Abstract
This paper assesses the extent to which public participation has been fully translated into practice the case of West African Gas Pipeline (WAGP) and Tank Farm (TF) projects in Nigeria. The empirical basis for this paper is constituted by published environmental impact assessment (EIA) report for the WAGP and TF projects. In addition to this, face-to-face semi-structured interviews were used to corroborate whether provisions of public participation as documented in WAGP and TF projects' EIA report have been fully translated into practice. The lack of compliance noticed with TF project was not surprising as such, being an indigenous oil company, but our expectation is that WAGP project, which is not just a multinational project alone but also sponsored by the World Bank, should comprehensively serve as a yardstick for other projects in Nigeria, although the reverse is the case. The findings further show that institutional problems have prevented public participation from being translated into practice. These institutional problems arise from deep-seated economic and social factors.
1. Introduction
Even though public participation in environmental impact assessment (EIA) aims to identify the impacts of projects on the quality of life of people (Lockie Citation2001; Barrow Citation2010; Cuppen et al. Citation2012), in practice it has not been fully translated more generally (Kørnøv et al. Citation2005; Bond & Pope Citation2012; Esteves et al. Citation2012). Petts (Citation1999, p. 6) suggests that researchers should investigate ‘whether EIA stages are fulfilling potential or wasting opportunity’. Importantly, Morgan (Citation2012) argues that a case study evaluation can be used to improve public participation practice. This has called for exploration of the Nigeria experience, in terms of establishing whether public participation provisions as documented in the West African Gas Pipeline (WAGP) and Tank Farm (TF) EIA projects report are coherent and integrated in their approaches to the country's EIA legislation and World Bank requirements, thus solving environmental problems.
We have divided the paper into four sections. The first presents the methods of data collection and analysis. In the second section, we discuss the legal and institutional context for public participation in Nigeria, so that project proponents identify their expectations. The third section describes the content of the two selected projects used in this paper – WAGP and TF, and assesses whether they have met the required expectations or not. The final section explores the main techniques for preventing public participation in Nigeria, including their reasons.
2. Methods of data collection and analysis
The paper aims to explore the Nigerian experience, in terms of establishing whether public participation provisions as documented in the WAGP and TF EIA projects report are coherent and integrated in their approaches to the country's EIA legislation and World Bank requirements. In this study, both secondary and primary data were used. We have described as secondary sources data collected from Government establishments and libraries, and this implies that they were not originally generated by us. Apart from materials obtained from libraries, the secondary data we have used in this paper include previously published EIA reports on a multinational (WAGP) project and the three indigenous (TF) oil company's projects. These three indigenous projects include OANDO Plc Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and Lister Oil Petroleum and Linetrale Gas Facilities EIA Reports. Therefore, an EIA report can be defined as the written details of an EIA activity ranging from project alternatives to impact monitoring submitted to the responsible government agencies in Nigeria.
Data directly collected by us are referred to as primary sources; we engaged 56 participants in semi-structured face-to-face interviews. The semi-structured face-to-face interview appears to be one of the most appropriate forms of qualitative methods, as it encourages what has been described as ‘conversation with a purpose’ (Bull et al. Citation2008, p. 706). The participants were interviewed on the subject of the quality of public participation in EIA, and the issues related to WAGP and TF projects were reflected on.
The starting point of our analysis was the transcription of semi-structured interviews, which were then coded manually to ensure data reliability (Creswell Citation2007). In addition, coding helped us in the translation of data into categories, so that they could be analysed, as this obliged us to focus on essential features. Based on the maxim that ‘quality representation cannot be achieved without accurate interpretation’ (Stake & Schwandt Citation2006, p. 414), we used narrative analysis, telling the stories, relationships, feelings and experiences of the policy actors. The main aim of our interpretative approach was to understand ‘the world from the point of view of participants…rather than deriving an explanation of the world’ (Green & Thorogood Citation2009, p. 14). Crucially, our paper did not simply focus on evaluation alone, but also upon a theoretically informed interpretation of data. The next section discusses the legal and institutional context for public participation in Nigeria, in which project proponents define their expectations.
3. Legal and institutional context for public participation in Nigeria
In Nigeria, EIA is operated by three different independent systems: the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) Act (1969), the Federal Ministry of Environment (FMENV) EIA Decree 86 (1992) and the Town and Country Planning Decree 88 (1992) (Ogunba Citation2004). Importantly, out of these three systems, the DPR and FEMNV EIA systems are related to the TF and WAGP projects. However, the DRP EIA system does not emphasize public participation (DPR Citation2002), while the FMENV EIA legislation gives consideration to public participation on paper (FEPA Citation1992).
One of the requirements for public participation under the FMENV EIA legislation is that ‘the EIA report shall include the proceedings of consultation with adjoining communities and other stakeholders held in a public forum…the proceedings shall be documented in the appendix to the report’ (Nwafor Citation2006, p. 191). Furthermore, section 37 of the FMENV EIA legislation states that a review panel shall ‘ensure that the information required for an assessment by a review panel is obtained and made available to the public’ (FEPA Citation1992, p. A991). In addition to the FMENV EIA requirements for public participation, the World Bank has also developed supplementary requirements that multinational oil companies' project in particular must meet under different headings: methodology, implementation and feedback (See Nwafor Citation2006, p. 199). For example, the proponent should ensure that everyone is able to attend, particularly those who may want to participate (Nwafor Citation2006. 191).
In this section, we have further described the role of FMENV, being the custodians of the country's EIA legislation. FMENV has responsibility for the formulation and implementation of environmental regulations in Nigeria in line with section 60 of the EIA Act. The FEMNV carries out oil- and gas-related EIA project implementation through its Department of Environmental Assessment, Oil and Gas Division. In addition, FMENV has two subsidiary executive agencies, the National Environmental Standards Regulations and Enforcement Agency (NESREA established in 2007) and the National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency (NOSDRA set up in 2006). NESREA is responsible for the enforcement of environmental laws, while NOSDRA has put in place different measures such as emergency response services and national oil spill planning among other activities. Having discussed the legal and institutional context of public participation in Nigeria through the FEMNV EIA legislation and the World Bank requirements, the next section describes the TF and WAGP projects and also assesses whether they have met the required expectations or not.
4. WAGP and TF projects: their descriptions, implementation successes and failures
There are two reasons why emphasis is given to both the WAGP and TF projects. First, the WAGP is operated by a partnership of multinational oil companies (for example, Chevron, NNPC, Shell and Volta River Authority among others), while the TF installation is basically carried out by indigenous oil and gas operators. The second is that both projects were widely cited by our interviewees as key developments that require improvement in Nigeria. Based on this, we concentrate on Nigeria's experience, as WAGP involves other countries such as Ghana, Togo and Benin. This section briefly describes both the WAGP and TF projects and reviews the extent to which public participation requirements as highlighted above have been met, before discussing the aspect of public participation requirements that have not been fully translated into practice from our interviewees' perspectives.
4.1 Description of the WAGP project and its implementation successes
The WAGP project covers both the offshore and onshore environment. It originates in Itoki, Nigeria, where it connects to an existing natural gas system at the Alagbado (Nigeria) facility, traverses the Nigeria coastline and then runs offshore to a distribution terminal near Takoradi, Ghana and beyond (WAGP Citation2004 and see Figure ).
Figure 1 WAGP's project areas. Source: WAGP Citation2004, p. ES 3.
According to the WAGP EIA report (2004), one of the main implementation successes is that the project gives recognition to stakeholders' consultation on the pros and cons of natural gas and pipelines. Similarly, the stakeholders were given an opportunity to provide their inputs on EIA- and non EIA-related issues through an ‘informal meeting’ (see Table ), while the types of stakeholders and number of consultations conducted can be found in Table .
Table 1 WAGP stakeholders' consultation summary of EIA and non-EIA issues.
Table 2 Summary of WAGP consultation by individual stakeholders.
4.2 Description of the TF projects and their implementation successes
Nigerian oil companies manage a range of onshore projects, one of the most significant being TF. TF is used to store petroleum products such as premium motor spirit and automotive oil. The project is situated at Apapa, which is an urban part of Lagos State, where several other TFs are situated. These TFs are designed to help the Nigerian Government solve the scarcity of petroleum products in the country.
One of the main implementation successes is that the indigenous oil companies' projects consider public participation, like the multinational oil companies' project. For example, the OANDO Plc EIA report depicts various meeting held with the local people, where questionnaires were administered together with photographic evidence. Similarly, the Linetrale Gas Facilities EIA report emphasizes that during the EIA review priority was given to the attendance of participants as stipulated under the FMENV EIA legislation. Having described the WAGP and TF projects and how they have met the country's and World Bank public participation requirements, the next subsection unpacks the requirements that have not been fully translated into practice.
4.3 Aspects of public participation requirements that have not been fully implemented
As evidenced above, both project proponents claimed that public participation had been conducted satisfactorily. However, it appears that from a legal point of view neither of them had fully met the FMENV EIA legislation and World Bank requirements. For example, neither the public participation proceedings nor comments from experts were attached as an appendix to the EIA reports, nor had the World Bank conditions for public participation methodology, implementation and feedback been met completely. Based on this, we assess the public participation failures related to the two projects – WAGP and TF– from our interviewees' perspectives.
4.3.1 Case study of the WAGP
The WAGP project has not fully complied with the content of FEMNV EIA legislation and World Bank conditions that require greater public participation. Thus one interviewee commented:
we have visited WAGP project at the high sea…there was EIA for this project, but the communities were not carried along and that is applicable to most multinational oil companies' project. (Interview with E.L. NGO, Social Environmental Rights Action Control Group Centre, 27 August 2010.)
The WAGP project is an example of a multinational oil company project, and one aspect that we considered required urgent attention was why the same multinational would comply in other national contexts but not in Nigeria. We explored this issue with one of the professors of Geography at the University of Nigeria, who believes that operators have not been complying with public participation requirements ‘because the situation in Nigeria appears to be business as usual’ (PL Academic University of Lagos, Control Group, 16 September 2010).
Despite the existence of numerous non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Nigeria, the lack of adequate public participation still remains a major challenge. Following the opinion of another Professor of Geography in Nigeria, the participants maintain that:
what we have seen from experience is confounding public participation. (Interview with PA, Academic University of Nigeria, Control Group, 6 September 2010.)
It appears that the approach to public participation in Nigeria is more top-down than bottom-up. Matland (Citation1995, p. 146) emphasizes that ‘top-down theorists see policy designers as the central actors and concentrate their attention on factors that can be manipulated at the central level, while the bottom-up theorists…argue policy really is made at the local level’. Therefore, the failure of public participation in Nigeria has encouraged the local communities to protest and NGOs to campaign against the inaccessibility of WAGP EIA report. This is evidenced by the following statement:
We did a campaign that WAGP EIA report should be put on internet and they have done that…you can now see it on World Bank inspection panel site. (Interview with M.H., NGO Environmental Rights Action, Control Group, 8 September 2010.)
If it had not been for the local people and NGOs, the WAGP EIA report would not have been accessible. However, it would have been preferable if the WAGP project's proponent had conceded this idea without the protest and campaign. The issue of protest, for example, shows that not everyone has had an opportunity to participate. This contravenes the World Bank requirements for public participation.
4.3.2 Case study of Tank Farm
The TF projects and indigenous oil company's projects in particular are meant to comply with the content of FEMNV EIA legislation, but this has not been fully achieved to a larger extent. In Nigeria, for example, a pipeline that was constructed by one of the indigenous oil companies failed to allow public participation. The project not only failed to permit public participation, but also failed to observe good practice, as the pipelines were laid very close to residential homes.
in Lagos there was a project that was carried out by Indigenous Oil Companies … and we asked people questions on what the pipeline will carry they said it will carry water … and the Ministry of Environment said that the pipes will carry gas, now imagine the public do not know this. (Interview with P.P., NGO, Environmental Rights Action, Control Group, 24 August 2010.)
However, even when the local communities participated in the EIA process, their inputs and information appeared to be irrelevant according to one interviewee. The interviewee continued:
the community representatives went to the laboratory and the result shows high level of toxicity … final report was published without any input from the community representatives … this is the similar situation with the entire oil and gas projects, where Non Governmental Organizations and communities information are not used. (Interview with E.L., Social Environmental Rights Action, Control Group Centre, 27 August 2010.)
It is therefore not sufficient to provide answers on public participation alone, but also the techniques that have been used to prevent public participation in Nigeria and the reasons for these techniques should also be explored – the next section deals with this issue.
5. Techniques for preventing public participation in Nigeria
We have categorized the techniques used for preventing public participation in Nigeria into four main subsections. This is discussed under different headings: quasi-participation; oil companies hiring people to support their project; inadequate ways of making EIA reports available to the public; and insufficient number of days for the public to lodge complains against a particular project.
5.1 Quasi-participation
It has become normal practice in the Nigeria for one of the national littoral states (states along the Nigerian territorial waters) to represent other states, and for one of the local government chairpersons to represent other local governments during EIA panel reviews. This is particularly common in offshore projects. The essence of this type of quasi-participation technique is to minimize cost, and this is evident from the statements below:-
Although for the deep sea, we have to pick a state from the littoral states to act as voice for all the other states…The chairman of the association of local government is picked to represent the rest Local Government Authorities…to reduce cost. (Interview with R.O. FEMNV, Programme Group, 2 September 2010.)
This quasi-participation can be likened more generally to what Richardson et al. (Citation1982, p. 2) describe as ‘inner circle negotiation, which involves a limited range of groups who matter’ in policy implementation. In more general terms, unequal access to consultative and participatory process has remained a monumental challenge in developing countries (Nwosu et al. Citation2006; Wood Citation2003).
5.2 Oil companies hiring people to support their project
According to one of the participants, another technique for preventing public participation in Nigeria is the use of ‘rented crowds’ (situations where oil companies are engaged in hiring people to support their project), which is common with onshore projects. This is evident from the statement below:
To some extent EIA has been endangered by public participation … some of the participants are rented crowd … I am saying this with all sincerity because it has happened on a number of occasions that you see them fighting. (Interview with O.K. academic, Nigerian Institute of Social and Economic Research, Control Group, 7 October 2010.)
It appears that one of the reasons for the ‘rented crowds’ scenario in the country's public participation might be the lack of value attached to the environment and public well-being. It is on this note that Nwafor (Citation2006, p. 589) describes the public participation in Nigeria as a ‘window dressing exercise’. However, it seems that the situation in Nigeria better than that in Uzbekistan, where there is no public participation at all (Khusnutdinova Citation2004).
5.3 Inadequate ways of making EIA reports available to the public
It seems that public participation has not been fully translated into practice in Nigeria because of the manner in which the EIA reports are disseminated. This has been otherwise described as poor provision of information (Hartley & Wood Citation2005). The empirical evidence shows that most EIA reports in the country are either not displayed or are displayed inconspicuously by the responsible agency, because of lack of financial resources, and about 75% of the participants agreed with this statement:
where we used to display EIA report … the place was not conspicuous I felt it should be and I was using my money to buy cardboard. (Interview with D.G., Waste Management Society of Nigeria, Control Group, 29 August 2010.)
5.4 Insufficient number of days for the public to
lodge complaints against a particular project
Apart from the use of selected people, rented crowds and reports not properly displayed as evidenced from the above, another technique for preventing public participation in Nigeria is that only 21-day periods have been allocated for the local people and NGOs to lodge any complaint before the commencement of any project. All the interviewees argued that a 21 day periods of grace will only be meaningful in Nigeria when the government implementing agencies are ready to do things the way they ‘ought to be from the onset’. For example, the government implementing agencies should be ready to move beyond advertising EIA reports alone to ensuring that they are available on the internet, displayed accordingly, and respecting the opinions of local people. Until this is done, the 21 day period of grace might remain a mirage:
what the law says is that EIA should be displayed for 21 days for input to be made … what happens is that they keep them in lockers with keys … so that people like us will not see the document and fault the document. (Interview with K.N. NGO, Environmental Rights Action, Control Group, 30 August 2010.)
Public participation in Nigeria has not only failed to translate into practice the FMENV EIA legislation and World Bank requirements alone, but it has also flouted recommendations made at an international workshop on best practice in EIA follow-up (Arts et al. Citation2001). Likewise, Nigeria's practices in relation to public participation are against the content of principle 22 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development that provides for effective participation of local people, and this is further viewed as a means of ‘promoting social responsibility and citizenship’ (Morrison-Saunders & Early Citation2008, p. 29). They also run against the content on international public participation set out in the Aarhus Convention, which emphasizes early public participation, full and complete access to documentation, and submission of public opinions into the policy process, among other issues (Hartley & Wood Citation2005).
6. Conclusion
What emerges from this paper is that institutional problems have prevented public participation from being coherent and integrated in its approach to environmental challenges and difficulties. These institutional problems arise from deep-seated economic and social factors. The lack of funds and value attached to public well-being and the environment, among other reasons, has contributed negatively to the effective implementation of public participation within multinationals' and national oil companies' projects.
Despite public participation not being fully integrated into multinational oil companies' projects, the situation is still better than that of national oil companies' projects, where people do not even know what a particular pipeline is intended to carry (water or gas). We therefore recommend that representatives from local communities should be allowed to participate fully in the projects and their views should be taken very seriously as they are critical stakeholders. Based on the multiple challenges related to public participation and the difficulty in even accessing EIA reports in Nigeria, the current 21 days consultation period should be increased to 52 days.
Funding
We wish to acknowledge the financial support of the Petroleum Technology Development Fund.
Related Research Data
References
- Arts , J , Caldwell , P and Morrison-Saunders , A . 2001 . Environmental impact assessment follow-up: good practice and future directions – findings from a workshop at the IAIA 2000 conference . Impact Assess Proj Appraisal , 19 ( 3 ) : 175 – 185 .
- Barrow , CJ . 2010 . How is environmental conflict addressed by SIA? . Environ Impact Assess Rev , 30 ( 5 ) : 293 – 301 .
- Bond , A and Pope , J . 2012 . The state of the art of impact assessment in 2012 . Impact Assess Proj Appraisal , 30 ( 1 ) : 1 – 4 .
- Bull , R , Petts , J and Evans , J . 2008 . Social learning from public engagement: dreaming the impossible? . J Environ Plan Manage , 51 ( 5 ) : 701 – 716 .
- Creswell , JW . 2007 . Qualitative inquiry research design: choosing among five approaches , London : Sage Publications .
- Cuppen , M , Broekhans , B and Enserink , B . 2012 . Public participation in EIA and attitude formation . Impact Assess Proj Appraisal , 30 ( 2 ) : 63 – 74 .
- Department of Petroleum Resources. 2002. Environmental Guidelines and Standards for the Petroleum Industry in Nigeria. Environmental Guidelines.
- Esteves , AM , Frankss , D and Vanclay , F . 2012 . Social impact assessment: the state of the art . Impact Assess Proj Appraisal , 30 ( 1 ) : 34 – 42 .
- FEPA (Federal Environmental Protection Agency) . 1992 . Decree no 86 1992 – EIA , Lagos Nigeria : Federal Government Press .
- Green , J and Thorogood , N . 2009 . Qualitative methods for health research , London : Sage Publications .
- Hartley , N and Wood , C . 2005 . Public participation in environmental impact assessment-implementing the Aarhus convention . Environ Impact Assess Rev , 25 ( 4 ) : 319 – 340 .
- Khusnutdinova , G . 2004 . Environmental impact assessment in Uzbekistan . Impact Assess Proj Appraisal , 22 ( 2 ) : 167 – 172 .
- Kørnøv , L , Christensen , P and Nielsen , EH . 2005 . Mission impossible: does environmental impact assessment in Denmark secure a holistic approach to the environment? . Impact Assess Proj Appraisal , 23 ( 4 ) : 303 – 314 .
- Lockie , S . 2001 . SIA in review: setting the agenda for impact assessment in the 21st century . Impact Assess Proj Appraisal , 19 ( 4 ) : 277 – 287 .
- Matland , R . 1995 . Synthesising the implementation literature: the ambiguity-conflict model of policy implementation . J Public Admin Res Theory , 5 ( 2 ) : 145 – 174 .
- Morgan , RK . 2012 . Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art . Impact Assess Proj Appraisal , 30 ( 1 ) : 5 – 14 .
- Morrison-Saunders , A and Early , G . 2008 . What is necessary to ensure natural justice in environmental impact assessment decision-making? . Impact Assess Proj Appraisal , 26 ( 1 ) : 29 – 42 .
- Nwafor , JC . 2006 . Environmental impact assessment for sustainable development: the Nigeria perspective , Enugu Nigeria : Environment and Development Policy Centre for Africa .
- Nwosu , HU , Nwachukwu , IN , Ogaji , SOT and Probert , SD . 2006 . Local involvement in harnessing crude oil and natural gas in Nigeria . Appl Energy , 83 ( 11 ) : 1274 – 1287 .
- Ogunba , OA . 2004 . EIA systems in Nigeria: evolution, current practice and shortcomings . Environ Impact Assess Rev , 24 ( 6 ) : 643 – 660 .
- Petts , J . 1999 . “ Introduction to environmental impact assessment in practice: fulfilled potential or wasted opportunity? ” . In Hand book of environmental impact assessment , Edited by: Petts , J . Vol. 2 , 1 – 9 . Oxford London : Blackwell .
- Richardson , J , Gustafsson , G and Jordan , G . 1982 . “ The concept of policy style ” . In Policy styles in Western Europe , Edited by: Richardson , J . United Kingdom : George Allen and Unwin Publisher .
- Stake , RE and Schwandt , TA . 2006 . “ On discerning quality in evaluation ” . In The Sage handbook of evaluation , Edited by: Shaw , IF , Greene , JC and Mark , MM . 404 – 418 . London : Sage Publications .
- West Africa Gas Pipeline (WAGP). 2004. West African Gas Pipeline Environmental Impact Assessment Report Prepared by West Africa Gas Pipeline Company Limited.
- Wood , C . Environmental impact assessment in developing countries: an overview . Conference on New Directions in Impact Assessment for Development: Methods and Practice