output, which then led to a downgrade in rank from 2nd Economic diversification towards downstream was relatively strong
(in 2005) to 5th (in 2010 and 2015). (IFL > 1), ranked as 5th (Appendix D). Meanwhile, the upstream side
The input structure of the tin mining sector was 73% of NTB domi­ was relatively low (IBL<1), ranked 8th. IFL experienced a significant
nated by business surplus (64%), wages and salaries (21%), depreciation increase (20.5%) compared to the average value (17.9%) but the per­
(10.9%), and indirect taxes (4.2%). While the rest was intermediate centage of IBL decline was very high (− 38.3%), far above the average
input by 27%, consisting of manufacturing industries other than base, value (1.5%).
precious, and other non-ferrous metals (48.4%), the tin mining sector On the scale of the province’s economic sector priority (Table I), the
itself (17.9%), construction, wholesale, and retail trade (16.6%) as well tin mining sector was in priority group II because it had IBL < 1 and IFL
as transportation and storage (8.8%). > 1. The high IFL was caused by output dominated by the inter-sectoral
On the other hand, the output structure came from inter-sectoral transactions of 97.2%. Meanwhile, the low IBL value was related to the
transactions (97.2%), followed by gross fixed capital formation low input from other sectors by 27%.
The matrix also shows three sectors in priority group I, namely (1)

6
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069

Tabel C.1 Tabel D.1

Direct and indirect forward linkages (FLDN) and direct and indirect backward The degrees of dispersion (IBL) and sensitivity (IFL) in the 18 economic sectors
linkages (BLDN) amongst economic sectors in Kepulauan Bangka Belitung of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province.
Province in 2005, 2010 and 2015. No Economic sectors μIBL μIFL ΔIBL ΔIFL
No Sector BL FL 2015–2005 2015–2005
2005 2010 2015 2005 2010 2015
1 Metal ore mining (tin 0.9 1.1 − 38.3% 20.5%
1 Metal ore mining (tin 1.9 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.4 2.1 mining)
mining) 2 Other mining and quarrying 0.8 1.1 − 9.6% − 18.6%
2 Other mining and 1.3 1.2 1.2 2.3 1.3 1.9 3 Agriculture, forestry, and 0.9 1.7 25.7% − 36.7%
quarrying fishing
3 Agriculture, forestry, 1.4 1.3 1.8 3 3.1 1.9 4 The manufacturing of base 1.6 0.7 31.79% − 13.82%
and fishing metals sector (tin smelting)
4 The manufacturing of 2.5 1.9 3.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 5 Industries of manufacturing 1.3 2.4 20.9% − 56.6%
base metals sector (tin of other than base, precious,
smelting) and other non-ferrous
5 Industries of 2.1 1.9 2.6 5.1 4 2.2 metals
manufacturing of other 6 Electricity, gas and water 1.2 0.9 − 26.6% 20.2%
than base, precious, supply
and other non-ferrous 7 Construction, wholesale and 1.5 1.3 82.5% − 35.8%
metals retail trade
6 Electricity, gas and 1.9 2.3 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.6 8 Transportation and storage 1.2 1.1 − 1.5% 39.5%
water supply 9 Food and beverage service 1.1 0.8 − 27.1% 18.1%
7 Construction, 1.9 1.6 3.5 2.2 2.6 1.4 activities
wholesale and retail 10 Information and 0.8 0.8 − 10% 44.7%
trade communication
8 Transportation and 1.9 2 1.9 1.4 1.6 2 11 Financial and insurance 0.8 0.9 − 12.2% 109.8%
storage activities
9 Food and beverage 1.9 1.8 1.4 1.1 1.3 1.4 12 Real estate activities 0.8 0.8 − 17.2% − 6.2%
service activities 13 Business activities, rentals, 0.7 0.9 6.7% 156.5%
10 Information and 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.6 and other agents
Communication 14 Public administration and 0.9 0.7 90.1% 3.9%
11 Financial and 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.3 2.3 compulsory social security
insurance activities 15 Education 0.9 0.7 − 22.5% 33%
12 Real estate activities 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.3 16 Human health and social 0.8 0.7 16.4% 19.9%
13 Business activities, 1 1.4 1.1 1 1.2 2.6 work activities
rentals, and other 17 Culture, entertainment and 0.9 0.7 − 41.5% 24.3%
agents recreation
14 Public administration 1 1.8 1.9 1 1.1 1.1 18 Individual services serving 0.8 0.7 − 40% − 0.2%
and compulsory social households
security Mean 1 1 1.5% 17.9%
15 Education 1.6 1.3 1.3 1 1.1 1.4
Note: IBL > 1 is a sector that has strong backward linkage with other sectors; IBL
16 Human health and 1 1.8 1.2 1 1.1 1.3
social work activities < 1 is a sector that has a low backward linkage with other sectors; IFL > 1 is a
17 Culture, 1.7 1.5 1 1 1 1.3 sector that has a high forward linkage with other sectors, IFL < 1: a sector has a
entertainment, and low forward linkage with other sectors.
recreation
18 Individual services 1.7 1.3 1 1.1 1 1.1
ranked 9th out of 18 economic sectors. These values indicate that for
serving households
every IDR 1 million increase in the output of the tin mining sector, there
would be an increase in the output of all sectors by IDR 1.5 million.
industries of manufacturing other than basic precious and other non- Likewise, the value-added multiplier was ranked 9th with a mean value
ferrous metals, (2) transportation and storage, and (3) construction, of 1.5, meaning that for every IDR 1 million increase in the NTB of the
wholesale and retail trade. These are intermediate inputs needed by the tin mining sector, there would be an increase in the regional NTB by
tin mining sector. IDR1.5 million.
Meanwhile, the other three impacts of the tin mining sector multi­
pliers were far below the average value, namely the surplus multiplier
5.5. Analysis of multipliers in I-O model (ranked 11th), the employment multiplier (ranked 12th), and the in­
vestment multiplier (ranked 13th). The lower values indicate that the tin
As illustrated in Fig. 5, the multiplier impacts generated by tin mining multiplier is lower than the multipliers of other economic
mining were below the average value, except the income multiplier (1.8) sectors.
that was above average (1.7). However, two of the five economic sectors In short, although dominated by multiplier impacts that were below
with a multiplier impact above the average (>2) were the base metal the average value, the tin mining sector was the 8th largest of the 18
processing industry (4.4), the largest output from tin mining activities, economic sectors with the highest multiplier impacts. This reflects that
and the industries of manufacturing of other than base, precious, and economic development in the tin mining sector was better than in most
other non-ferrous metals (3.8), the largest input required by the tin other economic sectors with lower multiplier impacts.
mining activities. Meanwhile, the construction, wholesale and retail
trade sector which represented a significant input required for tin 6. Discussion
mining, also produced an output multiplier (1.7) above the average
(1.6). Our analysis shows three main points regarding the economic
The income multiplier for the tin mining sector was ranked 6th out of development of the tin mining business in the Kepulauan Bangka Beli­
18 economic sectors. The values indicate that for every IDR 1 million tung Province during the decentralisation period, 2001–2015. First, tin
increase in the final demand of the tin mining sector, there would be an mining was a leading sector with a value of LQ>1, explaining its
increase in the household income for all sectors by IDR 1.8 million. The specialisation not only at the level of the producing region but also at the
average output multiplier for the tin mining sector was 1.5, which

7
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid
national level. For the region, the tin mining business contributed
significantly to the regional economy, at IDR 4.2 trillion (US$ 418
million) or a relative share of 13.4% annually. The literature on the
resource curse states that in the long term there is frequently a negative
relationship between the growth of the mining sector and the develop­
ment of the regional economy as a whole (Elbra, 2013; Mahonye and
Mandishara, 2015). The GRDP growth trends indicate that this is not the
case in Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province. Average annual growth
rates in other economic sectors (6.1%) exceed GRDP growth rates
observed in the tin mining sector (3.2%), resulting in an average GRDP
growth of 5.8% p.a. from 2001 to 2015.
Secondly, economic diversification is needed to avoid the resource
curse (Bontadini and Savona, 2017; Sabiroglu and Bashirli, 2012). It is
therefore important to assess the linkages between tin mining and other
economic sectors in the province. Out of the 18 economic sectors, the tin
mining sector was included amongst the five sectors that produced the
largest inputs and outputs. The five sectors with input-output values
above the average consist of (1) manufacturing in the base metals sector
(tin smelting), (2) construction, wholesale and retail trade, (3) agricul­
ture, forestry, and fisheries, (4) industries manufacturing other than
basic precious and other non-ferrous metals, and (5) metal ore (tin)
mining. Except for the third sector, all other sectors show economic pull
and push effects related to the tin mining sector as follows.
On the upstream side, the linkage of the mining sector was indeed
low (IBL < 1) due to a significant decline of 38.3%. The decline occurred
in the industries manufacturing other than base, precious, and other
non-ferrous metals, whose percentage decreased from 74.3% in 2005 to
29.5% in 2015. However, it should be noted that most of the inputs
required by the tin mining sector came from the output of this sector
(48.4%). By contrast, the construction, wholesale and retail trade sector
increased from 10.3% in 2005 to 18% in 2015. The inputs of the tin
mining sector also came from the output of the transportation and
storage sector, with an output increase from 4.3% in 2005 to 13.2% in
2015. When examined, these three sectors, driven by the tin mining
sector, showed IFL and IBL values greater than 1 (Priority 1) with IBL
growth above the average of 82.5% for the construction, wholesale and
retail trade sector, and 20.9% for industries manufacturing other than
base, precious and other non-ferrous metals, whereas the transportation
and storage sector had an IFL growth rate above the average at 39.5%.
On the downstream side, the tin mining sector displays a strong
degree of sensitivity (IFL > 1) encouraging economic diversification
towards the manufacturing of base metals, thus inserting the tin mining
sector in Priority II for development. In the period 2001–2015, tin
smelting in the province produced, on average, 75,337 tons of tin
annually with an average export value of US$ 1010 million. This ac­
counts for 74.8% of the province’s total exports (Statistics of Kepulauan
Bangka Belitung, 2020), illustrating the role of this region in generating
foreign exchange. Tin-based export activities create low linkages with
the downstream sector (IFL < 1), resulting in the vulnerability of this
region to experience the resource curse phenomenon (Alpha and Ding,
2016; Bahar and Santos, 2018; Mahonye and Mandishara, 2015).
However, this manufacturing sector has an IBL > 1 with an
above-average growth rate of 31.8%, reflecting its strong ability to
attract upstream economic sectors.
Thirdly, the impact of the tin mining sector’s income multiplier of
1.8 exceeds the average income multiplier of all economic sectors at 1.7.
This figure illustrates that if the regional governments wanted to in­
crease local purchasing power, the main sector that needed to be stim­
ulated is tin mining, as the income from this will significantly affect the
buying and selling activities in local markets (Ibrahim et al., 2019a).
However, an increase in income has the potential to reduce the amount
of labour absorption (Pelzl and Poelhekke, 2021; Rustam et al., 2019).
This explains why the employment multiplier effect in the tin mining
sector is of low value.
Meanwhile, the upstream and downstream sectors attracted and
encouraged by tin mining activities, such as the industries
8
The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069
manufacturing other than base, precious, and other non-ferrous metals
(3.8), the transportation and storage sector (2.3 except for the invest­
ment multiplier), and the manufacturing of base metals sector (4.4), also
had multiplier impact values above the average of all sectors (2). The
construction, wholesale and retail trade also had an average output
multiplier (1.7) higher than the average output multiplier of all sectors
(1.6), which indicates that its development would significantly affect the
output of all sectors. These figures illustrate that these sectors require
stimulation if a significant increase in impact across all sectors is desired,
with tin mining activities playing a central driving role.
In short, our analytical results are in line with the findings of Hil­
mawan & Clark (2019) for mineral-rich regions in Indonesia that no
evidence of a resource curse was found, as indicated by a positive
relationship between mining sector income and per capita income. This
result is also supported by Rahma et al. (2021), showing the Index of
Natural Resource Independence (NRDI) and the Index of Regional
Resource Curse (RRCI) of the Kepulauan Bangka Belitung of 6.1 and 8.3,
respectively, are much lower than other regions, including the East
Kalimantan (NRDI = 75.7; RRCI = 16.6) and the West Papua (NRDI =
50.9; RRCI = 15.2).
A significant difference can be observed between tin mining in
Kepulauan Bangka Belitung and the coal mining region of East Kali­
mantan, which local sector is classified as underdeveloped with low
inter-sector linkages, both forward and backward (Hilmawan et al.,
2016; Rahma et al., 2021; Suharto et al., 2015). Its low linkages indicate
that the mining sector is unable to drive other sectors in East Kali­
mantan, in both the upstream and the downstream sides. In addition, the
high economic dependence on the coal mining and oil/gas sectors will
cause East Kalimantan’s economic output to fall by 65.1% if these re­
sources were depleted or otherwise no longer extracted, likely triggering
a significant reduction in purchasing power in the region. This figure is
six times greater than the tin mining sector’s average output of 10.5% in
Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province. From this output, the tin mining
sector managed to create new output through the base metal processing
industry sector by an average of 22.7%. While these two sectors are thus
coupled, the provincial economy as a whole is nonetheless less
resource-dependant and more diversified than East Kalimantan.
7. Conclusion
The decentralisation policy in Indonesia’s mineral and coal mining
sector was associated with significant economic contributions to the
GRDP structure of the mineral-producing regions and further correlated
positively with per capita income (Hilmawan and Clark, 2019; Suciyanti
et al., 2018). However, empirical studies also illustrate the resource
dependence of some of Indonesia’s regional economies, making them
vulnerable to adverse impacts from the exploitation of natural resources
(Rahma et al., 2021; Suharto et al., 2015). This illustrates the need for
regional-level evaluations of economic development and resource curse
phenomena.
This case study on the Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province provides
an economic analysis of Indonesia’s most important tin production re­
gion. A close relationship between the tin mining business and the
overall regional economy is evident from the LQ, its contribution to
GRDP, and inter-sectoral linkages enabling the sector to generate sig­
nificant income multiplier impacts. These conditions allow the tin
mining sector to drive other economic sectors that, in turn, generate
significant additional multiplier impacts at all levels. From this stand­
point, we consider the tin mining sector is a main driver of the economy
in the province. We did not find economic trends to classify the region as
suffering from a resource curse, given that (1) there is a positive cor­
relation of growth in the tin mining sector and relatively high growth in
other economic sectors, and (2) significant values of multiplier impacts
outside the tin mining business exist, specifically in the transportation
and storage sector, the industries manufacturing other than base,
precious and other non-ferrous metals sector, and the construction,
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069

wholesale and retail trade sector. These three sectors are not charac­
teristic of regions experiencing the resource curse phenomenon (Bon­
tadini and Savona, 2017; Elbra, 2013; Mahonye and Mandishara, 2015;
Sabiroglu and Bashirli, 2012).
While our study illustrates provincial economic development trends,
it seems necessary to conduct further research into the relationships
amongst economic benefits, social welfare indicators, and institutional
aspects to explore the wider socio-economic framework of tin mining in
the province against the backdrop of the decentralisation policy.
Furthermore, for a holistic evaluation of resource curse effects, other
aspects of natural resource governance are important to consider given
the widespread environmental impact generated by onshore and
offshore tin mining activities.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors do not have a conflict of interest with any party related
to the publication of this scientific article.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Gavin Hilson and the reviewers of
this article for important comments improving this article. The authors
are especially grateful to Philip Schütte for his substantial advice,
insightful reviews, and editing. In addition, thanks to Rusni Budiati for
her assistance to copy-edit this article during the review process. This
research is also supported financially by the Indonesia Endowment Fund
For Education (LPDP).

Appendix A Calculation of the location quotient (LQ)

LQ = (Xi / GDRP)/(Xj / GDP) (1)

LQ is the location quotient index, GRDP is the total GRDP of all sectors, GDP is the total GDP of all sectors, Xi is the GRDP of the mining sector at the
regional level, and Xj is the GDP of the mining sector at the national level. An LQ > 1 indicates base and specialised sectors, LQ < 1 shows the non-base
and unspecialised sectors, and LQ= 1 shows the same specialisation sector between regional and national levels.

Appendix B Input-output analysis

The equation for calculating the total inputs and outputs is as follows:
∑3
j=1
Xij + Yi = Xi for i = 1, 2, 3 (2)

∑3
i=1
Xij + Vj = Xj , for j = 1, 2, 3 (3)

X = (I − A)− 1
F (4)

X is total outputs, I is the identity matrix, F is the final demand, A is the matrix A obtained from the input-output transaction matrix, referred to as aij,
and (I-A)− 1 is the Leontief inverse matrix, referred to as αij. The equation used to analyse the direct and indirect linkages is:
∑n
FLi = j=1
aij (5)
∑n
FLDN = j=1
αij (6)
∑n
BLi = i=1
aij (7)
∑n
BLDN = i=1
αij (8)

FLi is the direct forward linkage of sector I, FLDN is direct and indirect forward linkages of sector I, Bli is the direct backward linkage of sector I, BLDN
is direct and indirect backward linkages of sector I, αij is elements of Leontief inverse matrix.
The degrees of dispersion and sensitivity are calculated as follows:
∑
n nj=1 αij
IFLj = ∑n ∑n (9)
i=1 j=1 αij

∑
n ni=1 αij
IBLi = ∑n ∑ n (10)
i=1 j=1 αij

IFLj is the degree of sensitivity of sector j and IBLi is the degree of dispersion of sector j.
The equation used to measure the value of the economic multiplier is (Soelistijo, 2013):

1 Output multiplier
∑
OMji = αij (11)
i

9
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069

2 Income multiplier
/
IMji = Σαij IjT IjT (12)

3 Employment multiplier
∑ Ij αij
LMji = (13)
Ij

4 Value-added multiplier
∑ Vj αij
VMji = (14)
Vj

5 Investment multiplier
∑ kj αij
KMji = (15)
kj

6 Surplus multiplier
/
∑ Vj αij Vj
ΠMjII = (16)
kj αij

kj is a capital coefficient, αij is a Leontief inverse matrix element, vj is a

value-added coefficient, and T is transposed .

Appendix C Details on forward and backward linkages

Tabel C.1

Appendix D Economic dispersion and sensitivity analysis

Tabel D.1

References Carrillo Hoyos, S., 2019. Extractive industry revenues and the subnational resource
curse: the case of the Peruvian Andes. Extr. Ind. Soc. 6 (4), 1134–1142. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.exis.2019.06.001.
Alpha, B.B., Ding, Y., 2016. A study on the impact of natural resources endowment on
Cust, J., Poelhekke, S., 2015. The local economic impacts of natural resource extraction.
economic growth : empirical evidence from Mali. J. Econ. Develop. Stud. 4 (4),
Annu. Rev. Resour. Economics 7 (0). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-
81–103. https://doi.org/10.15640/jeds.v4n4a8.
100814-125106.
Arkam, D., Kuncoro, M., Darwin, M., 2017. The direct economic and fiscal impact of tin
Dubiński, J., 2013. Sustainable development of mining mineral resources. J. Sustain.
in Bangka Belittung Island Province. Int. J. Bus., Econ. Law 14 (3), 2004–2013. http:
Mining 12 (1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.7424/jsm130102.
//ijbel.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/ECON-8.pdf.
Elbra, A.D., 2013. The forgotten resource curse: South Africa’s poor experience with
Awolusi, O.D. (2015). Mining sector and economic growth in Southern African
mineral extraction. Resour. Policy 38 (4), 549–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
economies : a panel data analysis. 16. https://www.tips.org.za/research-archi
resourpol.2013.09.004.
ve/annual-forum-papers/2016/item/3158-mining-sector-and-economic-growth-in-
Erb, M., 2016. Mining and the conflict over values in Nusa Tenggara Timur Province,
southern-africa-economies-a-panel-data-analysis.
Eastern Indonesia. Extr. Ind. Soc. 3 (2), 370–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
Badeeb, R.A., Lean, H.H., Clark, J., 2017. The evolution of the natural resource curse
EXIS.2016.03.003.
thesis : a critical literature survey. Resour. Policy 51 (June 2016), 123–134. https://
Erb, M., Mucek, A.E., Robinson, K., 2021. Exploring a social geology approach in eastern
doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2016.10.015.
Indonesia: what are mining territories? Extr. Ind. Soc. 8 (1), 89–103. https://doi.
Bahar, D., Santos, M.A., 2018. One more resource curse : Dutch disease and export
org/10.1016/j.exis.2020.09.005.
concentration. J. Dev. Econ. 132 (December 2017), 102–114. https://doi.org/
Ericsson, M., & Löf, O. (2019). Mining’s contribution to national economies between
10.1016/j.jdeveco.2018.01.002.
1996 and 2016. Mineral Economics, 223–250. 10.1007/s13563-019-00191-6.
Bappeda of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province. (2017). Medium Term Development
Erman, E. (2004). Deregulation of the tin trade and creation of a local shadow state: a
Plan for Bangka Belitung Islands Province 2017-2022 (p. 170). https://bappeda.babe
Bangka case study. In L. V. Verhandelingen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-
lprov.go.id/dokumen-perencanaan/rpjmd.
(Ed.), Renegotiating Boundaries (pp. 177–201). Brill. 10.1163/9789004260436_
Benghida, S., 2017. Factors and challenges in developing countries under the resource
009.
curse. Int. J. Civil Eng. Technol. 8 (11), 901–910. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr
Erman, E., 2008. Rethinking legal and illegal economy: a case study of tin mining in
/hal-01653339.
Bangka Island. Southeast Asia: History Culture 2008 (37), 91–111. https://doi.org/
Bidayani, E., 2009. Economic value analysis of illegal minning with fishery capture and
10.5512/sea.2008.37_91.
tourism in Tanjung Ular coastal area Kabupaten Bangka Barat. Akuatik 3 (1), 10–12.
Erman, E., 2010. Actor, acces, and environmental politic in Bangka tin mining.
http://journal.ubb.ac.id/index.php/akuatik/article/view/399/357.
J. Indonesian Soc. 36 (2), 71–101. https://doi.org/10.14203/jmi.v36i2.640.
Bontadini, F., & Savona, M. (2017). Revisiting the natural resource industries “ curse ” :
Erman, E. (2014). Timah sebagai blessing atau resource curse?: perempuan, komunitas,
beneficiation or Hirschman backward linkages ? (1). http://comunidades.cepal.org/
dan gerakan protes di Pulau Bangka-Belitung; Tin as a blessing or resource curse?:
redlas/sites/redlas/files/2020-10/SesiÃ3nVI-FilippoBontadini-paper.pdf.
women, communities, and the protest movement on Kepulauan Bangka-Belitung.

10
S. Sulista and F.A. Rosyid
Masyarakat Dan Budaya, 16(3), 457–472. https://adoc.pub/download/9-anggy-den
ok-sukmawati-perkembangan-studi-perubahan-bahasa-.html.
Frankel, J.A. (2010). The natural resource curse: a survey. In NBR Working Paper Series.
10.2139/ssrn.1565588.
Gilberthorpe, E., Papyrakis, E., 2015. The extractive industries and and development :
the resource curse at the micro, meso and macro levels. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2 (2),
381–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2015.02.008.
Hamidi, J., 2015. Management of mining in Indonesia: decentralization and corruption
eradication. Law, Policy Glob., 44, 80–101. https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/ge
t_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/jawpglob44&section=11.
Hilmawan, R., Clark, J., 2019. An investigation of the resource curse in Indonesia.
Resour. Policy 64 (September), 101483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2019.101483.
Hilmawan, R., Yudaruddin, R., Wahyuni, Y.S., 2016. Coal mining operations and its
impact on sectoral and regional area. J. Indonesian Appl. Econ. 6 (1), 22–42. http
s://jiae.ub.ac.id/index.php/jiae/article/view/174.
Hirschman, A. (1982). A dissenter’s confession: “The strategy of economic development”
revisited. December. https://www.rrojasdatabank.info/pioneers4.pdf.
Ibrahim, Haryadi, D., Wahyudin, N, 2018. The social dilemma of tin mining of non-
miners people : a comparative study between Bangka and Belitung People’s
perception. E3S Web Conf. 73, 02014. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/
20187302014.
Ibrahim, I., Haryadi, D., Wahyudin, N., 2019a. Already dependent: a dependency
analysis of market activity on tin mining in Bangka Belitung. E3S Web Conf. 91,
1–10. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20199103004.
Ibrahim, I., Haryadi, D., Wahyudin, N., 2019b. Between fishing, mining, and suction
vessel: the compromise of Teluk Limau People, West Bangka, on tin mining
aggression. PEOPLE: Int. J. Soc. Sci. 5 (1), 178–185. https://doi.org/10.20319/
pijss.2019.51.178185.
Indra, C.A., 2013. Impact of unconventional tin mining in Lampur Village, Central
Bangka Regency. J. Soc. 1 (2), 17. https://media.neliti.com/media/publication
s/130285-ID-dampak-dari-penambangan-timah-inkonvensi.pdf.
Jalloh, M. (2013). Natural resources endowment and economic growth: the West African
experience. J. Nat. Resour. Dev., 66–84. 10.5027/jnrd.v3i0.06.
Kiser, D. (1992). A Location Quotient and Shift Share Analysis of Regional Economies in
Texas. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?um=1&ie=UTF-8&lr&cites=17419961
017986267312.
Lei, Y., Cui, N., Pan, D., 2013. Economic and social effects analysis of mineral
development in China and policy implications. Resour. Policy 38 (4), 448–457.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2013.06.005.
Mack, R.S., Jacobson, D.S., 1996. Core periphery analysis of the European Union: a
location quotient approach. J. Reg. Anal. Policy 26 (1), 3–21. http://www.scopus.
com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-0030391031&partnerID=40&md5=318fc75a2
4cf0dacdf67595c1db703b0.
Mahonye, N., Mandishara, L., 2015. Mechanism between mining sector and economic
growth in Zimbabwe, is it a resource curse ? Economic growth in Zimbabwe, is it a
resource curse? Environ. Econ. 3 (6), 81–92, 2015 Nyasha, 6(3).
Manzano, O., Gutiérrez, J.D., 2019. The subnational resource curse : theory and
evidence. Extr. Ind. Soc. 6 (March), 261–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
exis.2019.03.010.
Martawardaya, B., Basuki, T., & Hanafi, M.F. (2016). Kutukan sumber daya alam di
Indonesia; The Curse of Natural Resources in Indonesia. Article 33 Indonesia,
Newsletter edition 1, September, 1–4.
Ministry of ESDM. (2016). Analisis pembentukan harga di bursa timah Indonesia dan
dunia; Analysis of Price Formation on the Indonesian and World Tin Exchanges. htt
ps://www.esdm.go.id/assets/media/content/content-analisis-pembentukan-harga-
di-bursa-timah-indonesia-dan-dunia.pdf.
Ministry of ESDM. (2021). ASEAN mineral database. http://webgis.psdg.bgl.esdm.go.
id/gisasean/gisdim.phtml?ASEAN.
Olvera, B.C., & Foster-McGregor, N. (2018). What is the potential of natural resource
based industrialisation in Latin America? An Input-Output analysis of the extractive
sectors (Issue 31). 10.31219/osf.io/fdv5e.
Pelzl, P., Poelhekke, S., 2021. Good mine, bad mine : natural resource heterogeneity and
Dutch disease in Indonesia ☆. J. Int. Econ. 131, 103457 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jinteco.2021.103457.
Poncian, J., 2019. Extractive resource ownership and the subnational resource curse :
insights from Tanzania. Extr. Ind. Soc. 6 (2), 332–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
exis.2018.08.013.
Rahma, H., Fauzi, A., Juanda, B., Widjojanto, B., 2021. Natural resource curse
phenomenon in regional development in Indonesia. J. Ekon. Dan Pembangunan
11
The Extractive Industries and Society 10 (2022) 101069
Indonesia 21 (2), 148–163. https://jepi.fe.ui.ac.id/index.php/JEPI/article/view
/1358/361.
Rosyida, I., Khan, W., Sasaoka, M., 2018. Marginalization of a coastal resource-
dependent community: a study on tin mining in Indonesia. Extr. Ind. Soc. 5 (1),
165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2017.11.002.
Rustam, Pudjihardjo, M., Muljaningsih, S, 2019. The effect of capital-intensive
investment on employment: a case study in east Borneo. Int. J. Bus., Econ. Law 19
(5), 322–327.
Sabiroglu, I.M., Bashirli, S., 2012. Input – output analysis in an oil-rich economy : the
case of Azerbaijan. Resour. Policy 37 (1), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2011.12.003.
Soelistijo, U.W., 2013. Several indicators of the Indonesia economy added value: energy
and mineral resource sectors. J. Teknol. Min. Dan Batubara 9 (1), 35–49. http://jur
nal.tekmira.esdm.go.id/index.php/minerba/article/view/777.
Statistics Indonesia. (2015). Gross domestic product at 2000 constant market prices by
industrial origin (billion rupiahs), 2000–2014. https://www.bps.go.id/staticta
ble/2009/07/02/1200/-seri-2000-pdb-atas-dasar-harga-konstan-2000-menurut-la
pangan-usaha-miliar-rupiah-2000-2014.html.
Statistics of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung. (2012). 12 tahun Bangka Belitung dalam
statistik; 12 years of Bangka Belitung in statistics. Statistics of Kepulauan Bangka
Belitung.
Statistics of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung. (2020). Export-Import Statistics of Kepulauan
Bangka Belitung Province 2020. https://babel.bps.go.id/publication/2021/07/1
5/e1ca39095b3be55897cb5932/statistik-ekspor-impor-provinsi-kepulauan-bangka-
belitung-2020.html.
Statistics of Kepulauan Bangka Belitung. (2022). GDRP by industrial origin at base year
2010. https://babel.bps.go.id/indicator/52/32/6/-tahunan-pdrb-menurut-la
pangan-usaha-atas-dasar-harga-konstan-2010-100-.html.
Strotebeck, F., 2010. The location quotient-assembly and application of methodological
enhancements. Econ. Policy 47988, 0–15. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.
NEU.0000349921.14519.2A.
Suciyanti, M., Suseno, T., Saleh, R., 2018. Economic impact analysis of copper mining in
the Province of Papua. J. Teknol. Min. Dan Batubara 14 (1), 75. https://doi.org/
10.30556/jtmb.vol14.no1.2018.394.
Suharto, R.B., Hilmawan, R., Yudaruddin, R., 2015. Sumber daya alam untuk
kesejahteraan penduduk lokal : studi analisis dampak pertambangan batu bara di
empat kecamatan area Kalimantan Timur, Indonesia; Natural resources for the
welfare of local populations: an impact analysis study of coal mining in fou.
J. Organisasi Dan Manajemen 2, 127–137 https://doi.org/ISSN 2442-915.
Sulista, S., Ibrahim, I., Pratama, S., 2019. Accommodation, resistance and divided
community: study of the dynamics of offshore tin mining conflict between the
fishermen of the coastal area and companies in Bangka Island. PEOPLE: Int. J. Soc.
Sci. 5 (3), 275–296. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2019.53.275296.
Suryadi, A., 2016. The governance of tin mining in Bangka-Belitung Archipelago
Province (From perspective of good governance). Global J. Politics Law Res. 4 (1),
18–28. https://www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/The-Governance-of-Tin-
Mining-in-Bangka-Belitung-Archipelago-Province-From-Perspective-of-Good-Gover
nance.pdf.
Syahrir, R., Wall, F., Diallo, P., 2020. Socio-economic impacts and sustainability of
mining, a case study of the historical tin mining in Singkep Island-Indonesia. Extr.
Ind. Soc. 7 (4), 1525–1533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2020.07.023.
USGS. (2021). Mineral commodity summaries, January 2021. https://pubs.usgs.gov/
periodicals/mcs2021/mcs2021-tin.pdf.
Ushie, V. (2012). Political decentralization and natural resource governance in Nigeria
(Issue December). http://www.nsi-ins.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/2013-Politi
cal-Decentralization-and-Natural-Resource-Governance-in-Nigeria.pdf.
Yang, J., Rizvi, S.K.A., Tan, Z., Umar, M., Koondhar, M.A., 2021. The competing role of
natural gas and oil as fossil fuel and the non-linear dynamics of resource curse in
Russia. Resour. Policy 72 (January), 102100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2021.102100.
Yunianto, B., 2009a. Kajian problema pertambangan timah di Propinsi Kepulauan
Bangka Belitung sebagai masukan kebijakan pertimahan nasional: study of the
problems of tin mining in the Kepulauan Bangka Belitung Province as input of
national defense policy. Teknol. Mineral Dan Batubara 5 (3), 97–113. https://doi.
org/10.30556/jtmb.Vol5.No3.2009.893.
Zulkarnain, I., Erman, E., Pudjiastuti, T.N., Mulyaningsih, 2005. Konflik di kawasan
pertambangan timah Bangka Belitung: persoalan dan alternatif solusi. Conflict in the
Bangka Belitung Tin Mining Area: Problems and Alternative Solutions. LIPI Press. htt
ps://www.academia.edu/998455/Konflik_di_kawasan_pertambangan_timah_Bangka
_Belitung_persoalan_dan_alternatif_solusi.