This opening chapter raises the research questions that motivate this book. It briefly introduces the state of mineral exploration in China and the ensuing impacts on the Chinese economy and society and pinpoints the puzzling existence of a contained resource curse in China. After critically reviewing the existing debate on the resource curse, it proposes an original theory about how mineral resources affect state–capital–labor relations, which can explain the empirical observations in China. This chapter lays out the roadmap of the whole book and explains the research methods and data sources for the empirical analysis in the following chapters.

Chapter 8 focuses on State practice, with an emphasis on acts taken unilaterally by States in disputed maritime areas, due to which a conflict has arisen in bilateral relations. To provide the most complete picture of acts undertaken unilaterally in disputed waters, examples have been collected from two types of disputes: first, where disputes to title to territory underlie the disputed maritime areas; and, second, where overlapping claims to maritime zones exist. Unilateral conduct in disputed maritime areas is not exclusively concentrated to certain parts of the world. Varying extents of conflicts are created in State practice when activities under the authority of the coastal State – including concessioning, seismic work, exploratory drilling, exploitation, marine scientific research and fisheries activities – are undertaken unilaterally in a disputed maritime area. Reacting to such a unilateral act is often seen as vital by a claimant State, and these reactions can take various forms, including law enforcement. Acting in response might be a double-edged sword, however, as this reaction can sometimes set in motion a spiral of action and reaction, whereby each State feels obligated to react to the other’s act, so as to defend their sovereign rights and interests.

In the absence of delimitation, there are competing sets of sovereignty or sovereign rights of two States over the same area, which also imply exclusivity. This lies at the heart of why possible conflicts may occur between States. Different variants of overlapping claims can occur between States: that is, as regards internal waters, territorial seas, contiguous zones, EEZs, (extended) continental shelves and archipelagic waters. Varying with the type of disputed maritime zone involved, specific international law questions arise. Both claimant coastal States and third States can be affected by the existence of disputed maritime areas. For claimant States, questions arise around the extent to which rights can, and obligations have to, be exercised. For third States, or their nationals, questions arise concerning how to exercise rights that may have been obtained from one claimant State, and what obligations they must observe when acting, or seeking to act, in a disputed area. As State practice exemplifies, where a claimant, or a national of a third State, has undertaken unilateral conduct in a disputed maritime area, for example concerning mineral resources or fisheries, which regularly prompts the other claimant into responding – including, by taking law enforcement measures.

South Africa made remarkable progress from 1850 to 1961 with the establishment of a ‘modern’ fiscal state. This chapter shows that the discovery of diamonds and gold in the second half of 19th century facilitated the modernization of the country's fiscal system by providing the impetus for modern economic growth and by generating vast resources for the financing of infrastructure and essential social services. It also identifies two consequences of apartheid that negated vital potential benefits of the fiscal modernization process: the state could not achieve the legitimacy needed for political stability and long-term economic development, and the economic diversification that is essential for sustained economic progress in economies built on the extraction of exhaustible resources was thwarted by the debilitating effects of apartheid on policy priorities and the country's skills base. The main conclusion of the chapter therefore is that apartheid prevented South Africa from capitalizing on the opportunities afforded by its mineral wealth and otherwise solid governance foundations.