This article presents a multidimensional account of the politics of resource extraction in two subnational regions of India in response to the question: what are the political conditions that facilitate extraction? Emerging from the same moment of state creation in 2000, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh are adjacent mineral-rich states with similar demographic profiles and comparable levels of economic development. The authors argue that despite these similarities and India's highly centralized legislative framework for natural resource governance, the two states have developed distinctive 'extractive regimes' in the years since statehood, which contrast in important ways across three dimensions: political organization and history, institutional effectiveness, and the nature and management of social resistance. The article offers the first in-depth, comparative account of how subnational territorial reorganization in India acts as a critical juncture enabling the formation of extractive regimes, which have also converged in important ways in recent years.1. Adivasis refer to the indigenous peoples of India, who are also broadly described as tribal and categorized as the Scheduled Tribes within the Constitution. We will use 'adivasi' and 'tribal' interchangeably in this article. Development and Change 51(3): 843-873.Scholars writing on the politics of extraction have challenged the hegemony of the 'resource curse' paradigm (Ross, 2015) in a number of ways. This 2. The Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005 allows citizens to file information requests on aspects of governance, which the state is legally bound to respond to.