Advertisement

Economic analysis of Zambia’s ad valorem copper mineral royalty reforms using an analytic hierarchy process framework

  • Webby Banda
Original Paper
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

The Zambian Government has continuously been undertaking adjustment of the ad valorem copper mineral royalty. These reforms have been pursued with the main objective of instituting a robust mineral royalty instrument. In this paper, an economic analysis of Zambia’s ad valorem copper mineral royalty reforms was undertaken so as to determine that which is sturdiest in design. Four evaluation criteria were applied, namely, neutrality, government risk, investor risk and progressivity. Based on the results of these criteria, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) framework was used to determine the most robust royalty reform. Mineral royalty with the highest AHP score denoted that which is sturdiest in design. Results show that the 2009 mineral royalty with an AHP score of 0.91 is the most robust as it offers the best trade-off among the employed criteria.

Keywords

Zambia Copper Ad valorem Mineral royalty Analytic hierarchy process Neutrality Progressivity Investor risk Government risk 

References

  1. Amoako-Tuffour J, Owusu-Ayim J (2010) An evaluation of Ghana’s petroleum fiscal regime. The Ghana Policy J 4:7–33Google Scholar
  2. Appiah HL (2013) Tax reforms & revenue mobilisation: a case study of the mining sector of Ghana. University of Ghana, Master ThesisGoogle Scholar
  3. Ataei M, Jamshidi M, Sereshki F, Jalali SME (2008) Mining method selection by AHP approach. J South Afr Inst Min Metall 108(12):741–749Google Scholar
  4. Barrick, 2015. Barrick Reports First Quarter 2015 Results. Available at: http://www.barrick.com/investors/news/news-details/2015/Barrick-Reports-First-Quarter-2015-Results/default.aspx. Accessed 5 Feb 2017
  5. Boadway R, Keen M (2010) Theoretical perspectives on resource tax design. In: Daniel P, Keen M, McPherson C (eds) The taxation of petroleum and minerals: principles, problems and practice. Routledge, Oxon, New York, pp 13–74Google Scholar
  6. Daniel, P., Goldsworthy, B., Maliszewsk, W., Puyo, D.M., & Watson, A., 2008. Evaluating fiscal regimes for resource projects: an example from oil development. (Working paper 9/23/2008) International Monetary Fund (IMF), Washington D.CGoogle Scholar
  7. Daniel P, Keen M, McPherson C (2010) The Taxation of Petroleum and Minerals: Principles. Problems and Practice (London and New York: Routledge)Google Scholar
  8. Daniel P, Sunley M (2010) Contractual assurances of fiscal stability. In: Daniel P, Keen M, McPherson C (eds) The taxation of petroleum and minerals: principles, problems and practice. Routledge, Oxon, New York, pp 405–424Google Scholar
  9. FAD (2012) Fiscal regimes for extractive industries: design and implementation. International Monetary Fund (IMF), Washington D.CGoogle Scholar
  10. Goldsworthy, B., & Zakharova, D. 2010. Evaluation of the oil fiscal regime in Russia and proposals for reform. (IMF Working paper—WP/10/33) International Monetary Fund, Washington D.CGoogle Scholar
  11. Govori M (2015) Evaluating fiscal regimes for resource projects: an example from oil development. A different approach of tax progressivity measurement. (MPRA paper no. 62846). Munich Personal RePEc ArchiveGoogle Scholar
  12. Guj P (2012) Mineral royalties and other mining specific taxes. Perth: International Mining for Development CenterGoogle Scholar
  13. Hogan L, Goldsworthy B (2010) International mineral taxation: experience and issues. In: Daniel P, Keen M, McPherson C (eds) The taxation of petroleum and minerals: principles, problems and practice. Routledge, Oxon, New York, pp 122–162Google Scholar
  14. Jamshidi M, Ataei M, Sereshki F, Seyed MEJ (2009) The application of AHP approach to selection of optimum underground mining method, case study. Jajarm Bauxite Mine (Iran). Arch Min Sci 54(1):103–117Google Scholar
  15. Kabwe (2017) Optimal mining method selection for Nchanga’s upper orebody using analytic hierarchy process and Yager’s method. Min Technol:1–12Google Scholar
  16. Land B (2009) Capturing a fair share of fiscal benefits in the extractive industry. Trans Corp 18(1):157Google Scholar
  17. Land B (2015) Natural resource taxation in the Asia-Pacific region: fiscal regimes for mining. World Bank Group, JakartaGoogle Scholar
  18. Leijon, L.H.O., 2015. Tax policy, economic efficiency and the principle of neutrality from a legal and economic perspective. (Working paper 2015:2), Uppsala University, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  19. Lipsey, G. & Chyrstal, A., (1995). An introduction to positive economics, 8th ed. pp. 294Google Scholar
  20. Nakhle, C., 2004. Petroleum taxation: a critical evaluation with special application to the UK continental shelf. Ph. D. Thesis: University of SurreyGoogle Scholar
  21. Ostensson, O., Parsons, B., & Dodd, S., 2014. Comparative study of the mining tax regime for mineral exploitation in Kazakhstan. (Final report—94482), Oxford Policy Management, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  22. Otto, J., Andrews, C., Dougett, M., Guj, P., Stermole, F., Stermole, J., & Tilton, J., 2006. Mining royalties—a global study of their impact on investors, Government and Civil Society. pp. 7–8 The World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  23. Otto, J. & Cordes, J., 2002. The regulation of mineral enterprises: a global perspective on economics, Law and Policy, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law and Foundation, WestminsterGoogle Scholar
  24. Raja, A., 1999. Should neutrality be the major objective in the decision making process of the government and firm. Available at: http://www.dundee.ac.uk/cepmlp/main/html/car_article2. Accessed 5 Apr 2015
  25. Saaty LT (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83–98Google Scholar
  26. Saaty TL (1994) Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process, vol 6. Universitas Pittsburgh, USAGoogle Scholar
  27. Sinha, R., 2010. An international comparison of tax regimes. (Discussion paper) Centre for Budget and Government Accountability, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  28. Sunley, E. M. & Baunsgaard, T., 2001. The tax treatment of the mining sector: an IMF perspective. (Background paper prepared for the World Bank workshop on the taxation of the mining sector) International Monetary Fund (IMF), Washington D.CGoogle Scholar
  29. Tordo, S., 2007. Evaluating fiscal regimes for resource projects: an example from oil development fiscal systems for hydrocarbons: design issues. (World Bank Working paper no. 23) World Bank, Washington D.CGoogle Scholar
  30. World Bank, 2016. How can Zambia benefit more from mining. Available at: http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2016/07/18/how-can-zambia-benefit-more-from-mining. Accessed 18 Dec 2017
  31. World Bank, 2017. World Bank commodity price forecast. Available at: http://pubdocs.worldbank.org. Accessed 18 Dec 2017

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mining Engineering DepartmentUniversity of ZambiaLusakaZambia

Personalised recommendations