2.7.

1 Forms of Participation
Participation is a heterogeneous process, taking on different forms and methods depending on the
administrator, society or government. Participation does not only imply negotiation, convergence
and cooperation of interests and actors, so there is bound to be disagreement and confrontation. It
is not a mere approval of proposals made by a higher authority but entails a genuine involvement
of all relevant stakeholders. Therefore, the promoters of participation must understand the
advantages and disadvantages of these methods since they will all generate different
expectations.

Informative participation: This implies exchanging information and knowledge on certain issues
of concern to the community. The community provides the information to the State and vice
versa, enabling everybody to make proper decisions about administering resources, leading to
more optimal resource management. It is clear to note that there is a distinction between
informative participation and access to information, while in the latter, the individual (either
particulate or collective) becomes the active participant. In the first instance, the individual
becomes a passive receptor of the information, and in the second, the individual receives the
information because he or she has requested it. At the same time, the State is passive with respect
to the obligations assumed.

The Aarhus Convention obliges states to ensure certain minimum requirements are observed
when informing the public. Article6(2) of the international treaty includes obligations to ensure
the public concerned are informed early in an environmental decision-making procedure and in
an adequate, timely and effective manner of the activity in question and of information on the
proposed activity supplied by the developer, the type of decision possible, and the authority
which will make the final decision. In addition, certain procedural rights must be provided to the
public, including notice on when the process will begin, the opportunities for public
participation, arrangements if any for a public hearing, as well as the name of the public
authority from which relevant information can be obtained and to which the public can send
comments.1 These requirements are designed to ensure that consultation with the public is
meaningful in providing the public with the opportunity to become involved in the process. Also,

1 Aarhus Convention, Art. 6(2)

Article 7 states that After providing the public with the required information, each Party should
make adequate practical or other measures to allow the public to plan and develop environmental
plans and programs within a transparent and fair framework.

Consultative participation: This implies expressing opinions and inquiry into the actors' position
in a given situation, but it is not directly binding to the authorities. One of the available legal
mechanisms for consultative participation in the public hearing in which the State calls the
affected victims to a given site to hear their ideas on a specific issue; the conclusions reached
during this type of proceeding, no matter the outcome, are usually not binding on the State. Each
State can participate in EIA programs to adhere to its policy and benefit from a diverse
environment, initiatives, and natural resources. However, under the European Council
Environmental Impact Assessment Directive,2 states must guarantee effective consultation with
the public by 'ensuring that before consent is given, projects likely to have significant effects on
the environment by virtue among other things of their nature, size or location are made subject to
an assessment concerning their effects'.3 Article 8 notes that opinions and comments gathered
from the public must be considered and taken into account by the decision-maker in deliberations
on the project's viability. This obliges the developer to cooperate with relevant competent
authorities and the public to collect and make available information relating to the proposed
project's environmental impact. In this way, the relevant national decision-making authority is
provided with the requisite information on a specific project proposal enabling the latter's likely
environmental impact to be assessed before deciding the project's future.

Participation in decision-making implies commitment and exercise of power in the decision-

making process. An example is a participation in budget allocation in which the State calls all
social; actors affected not only to express their ideas and opinions but also to decide on what,
when, and how investment resources are allocated. Here, the decisions that result from the
participatory process are binding to the state. The preamble to the Aarhus Convention underlines
the importance of public participation in that it 'enhances the quality and implementation of
decisions, contributes to public awareness of environmental issues, give shallow the publicness
its concerns, and enables public awareness authorities to take account of such concerns. In the
decision-making process, relating to those activities listed in Annex I of the Aarhus Convention,
2 Council Directive 85/337/EEC [1985] OJ L175/40 as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC [1997] OJ L73/5.
3 EIA Directive supra note 3, Art. 2(1).
states parties are obliged to ensure that specific requirements are met with regard to public
participation.4 Furthermore, the same requirements must be followed in assessing the viability of
non-Annex 1 projects, which may significantly affect the environment in the view of the State
party concerned.5 In effect, therefore, the Convention requires public participation in the
permitting process relevant to those activities which potentially have a significant environmental
impact. Activities noted in Annex 1 are categorized into twenty groups, which among other
things, cover the energy sector and are relevant for this research:6 the production and processing
of metals, the mineral industry, production and gas extraction for commercial purposes, and
pipelines to transport gas, oil, and chemicals.

Participation in management (co-management or joint management): This implies exercising

power and commitment to effectively implement policies, projects, public works, and services.
This is the highest stage of participation, in which the State empowers social actors to become
the executors or monitors of the activities. Unfortunately, while the Aarhus Convention refers to
public participation in policy preparation, it states it in terms that leave an enormous deal of
discretion to State parties: "To the extent appropriate, each party shall endeavour to provide
opportunities for the public participation in the preparation of policies relating to the
environment".7

The ambiguous nature of this obligation is unfortunate, and the Commission does not anticipate
proposing legislative measures to implement it.8 However, it is submitted that each state must be
allowed to participate in the public program at the policy-making stage of every policy which
impacts the environment.

For the adoption and application of the Aarhus Convention at the European Commission, a
Regulation (No 1367/2006) was enacted by the European Community. The latter must be
differentiated from the European Directives established in implementing the Convention in the
Member States of the European Union (EU). Directives are directed to the European Union
members and must be incorporated into the national legal systems of the member states in

4 Aarhus Convention, Art. 6(1) a.

5 Id Art. 6(1) b.
6 Activities include mineral oil and gas refineries, coke ovens, and operations for the final disposal of irradiated nuclear fuel.
7 Aarhus Convention, Art. 7.
8 Proposal for a Directive providing public participation regarding drawing up specific plans and programmes relating to the environment,
amending Council Directives 85/337 and 96/61, COM (2000) 839. Pp7
question. The previously stated "Regulation," on the other hand, is directed to the authorities of
the EU, such as the European Commission, the European Investment Bank and the Council.

Organizations or individuals have no right to challenge the EU institution's decisions before the
European Court of Justice (ECJ) in environmental issues, according to the prevalent case law of
the European Court of Justice, the majority of which made the decision even before the
Convention entered into the EU's force. This is criticized by the communicant, who points out
that the Access to Justice clause in Regulation 1367/2006 only gives the courts access to the
legal situation under the European Communities Treaty (which, in effect, denies the community
concerned access to justice).

It is the responsibility of the European Parliament to develop a capacity-building program and

provide training on the implementation of the Aarhus Convention for central, municipal, and
regional authorities who are responsible for Aarhus-related issues. These include the
establishment of provincial commissions to provide free legal assistance, as well as training for
judges, prosecutors, and attorneys, and the development of a public awareness-raising campaign
on Aarhus rights.

Participation will have varied dynamics in each of these instances, creating different expectations
of the public or stakeholders who participate.

1.1 Participatory Rights of Groups

Sustainable development has been defined as ‘development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising on the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs.’ 9 As
sustainable development depends upon the resolute effort of everyone, so does public
participation, which is a vital precept of sustainable development. The Rio Declaration opens
with 'human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development. 10 Most
international and nationals' laws and practices infuse that 'human dimension' into different areas
like resourcing planning, operating and financing activities globally. In the past, most major
projects only needed the landowner, the project developer, financier and the government with

9 The World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), Our Common Future 43 (1987) [hereinafter WCED].
10 For the public participation part, see Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, June 13, 1992, princi.10,20,21,22, adopted by the
UN Conference on Environment (UNCED) at Rio de Janeiro. UN DOC. A/CONF.151/26(vol.1) (1992); 31 I.L.M. 874 (1992).
jurisdiction over the land to get on. Still, even when public participation exists, some individuals,
groups or opinions might be excluded from the participatory process because of several factors
such as; gender discrimination, race, age, ethnicity, nationality, culture, illiteracy and geography.
International law has addressed this human exclusion by creating specific requirements for the
participation of these historically excluded groups.11

Since indigenous peoples' labour rights are fundamental, the International Labor Organization's
Convention No. 169 and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
include special provisions on employment and labour rights in African countries like South
Africa and Kenya.12 The majority of indigenous peoples have developed highly specialized
livelihood strategies and occupations tailored to the conditions of their traditional lands and are
therefore highly reliant on access to lands, territories, and resources to survive. Traditions-based
occupations include handicrafts and rural and community-based industries and activities such as
hunting and fishing and trapping, shifting cultivation, and foraging for food. In some cases, the
indigenous peoples are simply identified by their traditional occupations, such as pastoralists,
shifting cultivators, and hunter-gatherers, which are all examples of traditional occupations.

A lack of respect for indigenous peoples' rights and cultures frequently results in discrimination
against their traditional means of subsistence and livelihood, for example, in parts of South-East
Asia where practices such as rotating agriculture are prohibited by law, as well as in parts of
Africa where the government does not recognize pastoralists' rights to land and grazing.

Though the initial persons or group remain essential for the project, the new public participation
laws have introduced a variety of additional 'players' such as environmental and human rights
organizations, local communities, indigenous people and their campaigners, citizen advisory
boards and other new voices.

Anderson alludes that it is morally right for these marginalized groups to be included in
environmental decision-making as they predominantly suffer from environmental degradation,

11 Donald M. Zillman, Alastair Lucas, and George (Rock) Pring (2002) Human Rights in Natural Resource Development. Public Participation
in the Sustainable Development of Mining and Energy Resources. Oxford University Press. (2007). Pp.58
12 ILO, INDIGENOUS & TRIBAL PEOPLES’ RIGHTS IN PRACTICE. PROGRAMME TO PROMOTE ILO CONVENTION No. 169 (PRO
169) International Labour Standards Department (2009):153 <https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---
normes/documents/publication/wcms_106474.pdf> accessed 5 September 2021.
and also because the environmental decision will be significantly improved if the decision-
13
makers 'are the same as those who pay for and live by the consequences of the decisions. Most
International instruments touched on the importance of inclusiveness for the success of any
project. For example, Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration states that environmental issues are
best handled with the participation of concerned citizens.’14 Also, on the topic of inclusiveness,
the OAS Public Participation Strategy expressed that 'Full participation by all those interested in
or affected by sustainable development issues is essential to achieving durable solutions. Special
efforts should be made to include the private sector's participation and create equal opportunities
for women and vulnerable groups such as indigenous populations, youth, disadvantaged racial
and ethnic minorities (including disadvantaged populations of African descent), and other
traditionally marginalized groups.'15 These five groups: indigenous communities, local
communities, women, youth and NGOs have increasingly become the conventional special
inclusion groups in most modern international law and will be discussed below.

1.1.1 Indigenous Peoples

Environmental law recognizes the importance of indigenous peoples and local communities,
particularly their traditional knowledge about environmentally sustainable practices.
Consecutively, the human rights treaties and instruments relating to indigenous peoples also
contain specific environmental protections. Principle 22 of the Rio Declaration states that
'Indigenous people and their communities, and other local communities, have a vital role in
environmental management and development because of their knowledge and traditional
practices. States should recognize and duly support their identity, culture and interests and enable
16
their effective participation in achieving sustainable development.' It is important to note that
these laws have been framed because indigenous people have for centuries established and
practised a sustainable way of life linked to their lands and resources, which are necessary for

13 Micheal R. Anderson, Human Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection: An Overview, in Human Rights Approaches to
Environmental Protection 1, at 9. (Alan E. Boyle & Michael R. Anderson eds., 1996)
14 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, supra note 86, principle 10.
15 Organization Of Amemerican States Inter-American Council For Integral Development (Oas Cidi),Inter- American Strategy For The
Promotion Of Public Participation In Decision-Making For Sustainable Development, Cidi/Res. 98(V_0/00), Oea/Ser. W/Ii.5, Cidi/Doc.25/00 (20
April 2000) [Hereinafter 2000 Noas Public Participation Strategy]. Available at https://www.oas.org/dsd/PDF_files/ispenglish.pdf

16 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, principle 22.

their survival.17 For example, Article 26 of the UNDRIP18 provides that rights to lands,
territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or
acquired, and they also have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and
resources that because of traditional ownership they possess. In the past, indigenous peoples
'have often been on the losing end of the development process, 19 while the financial benefits have
gone to others. Mining minerals, energy, and other resources on their lands have led to
devastating environmental and social impacts.20

Although only a few countries have ratified it, the 1989 International Labour Organization (ILO)
Convention No. 169 remains the most robust body of rules relating to the participatory rights of
indigenous people. Article 6(1) requires consultation with indigenous peoples on legislative or
administrative measures directly affecting them. Article 7 (1) of the treaty mandates the
participation of indigenous people by stating that: The peoples concerned shall have the right to
decide their priorities for the process of development as it affects their lives, beliefs, institutions
and spiritual well-being and the lands they occupy or otherwise use, and to exercise control, to
the extent possible, over their own economic, social and cultural development. In addition, they
shall participate in the formulation, implementation and evaluation of plans and programmes for
national and regional development, which may affect them directly. Article 7(1) provides that
'Governments shall ensure that, whenever appropriate, studies are carried out, in cooperation
with the peoples concerned, to assess the social, spiritual, cultural and environmental impact on
them of planned development activities. The results of these studies shall be considered as
fundamental criteria for the implementation of these activities. Article 15 compels consultation
with indigenous people before a state may undertake or permit any programmes to explore or
exploit state-owned mineral, subsurface resources, or other resources on indigenous lands. While
Article 12 requires that indigenous people have access to legal proceedings to enforce their rights
under the convention.

17 See R. Stavenhagen, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of indigenous People,
UN Commission of Human Rights, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2002/97 (2002) para 39-40.
18 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, adopted 13 September 2007.
19 The World Bank, The World Bank Participation Sourcebook (1996).
20 For some reports on the impact, see Inter-Am. C.H.R., Report of the Situation of Human Rights in Ecuador, OEA/Ser. L./V/II.96, Doc. 10. 1,
Apr.24, 1997, at 77-117.
The International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) 21 and the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)22 also serve as
important sources of public participation rights for indigenous people. The Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination that was established as a monitoring body under CERD has
asked states to 'ensure that members of indigenous peoples have equal rights in respect of
effective participation in public life and that no decisions directly relating to their rights and
interests are taken without their informed consent.23 Likewise, Article 27 of the ICCPR has been
invoked to protect the indigenous land and culture, even though public participation was not
explicitly mentioned. The United Nations Human Rights Committee interpreted Article 27 in a
comprehensive manner:

With regard to the exercise of the cultural rights protected under Article 27, "the committee
observes that culture manifests itself in many forms, including a particular way of life associated
with the use of land resources, especially in the case of indigenous peoples. That right may
include such traditional activities as fishing or hunting and the right to live in reserves protected
by law. The enjoyment of those rights may require positive legal protection measures and
measures to ensure the effective participation of members of minority communities. In decisions
which affect them…... The protection of these rights is directed toward ensuring the survival and
continued development of the cultural, religious and social identity of the minorities concerned,
thus enriching the fabric of society".24

It is important to note that this explanation by the Committee shows that Article 27 protects the
cultural life rather than the physical life of the indigenous people, even though the survival of the
group may be at stake. For example, in Bernard Ominayak and the Lubicon Band v. Canada,
applicants alleged that the government of the province of Alberta had deprived the band of their
means of subsistence and their right to self-determination by selling oil and gas concessions on
their lands. The Committee characterized the claim as one of the minority rights under Article 27

21 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 999 U.N.T.S. 171
22 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, March 1966, 660 U.N.T.S 195.
23 Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, General Recommendation XXIII Concerning Indigenous
People, UN Doc.
CERD/C/51/Misc.13/Rev.4 (1997)
24 United Nations, Compilation and General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies,
HRI/GEN/1/Rev. 4, 7 February 2000
and found that the historical inequities and more recent developments, including the oil and gas
exploitation, were threatening the band's way of life and culture and thus violated Article 27.25

The UNDRIP is another framework that affirms the right to participate fully, only for the
"indigenous people". Article 18 states: Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in
decision-making in matters that would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by
themselves following their procedures, and maintain and develop their indigenous decision-
making institutions. Article 32(2) of UNDRIP elaborates further that: "States shall consult and
cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their representatives'
institutions in order to obtain their free and informed consent before the approval of any project
affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the
development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources."

Courts have continued to reinforce this obligation. In the Inter- American Court of Human
Rights in Saramaka People v Suriname,26 the court stated that before natural resource
development can be carried out, there should be a prior environmental and social impact
assessment. These safeguards are intended to preserve, protect and guarantee the special
relationship that the Saramaka community has with their land, ensuring their survival as
indigenous people.

It is worth noting that the Nigerian constitution does not recognize the Niger Delta peoples as
Indigenous people to consider the possible use of UNDRIP in Nigeria and therefore abstained
from voting.27 This also explains the challenging situation and relationship between the Niger
Delta people and the Nigerian government in relation to their land and resources. 28 However, the
writer believes that accepting the Niger Delta people as indigenous people would serve as a
medium for addressing the plight of the host communities in the Niger Delta. It is, however,
beyond the scope of this research, but a brief explanation continues in the next chapter.

25 United Nation, Document CCPR/C/38/D/167/1984, Communication 167/1984, Decisions of the Human Rights Committee (1990)
26 Case of the Saramaka People v Suriname, Saramaka People v Suriname, Interpretation of the judgment on preliminary objections, merits,
reparations and costs, IACHR Series C No 185, IHRL 3058 (IACHR 2008), 12th August 2008, Inter-American Court of Human Rights [IACtHR]
27 Art. 18 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, UN Doc/A/61/.67 (2007). The General Assembly adopted UNDRIP
on 13 September, 2007 by a majority of 144 states in favour, 4 votes against (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States) and 11
abstentions, including Nigeria. Since its adoption, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States have all reversed their positions and
now endorse the Declaration see also Section 25 of the Constitution of the FRN, 1999 (As Amended) also provides for citizenship rights.
28 Nigeria was not the only African country that abstained from signing the UNDRIP. Most African States were either absent or abstained from
signing the UNDRIP. See generally, Dwight G. Newman, "The Law and Politics of Indigenous Rights in the Post-Colonial African States" (2008)
102 Proceedings of the Annual Meeting ASIL 69
1.1.2 Local Communities.
Although international and national governments have a significant role in implementing
sustainable development, it is obvious that a considerable amount of the practical movement
towards sustainable development happens at the local community level. The central and local
governments have often taken decisions unilaterally without engaging or considering the needs
and interests of the local communities. For example, nationally approved mineral and energy
projects, pipelines, timber contracts, and dams have displaced local farmers, fishers, hunters,
nomads, and communities. Many communities attempt to resolve conflicts surrounding multiple
uses of lands where values are held tightly, and stakeholders differ on the type and scale of
development. It is then little wonder why the 'local communities' have gained attention under the
sustainable development paradigm. As grassroots political activism continues to grow, the need
to recognize local community concerns in all project planning and decisions also grows to reduce
the negative impacts of the development. 29 Principle 22 of the Rio Declaration joins 'other local
communities' with 'indigenous people' as worthy of having participatory rights and roles in
environmental management and development.30 Agenda 21 expresses the importance of
involving 'local' and 'community' interests in many of its provisions. Chapter 28 is a special
appeal to 'local authorities to engage in a dialogue for sustainable development with the members
of their constituencies. This dialogue seeks for a new participation process where the
communication between local authorities and all local stakeholders goes beyond existing and
traditional consultation. Agenda 21 gives little guidance as to how local communities should
proceed with a Local Agenda 21 process. Chapter 28 does not offer a universal and general
systematic guide for community involvement, and each community has to find its own most
appropriate way. The general assumption is that local authorities can deal very effectively with
public involvement because 'as the level of governance closest to the people, they play a vital
role in educating, mobilising and responding to the public to promote sustainable development.31

1.1.3 Women
Women play vital roles in relation to their natural environment across the regions and cultures of
the world. In developing nations, women are largely responsible for the management and
conservation of resources for their families. They spend vast amounts of time collecting and
29 Pring &Noe, supra note 87, at 65.
30 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, supra note 86, principle 22.
31 Rio Declaration Id. ch.28. 1.
storing water, securing sources of fuel, food, managing farms and lands. In addition, as women
are the primary caregivers to children, the elderly and the sick, the whole community relies on
them. Their traditional and generational knowledge of biodiversity, for example, supplies
communities with medicines, nutritional balance and crop rotation methods.

Women can be particularly vulnerable to environmental changes or threats because they are
often deeply dependent on available natural resources for food, fuel and shelter. Because
women's workload is often centred on managing natural resources, biodiversity and ecosystems,
their experiences and perspectives are essential to sustainable development policy-making and
actions at every level for a healthy planet for generations to come. However, 'experience in
participatory development has made clear that, unless specific steps are taken to ensure the equal
participation of men and women, women are often excluded.' 32 Therefore, when women are
excluded, 'projects fail to benefit from women's contribution and fail to meet women's particular
needs and interests.33

However, in several parts of the world, men are usually regarded as the official decision-makers
within their communities, and they have considerable authority and influence over the way
natural resources are managed.34 Notwithstanding, women and men both make use of natural
resources and impact the state of the environment in different ways. On the other hand, women's
duties are frequently less apparent than men's and are not legally recognized. For example,
women frequently perform manual labour on land where they do not have legal tenure rights.
They spend a significant amount of time collecting water, fuelwood, and other items for family
sustenance (which is not considered work); women who fish are responsible for mending nets,
gutting fishes, and marketing them, but they are not always considered "fishers."

International agreements indicate that women must be equal participants in all decisions related
to their environment worldwide. For example, the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) specifically provides, inter alia, that states
parties ‘shall ensure to women, on equal terms with men, the right . . . to participate in the
formulation of government policy and the implementation thereof. . . and to participate in

32 The World Bank Participation Sourcebook (1996)

33 The World Bank Participation Sourcebook (1996)
34 Elizabeth Watson, Natural Resource Management And The Importance Of Gender (2012)
<https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/women_conservation_overview_2012.pdf> accessed 10 September 2021.
associations concerned with the public and political life of the country.’ 35 The Forestry Principles
provides that ‘the full participation of women in all aspects of the management, conservation and
sustainable development of forests should be actively promoted’.36 The 1992 Convention on
Biological Diversity recognises in the preamble "the vital role that women play in the
conservation and sustainable use of the biological diversity and affirm the need for the full
participation of women at all levels of policy-making and implementation for biological diversity
conservation.37 Principle 20 of the Rio Declaration states, "women have a pivotal role in
environmental management and development. Their full participation is therefore essential to
achieve sustainable development.'38Agenda 21 set out numerous objectives and activities
encouraging increase in women's participation, including proposing that national governments
'formulate and implement clear policies and national guidelines, strategies and plans for the
achievement of equality in all aspects of society, including the promotion of women's literacy,
education, training, nutrition and health and their participation in key decision-making positions
and the management of the environment, particularly as it pertains to their access to resources. 39
It also recognises 'the active involvement of women in economic and political decision-making
as critical to its successful implementation.40

Remarkably, the Aarhus Convention does not contain any specific provisions related to the
participation of women. It may be that they did not think the participation of women was still an
issue in most States or that other laws and instruments had dealt with it.

1.1.4 Youth
Youth in the Niger Delta region face limited livelihood opportunities in a context marked by war
and violence within the region.41 Within the region, there is growing concern about the role of
'youth' as a challenge to the consolidation of peace and development. This is because they are

35 UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), CEDAW General Recommendation No. 19: Violence
against women, 1992, available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/52d920c54.html [accessed 5 February 2020]
36 Non-legally Binding Authoritative Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management, Conservation and Sustainable
Development of All Types of Forests. UN Doc. A/Conf.151/6 Australian Zoologist: 1992, Vol. 28, No. 1-4, pp. 103-107.
https://doi.org/10.7882/AZ.1992.019
37 United Nations Convention on Biodiversity, June 5, 1992, 12th prmbl.,31 I.L.M. 818 (1992)
38 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, supra note 86, principle 20.
39 AGENDA 21, Ch.24.1. U.N. Conference on Environment and Development, (UNCED) at Rio De Janeiro, June 13,1992. U.N. Doc.
A/CONF.151/26 (1992), reprinted in AGENDA 21: EARTH'S ACTION PLAN (Nicholas A. Robinson ed., 1993) [hereinafter Agenda 21]
40 Id. ch.24.2(f)
41 CPED, Promoting Community-Based Youth Participation In Peace Building In Niger Delta Region And Policy Implication (2017)
<https://media.africaportal.org/documents/Promoting-Community-based-youth-participation-in-peace-building-.pdf> accessed 11 September
2021.
key actors in the prevalence of conflict and violence. Youth participation in peace-building in the
Niger Delta should therefore be based on the development of young people's abilities in
mediation, conflict resolution, negotiation, communication, social norms and life skills, among
other things. Developing the structures that encourage youth participation in peace-building
processes in the Niger Delta area would actively contribute to their participation in decision-
making and activities that impact their well-being.

Increasingly, national and international organizations have begun to involve young people in
community life (participation). Principle 21 of the Rio Declaration acknowledges the 'creativity,
ideas and courage of the youth of the world' and urges that the youth 'should be mobilized to
forge a global partnership' to achieve sustainable development. However, it does not include or
urge youth participation in decision-making as it does in the other groups (indigenous people,
women, and local communities).42 In contrast, Agenda 21 dedicates an entire chapter to and
supports participation in 'Children and Youth in Sustainable Development.' It provides that
'Youth from all parts of the world must participate actively in all relevant levels of decision-
making processes because it affects their lives today and has implications for their futures. In
addition to their intellectual contribution and ability to mobilize support, they bring unique
perspectives that need to be considered.'43 It also includes various methods of increasing youth
participation.44

1.1.5 Non-Governmental Organizations

Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have been defined as private organizations "not
established by a government or by intergovernmental agreement which is capable of playing a
role in international affairs by virtue of their activities.45 In International Law, NGOs are
described as "private international organizations that serve as a mechanism for cooperation
among private national groups in international affairs’.46 NGOs are expanding their participation
in international environmental law and governance. 47 The origins of the NGOs can be found in

42 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, supra note, principle 21

43 AGENDA 21, Ch.25.2. U.N. Conference on Environment and Development, (UNCED) at Rio De Janeiro, June 13,1992. U.N. Doc.
A/CONF.151/26 (1992)
44 Agenda 21 Chapter 25.4-25.10
45 Hermann H.K. Rechenberg, Non-Governmental Organizations, 9 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 276 (1986).
46 The International Law Dictionary 77 (Robert L. Bledsoe & Boleslaw A. Boczek, 1987).
47 A. Dan Tarlock, The Role of Non-Governmental Organizations in the Development of International Environmental Law, 68 CHI.-KENT L.
REV. 61 (1993).
the history of the United Nations when the UN Charter was drawn up in 1945 and the
designation "nongovernmental organisation" was given consultative status in UN activities as an
international non-state organisation.48

Their existence in environmental NGOs can be traced back to the International Union for the
Conservation of Nature (IUCN or World Conservation Union) in 1948. NGOs have so much
influence that they regularly take part in multilateral conferences and monitor the
implementation of treaties.49 For example, in the 1998 negotiation of the Aarhus Convention,
more than 200 NGOs from forty-nine countries sent representatives to Aarhus to engage in
plenary discussions with the Ministers and consider ways to strengthen participatory democracy
and sustainable development.50 Some treaties explicitly allow NGOs to act as ‘observers’ at
meetings.51 NGOs act as co-participants in most domestic environmental decision-making. They
help to provide technical and legal capacity building in developing nations. NGOs 'act as a voice
to the voiceless' and propel the substance of environmental law in a more just, inclusive and
equitable direction.' 52 When considering the interests of the global commons and interests of the
future generation, NGOs are seen as the only actors who can perform an important guardianship
role and therefore increased involvement of NGOs is supported.53 NGOs act as co-participants in
most domestic environmental decision-making. They help to provide technical and legal capacity
building in developing nations. Their influence can also be seen in the crucial role they played in
the negotiations of the $3.7 billion Chad-Cameroon oil pipeline project, where they demanded
the institution of a democratic government in Chad, an end to corruption in Cameroon, an
Environmental Impact Assessment, better compensation for any property damage in the course
of building the pipeline, and monitoring mechanisms to understand how the Chadian government
use the money.54 However, the role of NGOs is not without controversy, as the most powerful
NGOs are from most developed nations, so their true representative nature is a mooting point.55
48 Lewis, D. and Kanji, N. (2009) ‘NGO roles in contemporary development practice’. Chapter 5 in Non-Governmental Organizations and
Development. London: Routledge.
49 Nancy Lindborg, Nongovernmental Organizations: Their Past, Present, and Future Role in International Environmental Negotiations, in
International Environmental Treaty-Making 1-25 (Lawrence E. Susskind, Eric Dolan and J. William Breslin ed. 1992)
50 NGO CONFERENCE, Environment for Europe, in NGO Resolution on the Public Participation Convention (June 22,1998), at
http://www.participate.org/arhus/reso;lution.htm.
51 For example, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, May 9,1992, UN Doc. A/CONF.151/26,31 I.L.M 849 (1992) art.
7(6);1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer,Sept. 16,1987,art. 11 (5),I.L.M 1550.
52 Kal Raustiala, The ‘Participatory Revolution’ in International Environmental Law, 21 Harv. Envtl. L. REV. 537,567 (1997).
53 See Raustiala, ibid.
54 Douglas Farah & David B. Ottaway, Watchdog Groups Rein in Government in Chad Oil Deal, WASHINGTON POST, Jan.4, 2001, at A14.
55 Kal Raustiala, The ‘Participatory Revolution’ in International Envioronmental Law, 21 Harv. Envtl. L. REV. 537,567 (1997).
An application for a $300 million loan guarantee from the United States Export-Import Bank was
granted preliminary clearance in June 2000 for a project to produce crude oil in Chad as well as
export it via a pipeline to Cameroon's Atlantic coast. This project's consultation phase began in
1993, while building officially commenced in 2000. The project also included the development
of the Doba oil fields in Chad and the construction of a buried pipeline measuring 30 inches wide
that would run 1,070 kilometres from the oil and gas fields in Chad to Cameroon's Atlantic Coast
pumping stations, infrastructure and ancillary facilities, among other things.

Kribi, on the coast of Cameroon, will also see the construction of an offshore export port
infrastructure (an offloading vessel and moored floating storage), accompanying marine
pipelines, and related facilities and infrastructure.

In addition, the project will see the execution of environmental management plans in Chad and
Cameroon and the implementation of a relocation plan in Chad and a compensation initiative in
Cameroon, among other things. Aside from that, Chad has established a revenue management
plan that is intended to direct petroleum earnings to the education and health sectors and rural
projects and infrastructure development transparently.

Those living in the oil-producing region surrounding Doba and Bèbédja are beginning to
experience the benefits of a policy requiring that 5 percent of oil earnings be reinvested in the
region, which was implemented in 2011.

School buildings and infrastructure, water towers, new marketplaces, and other facilities are
being constructed and renovated in the region due to oil revenue. As of the end of 2006, around
$30 million has been provided to assist residents who live in close proximity to the
manufacturing region.

The Chad-Cameroon Oil Production and Pipeline Operation, which is being carried out by
Exxon Mobil Corporation and its subsidiaries Esso Exploration and Production Chad Inc,
commenced pipeline fill operation in July 2003, with Esso Exploration and Production Chad Inc
serving as the project's operator. The pipeline and the infrastructure for one of the three oil fields
now under construction had been finished one year ahead of the originally scheduled completion
date. The pipeline runs 660 miles from the oil reserves in southern Chad to a Storage, Floating
and Offloading (FSO) vessel in the Gulf of Guinea, which is seven miles offshore Kribi, thus,
Cameroon, and is operated by the French company Total. It was completed by the beginning of
2004 that the central treatment facilities in Chad were completed.

1.2 Exercising the Right to Participate.

Just like most human rights, some basic conditions need to be met to ensure the enjoyment of the
right to participate. They are as follows:

Access to information: For participation to be effective and fruitful, it should be informed. The
design and implementation of a participatory process should involve developing effective
mechanisms of access to information. Likewise, the information shall be clearly outlined and
understandable as far as possible. Access to information includes the right of citizens to obtain
information, subject to certain limited and explicit restrictions, without having to show interest in
the information. The information Directive56 obliges member states to ensure that public
authorities with responsibilities for and possessing information relating to the environment make
available such information at the request of any natural and legal person as soon as possible, or at
least within two months of a request. The person making the request needs to show no interest,
but any application can be refused because it seeks to protect specific legitimate interests. 57 An
important element of the right to access information is the duty of institutions to inform the
public of their participatory rights. It is not just enough for these rights to exist; the institutions
must make an affirmative effort to inform the public of those rights. Any person who feels his or
her request has been unreasonably refused or ignored may seek judicial or administrative review
of the decision.58

Autonomy: Participation requires autonomy of the actors, that is, the independence or no
subordination of the stakeholders with respect to one another.
56 European Commission, Report on the Experience Gained in the Application of Council Directive 90/313 on the Freedom of Access to
information on the Environment, COM (200)400, at 8. In June 1990, the Community subsequently adopted Council Directive 90/313 on the
access to information held by public authorities. It provided a focal point for discussion in the initial negotiations on Pillar I of the Aarhus
Convention.
57 Article 3(2)
58 Article 4.
Political willingness: Participation will not be possible if the State authority that should promote
it does not have the true intention to open itself to community opinion. The executive should and
must foster the process for it to happen. Without the genuine political will to create a
participatory space, participation cannot be successful.

Stakeholder identification: The exhaustive incorporation of the stakeholders involved is essential

for successful and meaningful participation since, without incorporating the opinions of all the
interested parties, the true representation will not be achieved. This includes the stakeholders
who may be positively or negatively affected or indirectly affected by omission. When
considering stakeholders' importance in the participatory process, it is important to discuss their
identity in detail.

Public participatory practices in Nigeria are classified into two as mentioned below. 59 Statutory
Participation: This refers to activities connected to planning and execution via constitutional
grounds, such as zoning control of all sizes. In this regard, citizens contribute primarily to
expressing their intentions to suggested plans or policies. This participation includes regular
individuals, NGOs private sector planners, among others. Despite the long-existing legacy of
statutory participation, citizens are still asking for more engagement in the planning process.
However, government establishments continue to protect themselves by restricting the chances
of individuals in involvement. Voluntary Involvement: This refers to unofficial or informal
participation due to ethical or moral ideals linked to participation. This involvement is generally
developed through informal means and started by people, business sector planners, academia and
NGOs. Mechanism of voluntary involvement is public meetings, focus groups, choice polls,
writing in a newspaper, internet and other media services.

1.2.1 Who is a Stakeholder?

There are several definitions of a stakeholder. However, giving a definition or description of who
a stakeholder is has remained a major issue for scholars.60 Freeman described a stakeholder as
"any group, organization or individual who can affect or is affected by achieving the

59 Jiman Chado and Foziah Bte Johar, 'Public Participation Efficiency In Traditional Cities Of Developing Countries: A Perspective Of Urban
Development In Bida, Nigeria' (2016) 219 Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences.
60 Philips, R. A., & Reichart, J. (2000). The environment as a stakeholder? A fairness-based approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(2), 185-
197. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006041929249
organization's objectives."61 This description, therefore, suggests that the organization and its
stakeholders have a mutually dependent relationship, where the achievement of any objective
can only be achieved by cooperation and support from stakeholders. A stakeholder has been
defined as any individual or group whose interest has at least some fundamental value based on
its legitimate interest in the organization.62 Despite these definitions, there has been a debate as to
whether stakeholders should be considered an entity affected by an organization's objectives or
limited to those important for the achievement of an organization and its objectives. 63 Schiller et
al argued that this definition widens the scope for the stakeholder composition in any
organization to include other entities affected by the organization's actions. 64 Cummings and
Patel described employees, customers, shareholders, community and suppliers as important
stakeholders who can influence an organization's objectives.65

Mitchell et al. have argued that the natural environment is a non-human stakeholder since it
exerts its influence using other stakeholders. However, Philips and Reichart argue that only
humans capable of interacting with one another should be referred to as potential stakeholders.
Their viewpoint is important for this research because of the weight of the interaction among
stakeholders; whilst a natural environment could be viewed as a potential stakeholder, it would
still need to be represented by its people. Soukhanov went further with his description of a
stakeholder by including a stakeholder by proxy, which he referred to as "the state, quality or
fact of being near or next in space, time or order'' to an organization. These different views
expressed above show the importance of reliance among stakeholders and each to thrive.

Some scholars have referred to a stakeholder as anyone or group who puts themselves at risk or
has a stake or interest in an organization. For example, Clarkson suggested that an individual or
group be exposed to some risk and accept the risk because of its impact on an organization's
operations or activities before being referred to as a stakeholder. Interestingly Freeman 66 often
61 Freeman, R. E. (1994) The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 409-421. Freeman, R. E.
(1988). A stakeholder theory of modern corporation. Perspective in Business Ethics Sie 3E,144. At 46.
62 Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of
Management Review, 20(1), 65-91.
63 Friedman, A. L., & Miles, s. (2006) Stakeholders: Theory and practice Oxford University Press on Demand.
64 Schiller, C., Winters, M., Hanson, H., & Ashe, M. C. (2013) A framework for stakeholder identification in concept mapping and health
research: A novel process and its application to older adult mobility and the built environment. BMC public Health 13(1). https:
//doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-428.
65Cummings, L. and Patel, C (2009), "Chapter 2 Stakeholder literature review",  Cummings, L. and Patel, C (Ed.) Managerial Attitudes toward
a Stakeholder Prominence within a Southeast Asia Context (Studies in Managerial and Financial Accounting, Vol. 19), Emerald Group
Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 17-51. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-3512(2009)0000019006
66 Freeman, R.E. (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman, Boston.
described a stakeholder as anyone having an “interest”, while Carrol and Buchholtz 67 considered
a stake as an interest in an endeavour. These scholars all agree that a stake must involve an
element of risk and be of value to its holder. Then again, the use of the word ‘stake’ remains a
mooting point among scholars.68

In relation to participation in environmental management, a stakeholder is a person involved in a

project or may be affected by the outcome. They are referred to as "polluters who effect change
by causing pollution and victims who are affected by the pollution." However, the determination
of stakeholders depends on the legitimate stake they have in the process or project. 69 In relation
to oil and gas management and, therefore, this thesis, stakeholders are actively involved in
decision-making and those affected by oil production activities. Hence, in the Nigerian oil and
gas industry, there are three groups of stakeholders. First, the host communities of the Niger
Delta suffer the adverse effects of oil and gas production. Second, the oil and gas companies are
responsible for environmental degradation through oil spillage and gas flaring, and finally, the
Nigerian Federal Government is the key decision-maker or 'public authority' of the nation.

The stakeholder identification process shall be further developed in chapter 3, discussing

representation in the Nigerian participation process.

1.3 Participatory Processes: Evaluating the Public Participation Process

The right to public participation is upheld when procedural dimensions of public involvement or
public participation are structured to enable deliberation among the various stakeholders
involved. Nevertheless, there is no saying that allowing public judgments in development
proposals and involving the public in decision-making is easy. However, the process can be a
rewarding experience that enhances both legitimacy of decision-making and the value of the
project embarked on. This means that when participation processes and techniques are
effectively followed, it can bring about better policy direction, improved services, a new
imagination or way of tackling an issue, better understanding and, more broadly, a sense of hope

67 Carroll, A. B., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2009). Business and society: Ethics and stakeholder management (7th ed.). Mason: South-Western
Cengage .Google Scholar
68See Rowley, T. J. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. The Academy of Management Review,
22(4), 887–910. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1997.9711022107. Wolfe, R. A., & Putler, D. S. (2002). How tight are the ties that bind stakeholder
groups? Organization Science, 13(1), 64-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.1.
69 Mark S. Reed et al., "Who is in and Why? A Typology of Stakeholder Analysis Methods for Natural Resource Management" (2009) 90 J. of
Environmental Management 1933.
and shared commitment to change within any community. However, this begs the question, how
can you ensure that participation is undertaken efficiently and effectively in any decision-making
processes or under the EIA? In order to answer this question, it is important to note that there can
be several reasons (which can sometimes be meshed and conflicting) why policymakers move
toward participation. Therefore, there cannot be a single definition or description of an effective
participatory technique or method. Participatory processes can serve different purposes for
different people, so their success should be evaluated on the different expectations around their
deployment.

Graham Smith suggested that public participation is a group of methods and techniques designed
to consult, inform, involve and empower people or interested parties regarding environmental
issues.70 This statement recognizes the relationship between participation and power and
identifies the structures and the differing intensity of participation required to ensure all
interested parties communicate. As a result, designing a participatory process means assessing
several issues like; early involvement of stakeholders, information exchange, availability and
clarity of materials, inclusiveness, diversity of views represented, opportunities for participation,
accessibility to the decision-making process, identification and integration of concerns, number
and types of participants, and the participatory method to ensure good feedback. As stated by
Konisky and Beierle71 “the result of participatory processes is largely dependent on the type of
process in use, which defines the role of the participants themselves." The literature on the
dimensions of participatory processes varies depending on the focus of the research. For
instance, while the legitimacy of the process, which includes participant representation,
government mandate and influence, and consensus-based decision-making, is important to
Mascarenhas and Scarce,72 Abelson et al73 focuses on representation, procedures or structures,
information and then outcomes. Diduck74 on the other hand, explores the breadth of
representation, degrees of participation, the timing and the participatory techniques as useful
yardsticks for evaluating public participation in the EA processes or project development.
70Smith, G. (2009). Democratic Innovations. Designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
71 Konisky, D.M., and T.C. Beierle, “Innovations in Public Participation and Environmental Decision Making: Examples from the Great Lakes
Region. Society and Natural Resources” (2001):14, 817
72 Mascarenhas, M., and R. Scarce. 2004. "The Intention Was Good": Legitimacy, Consensus-Based Decision Making, and the Case of Forest
Planning in British Columbia, Canada. Society and Natural Resources 17:17-38.
73 Abelson, J., P.-G. Forest, J. Eyles, P. Smith, E. Martin, and F.-P. Gauvin. 2003. Deliberations about Deliberative Methods: Issues in the
Design and Evaluation of Public Participation Processes. Social Sciences & Medicine 57:239-251.
74 Diduck, A. P., and A. J. Sinclair. 2002. Public Involvement in Environmental Assessment: The Case of the Non-Participant. Environmental
Management 29:578-588.
Following discussions in various literature, it is also recognised that before the effectiveness of
any public participation process can be evaluated, the theoretical framework has to be
consistent.75 This means that the framework should have a clear plan that correctly describes the
specific aspects of the process, such as the resources used, the objectives, and the desired
outcomes. Any study based on a clear framework will eventually lead to more trustworthy and
consistent findings.76

Although there is a significant crossover throughout the literature, it remains clear that broad
public representation is an important part of public participation. This means that efforts should
be focused on engaging both active and inactive publics, including various stakeholder
perspectives and reducing barriers to participation. Also, whilst considering the breadth of
involvement, the focus should be on striking a balance between local and outside interests. It
ensures that local community values are incorporated into the planning process. Equally,
appropriate roles need to be identified for the application of expert knowledge. This may include
considerations regarding which stage of the process publics should be included to ensure that
involvement is the most effective and applicable. The Aarhus Convention promotes early
information and engagement, and many scholars have maintained that the earlier public
engagement occurs, the better the opportunity to influence both the process and its outcomes.
Peele notes that unsuccessful public participation appears to occur more often than successful
public participation because the proponents try to introduce public participation to implement
their project.77

However, since many parties are involved in the public participation process, all with different
knowledge, perspectives, and expectations, it is an uphill task to define effectiveness because
what may be effective to some parties may not be for others. 78 For example, while the developer
may measure success in terms of the support of the public for the decisions, the resolution of
conflicts, or the implementation of the decisions, the participants are now more increasingly

75 Abelson, J., P.-G. Forest, J. Eyles, P. Smith, E. Martin and F.-P. Gauvin (2003). "Deliberations about Deliberative Methods: Issues in the
Design and Evaluation of Public Participation Processes." Social Science and Medicine 57(2): 239-251; Thurston, W. E., G. MacKean, A.
Vollman, A. Casebeer, M. Weber, B. Maloff and J. Bader (2005). "Public Participation in Regional Health Policy: A Theoretical Framework."
Health Policy 73(3): 237-252.
76 Thurston et al. ibid (n132)
77 Peelle, E. B., M. Schweitzer, J. F. Munro, S. A. Carnes and A. K. Wolfe (1996). Factors Favorable to Public Participation Success. Oak
Ridge, Tennessee, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
78 Frewer, L. J. and G. Rowe (2005). Evaluating Public Participation Exercises: Strategic and Practical Issues. Evaluating Public Participation
in Policy-Making. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Paris, OECD Publications: 85-108.
interested in whether their inputs make any difference. Moreso, the community, should be able to
block or modify a project proposal in order to achieve a successful outcome. Thus, it is important
to integrate and balance these different views of every involved party to achieve public
participation.

As participation involves several members with diverse capabilities, participatory processes

should also equalize power imbalances among the participants. This can be seen as a function of
the individual stakeholders' influence and resources at their disposal. Similarly, technical
expertise and negotiating skills can be a power-related issue that can create an imbalance in a
participatory process.79 For instance, if an individual or group already possess technical skills,
they may also be developed by retaining experts through funding mechanisms while having the
negotiating skills or experience linked to individual participant capacities, which may develop
over time as they continue to be involved themselves in public dialogue. These voices and
opinions are bound to drown other voices and interests, which might not lead to the best
outcome, so power balance is essential.

Therefore, evaluating the effectiveness of any participatory process and outcome is influenced by
individual expectations and interpretations. Consequently, there cannot be a single definition of
any effective participation or its process. Also, considering the complexity of environmental
management, it is logical to see why there are diverse definitions of success in assessing the
effectiveness of public participation because you not only contend with the interested parties and
the vast diversity of stakeholders, there are also the tremendous differences of interests between
these groups. As Rowe and Frewer note, "the merits of participation are difficult to ascertain as
there are relatively few cases in which the effectiveness of participation exercises has been
studied in a structured (as opposed to highly subjective) manner".80 While evaluating the
participatory techniques and processes of the UK Environmental Agency for its waste strategy
development, Petts81 used different questions and measures like clarification of objectives and
legal process; consensus building; input of the assessment process; representativeness;
inclusivity; deliberation; capability; sound learning; actual decision representativeness; and trust
79 Michael Mascarenhas & Rik Scarce (2004) “The Intention Was Good”: Legitimacy, Consensus-Based Decision Making, and the Case of
Forest Planning in British Columbia, Canada, Society & Natural Resources, 17:1, 17-38.
80 Rowe, G. and L. J. Frewer (2004). "Evaluating Public Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda." Science, Technology and Human
Values 29(4): 512-557, p.512.
81 Petts, J. (2004). "Barriers to Participation and Deliberation in Risk Decisions: Evidence from
Waste Management." Journal of Risk Research 7(2): 115-133.
enhancement. Therefore, effective participation should have good connections between the
purpose of the process and the outcome, particularly if outcomes are likely to be limited. While
using these measures to assess the effectiveness of the process, Petts 82 concluded that, for any
participatory framework and process to be effective, it must: ensure all resources such as time,
money, and staff must be available for the process; identify and minimise all barriers to the
public participation process; give all participating and non-participating stakeholders all the
necessary information; make sure the dialogue is open, inclusive, detailed and constructive; the
participatory process should provide enough information, encourage satisfaction and consensus
by ensuring that every participant is happy with the process; and finally, the process should
increase trust between proponents and stakeholders.

Cleaver83 argues that while heroic claims have been made about participation and participatory
approaches being a process of democratization and empowerment, a way of ensuring greater
efficiency and effectiveness of investment, and even the sustainability of development, there is
little or no evidence to show the long-term effects of participation either as it improving the lives
of the vulnerable or as a strategy to social change. He suggests that participation in any form has
become an act of faith in development, something we all believe in and rarely question. This act
of faith is based on the three main tenets: that participation is intrinsically a "good thing"
(especially for the participants), that a focus on 'getting the techniques right' is a primary way of
ensuring the success of such approaches and that the considerations of power and politics, on the
whole, should be avoided as divisive and obstructive.

The main objective of this research is to develop an understanding of public participation, host
communities' participation and its effectiveness in the Nigerian oil and gas industry. The
'effectiveness' of the framework will be based on Cleaver's three tenets, then a combination of
measures that focus on access to information, early involvement and engagement of participants,
an inclusive and transparent process; fosters two-way communication and learning processes;
ability to influence decisions; seeks for a consensus and resolves conflicts among stakeholders.

82 Petts, J. (2004) ibid

83 Cleaver, Francis., Paradoxes of Participation: Questioning Participatory Approaches to Development. Journal of International Development
J. Int. Dev. 11, 597±612 (1999)