Paper short abstract:

This paper analyses why two companies critical to Angola’s political economy – the oil sector SONANGOL and the diamond-mining sector ENDIAMA – have taken such distinct paths. (continues below)

Paper long abstract:

(continuation of short abstract) It asks the following question: why is Angola's extractive sector frantically disputed by oil majors and largely ignored by mining majors?

Using data collected during interviews with Angolan officials, the paper begins by addressing three conventional explanations. Firstly, colonial legacy shapes the nature of relations between the companies and the state in the post-colonial period. Secondly, the nature, value and geographic location of the resource extracted determine the importance of the company for the state. Thirdly, the background and training of bureaucrats define the corporate culture of each of the companies.

The second half of the paper moves beyond conventional historical, geographical and cultural explanations. It emphasises that while SONANGOL and ENDIAMA are rightly perceived as the "successful" and the "failed" models of Angola's post-colonial business management, respectively, both are key in serving the interests of the state in very different ways. While SONANGOL is characteristic of the centralisation of power in the hands of a small elite, ENDIAMA is emblematic of the pervasive clientelism that structures the relationship between each body of the state and the society.