| As for mineral rights, you can go two ways with it, 1 - when you buy land the owner of that land owns not only the top of that land but everything below it, or 2 - while a private owner can buy the top of the land the natural resources under the ground still belong to the government.
now each has its benefits and problems. the first one helps promote investments in mining as companies own completely what they mine, so this makes investment easier in natrual resources and helps grows the private sector of a country with less governmental red tape. the problem is that foreign investors can mine YOUR resources and you see little benefit as most of it is shipped out of your country.
the second one offers better protection of natrual resources so that the home country sees more benefits from the mining of natural resources in the case of foreign investments. the government can control what companies do and how much they profit from the mining of the resources as they are more or less just leasing the rights to mine and don't own the resources to mine. by having companies pay leasing rights and putting whatever other tariffs on the mining and export of natrual resources the home country can see a greater benefit than in first type. however, this discurages foreign investment for the same reason it benefits the home country, they don't get total control of the resources. also, to take the example of Mexico when they nationalized the oil industry, it pisses foreign companies and countries off..... a lot.
so protect investments, or protect profit for the home country? of course there can be a balance between the two these are just the two extremes, and i think i've rambled on enough. | 
Linear Mode
