ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE APPROACH THROUGH COMPENSATION,

REMEDIATION, AND MITIGATION IN THE CONTEXT OF PETROLEUM

POLLUTION IMPACTS
CONTENTS
1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................2
1.1 BACKGROUND.........................................................................................................2
1.2 THE ECONOMY OF OIL EXTRACTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL
DEGRADATION...................................................................................................................3
1.3 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES.........................................................................................4
1.4 Research rationale.......................................................................................................5
1.5 Outline of Chapters......................................................................................................6
2 CHAPTER TWO............................................................................................................7
2.1 Literature Review........................................................................................................7
2.2 WHAT IS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE?...............................................................7
2.3 HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE...........................8
2.4 COMPENSATION IN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE..........................................10
2.4.1 TYPES OF COMPENSATION …………………………………...………...11
2.5 GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS ROLES IN COMPENSATION......................13
2.6 ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION....................................................................14
2.6.1 REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES ………………………………………..15
2.6.2 BENEFITS OF ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION ……………………15
2.7 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION.......................................................................16
2.7.1 WHAT IS ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION? ………………………………..16
2.8 PETROLEUM POLLUTION....................................................................................16
2.8.1 PETROLEUM POLLUTION ON LAND ………………………...…………16
2.8.2 PETROLEUM POLLUTION ON THE SEA …………………...…………...17
2.9 IMPACTS OF PETROLEUM POLLUTION...........................................................18
2.9.1 IMPACTS OF PETROLEUM POLLUTION (GULF OF MEXICO AND
NIGER DELTA) ……..…………………………………...…………………18
2.10 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).....................................................................23
2.11 SUMMARY..............................................................................................................25
CHAPTER THREE..................................................................................................................26
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY..................................................................................26
3.1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................26
3.2 RESEARCH APPROACH........................................................................................26
3.3.1 Rapid Evidence Assessment………………………………………………...…….26
3.3 Data Collection..........................................................................................................27
3.3.1 Selection Criteria …………………………………………………………….27
3.3.2 Process ……………………………………………………………………….27
3.4 Ethical Considerations...............................................................................................28
CHAPTER 4.............................................................................................................................28
ii
4.1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................28
4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE APPROACH THROUGH COMPENSATION..........29
4.2.1 Gulf of Mexico (Deepwater Horizon spill) ……………………………………….29
4.2.1.1 Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF).........................................................................30
4.2.1.2 Governmental-backed funds.....................................................................................31
4.3 THE NORWEGIAN OIL FIELDS................................................................................31
4.4 THE NIGER DELTA, NIGERIA...................................................................................32
4.3 RESTORATION AND REMEDIATION IN THE STUDY AREAS...........................33
4.4 COMPARATIVE REMEDIATION MEASURES........................................................34
4.5 GLOBAL RESPONSE TO POLLUTION.....................................................................36
4.5.1 THE PARIS AGREEMENT.......................................................................................36
5 CHAPTER FIVE...........................................................................................................38
5.0 DISCUSSION....................................................................................................................38
5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND THE GLOBAL NORTH -SOUTH DIVIDE....39
5.2 BALANCING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ACROSS THE NORTH-SOUTH
DIVIDE..........................................................................................................................40
5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE CHALLENGES IN THE NIGER DELTA................41
5.3.1 CHRONOLOGY OF OIL SPILLAGES IN THE NIGER DELTA ………...……41

iii
 ABSTRACT
Across the globe, oil and gas activities by oil companies pollute the environment. And because
these activities happen near human populations, livelihoods and human health are adversely
impacted due to the impacts oil extraction and transportation have on soil, water, and air of the
environment. This paper aims at garnering a deep insight into how people impacted by these
environmentally degrading activities can access environmental justice most especially in the global
South where oil and gas activities have intensified. The role of International Oil Companies (IOCs)
was also scrutinized through the lens of environmental compensational framework and remediation
method mostly in the global South. Focus is given to potential roadblocks that could curtail the
ability to hold businesses accountable for environmental harm. In order to improve victims of
environmental harm's access to justice, various remedies to the corporation's limited liability are
also considered. To ensure a balanced view, this paper analyzed three case studies namely Gulf of
Mexico, the Norwegian oil fields and the Niger Delta to support the case in disparity to access of
environmental justice between the global North and global South.

Key words: environmental justice, oil spillage, compensational framework, remediation, land use
act

iv
 CHAPTER ONE
Introduction

1.1 Background

The concept of environmental justice seeks equality for everyone who live, work, and play in
environments directly impacted by the combined activities of resource extraction (e.g., crude oil
exploration and production), hazardous waste disposal, land appropriation, and other environmental
discrimination activities. These activities, such as petroleum exploration and production, exert a
heavy burden on the environment with grave consequences in heavily marginalized communities.
The environmental pollution from hazardous crude pollutants and poisonous chemicals during
exploration, extraction, production, and transportation activities constitutes a serious threat to
human existence.

The huge and continuous industrial and oil exploration activities conducted by multinational
businesses in various parts of the world are the cause of pollution in the form of air, water, and soil.
Drilling, seismic activity, oil exploration, loading, transportation, and refining, as well as oil spills
and gas flares that may be unintentional as a result of an operational error or technical defect, all
contribute to pollution in the oil and gas industry.

Communities that are situated within the areas of these oil extraction activities are frequently
burdened with environmental pollution crisis, which turns into problems. They are responsible for
the environmental consequences of these extraction activities, but the economic boom they create
eventually results in poverty because their primary sources of income fishing and farming have
been destroyed (Malin 2019).

Given the growing need for oil resources and pressing issues of how to live in the future, it
is essential to examine production methods, pollution, and compensation from a global perspective.

1.2 THE ECONOMY OF OIL EXTRACTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION.

The rapid rise in petroleum extraction has reshaped economies, redistributed patterns of wealth and
political power, overturned long-established social structures, and birthed whole new fields of
scientific knowledge and technological innovation (Curtis 2013, Ross 2017). At the same time, the
activities surrounding oil extraction have also adversely impacted the biophysical environment. Oil
industries have desecrated large areas of the earth’s surface throughout the world (both on land and
in the sea) drilling oil wells, shafts, and boreholes into the earth's crust (LeCain, 2009). What is
more, the effects of extraction and processing have reached far beyond the lithosphere. Extraction
1
operations have impounded or re-directed rivers, razed forests, and poisoned air and water with a
mixture of chemical pollutants, causing severe damage to the health and well-being of a number of
organisms, including humans (Odell et al. 2018, Sovacool 2020).

Hence, the need for not only remediation but also mitigating the impact of the adverse effect of
these hazardous pollutants and poisonous chemicals which constitutes a serious threat biodiversity.
This has meetings by world leaders, academics, NGOs, and environmental and pollution specialists
who met to devise means of minimizing the occurrences as well as mitigating the impacts on
vulnerable communities. In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA),
(2012) and corroborated by the National Institute of Environmental Health Science (NIEHS), 2013
defined Environmental Justice as “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people
regardless of race, color, national origin, or income concerning the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies”. For them, fair treatment means
no group of people should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental
consequences resulting from industrial, governmental, and commercial operations or policies. They
refer to the empowerment of people to seize opportunities to participate in decisions about activities
that may affect their environment, livelihood, or health. Public contribution can influence the
regulatory agency’s decision to consider community concerns in the decision-making process.

The discovery of these mineral resources has frequently caused more harm than good for many
individuals who reside near valuable mineral or oil deposits. The so-called "resource curse," which
is the notion that states that rely on a single mineral resource are more likely to be corrupt,
undemocratic, and militaristic than those that do not, has frequently affected people as a result of
mineral extraction. While it has occasionally helped local incomes by creating jobs and stimulating
demand for local produce, it has also frequently exposed people to the "resource curse" (Auty 1993,
Ross 2012).

Theoretically, the Global North fared better than the Global South when it came to compensation
for the effects of oil pollution, albeit highly industrialized, mineral-rich nations like Canada,
Australia, or Norway do appear to be outliers. Across a large portion of the Global South, the
overall pattern of environmental contamination without equal compensation is easily discernible.
Oil-rich nations like Angola, Gabon, and Nigeria provide a good example of such malady (Reed
1987, Monday Kouango, 2002, Okonta and Douglas 2003, Reed 2009). Rather than enhancing the
lives of common people, these oil-rich republics used the riches created by enormous amounts of

2
extracted petroleum to maintain autocratic governments and enriching their supporters rather than
improve the lives of ordinary people.

However, the "resource curse" was not only an economic issue, it also pose a significant ecological
component that makes it impossible to provide a just and lasting remedy for a population whose
ecosystem has been destroyed as a result of oil extraction activities. Long-serving as a symbol of
the links between the political, social, and environmental consequences of mineral extraction is the
tragic story of the Niger Delta, which has arguably seen more severe and long-lasting ecological
damage from oil production than any other region in the world (Okoji, 2000; UNDP, 2006; Steyn,
2014).

1.3 AIM AND OBJECTIVES

Hence, the aims and objectives of this research include:

 Carrying out a comparative appraisal of the environmental justice approach through

compensation, remediation, and mitigation between the global North and the global South.

 Discussing the challenges of the impacts of Hydrocarbon on the environment and the
people’s capacity to be involved in decision-making affecting their respective environment.

 Examine the issues around the regulatory framework on oil extraction in the global South in
terms of compensation.

 Social contracts and relationships between oil and gas companies and their host
communities.

 Examine how the success of compensational implementation in the US and Norway can be
replicated in the Niger Delta.

1.4 Research rationale

All over the world, environmental pollution from hazardous pollutants and poisonous chemicals
from various sources constitutes a serious threat to human existence. The issue of environmental
justice particularly, in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria has constituted a major concern among
environmentalists and pollution experts, NGOs, and the various communities where environmental
problems are prevalent, and it has equally become a recurring issue among the transnational media.

3
It is also a burning political issue in Nigeria where armed violence, piracy, kidnapping, illegal
bunkering activities, and civil unrest have continued to trouble the oil-rich Niger Delta region due
to the prevalent environmental degradation. Hence, the critical questions this research seeks
answers to are:

 What is the environmental justice approach through compensation, remediation, and

mitigation of petroleum pollution impacts in the US, Norway, and the Niger Delta?

 Why are the approaches adopted in the Niger Delta not as effective as the approaches in the
Gulf of Mexico?

 Intent on seeing how environmental justice can be equalized between the case study areas.

 What are the challenges of using compensation, remediation, and mitigation in petroleum-
polluted host communities in the Niger Delta?

 What recommendations are proffered to the above challenges?

1.5 Outline of Chapters

This research work is divided into six chapters. Chapter One introduces the work and is segmented
into the background to the research, the statement of the problem of the research, the Research
problem, aims, and objectives of the research.

Chapter two deals with the literature review around the research, definitions of Environmental
Justice, compensations, mitigation and remediation, historical evolution of environmental justice,
pollution, and its impacts on man and the environment.

Chapter three describes the strategy adopted in choosing the research methods. This research adopts
the qualitative method, an interpretive case study methodology to study the research problem. The
collection of data was done using a qualitative approach.

Chapter four is the results of applying the environmental justice approach through compensation in
the various case study areas with sub-sections also discussing the application of remediation and
then mitigation.

4
Chapter five discusses the challenges of the various Environmental justice approaches and the way
forward in the Niger Delta.

Chapter six is the conclusion, summarizing findings and recommendations for future research and
applications in real life.

5
 CHAPTER TWO

Literature Review

The main goal of this review is to explain the concept environmental justice. This will include a
general discussion of the idea of environmental justice, from its inception to its current applications
in contemporary society, will follow. This chapter will deal with events, problems that prompted its
creation, the benefits of exerting environmental justice, and, challenges implementing this justice
with a view on how they are assessed with solutions and motivations to take decisions for
remediation. This review will finally then go on to discuss environmental justice in the target study
areas (the Gulf of Mexico, Norway, and the Niger Delta).

2.1 Describing ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE?

While some theorists define environmental justice as the "equitable distribution of environmental
risks and benefits" (Schlosberg 2002), the Environmental Protection Agency's (US EPA's) (2012)
definition, which was supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Science
(NIEHS) (2013) definition, is the most accurate: the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of
all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income concerning the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.

The concept of a fair division of costs and gains in the use and exploitation of goods and natural
resources of shared interest, such as water and air, is discussed in this definition. In terms of law,
this concept aims to establish balance in resolving environmental concerns by actively including
individuals affected by or participating in decisions regarding the environment.
In addition, environmental justice aims to strengthen peoples’ ability to transform social benefits
into a thriving community as another standard for a just society (Zwarteveen et al 2014)

2.2.1 2.1.1 HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

The environmental justice movement is said to have started with the demonstrations held in 1982
by the primarily black population of Warren County, North Carolina, against the construction of a
landfill and the disposal of PCB-contaminated (polychlorinated biphenyl) soil in their
neighborhood (Bullard 1990). Over 500 people were detained as a result of the large-scale protests
against the disposal of PCB-contaminated soil in the primarily Black town of Afton, which was led
by the United Church of Christ's Commission for Racial Justice. This prompted the research that
showed race to be the most crucial variable in predicting the location of hazardous waste facilities
in the US (Chavis et al 1987); this phenomenon was initially referred to as environmental racism.

6
Blacks, Latinos, Asians, and other communities of colour and impoverished communities
discovered that businesses constructed in underprivileged places, injure the underprivileged people
nearby with pollution and chemicals, and they perceived these actions as environmental racism. It
is necessary to inform the neighborhood and put pressure on local city officials to take action by
demonstrating that the factory or building poses a threat to the public's health and was erected on
purpose. Unfortunately, industries and businesses often construct hazardous factories in the least
expensive locations, and occasionally one see people being left behind in these less developed areas
where a company builds facilities that in some manner produce pollutants and poisonous chemicals.

Following these studies, there were widespread objections and lawsuits against hazardous waste
disposal in poor, generally black communities (Cole et al 2001). A movement, predominantly led
by white affluent leadership, the mainstream environmental movement as constituted then was
increasingly being criticized over its inability to address social equity concerns (Allen 2009).i
In industrialized nations, the expense of disposing of hazardous waste increased as a result of
grassroots movements and environmental organizations' promotion of environmental rules in the
1970s and 1980s. The 1990s saw the first meetings of environmental organizations that had
previously operated independently. In Washington, D.C., between October 24 and 27, 1991, there
was the first National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit. It gathered activists from
each state in the US as well as some from overseas. These activities led to the 1994 signing of Law
12898, "Federal Actions to Achieve Environmental Justice for Low-Income and Minority
Populations," by President Clinton. All environmental unfairness in federal laws and regulations
was to be eliminated by this measure. This is how the idea of environmental justice went from the
streets to being included for the first time in a public administration in less than twenty years.

In the following years, the movement both broadened and formalized with hundreds of new studies
that examined the relationship between minority communities, institutional power, and
environmental hazards (Bullard et al 2007).

In 1994, President Bill Clinton issued an Executive Order that established environmental justice as
a top federal objective. In response to this directive, federal agencies started to take environmental
justice into account when implementing and evaluating policy (Mitchell and Dorling 2003). The
Seventeen Principles of Environmental Justice were created in 1991 during the First National
People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit in Washington, DC (Bryant and Mohai56
1992). At this point, socioeconomic issues like housing, transportation, gender inequality, and
educational gaps were added to the list of environmental justice concerns (Bullard et al 2007).

7
Today, environmental justice has expanded into a global movement, and it has given political
ecology various ideas that have been formalized or incorporated into academic literature (Martinez-
Alier 2014). These ideas consist of:
 ecological debt,
 environmental racism,
 climate justice,
 food sovereignty,
 corporate accountability,
 ecocide, sacrifice zones,
 environmentalism of the poor

In the past 30 years, environmental justice organizations in the US have seen a dramatic shift, with
an increase in the number of organizations obtaining official legal status. In the US, registering an
organization requires two steps: state-level incorporation, followed by an application for federal
tax-exempt status (SEARAC and Mosaica 2009).

Research demonstrates that there have been enormous impacts of different types of environmental
justice groups including community groups, religious institutions, indigenous groups, youth
organizations, and community development corporations on environmental justice victories across
the country (Arriaga 2010). However, further research is needed to understand the roles and
responses of environmental justice groups when they transition into registered non-profit
organizations and hence face both planned and unanticipated consequences of that shift. An
example is the Registered Environmental Justice Organization (REJO) which is a formal
organization, they are known as registered non-profit organization and their core mission is to
protect people of colour, low-income communities, and indigenous organizations from
environmental and health hazards and advocate for equal access to the decision-making process
(Alejandro Colsa Perez et al 2015)ii

2.2 COMPENSATION IN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

Oil and gas operations are one of the major activities that produce a significant quantity of pollution
(air, water, and land), frequently posing a serious threat to human life and the environment. Thus,
any action (labour, services, monetary contribution, or restrictive covenants) to make up for the
environmental effects of actions that cannot be avoided, corrected, or minimized can be referred to
as compensation as a component of environmental justice. It offers effective ways to make up for
the affected resource or value loss by balancing, correcting, or otherwise making amends.

8
Although compensation is a useful tool for policymakers, it should be used in the context of the
mitigation hierarchy, which suggests that environmental consequences should be avoided first, then
minimized, and eventually restored when practical. Any remaining effects can be compensated for
using a variety of various compensation scaling methods after these first measures have been
implemented (BBOP 2012)

Recent proposals have identified compensation to reduce inequities between different groups due to
siting of undesirable land uses (Bradford 1995). Compensation has become an integral part of
environmental justice and most analysts agreed compensation can be divided into two categories
they are - compensation defined by purpose and compensation defined by timing.

2.2.2 TYPES OF COMPENSATION

Compensation defined by purpose
Compensation defined by purpose falls under this category and can be further divided into several
different types such as compensation as a remedy, compensation as preventative, or compensation
as an incentive.

 Compensation as a remedy - Compensation's goal as a remedy is to "make impacted

communities as well off after the catastrophic occurrence as they were before," or to return the
situation to the way it was. The purpose of compensation as a remedy is to cover the inevitable,
illegible, or unknown effects of siting. Such corrective compensation can be provided in the
form of cash payments, the provision of backup money or insurance, or the replacement of
resources or services in kind (such as the replacement of tainted water supplies) (Cole 2011)

 Compensation as preventive or Mitigation measure - Preventive measures, often known as

mitigation, are another form of compensation (Cole 2011). Here, the main goal is to stop the
facility from harming the neighbourhood or, when possible, to lessen the severity of the harm.
By revamping their facilities and/or operations, businesses can, for instance, forecast and
prevent issues like water contamination and noise pollution. Companies and communities, on
the other hand, find it more difficult to deal with injuries brought on by less obvious or
predictable events, such as social stigma or an elevated risk of accidents. Such issues can be
partially resolved through design improvements, but they cannot be entirely resolved. Where
less predictable harms cannot entirely be avoided in this situation, compensation may be used
as a remedy to address the harm that cannot be alleviated.

9
 Compensation as an incentive - Compensation can also take the form of an incentive in
addition to remedy and mitigation. The payment as an inducement "reward[s] the community
for embracing the facility by providing monies or benefits over those needed to remediate any
losses produced by the facility." By addressing other community needs, incentives make it
simpler to adapt undesired land use and urge communities to accept it. Companies can, for
instance, offer to construct community leisure centers, clean up additional existing trash sites,
provide monetary payments, or even enhance snow ploughing on local streets.

COMPENSATION DEFINED BY TIMING

Depending on when it is delivered, compensation can alternatively be categorized as ex-ante,
continuing, or ex-post (Been 1994). In these situations, the compensation has the same goal but a
different approach depending on when it is given.

2.2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPENSATION FRAMEWORK

Compensation should be viewed as one of several tools for improving biodiversity conditions, and
it should only be used under specific conditions. The Business and Biodiversity Offsets Program
(BBOP), among others, advocates for strict adherence to the mitigation hierarchy (BBOP 2012).
This hierarchy regards compensation as a "last resort," after all reasonable measures have been
taken to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the impacts of a development project, and then to restore
biodiversity on-site. The unavoidable residual effects should be compensated. Compensation
should not be used to justify projects that have been poorly planned in terms of avoidance,
minimization, mitigation, or on-site restoration of project impacts.

If the future use of compensation is to increase in countries where oil spills are likely, several key
issues must be addressed in a compensatory framework, whether that goal is No Net Loss of
biodiversity and ecosystem services (i.e., full internalization of external damage costs, as
envisioned by the EU initiative) or some "acceptable level of loss" (i.e., based on some partial
internalization of damage costs).

To achieve this, environmental compensation must be taken as part of the planning and regulatory
processes. First, the process of determining, creating, and approving a measure of compensation
and, secondly the local planning and regulatory approval procedure for the actual (damaging)
development project, as well as the ensuing environmental impact assessment, is crucially
connected (EIA). The necessity to evaluate the environmental implications of proposed projects
and, or policies, is a common thread across national planning and regulatory assessment processes.
The mitigation hierarchy is followed in some form by most nations, where compensation is
10
considered as "last option strategy" if other steps have been taken to avoid, reduce, and restore
damages.

This suggests that any efforts to enhance the use of compensation should start by addressing the:
(1) local spatial planning and (2) the EIA process.

BBOP Mitigation Hierarchy 2012

S/N MEASURE OBJECTIVE

Measures made to totally prevent impacts on specific

1 Avoidance
2 Minimization
biodiversity components, such as cautious geographical
or temporal positioning of infrastructure pieces, to avoid
producing consequences from the start.
Actions done to minimize, to the degree that is
reasonably possible, the duration, intensity, and/or
extent of consequences (including direct, indirect, and
cumulative impacts, where appropriate).

Actions made to restore ecosystems that have been

3 Rehabilitation / Restoration
4 Compensate
removed or degraded as a result of impacts that cannot
be totally avoided or reduced.
In order to achieve No Net Loss or a Net Gain of
Biodiversity, these measures are taken to make up for
any remaining major, detrimental impacts that cannot be
avoided, mitigated, and/or recovered or restored. Offsets
might take the shape of proactive management measures
like restoring damaged habitat, stopping further
deterioration, reducing risk, or securing regions where a
loss of biodiversity is expected or already occurring.

2.3 GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS ROLES IN COMPENSATION

A functional compensation framework requires two prerequisites: (1) a demand for compensation
based on a clear regulatory requirement that polluters pay to repair environmental damage, and (2)
a reasonable and accessible supply of compensatory credits for polluters to purchase, create, or
otherwise obtain. It can effectively be termed the “demand and supply” model.

Establishing and strictly enforcing a regulatory requirement is the most effective strategy to ensure
demand for compensation. Previous studies have demonstrated that voluntary attempts for
compensation are not likely to stimulate demand in a significant enough way (Cole et al 2014). In
other words, if they are not obligated to pay to repair the damage, the regulated community is

11
unlikely to offer compensation. The demand may be made by municipal, regional, or even national
governments. Furthermore, international governing bodies like the EU can back regulatory demand
through big programs that promote pay to accomplish important objectives (e.g., NNL, Biodiversity
strategy, etc.). It's time for municipal, regional, and national authorities to act given recent EU
efforts.

There are several things that can increase supply. First, just like with demand, strictly enforcing
compensation rules signals to landowners that the regulated community will seek compensation in
the future, which encourages landowners to consider the ecological restoration as a viable
alternative for future land use. The requirement for skilled service providers is crucial. Vaissière &
Levrel (2015) study this in-depth in the US context. An effective illustration is the compensation
broker, Bank of England, whose agreements have given it access to numerous potential
landowners, each of whom can operate as a "provider."

The second source of motivation is clear regulation wording, which informs potential suppliers on
important issues like what would be required. When? What doesn't belong here? etc. Finally,
supply can be increased through a price mechanism. By providing a price to individuals who
increase biodiversity and or ecosystem services, for instance, a market for the purchase and sale of
compensation credits through, for instance, habitat banking compensates landowners for boosting
the supply of credits. Landowners can make a different kind of revenue thanks to this.

Furthermore, from an economic standpoint, the need to remedy a market inefficiency known as an
externality motivates the demand for compensation. An externality occurs when the creation or
consumption of a good or (ecosystem) service imposes a cost on a third party who is not directly
involved in the market. In this instance, negative externality results from private and or public
actors' failure to factor the cost of environmental damage to society into their internal decision-
making (e.g., the decision to flare gas).

Hence, oil and gas industries ("polluters") would "internalize" these costs and make decisions that
are better from a social standpoint if they were given incentives to take into account these external
environmental costs on society, such as being compelled to pay for offsetting compensation
projects. The Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) is based on the notion that, from an equality standpoint,
the onus of mitigating or eliminating pollution (or environmental harm) should be shifted from the
government to those who are responsible for it.

12
Externalities related to environmental damage are made clearer, in monetary or non-monetary
terms, when there is a strong legislative driver for compensation. Similar to how pollution-trading
programs assign costs to pollutants and thereby establish a clearer link between emissions and
human welfare, compensation requirements ensure that the value provided by undeveloped
"natural" landscapes is explicitly taken into account during the decision-making process, thereby
establishing a clearer link between land use impacts and human welfare.

In line with the PPP's justice goal, requiring developers to address their impacts also saves money
for taxpayers.

2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION

Environmental remediation is the action that deals with the removal of pollution or contaminants
from environmental media such as soil, groundwater, sediment, or surface water.

In almost all countries, sites are steadily being highly contaminated by a variety of hazardous
agents as contaminants are accidentally released into the environment either by active industrial
sources or as toxic waste from current or past industrial activities. From a public health point of
view, contaminated sites can be defined as, “Areas hosting or having hosted human activities which
have produced or might produce environmental contamination of soil, surface or groundwater, air,
food-chain, resulting or being able to result in human health impacts” (Martuzzi et al. 2014).
Industrial activities especially those related to large petrochemical plants, power generation, and
heavy industry such as steel mills, and mining leading to environmental pressure, with potentially
adverse social and health effects on local communities (World Health Organization 2009) Since
these contaminants are hazardous, it became imperative that they are removed from the soil, water
(ground and surface), and sediments in the soil. Remedial action is generally subject to an array of
regulatory requirements, and may also be based on assessments of human health and ecological
risks where no legislative standards exist, or where standards are advisory (Watts 2019)

2.4.1 REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES

Once a site is suspected of being contaminated there is a need to assess the contamination. This can
determine the type of remediation technology to adopt as there are two broad types of
environmental remediation, based on where treatment mechanisms are applied:

 Ex-situ methods which involve excavation of affected soils and subsequent treatment at the
surface as well as extraction of contaminated groundwater and treatment at the surface.

13
  In-situ methods which seek to treat the contamination without removing the soils or
groundwater.

Remediation without doubt has proven to be beneficial in several ways; property value increases,
higher productive yield, and so many other benefits such as:

 Reducing material damage

 Improving aesthetics

 Boosting ecosystems

 Improving human health

 Enhancing the quality of the land

 Redevelopment into modern quality

 Property value enhancement

2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION

The process of mitigating environmental effects brought on by human activity, particularly those
brought on by infrastructure projects such as those involving the development of roads, energy,
water, and other types of utilities, is known as environmental mitigation. The project needs to be
moved first to a location with less of an adverse impact on the environment. If relocation is not an
option, damage reduction techniques based on science should be implemented. If environmental
damage is unavoidable, reasonable recompense should be provided. Although this concept is sound
conceptually, it has only been partially implemented.

The term "environmental mitigation" is primarily used by regulatory agencies and the associated
environmental industry to describe projects or programs intended to counteract known impacts on
existing historic or natural resources like streams, wetlands, endangered species, archaeological
sites, paleontological sites, or historic structures.

14
2.6 PETROLEUM POLLUTION

Any spill of crude oil or one of its refined products is referred to as an "oil spillage" incident. The
largest and most harmful pollution incidents, however, typically involve the release of heavy
bunker fuel or oil from stranded tankers or drilling platforms at sea, from barges or ships on
significant interior rivers, or well blowouts or damaged pipelines on land (Freedman 1995).

Both on land and in water, oil spills can have disastrous effects on the environment.

2.6.1 PETROLEUM POLLUTION ON LAND

There are numerous ways that a spill on land can happen, but the biggest incidents typically involve
a pipeline breakage or a well blowout. In 1982, there were 136 thousand kilometres of natural gas
pipelines and 64.5 thousand kilometres of liquid petroleum pipelines worldwide (Gilroy 1983).
Pipeline ruptures have a variety of causes. Seismological events, sabotage such as oil theft in the
Niger Delta, deliberate spills such as during the Gulf War, and occasionally hunters using above-
ground pipes as targets are among them. In many places of the world, it is difficult to accurately
estimate the entire amount of oil that leaks from pipelines. However, individual accidents are
typically far smaller than can possibly be spilt by oceanic supertankers or by blowouts of offshore
installations due to the extensive use of spill sensors and mechanisms for shutting down portions of
pipelines. Terrestrial spills often have a considerably less geographic impact than maritime ones
because the spread of spilled oil is much more constrained on land (unless the spilt oil reaches a
watercourse). A more thorough description of the features and ecological repercussions of
terrestrial spills will be provided.

The main causes of oil pollution in the Niger Delta are incorrect disposal of drilling muds, oil
bunkering, gas flaring, maritime and land accidents, tank washing and oil ballast discharges, depot
leakage, and oil pipeline failure or rupture. A normal oil well generates a mixture of water, gas, and
oil; once the oil is extracted, much of the wastewater (sometimes referred to as formation water or
generated water) is purposefully released into the local environment untreated.

During the Gulf War, there was a massive leakage on land that started in January 1991 when more
than 700 Kuwaiti production wells were destroyed and set on fire, causing massive discharges of
petroleum to the atmosphere and the soil. About half of the oil wells were sealed within 6 months,
with the last one being done so in early November 1991. Estimates of the daily petroleum output
from the burning oil wells ranged from 2 to 106 tonnes per day (Bakan et al., 1991; Johnson et al.,
1991; Popkin, 1991; Warner, 1991; Earle, 1992).

15
2.6.2 PETROLEUM POLLUTION ON THE SEA
Oil pollution is more pervasive in marine environments than terrestrial ones. Oil pollution is one of
the most predominant forms of ocean pollution causing severe damage to amenities, ecosystems,
and resources.

Since the Torrey Canyon ran aground off Cornwall on March 18 and spilled 38 million gallons
(0.14 106 L) of oil, there have been over 25 significant oil spills in the world's oceans. The
Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion on April 20, 2010, which caused a sea bottom gusher of
more than 60,000 barrels of oil per day (9.5 106 L/d1), caused the most recent calamity in the Gulf
of Mexico. The Deepwater Horizon oil leak calamity is the biggest in American history. Oil leak
disasters were more or less "tolerated" before the Deepwater Horizon accident because the
contamination was not always that obvious and because the oil, or at least most of it, seemed to be
decomposed by bacteria over a period of months rather than years. Due to this, even though there
are a lot of oil spills, and they seem to be getting worse, it has not always been included in
monitoring programs up until recently.

Numerous compounds are included in the hydrocarbons found in crude oil, gasoline, and
lubricating oils; these chemicals also enter the coastal zone through wastewater discharges.
Particularly in developing nations, waste oil (from used motor oil) is regularly discharged into
municipal water systems.

2.7 IMPACTS OF PETROLEUM POLLUTION

As described later in the case studies, most of these spillages caused significant ecological damage,
even though it was not always adequately recorded.

2.7.1 Gulf of Mexico (DEEPWATER HORIZON SPILL)

The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, which has been called the biggest
environmental disaster to ever hit the United States, discharged around 4.9 million barrels (210
million US gal: 780,000 m3) of crude oil, making it the worst maritime oil spill. Environmental
impacts resulted from both the spill and the cleanup attempts.

According to scientists, fish and dolphin reproduction rates in the area were incredibly low in 2021
as a result of the effects of the Deepwater spill on marine life on the seafloor. In the months that
followed BP's Deepwater Horizon disaster in 2010, there were earnest attempts made to remove all
of the crude oil that had leaked into the environment. Some of the oil was directly recovered, some

16
were skimmed, while others were burnt. Many of them evaporated or vanished after being
chemically dispersed, but a lot remained.

Many of the compounds identified in the oil pollution were changed within a few months by
hungry bacteria and heat from the sun. In a sense, these crude oil compounds were created from
scratch. Their toxicity may have been affected by the changes in their chemical and physical
characteristics. Larger compounds were more resistant to weathering than smaller ones. These
substances gradually turned into a sticky, intractable jelly that coated the marshlands of the Gulf for
many years.

As oil weathers, the residue becomes resistant to further rapid compositional changes, and this
means that, if not removed by response personnel, residues can remain in environments for an
extended time, causing long-term disruptions of impacted areas," (Carley Cassella, 2022) Oil
residues from an oil spill way back in 1979, for instance, were found on the Yucatan peninsula in
2020, almost 40 years after the initial disaster.

Now shorelines along the northern Gulf have been similarly impacted by a sticky substance that
resembles the composition of moderate to heavy crude oil.

Researchers suspect that after the Deepwater spill, crude oil that wasn't cleaned up and didn't
evaporate gradually drifted back into the water column through wind and waves. The tides would
have then carried these chemicals to the shore or deeper waters.

In the summer of 2011, a year after the spill, researchers found most of the crude oil compounds
had been substantially altered by evaporation, dissolution, photochemical oxidations, and microbial
degradation. What that does to the residues actual toxicity is unclear. Only a small number of crude
oil compounds have had their environmental effects analyzed by researchers to date.

2.7.2 NIGER DELTA PETROLEUM POLLUTION

The Niger Delta region has high biodiversity characteristics of extensive swamp and forest areas,
with many unique species of plants and animals. The mangrove forest of Nigeria is the third largest
in the world and the largest in Africa; over 60% of this mangrove, or 6000 km2, is found in the
Niger Delta. 

Since the soil's ability to absorb oil is like a sponge and release it again during the rainy season,
mangrove forests are particularly susceptible to oil spills. The oil that seeps into the sediments and

17
suffocates the roots of mangrove trees, which form the structure for this habitat, is destroying them
at an alarming rate. The biological productivity (and consequently fish resources) of coastal
waterways depends on the organic carbon and nutrients provided by mangrove environments.

It is well known that once oil and its chemical components seep into subtidal and marsh sediments,
they can remain there for decades and have a severe negative influence on the marsh flora, marine
worms, and other aquatic life forms that live in, on, or near the substrate. Mangrove forests are
essential for sustaining local communities due to their biological roles and the multiple essential
resources they provide, including soil stability, medicines, healthy fisheries, wood for fuel and
shelter, tannins and dyes, and "bush" meats.

The Niger Delta, an environment marked by the surge and flow of water, is regularly flooded due
to the excessive rainfall in southern Nigeria and its low, poorly drained topography. At the current
rate, it is predicted that reduced siltation in the delta will result in the loss of about 40% of the
populated area within 30 years when combined with riverbank and coastal erosion. The activities of
the oil industry are putting pressure on the delicate delta ecosystem.

Almost every phase of petroleum exploration and production produces toxic wastes of varying
chemical compositions (Table 1). Principal sources of oil pollution include improper disposal of
drilling muds, shipping and terrestrial traffic accidents, tank washing and oil ballast discharges,
depot leakage, and failure or rupture in oil pipelines.

An oil well typically produces a mixture of oil, gas, and water, and after separating the oil much of
the wastewater (known as formation water or produced water) is deliberately discharged untreated
into the local environment. Produced water may contain approximately 8–10% oil as well as other
chemical additives such as organic solvents, lead, chromium, nickel, zinc, cadmium, mercury,
arsenic, cyanide, and barium.

Although the water discharged generally contains low concentrations of oil, its large volume,
together with occasional oil spillage, can have long-term effects, depending partly on the ecological
setting in which the discharge is made. Another major source of waste is drilling, which produces
large amounts of mud and dry cuttings. The muds and cuttings, which may contain chemical
additives, salts, metals, and hydrocarbons, are often dumped indiscriminately into waterways,
drainage channels, or agricultural soils.

Table 1. Contaminants associated with oil exploration and production and their
18
 potential health effects J. Nriagu, 2011
Contaminants Sources Potential health effects
Polycyclic aromatic Diesel exhaust Probable or possible carcinogens.
hydrocarbons (PAHs) Flaring Animal studies show reproductive
effects.
Storage pits and ponds
The conflagration of oil
spills and wastes
Metals (including Drilling muds There are different potential health
arsenic, barium, effects associated with each metal.
Stimulation fluids
cadmium, chromium, Possible toxic effects include skin
lead, mercury, selenium, Storage pits and ponds problems, hair loss, kidney damage,
zinc, and others) Produced water high blood pressure, increased cancer,
neurological damage risk, and others.
Venting and flaring
Diesel exhaust
Volatile organic Venting and flaring of React with NOx to form ground-level
compounds (including natural gas ozone and smog, which can trigger
BTEX (benzene, Storage pits and ponds respiratory problems. Can cause health
toluene, ethylbenzene, problems such as cancer.
and xylenes) Oily wastes
formaldehyde, and Diesel and natural gas
others). engine exhaust
Compressors
The conflagration of oil
spills and wastes
BTEX Venting of natural gas Benzene is a known carcinogen.
Toluene may affect the reproductive
and central nervous systems, whereas
Storage pits and ponds ethylbenzene and xylenes may have
respiratory and neurological effects.
Produced water
Dehydration
Diesel fuel Stimulation fluids Both fuel and exhaust contain
Oil-based drilling muds carcinogenic substances like benzene
and PAHs.
Engines/heavy equipment
Particulate aerosols Diesel exhaust Can be inhaled and cause health effects
like respiratory ailments, aggravation of
asthma and allergies, painful breathing,
shortness of breath, chronic bronchitis,
and premature death. May combine
with other air pollutants to aggravate
health problems. Some particulates,
Pits (dust from) such as diesel exhaust, are
Venting and flaring carcinogenic.
The conflagration of oil
spills and wastes
19
Sulfur oxides Diesel and natural gas React with other chemicals to form
engine exhaust particulate pollution, which can damage
the lungs and cause respiratory illness,
heart conditions, and premature death.
Nitrogen oxides Compressor engines React with VOCs to form ground-level
ozone and smog, which can trigger
respiratory problems. React with other
chemicals to form particulate pollution,
which can damage the lungs and cause
respiratory illness, heart conditions, and
Flaring premature death. React with common
organic chemicals to form toxins that
Diesel and natural gas
may cause biological mutations.
engine exhaust
The conflagration of oil
spills and wastes
Carbon dioxide Flaring Greenhouse gas
Engine exhausts
Power generating plants
Carbon monoxide Flaring Can cause brain damage
Methane Stimulation fluids The main concern is the explosive
Oil-based drilling muds nature of this gas.

Engines/Heavy
Equipment
Anaerobic pits and ponds

2.8 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Thomsen (2012) asserts that as oil demand continues to rise, more drilling will be required in
sensitive areas, creating environmental problems between multinational corporations and the
communities in which they operate. As a result, multinationals must incorporate moral behaviour
into all aspects of their business operations. Increasingly, companies are being urged to take on
constructive roles and help promote sustainable growth. Given their global influence and activities
in which they deal with a variety of problems, stakeholders, and institutional environments in both
home and host nations, multinational businesses (especially IOCs) are particularly affected by this.

Prior to the current focus on the role of MNEs in "fixing" issues, non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) waged a campaign against the detrimental effects of globalization in general and the
influence of IOCs in this process in particular. However, attempts to control corporate behaviour
have generally not been very successful due to the wide range of issues involved, the majority of
which are international and necessitate a much wider consensus and harmonisation of rules and
implementation mechanisms than is technically and politically feasible.
20
According to recent research, a nation's institutions play a crucial role in deciding whether or not a
resource is a curse when viewed through the lens of CSR. The resource curse tends to be avoided
by nations with "excellent" democratic accountability and rule of law institutions, but not by
nations with "poor" institutions (Collier and Goderis 2007, Mehlum et al., 2006, Robinson et al.
2006). To put it another way, nations that have institutions that prevent politicians from leveraging
resource rents to consolidate their power and that discourage unproductive rent-seeking by ensuring
entrepreneurs' claims to profit from productive activity do better than others.

According to Jederzej (2009), disputes that the organization may have caused or been involved in
might thwart successful CSR plans. In the same spirit, multinational corporations' failure to
comprehend local needs and incorporate them into their CSR programs is another way that good
CSR strategies end up being unpopular with the host communities. Ntido (2013) also noted that
while the oil companies believe they have less responsibility to the host communities once they
have completed their part of the business to the body recognized by Law (the Federal government),
the communities on the other hand expect the companies to foster good neighbour relationships by
giving back to the communities.

Even though the importance of institutions for economic growth cannot be downplayed,
particularly in resource-rich nations, an understanding of how multinational firms interact with
local institutions is lacking. This is regrettable because multinational firms frequently play a
dominant role in countries with abundant natural resources. Do the actions of multinational firms in
nations with abundant resources worsen or improve the institutional issues that underlie the
resource curse? (World Development 2009).

The absence of widespread international regulation on social and environmental issues can be
considered as, both a problem and an opportunity for IOCs. Regardless of one's view, it means that
there is a so-called ‘moral free space’ in which ‘there are no tight prescriptions’ for IOCs, and
‘managers must chart their own course’ (Donaldson 1996: p. 56). Even if some aspects of business
activities are regulated, this usually does not apply everywhere, and rules are likely to differ across
countries/regions, as will monitoring and compliance.

One of the reasons oil companies encounter hostility from their host communities, according to
Okoro (1996), cited in Hamilton (2011), is the lack of or inadequate provision of social amenities to
make up for the environmental harm caused in the Niger Delta, along with employment for their
educated youths. While some of these oil companies, like Shell, have provided fair CSR responses,
according to Ugochukwu (2008), the host communities, according to Hamilton (2011), view these
21
multinationals as wealthy entities that should replace the government in providing amenities for
them and as such, should do more than they are doing.

Despite disagreements over definitions, it can be said that when viewed in this light, CSR appears
to be more than simply "beyond compliance" and promoting social causes (Rodriguez, Siegel,
Hillman, & Eden 2006: p. 736); it also does not entail "systematic over-compliance" (Portney
2008) or merely "sacrificing profits in the social interest" (Reinhardt, Stavins, & Vietor 2008).
Instead, corporate social responsibility refers to the management of an organization in a way that
allows it to be "economically profitable, law-abiding, ethical, and socially supportive" (Carroll,
1999: p. 286). This is challenging when a company is operating in a variety of contexts with
frequently conflicting views on the place of business in society (cf. Devinney 2009).

These factors taken together are what IOCs must contend with in their daily operations as well as in
their interactions with other businesses and stakeholders, which have an impact on society as a
whole.

2.9 SUMMARY

From this review, this is a complex concept that requires closure on the disparity in the successes of
environmental justice between developed nations and developing nations. The communities in
developing nations need to be more involved in the decision processes affecting their habitats. This
research seeks to pave way for critical discussions on the extent of environmental pollution to
which activities of oil industries have met out to the Niger Delta environment by drawing
inferences from the compensation, remediation and mitigation processes obtained in the Gulf of
Mexico.

22
 CHAPTER THREE

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This research used a secondary methodology approach which involved a complete systematic
assessment of the environmental impacts of petroleum pollution supported by evidence from a
thorough literature review on compensatory, remedial and mitigation measures adopted in the study
areas. A secondary route was taken as the knowledge that is needed to address the research
question lies within a vast research literature documenting case studies of those directly affected,
journals, research publications, from community leaders, research bodies, NGOs, government
agencies, etc. A content analysis approach most effectively allowed for collecting and examining
this information.

3.1 RESEARCH APPROACH

The burning question in this research is to relate how effective environmental justice has been
successfully implemented in the developed versus the undeveloped, where the Gulf of Mexico and
Norway, to draw a correlation with countries in the Global South (Niger Delta will suffice as a case
study). The data gathered in this analysis were done with an inductive perspective. This approach
follows a process of data collection from which commonalities and patterns can be drawn and thus
allows for the formulation of general conclusions and theories (Bernard, 2018). This approach also
23
provides the necessary flexibility that enables changes in the formulation of theories as the process
evolves (Goddard and Melville,2011) (Harvard University 2013).

2.9.1 3.1.1 Rapid Evidence Assessment

The purpose of conducting a Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) was to understand the current
compensational models accessed by communities within locations where oil and gas activities take
place. This was to:

 critically analyze the impacts of environmental pollution on (petroleum exploitation

host) communities
 determine if most people living in areas near extractive sites are acutely aware of
and concerned about, the threats they face from pollution
 analyze how economic and political processes determine the way communities are
compensated for activities polluting their environment.
 Determine if the economic and social benefits were worth the environmental dam-
age these activities constituted.

To obtain a balanced assessment to determine what is known and unknown about the current state
of an issue, REA used a systematic approach to analyze existing evidence – most often empirical
studies (Barends et al., 2017). They are often chosen as they are rigorous in approach and can be
completed in as little as a few weeks. However, achieving an outcome on this timescale requires the
sacrifice of the breadth and or depth of the research. REA was developed and has been extensively
used, due to the growing need for policymakers to have a quick and inexpensive review that
maintained the thoroughness of a systematic review, thus suiting the fast-paced nature of policy
development (Khangura et al., 2012).

Due to time constraints, the decision was taken to use an REA for the purposes of this study to beat
the timeline. Firstly, the short time frame allocated for data collection did not allow time for an in-
depth systematic review, particularly as the interviews were also being conducted concurrently with
the REA. Again, given the breadth of research, depth had to be sacrificed and this approach
allowed for this while maintaining systematic rigour.

3.2 Data Collection

2.9.2 3.2.1 Selection Criteria
With over 100 recognized bodies (able to award degrees) as determined by the Department for
Education (DfE), these institutions were included within the REA (DfE, 2018). In this, the breadth
of the study was kept as wide as possible.
24
2.9.3 3.2.2 Process
Major search terms used are Oil spillage, Environmental justice, Globalization, History of
Environmental Justice, Oil extraction, and hazardous emissions, Environmental justice
compensations, Environmental remediation, Environmental History, Environmental pollution
mitigation (See Reference) via the search feature on the webpage and the first twenty results from
each search were observed. If the title or description of a webpage referred to the terms mentioned
above, it was examined further. Also, if a webpage was found to contain appropriate materials,
links were used to gather further information. While sourcing for materials Alex Fergusons Library
provided a lot of materials making it unnecessary to pay online research sites for materials gotten
easily by just presenting my User name and school Identity password. For each case study the
environmental justice atlas was studied, then data was gathered on whether the search terms
returned any relevant results, what measures had been implemented to address environmental
degradation, and what pledges or targets had been made. Importantly, results describing plans for
future initiatives were also considered in this research.

By using these search terms, the depth of study was broadened as alternative terms may have
yielded applicable results or results may not have appeared for several other reasons.

3.3 Ethical Considerations

This research has a very short time frame allocated for data collection and analysis hence did not
allow time for an in-depth critical and systematic review. However, given the breadth of research
and analysis of data collated, depth was not sacrificed, and this approach allowed for maintaining
systematic rigour.

25
 CHAPTER 4

4.0 Results of Case Studies

This chapter will critically identify damages done in the study areas and analyze the economic
concept adopted for compensating individuals (and ultimately the society) for losses, which is
inherently anthropocentric (centered on human values and experiences). With the assumption that
environmental compensation is motivated by a concern over society’s well-being, this paper will
draw theories from economic justice; being the study of how well members of society can
participate in decisions that affect their environments. It is going to investigate welfare measured in
terms of income and general prosperity and quality of life and may consider such factors as e.g.,
human health, access to education, level of pollution, access to nature, etc. The anthropocentric
approach used in this report assumes that welfare is based on individual preferences for goods and
services, which necessarily includes levels of biodiversity and ecosystem services.

The study areas are – the Gulf of Mexico (Deepwater Horizon incident), Norwegian oil fields and
the Niger Delta. This report will critically look at the environmental justice approach in the study
areas through the following scope:

 Compensation
 Remediation

26
  Mitigation

4.1 Gulf of Mexico (Deepwater Horizon spill)

Background
4.1.1 Compensation
Write here on compensation
4.1.2 Mitigation
Write here on mitigation
4.1.3 Remediation
Write here on Remediation
The Deepwater Horizon spill, a result of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion of April 20,
2010, is touted as the worst oil spill disaster in the history of the US as this incident was responsible
for the discharge of over 60,000 barrels of oil per day (9.5 × 106 L/d -1) over the sea floor with more
than 43,000 square miles of the Gulf and its shoreline severely impacted. Residents experienced
adverse health impacts of the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill through consumption of seafood,
increased air pollution, and exposure to contaminants on beaches and in the water.

In response, swift litigation against Transocean, which owned the Deepwater Horizon, was
instituted by fishermen, hotel operators, landowners, rental companies, restaurant owners and
seafood processors. The plaintiffs premised their claims on the United States Oil Pollution Act,
1990 (OPA) which deals with compensation for oil spills, the responsible party pays removal costs
and damages in addition to compensation.

The plaintiffs claimed both current and potential future loss of business in the aftermath of the oil
spill and leveraged on the OPA which stipulates that damage claims cover natural resources, real
and personal property, and loss of natural resources, loss of revenues to the Government, loss of
profit or impairment of earning capacity, damages for net costs of providing increased or additional
public services during removal. Natural resources include amongst others land; fish and drinking
water supplies and the claimant do not necessarily need to be the owner of natural resources. The
claimant only needs to prove that he relies on the polluted environment for living. Compensation
has been defined in the US by comparing income before and after the spill using insurance loss
adjusters.

The litigation lasted over 6 years and judgement came on April 4, 2016, when District Judge Carl
Barbier approved a settlement for $20.8 billion over BP’s responsibility for civil penalties and
future litigation for natural resource damages arising from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

27
The settlement included provisions for the largest recovery of natural resource damages ever
approved for injuries to natural resources.

Under the settlement, BP will pay the Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration
(NRDAR) Trustees (five Gulf States and four federal agencies) up to $8.8 billion for restoration to
address natural resource injuries.

The settlement includes:

 $1 billion already committed during early restoration

 $7.1 billion for restoration over 15-plus years, beginning in April 2017
 Up to an additional $700 million to respond to natural resource damages unknown at the
time of the agreement and/or to provide for adaptive management (US DOI)

Other compensational programs set up include the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF), a $20
billion trust fund set up by BP and the governmental distribution funds. This paper will go ahead to
analyze the depth to which these programs have been instrumental in meeting environmental justice
for all concerned parties.

Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF)

The Gulf Coast Claims Facility was established by BP in pursuit of the States Oil Pollution Act,
1990 (OPA) which designated it as the responsible party for the oil spillage disaster. This body
became the primary means of compensation because of the Deepwater Horizon spill.

It allowed for various claims and encouraged private individuals to file claims seeking
compensation for direct damages resulting from the Spill or for the cost incurred while trying to
mitigate or prevent damages resulting from the spill. Affected netizens can also file compensational
claims for damaged properties or repairs undertaken before and after the damages.

Physical injuries or deaths caused "proximately caused by the Spill or the explosion and fire
associated with the Deepwater Horizon incident, or by the cleanup of the Spill" were also allowed.

Throughout the 159 clusters of communities in the region, claim centres and Community Outreach
were set up to make it easy for affected people to process claims and access compensations from
the 20 billion dollars Trust Fund.

However, the claims also had issues as it is affecting different communities in different ways, and
they include:

28
  There is a need for pre-approval from the Federal On-Scene Coordinator and communities
unaware of this policy end up being delayed in accessing compensation.
 Compensations for mental or emotional health injuries are excluded from the claims and
this may disenfranchise communities of colour or low-income people.

Governmental-Backed Funds
The federal, state, and local governments are also playing active roles in compensating victims with
their roll-out of funds. These arms of governments also filed claims to compensate for property
damage, loss or lost profits, or earning capacity.

4.2 THE NORWEGIAN OIL FIELDS

Norway has proven to be the world’s poster child in turning oil and gas resources to the benefit of
its people. They avoided the so much-touted resource curse by making the citizens share in the
costs and benefits of oil and gas extraction in the Norwegian fields (Olsen 2002). This enabled the
communities to be involved in decision-making on issues of environmental impact assessment and
control.

Norway has over time demonstrated a commitment to transparency and fiscal responsibility
through the management of its state-owned investment vehicle, the Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF)
or known as the Norwegian Oil Fund. With status control over the oil revenue, the state has been
able to turn it to the benefit of the current and future population. This also entails compensation and
remediation resulting from oil production activities (Neill 2016).

Oil and gas activities emit pollution and Norway is not an exception. With a thriving fishing
industry, pollution activities in the sea affect the income and businesses of fishers and this, in turn,
has led to conflicts between fishers and oil industries (Arne 2016). The Norwegian government has
adopted many measures towards facilitating a more cordial coexistence between the fishing
industry and the oil industries by compensating fishers whose incomes are affected by oil spillage
either during production activities or during transporting crude oil. Compensation may be set
entirely or partly as a lump sum or as fixed annual payments (Petroleum Act 29 1996).

4.3 THE NIGER DELTA, NIGERIA

Oil spillage and gas flaring arising from oil and gas activities constitute the major pollution in the
Niger Delta. Because the oilfields are interwoven within the host communities, the impact of IOCs
operating in the Niger Delta is severe on the environment and the people with the air, soil,
farmlands, and aquatic life severely polluted. The communities in the Niger Delta wish to live in a

29
fair society, one in which laws are effectively implemented and respected and the justice system is
also fair and accessible, implying that institutions, procedural rules, and substantive laws function
to empower individuals to pursue and obtain justice and wellbeing. Effective access should not just
be an optional extra or luxury of economically advanced societies but, for all societies, there should
be justice for all, meaning that justice should be available, accessible, inclusive, and accountable.

The discovery of oil within the Niger Delta has become the proper definition of a resource curse as
their environment continues to get polluted without access to justice. In Nigeria, access to justice is
marred by lax laws, lack of independent judicial institutions, police brutality, inhumane prison
conditions, lengthy pre-trial detention, impunity for perpetrators of sexual and gender-based
violence, lack of political will to enforce compliance with extant legal provisions, which define the
acknowledged tardiness in the administration of justice in the country, and bad governance. This
has led to the marginalization of groups and whole communities from the dividends of governance,
allocations, and development.

Due to the Nigerian governments weak regulations which allow international Oil Companies
(IOCs) to evade justice meted out to the environment, oil-producing communities in the Niger
Delta began taking their grievances to overseas courts. In 2011, the Bodo community took Shell to
court in the United Kingdom for the 2008 oil spills. Shell accepted responsibility and the
community is now seeking compensation. In October 2011, Ogale village in Rivers State, described
by UNEP as one of the world's most polluted places, filed a case against Shell in a United States
federal court, seeking US$1 bn in compensation for negligence. In 2017, ERA/FOEN and the
Ikebiri community filed a suit in Milan against the Italian oil company (Eni) demanding
compensation for damage caused by an oil pipeline explosion in 2010. Such actions are expected to
embolden Niger Delta communities to institute more cases to demand environmental accountability
from IOCs. Communities resort to Western courts due to the lack of faith in the Nigerian system,
where apart from lengthy delays, the IOCs sometimes refuse to comply with orders from Nigerian
courts to pay compensation or, for that matter, end gas flaring.

Gas flaring has been a recurring decimal in the Niger Delta for over 60 years. The IOCs treat
official gas flaring deadlines with disdain as Nigeria's dependence on petroleum denies the country
a position of strength. On 14 November 2005, a Nigerian Federal High Court declared that the
continued flaring of gas in Nigeria was inconsistent with the right to life and/or dignity of a person
enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution and the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights as
domesticated, and therefore, unconstitutional, null and void (Iguh 2016). Yet, the Nigerian
government and IOCs have paid little attention to their cry for environmental justice.
30
Overall, compensation has been weak and ineffective. Some measures were attempted to make
recompense to the Niger Delta communities, and they include:

 Creation of a ministry for the Niger Delta

 A special commission (NDDC) was also created to handle compensation, job creation,
business support, and environmental rehabilitation of the Niger Delta.
 13% of oil earnings are being paid to the states that make up the Niger Delta
 Scholarship awards to indigents of the Niger Delta

However, these measures are marred by massive corruption and gross ineffectiveness. IOCs also
refused to pay compensations as they claimed the spillages are the results of willful sabotage by the
communities and locals who practice illegal refineries.

4.4 RESTORATION AND REMEDIATION IN THE STUDY AREAS

Oil and gas activities have continued unabated due to increased global industrialization and
urbanization in the last few decades. Hence, in the process of petroleum extraction, transportation,
processing, and utilization, the leakages of petroleum into soils are almost inevitable. This is due to
several factors which include imperfect management, incomplete combustion, leakage from ageing
pipelines, and other accidental factors. And when pollution occurs as it most often does during
these activities, the vulnerable are gravely affected. Owing to the toxicity of petroleum and related
derivatives, petroleum pollutants in soils can cause serious local environmental and human health
issues. Consequently, effective soil remediation technologies for oil-contaminated sites are
crucially demanded to gain justice, sustainable development, and environmental safety.

This section will attempt to highlight restoration and remediation measures in the Niger Delta in
comparison to the Gulf of Mexico cleanup.

4.5 COMPARATIVE REMEDIATION MEASURES

Niger Delta and the Gulf of Mexico
The US in its OPA (90) enacted a legislative statute that, in part, requires the Responsible
Party (RP) to remediate the spilled oil and compensate those economically injured for identifiable
losses and it further required that trustees for natural resources ensure that injuries to natural
resources are identified and damages compensated. Specifically, Section 1066 D.1 of the OPA
states: “The measure of natural resource damages is

31
a) The cost of restoring, rehabilitating, replacing, or acquiring the equivalent of, the damaged
natural resources.
b) The diminution in value of those natural resources pending restoration (known as interim lost
use); plus
c) The reasonable cost of assessing those damages”

On the part of the Niger Delta, Nigeria has at least 43 statutory instruments regulating the
petroleum industry, and a few principal Acts, along with the constitutional provisions. Chief among
these are the National Oil Spill Detection and Response (establishment) Act (NOSDRA Act) 2006
and the DPR, Environmental Guidelines and Standard for the Petroleum Industry in Nigeria
(EGASPIN), which stipulates that oil spills must be prevented as much as possible while clean-up
exercise should start within 48hours of occurrence with a purpose of rehabilitating the soil and
restore it to its normal state.

Over 90% of oil leak incidents in the Niger Delta hardly ever get cleaned up because of the lax
laws already in place. Environmental pollution in the Niger Delta worsens without remedy because
of inconsistencies, conflicting authorities and responsibilities between ministries, and a lack of
resources within key agencies. Furthermore, environmental pollution within the oil and gas sector
was excluded from its area of enforcement by the National Environmental Standards and
Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA).

In addition, the government agencies concerned lack qualified technical experts and resources
(UNEP 2011). The fallout is a serial weak and ineffective enforcement of environmental laws.

The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) was asked by the Nigerian government to
evaluate the effects of oil contamination in Ogoniland on the environment and public health.
According to the report, which was published in 2011, Ogoniland has significant and extensive oil
contamination a lot of environmental components were affected. At a community (Ejama-Ebubu),
heavy contamination is still present 40 years after the oil spill occurred, despite repeated clean-up
attempts. The UNEP indicated significant effects on livelihoods and long-term health impacts.

In 2012, President Goodluck Jonathans’ government established the Hydrocarbon Pollution

Restoration Project (HYPREP) to implement the UNEP recommendations on the Ogoni
environment clean-up. Still, this administration failed to deliver on the clean-up of the region
despite Jonathan is from the Niger Delta region. The program suffered severe structural defects and
a clear lack of official commitment, nepotism, and widespread corruption (The Guardian 2019)

In 2015, the succeeding administration of Muhammadu Buhari administration announced a fast-

tracking of the implementation process, and on 2nd June 2016, in Bodo, Rivers State, the FG
32
officially flagged off the clean-up of Ogoniland and other impacted communities in the Niger Delta
region. A major government program for polluted areas, it was anticipated that the project would
also engage youths and women to generate employment. Regrettably, President Buhari did not
bring any radical change to the clean-up program (The Guardian 2020). Actual clean-up
commenced only with the reactivation of HYPREP, in January 2019, when 16 contractors moved
on site. Since then, about 21 sites have been handed over to contractors by HYPREP. The FG
planned to hand over 36 impacted sites under Batch 1, Phase II remediation works to contractors on
13 February 2020. The HYPREP claimed that each contract provides a minimum of 35 local job
opportunities, but without clarity as to the nature of the jobs if they are permanent placements, the
level of employees, and their duration. While the President Buhari-led administration claimed, in
January 2020, that the progress recorded in the Ogoni clean-up project was attracting positive local
and international commendation on ground assessments gave a different verdict. For instance,
nothing tangible has been achieved in the cleaning exercise over four years after flag-off. Civil
Society Organizations (CSOs) and communities raised the alarm that the initiative had deviated
from the recommendations of the UNEP report. Although a template for intervention was provided
by the UNEP report, many of the relevant issues are yet unresolved. Rather, the institutional issues
as well as recommendations and steps to be followed in carrying out the exercise appear to have
been politicized. CSOs claim that the handover of 21 sites to contractors was riddled with
allegations of corruption, unwholesome compromises, and nepotism (Uwaegbulam 2019).

Now over four years after its establishment, HYPREP has been unable to make any meaningful
progress. The ERA/FOEN lamented that the clean-up project has been corrupted as political
patronage for politicians to the detriment of the poorly impacted victims. Stakeholders and
concerned indigenes of the larger oil-producing communities have said they would not accept the
Ogoniland clean-up without the provision of an alternative and sustainable means of livelihood.

With the above few instances, injustice continues to pervade the Niger Delta region in comparison
to what is currently being done at the Deepwater Horizon incident of the Gulf of Mexico.

4.5 GLOBAL RESPONSE TO POLLUTION

4.5.1 THE PARIS AGREEMENT
The Paris Agreement is an international and legally binding treaty to limit global warming through
reducing carbon emissions which has been ratified by 190 countries, including Nigeria, and will
therefore be considered in more detail in the final part of this paper. As a party to the Paris
agreement, Nigeria signed the agreement in 2017, and as part of its Nationally Determined
Contributions (NDCs), committed to cutting their carbon emissions unconditionally by 20 percent
or conditionally by 45 percent with international support by 2030.
33
Through its Department of Climate Change in the Ministry of Environment, the Nigerian
government listed eight areas of interest it proposed to mitigate carbon emissions (Department of
Climate Change 2021). They include:

 By 2030 target to end gas flaring,

 45 percent conditional and 20 percent unconditional emission reduction of carbon,
 Providing off-Grid Solar of up to 13 Giga Watts and Reforestation.
 Climate Smart Agriculture,
 Promote the use of Bus to discourage the massive use of Cars,
 improve the electricity grid (bid to reduce fuel/diesel generator use) and
 to attain 30 percent energy efficiency by 2030.

However, the country has only paid lip service to its policies and has continued to allow oil and gas
industries to indiscriminately flare their gas deposit. Corruption, politicization, and armed security
jackboots led to weak environmental protection from both National Oil Spill Detection and
Response Agency (NOSDRA) and National Environmental Standards/Regulations Enforcement
Agency (NESREA).

In a 2018 report, the country was rated as the 7 th worst emitter of gas in the world and these
emissions have been on an incremental rise over the years (GGPR 2018).

34
 CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 DISCUSSION
In here compare the case studies
From the preceding chapter, oil and gas exploration, extraction, refining and transportation have
devastating and enormous environmental consequences with oil spills, polluting emissions and
explosions being daily occurrences. Major results of these negative impacts on the environment,
such as regional and local air pollution, water pollution, ground contamination, and climate
instability are huge tolls on the people occupying the environment. Global poverty will rise as
people's homes and livelihoods are threatened by the environmental effects of these pollutions, and
this will have an impact on their ability to live comfortably.

This can accurately be termed as a violation of the human rights of the indigent people living
within the environment where these oil and gas activities are lined up. Additional categories for
violations include substantive and procedural. The extraction and processing of oil and gas may
have an impact on people's fundamental human rights, such as the right to life, health, and property.
The effects of pollution from oil and gas extraction on water quality and human health are another
common human rights concern. The right to an adequate standard of living and the fundamental
right to life are both impacted by pollution from oil spills that harm the ecosystem, farmlands, and
fisheries.

Oil and gas corporations must purchase land to engage in the exploration and extraction of oil and
gas. Human rights breaches may result from the displacement of families and changes in access to
farmland, pasture, or forest resources. When land purchase is negotiated incorrectly or for
insufficient pay, rights abuse may occur. In some circumstances, compensation is impossible to

35
lessen the effects of development, such as where customary rights to the occupation and use of land
exist and when the expropriation of such land undermines the right to cultural life.

Procedural human rights, such as the rights to information access, decision-making involvement,
and remedy access, including access to justice, are increasingly being denied the people. Citizens
can comprehend how the plans and activities of oil and gas firms may affect their rights to life,
health, and a sufficient standard of living by having access to information. Abuse of the right to
participate in decision-making may result from disagreements on the timing, procedure, and scope
of community engagement and the establishment of free, prior, and informed consent. Oil and gas
exploration and extraction frequently take place on territories that has historically been essential to
the livelihoods and cultural identities of indigenous peoples, who are frequently marginalized on
the social and economic fronts.

The rights of communities and individuals who may already be disadvantaged or vulnerable are
particularly in danger since the negative effects of climate change are disproportionately felt by
people in the Global South. The negative effects of climate change may function as a danger
multiplier, posing an indirect threat to rights due to factors including rising food prices, social
unrest, and political unpredictability. This will lead this paper to critically discuss environmental
justice through the lens of the Global North and the Global South divide.

5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND THE GLOBAL NORTH -SOUTH DIVIDE

Conflicts over environmental justice are present in both the global north and the global south
(Walker 2012). The struggles of the indigenous peoples of the Arctic and the Pacific Islands for
climate justice, the opposition of local and indigenous communities of the Niger Delta to
environmentally destructive oil drilling, and the opposition of international agrarian movements
(like La Via Campesina) to corporate-dominated free trade policies that threaten rural livelihoods
are some of the most notable (McMichael 2008).

Mineral resource extraction is expected to continue in the future. The OECD estimates that in 2011,
the world consumed 7 gigatonnes of metal annually, and predictions indicate that figure will
increase to 19 gigatonnes by 2060. The usage of non-metallic minerals is anticipated to increase
from 35 to 82 gigatonnes throughout that time, with emerging nations of the global South
experiencing the largest increases (OECD, 2018).

It has been provocatively asserted by Mitchell (2011) that the extraction and processing of coal and
oil have significantly impacted political and economic institutions, resulting in the emergence of

36
new varieties of Euro-American "carbon democracies." On the other hand, oil-rich nations like
Angola, Gabon, and Nigeria provide a great example of the “resource curse” (Reed 1987, Kouango
2002, Okonta and Douglas 2003, Reed 2009). In these so-called "resources rich countries," income
generated from massive amounts of extracted petroleum was mostly used to maintain authoritarian
regimes and enrich their supporters rather than to better the lives of common people.

The pursuit of environmental justice within and between countries is significantly hampered by
North-South economic and political disparities, even though environmental law scholars and
practitioners have used the force of human rights law to advocate for the people and communities
who have been harmed by environmental degradation. For resource-rich areas like the Niger Delta,
a mineral strike is often more devastating on the long run, leaving behind environmental
destruction, territorial dispossession, political repression, and massacres by state forces serving as
security for petroleum transnationals or mineral cartels with headquarters in the global North
(Nixon 2011). The "slow" environmental damage brought on by extractive industries has
frequently been minimized or accepted as "an inevitable part of industrial urban modernity" (Singer
2011), in many instances the level of harm to local environments, health, livelihoods, and
lifeworlds was simply too great to be disregarded.

North-South environmental unfairness takes the shape of social, procedural, procedural, and
distributive unfairness. But while the North has contributed disproportionately to environmental
deterioration worldwide and has immensely benefited economically from this, the South suffers
from distributive injustice due to unequal exposure to environmental risks. This disparity results
from the continued unsustainable extraction of the South's natural resources to satisfy Northern
consumers, the transfer of polluting industry and hazardous wastes from the North to the South, and
the vulnerable geographic locations and weak, often time corrupt, regulatory capabilities of many
Southern nations.

The North's greater economic and political influence causes it to dominate decision-making in the
World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and
even in negotiations for multilateral environmental and human rights treaties. This enforces
procedural injustice in North-South relations (Hossay 2006). Finally, North-South environmental
conflicts are inextricably linked to colonialism and post-colonial trade, aid, finance, and investment
policies that led to the impoverishment of Southern nations and made it possible for the North to
exploit their resources while externalizing the costs to society and the environment.

37
5.2 BALANCING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ACROSS THE NORTH-
SOUTH DIVIDE
Human rights law is a flexible tool that can be used to conceal and uphold Northern dominance or
to disrupt it. It is crucial to recognize and oppose certain grand narratives that uphold Northern
hegemony to advance environmental justice through human rights law and advocacy, such as the
propensity of Northern states and non-governmental organizations to single out Southern states for
human rights abuses while ignoring Northern complicity. To dispel the myth of the saviour savage
and ensure that the discourse and practice of human rights address the more fundamental structural
injustices that give rise to environmental injustice, a critical approach to environmental human
rights law must expose the current and historical causes of environmental human rights abuses.
Breaking down these generational hierarchies, highlighting the interconnectedness of human rights,
and empowering Southern states and marginalized communities to advance the environmental
human rights project are all achieved through a narrative that acknowledges the co-evolution of
these generations of human rights violations throughout both North-South anti-imperial struggles
and a variety of local and global social justice movements.

International organizations dedicated to upholding human rights, such as the International Covenant
on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), must have the guts to hold Northern nations
and businesses accountable for their role in environmental and human rights violations. In addition
to holding national governments accountable for their violations of environmental human rights, it
is crucial for human rights law to expressly permit claims against Northern actors (states and
multinational corporations), who have enormous economic influence over the weak Southern
governments and are associated with these violations (Knox 2010).

5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE CHALLENGES IN THE NIGER DELTA

Access to justice is frequently hampered in Nigeria by lax or outdated laws, a lack of independent
judicial institutions, police brutality, inhumane prison conditions, protracted pretrial detention,
impunity for sexual and gender-based violence perpetrators, a lack of political will to enforce
adherence to existing legal provisions, which define the acknowledged slowness in the
administration of justice in the nation, and poor environmental governance. The marginalization of
people and even entire communities from the benefits of governance and development is another
issue that results from poor governance. This has over the years taken an adverse reaction to oil
spillage cleanup and environmental remediation in the Niger Delta.

38
5.3.1 CHRONOLOGY OF OIL SPILLAGES IN THE NIGER DELTA
Findings according to research (Ayuba 2102), the nation of Nigeria experienced its first oil leak in
1908 at Araromi, in what is now the state of Ondo. 570,000 barrels of oil were leaked into the
Forcados estuary in a Delta State disaster that occurred in July 1979, contaminating the adjacent
swamp vegetation and aquatic ecosystem (Ukoli 2005).

Between January 17 and January 30, 1980, the Funiwa No. 5 Well in the Funiwa Field was reported
to have blown out 421,000 barrels of oil into the ocean. When the oil flow stopped, 836 acres of
mangrove forest within six miles off the shore were destroyed. On the 10th of May 1980 Oyakama
oil leaked, which released over 30,000 barrels of oil. In August 1983, 5,000 barrels of oil from the
Ebocha-Brass (Ogada-Brass 24) pipeline leaked into Oshika village in Rivers State, flooding the
lake and swamp forest. A lesser oil spill of 500 barrels occurred in the vicinity in September 1979,
which caused crab, fish, and shrimp deaths (Gabriel 2004).

In February 1995, an oil spill from the Ogada-Brass pipeline near Etiama Nembe released about
24,000 barrels, which flowed over the freshwater swamp forest and into the brackish water
mangrove swamp. Since 1989, the operational region of the Shell Petroleum Development
Company (SPDC) has seen an average of 221 spills per year involving 7,350 barrels (SPDC report
1996). A total of 4,647 oil spill incidents occurred between 1976 and 1996, releasing 2,369,470
barrels of oil into the environment, 1,820,410.5 (77%) of which were not recovered. On February
20, 1991, The Punch Newspaper of Nigeria stated that 2,796 oil spill incidents totaled between the
years 1976 and 1990 resulted in the spilling of 2,105,393 barrels of oil.

According to the UNDP, 6,817 oil spill incidents between 1976 and 2001 resulted in the loss of
three million barrels of oil, with over 70% of the oil never being recovered. Mobil spilt 40,000
barrels of crude oil in Eket in January 1998, and in January 1980, an offshore well blew out,
spewing around 200,000 barrels of oil into the Atlantic Ocean from an oil plant and destroying 340
hectares of mangrove forest. A 55-year-old Shell-owned pipeline burst twice between 2008 and
2009, spewing 600,000 barrels of crude oil into the nearby Bodo community and the waterways.

39
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

Figs. 1-2. Oil spill sites in Nigeria from 2007 -2008

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

40
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

Figs. 3-4. Oil spill sites in Nigeria from 2009 -2010

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

41
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

Figs. 5-6. Oil spill sites in Nigeria from 2011 -2012

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

42
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

Figs. 7-8. Oil spill sites in Nigeria from 2013 -2014

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

43
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

Fig. 9. Oil spill sites in Nigeria in 2015

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

44
10

Fig. 10. Oil spill sites in Niger Delta in 2006

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

45
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

11

12

Figs. 11-12. Oil spill sites in Niger Delta States from 2007 to 2008

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

46
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

13

14

Figs. 13-14. Oil spill sites in Niger Delta States from 2009 to 2010
[

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

47
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

15

16

[[

Figs. 15-16. Oil spill sites in Niger Delta States from 2011 to 2012

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

48
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

17

18

Figs. 17-18. Oil spill sites in Niger Delta States from 2013 to 2014

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

49
 Onwuteaka; JGEESI, 4(3): 1-18, 2016; Article no.JGEESI.22809

19

Fig. 19. Oil spill sites in Niger Delta States in 2015

(Source: Oil spill monitor – NOSDRA)

50
 Fig. 20. Pipeline density showing potential sources of oil spill sites in the Niger Delta

5.3.2 INADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL COMPENSATION

The power dynamics between the oil and gas firms and the nearby farmers and fishermen who
face the net costs will determine how much compensation the oil and gas companies will offer. If
the oil and gas companies continue to be more dominant than the local farmers and fisherman,
there will likely be more oil spills that will continue to have adverse impact on the livelihoods of
the locals (Adonteng-Kissi, 2017). The huge power inequality between the oil companies and the
local farmers and fisherman continue to sustain environmental degradation and inadequate
compensation as the compensation paid by the oil and gas corporations does not make up for the
additional operating impact (Chijioke et al., 2018). Additionally, in the context of negotiations
for compensation for the costs imposed on the underprivileged populations, power inequality
favors the influential oil and gas businesses (Adonteng-Kissi, 2017). Furthermore, through
accelerating poverty and escalating political unrest, power imbalance accelerates the rate at
which environmental resources are depleted by both the underprivileged rural farmers and
fishermen.

51
Oil firms have often cited rules 23 and 25 under the Petroleum (Drilling and Production) Act of
1969, which protected them from having to pay damages for oil leaks brought on by sabotage, in
other instances to justify not having to pay compensation for significant oil spills.

5.4 APPLYING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN THE NIGER DELTA

In order to support the sustainability of oil and gas companies' activities, it is essential to address
concerns regarding local people' rights to just compensation. The legal structure governing
compensation for oil spills and other environmental consequences must be made more feasible
and attainable, even though the difficulties with this framework go beyond the effects of social
and environmental governance. Focusing on livelihood and distributional consequences when
governing the oil and gas sector could potentially provide fresh perspectives on how to handle
violent clashes between oil firms and local residents.

Furthermore, in order to prevent arbitrary compensation rate setting, the legal system governing
compensation claims must be able to define what "fair" and "appropriate" compensation means
and ensure compliance. The restoration of the people whose livelihoods have been harmed is
covered by best international principles for fair and equitable compensation. The Land Use Act
needs to be revised to include compensation for pollution victims in addition to the always
meager compensation for land acquired for oil and gas extraction. The political and economic
context must not impose any limitations on local communities' ability to exercise their legal
rights. When local communities are structurally considered and included when making decisions
about how to use property, justice is guaranteed.

The regulatory framework must also look at rate of equipment failure and mandate oil companies
on the need to mitigate pollution. Most spillages are results of equipment failure in the Niger
Delta.

52
 CHAPTER 6

6.1 CONCLUSION/SUMMARY

Mineral resources extraction will continue to dominate as a major economic driver to

government and multinationals. Oil and gas activities will worsen the negative health, economic,
and social effects of oil pollution and greenhouse gas emissions if aggressive plans to establish
healthy and acceptable compensational frameworks and remediation methods are not adopted,
especially in the global South. The most vulnerable people are always the ones who suffer the
most, which intensifies structural inequalities in regions of the global South that already have the
highest rates of inequality in the world and multiplies the negative consequences of their
circumstances. As environmental justice awareness increases and the affected people realize that

53
they only share the burden of oil and gas production and not benefits, relationship between the
multinationals and the host communities have been anything but cordial.

Furthermore, weak enforcements and regulations on existing laws protecting the environment
emboldens multinationals to continue degrading the environment without commensurate
compensations and remediation. This has led to more despair to the local people and in the Niger
Delta, the situation snowballed as the youth took into armed violence through militancy, oil theft
and bunkering which worsened the situation as women and children suffered double jeopardy on
account of this as the state responds with repression and brutal force on the goading of the IOCs.

To ensure environmental justice is accessible to the vulnerable people where oil and production
take place, it is important to introduce and strengthen punitive measures to enable IOCs to be
liable to environmental damages. The “polluters pay principle” mantra must be strictly adhered
to for IOCs to find it more profitable to avoid or mitigate environmental damages during
operations. Countries in the global North needs to take up litigation actions against companies
from their countries operating in the global South.

Although the constraints inherent in the legal framework regulating compensation go beyond the
effects of social and environmental governance, there is a need to make it more practicable and
achievable to compensate for oil spills and other environmental impacts. Focusing on livelihood
and distributional consequences when governing the oil and gas sector could potentially provide
fresh perspectives on how to handle violent clashes between oil companies and local populations.

As financial compensations may not be sustainable unless they achieve some level of satisfaction
for local people, the enforcement of environmental legislation must be related to the
consolidation of land-use control relevant to compensation. This research makes the case that, if
the government and oil corporations don't exercise caution, land use issues might repeatedly
serve as a catalyst for political involvement among the locals, which would have a number of
negative effects on how oil firms operate in the area.

6.2 RECOMMENDATION

The recommendations that are provided below are based on the discussions that were developed
in the previous chapters of chapters 4 and 5 as well as the theoretical compensational framework
that is described in chapter 2. In general, the recommendations centered on the main goal of this
study, chiefly how to increase IOCs' environmental responsibilities, particularly their duties to
54
make up for environmental harm caused by their operations. Therefore, the main emphasis of the
proposals is on enhancing the efficiency of the compensatory obligations and remediation
techniques. While some recommendations concentrate on environmental responsibility others are
more general in nature and concentrate on enhancing access to justice.

 Strengthen current laws and acts to make it possible for them to impose harsher penalties
on IOCs for environmental harm while highlighting the idea on rapid compensation claim
as is obtainable in the global North. The land use act should also be reviewed to give
landowners on whose environments resource are found a better say in decision making.
 To give businesses the best incentives to prevent environmental harm, the right balance
of civil, administrative, and criminal liability must be used. There is no justification to
shield businesses from criminal prosecution.
 To be able to implement the rules and regulations on environmental management and
mitigate oil pollution disasters, government agencies should be provided with qualified
appropriate staff, efficient monitoring facilities, and financial resources.
 The international oil firms should make sure that all the host communities are fully
involved in the development of projects. Distinct groups should be included in decisions
that affect their environment and way of life because they have different demands and
inhabit different terrain. The rights to information access, decision-making involvement,
and access to redress, including justice, are all examples of procedural human rights.
Citizens can comprehend how oil and gas corporations' plans and operations may affect
their rights to life, health, and a reasonable quality of living by having access to
information.
 States in the global North should begin to hold their respective indigenous companies
operating as IOCs in the global North responsible for best global practices. These
businesses control corrupt Southern governments' policies and practices, and they engage
in practices that harms defenseless individuals in their operational environments.
 Through scholarship offers, skill-building opportunities, employment openings, and
support for small enterprises as part of their CSR, multinationals should collaborate with
the federal, state, and municipal governments to further the capacity-building initiative.

This paper examined a variety of literature reviews and other research papers to examine the
environmental compensational framework and the potential for holding multinationals
accountable for environmental harm to enable them play sustainable roles in furthering

55
developmental goals. This study explored those constraints from the perspective of the Niger
Delta, a region in the global South and a relatable incident in the Gulf of Mexico. The rather
broad, multidisciplinary perspective obviously had advantages, but it also undoubtedly had
limitations. As a result, certain topics may be briefly discussed and supported by literature but
not thoroughly studied. The extensive references list in Chapter 7 is available to readers who are
interested in more information and further research.

REFERENCES

A. Hurley Environmental Inequalities: Class, Race, and Industrial Pollution in Gary, Indiana,
1945- 1980 University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill (1995)

Adedipe Biodun, (2004), - The Impact of Oil on Nigeria’s Economic Policy Formulation.

Adejumobi. S, (2002) - The Nigerian crises and alternative political framework in

Constitutionalism and National Question

56
Adekola Ganiyu & Okogbule, Eugene E, (2013) - Relationship between Shell Petroleum
Development Company (SPDC) and Her Host Communities in the Promotion of Community
Development in Rivers State, Nigeria. International Education Research Volume 1, Issue 2
(2013), 01-13. ISSN 2291-5273

African Development Bank and the African Union, (2009) - OIL AND GAS IN AFRICA. ISBN
978-0-19-956578-8

Aghalino S. O and Eyinla B, (2009) - Oil Exploitation and Marine Pollution: Evidence from the
Niger Delta, Nigeria. J um Ecol, 28(3): 177-182 (2009)

Ajayi Olawale, (2012) - LAW, WATER AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:

FRAMEWORK OF NIGERIAN LAW. ISSN 1746-5893

Akinro A.O, D.A Opeyemi and I.B Ologunagba, (2008) - Climate Change and Environmental
Degradation in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria: It’s Vulnerability Impacts and Possible
Mitigations. Research Journal of Applied Sciences 3 (3): 167-173, 2008. ISSN: 1815-932X

AKINWALE Yusuf Opeyemi, (2010) - EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF RESOURCE CURSE IN

NIGERIA. International Journal of Economics and Management Sciences Vol. 1, No. 6, 2012.

Akosua K. Darkwah, (2010) - THE IMPACT OF OIL AND GAS DISCOVERY AND
EXPLORATION ON COMMUNITIES WITH EMPHASIS ON WOMEN. Available from
http://www.g-rap.org/docs/oil and gas/netright-akosua darkwah-2010.pdf [Accessed on
26/06/2013]

Alberini, A. & Austin, D., “Liability policy and toxic pollution releases”, in Heyes, A. (ed.),
Alexander, J.C., “Unlimited shareholder liability through a procedural lens”, Havard Law Review,
1992, Vol.06, 387-445.

Alexandra S Wawryk, (2012) - INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS IN

THE OIL INDUSTRY: Improving the Operations of Transnational Oil Companies in Emerging
Economies.

Alison Lindsay Shinsato, (2005) - Increasing the Accountability of Transnational Corporations

for Environmental Harms: The Petroleum Industry in Nigeria. Northwest Journal of International
Human Rights (2005 - 2006), Volume 4 Issue 1.

Aluko M.A.O., (2004) - Sustainable Development, Environmental Degradation and the

Entrenchment of Poverty in the Niger Delta of Nigeria. J. Hum. Ecol., 15(1): 63-68 (2004)

Alvarez A. Ramon and Elizabeth Paranhos, (2012) - Air Pollution Issues Associated.

Ambec, S. et al., The Porter hypothesis at 20: can environmental regulation enhance innovation
and competitiveness?”, Review of Environmental Economic Policy, 2013, Vol. 7(1), 2-22.

Amina Laraba Wali, (2008) - Oil Wealth and Local Poverty: Exploitation and Neglect in the
Niger Delta. ISBN 0549482660

57
Aminu, Suraju Abiodun, (2013) - The Militancy in the Oil Rich Niger Delta: Failure of the
Federal Government of Nigeria. INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY
RESEARCH IN BUSINESS; Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research VOL 4, NO 11

Amnesty International, (2013) - NIGERIA: BAD INFORMATION: OIL SPILL

INVESTIGATIONS IN THE NIGER DELTA, [online], November 7, 2013.

Ansari Md Nazir, (2008) - Research Method vs. Research Methodology, [online], April 4, 2012.

Anthony Enisan Akinlo, (2012) - How Important is Oil in Nigeria’s Economic Growth? Journal
of Sustainable Development Vol. 5, No. 4; April 2012.

Arlen, J. & Buell, S.W., “The law of corporate investigations and the global expansion of cor-
porate criminal enforcement”, USC Law Review, 2020, Vol. 93, forthcoming; NWY School of
Law, Law and Economics Research Paper Series, Working Paper No. 19-40.
Arlen, J.H. & Kraakman, R.H., “Controlling corporate misconduct: a comparative analysis of
alternative corporate incentive regimes”, New York University Law Review, 1997, Vol. 72, 687-
779.
Armstrong, C. (2013). Sovereign wealth funds and global justice. Ethics & International Affairs,
Arthur, J., Waring, M., Coe, R. and Hedges, L.V. 2012. Research methods and
methodologies in education

Australian Government Civil Aviation Safety Authority, (2013) - CASA's Environmental

Management System.

B. (eds.), The EU Environmental Liability Directive. A Commentary, Oxford, Oxford University Press,
2013b, 333-342.
B.C. Black Crude Reality: Petroleum in World History Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham (2012)
B.W.M. Adams Green Development: Environment and Sustainability in a Developing World(3rd
edn.), Routledge (2009)

Backes, C., Faure, M. & Fernhout, F., “Legal background”, in Faure, M. & Philipsen, N. (eds.),
Access to Justice in Environmental Matters: A Socio-Economic Analysis, The Hague, Eleven Inter-
national Publishing, 2014, 7-15.

Badejo T. Olusegun and Nwilo C. Peter, (2006) - Impacts and Management of Oil Spill Pollution
along the Nigerian Coastal Areas.

Barends, E., Rousseau, D.M. and Briner, R.B. 2017. CEBMa Guideline for Rapid Evidence
Assessments in Management and Organizations
Barry B Political argument London: Routledge & Kegan Paul (1965).

Bell, S. & McGillivray, D., Environmental Law, 6th edn., Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2005.
Benjamin SA Assessing the crisis resolution strategies in the Niger Delta Policy Analysis Series
No 5 Abuja: Policy Analysis Research Project (PARP), National Assembly (2010).
Bergkamp, L. & Goldsmith, B. (eds.), The EU Environmental Liability Directive. A Commentary,
Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013a.
58
Bergkamp, L. & Goldsmith, B., “Practice to date and path forward”, in Bergkamp, L. & Goldsmith,
Bergkamp, L. & Pak, W.-Q., “Piercing the corporate veil: shareholder liability for corporate torts”,
Bergkamp, L. & Van Bergeijk, A., “Exceptions and defenses”, in Bergkamp, L. & Goldsmith, B.
(eds.), The EU Environmental Liability Directive. A Commentary, Oxford, Oxford University Press,
2013b, 80-94.
Bergkamp, L. & Van Bergeijk, A., “Scope of the ELD regime”, in Bergkamp, L. & Goldsmith, B.
(eds.), The EU Environmental Liability Directive. A Commentary, Oxford, Oxford University Press,
2013a, 51-79.
Bergkamp, L., “The Environmental Liability Directive and liability of parent companies for
damage caused by their subsidiaries (“enterprise liability”)”, European Company Law, 2016, Vol.
13(5), 183-190.
Bergkamp, L., Herbatschek, N. & Jayanti, S., “Financial security and insurance”, in Bergkamp, L.
& Goldsmith, B. (eds.), The EU Environmental Liability Directive. A Commentary, Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2013, 118-138.
Bergkamp, L., Liability and Environment. Private and Public Law Aspects of Civil Liability for
Environmental Harm in an International Context, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2001.
Bianco, F. & Lucifora, A., “Environmental criminal law in France”, in Farmer, A., Faure, M. &
Vagliasindi, G.M. (eds.), Environmental Crime in Europe, Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2017, 59-93.
BIO & Stevens & Bolton, Contract 070307/2008/516353/ETU/G.1, Final Report November 2009,
European Commission DGENV, Study on the implementation effectiveness of the Environmental
Liability Directive (ELD) and related financial security issues. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/envi-
ronment/enveco/others/pdf/implementation_efficiency.pdf.
BIO & Stevens & Bolton, Study on ELD effectiveness: scope and exceptions, final report, 19 Feb-
ruary 2014, ENV/A.1/ETU/2013/0038rl. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/lia-
bility/pdf/- BIO%20ELD%20Effectiveness_report.pdf.
BIO Intelligence Services & Stevens & Bolton LLP, Implementation Challenges and Obstacles of
the Environmental Liability Directive (ELD), Final Report, European Commission-DG-ENV,
16 May 2013a, contract No. 07.0307/2012/623289/ETU/A.1. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/
environment/archives/- liability/eld/eldimplement/pdf/ELD%20implementation_Final%20re-
port.pdf.
BIO Intelligence Services & Stevens & Bolton LLP, Implementation Challenges and Obstacles of
the Environmental Liability Directive (ELD), Annex-Part B, 16 May 2013b.
BIO, European Commission, Service Contract 070307/2007/485399/G1, Bio Intelligence Service,
Final Report on Financial Security in Environmental Liability Directive, August 2008. Available at:
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/liability/pdf/eld_report.pdf.
Bocken, H. & Ryckbost, D. (eds.), Interuniversity Commission fort he Revision of Environmental Law in the
Flemish Region, Codification of Environmental Law, Draft Decree on Environmental Policy, 1996.

Bollier David, (2009) - The Rights of Future Generations, [online], April 28, 2009.

59
Botchway N. Francis N, (2011) - Natural Resource Investment and Africa's Development.

Bowles, R., Faure, M. & Garoupa, N., “The scope of criminal law and criminal sanctions: an economic
view and policy implications”, Journal of Law and Society, 2008, Vol. 35, 389-416.
Boyd, J., “A market-based analysis of financial insurance. Issues associated with US natural resource
damage liability”, in Faure, M. (ed.), Deterrence, Insurability, and Compensation in Environmental Lia-
bility. Future Developments in the European Union, Wien, Springer, 2003, 258- 302.
Brans, E., “Fundamentals of liability for environmental harm under the ELD”, in Bergkamp, L. & Gold-
smith, B. (eds.), The EU Environmental Liability Directive. A Commentary, Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2013, 31-50.
Briggs, J. & Jordan, S., “Developments in the law: the presumption of shareholder liability and the impli-
cations for shareholders in private damages actions and otherwise”, Global Competition Litigation
Review, 2009, Vol. 2(4), 203-209.
C. Ballard, G. Banks Resource Wars: The Anthropology of Mining Annu. Rev. Anthro-
pol., 32 (2003), pp. 287-313
C.P. Egri, D. Ralston Corporate responsibility: A review of international management research
from 1998 to 2007 Journal of International Management, 14 (2008)
Calabresi, G., The Costs of Accidents. A Legal and Economic Analysis, New Haven, Yale University Press,
1970.
Cassotta, S., Environmental Damage and Liability Problems in a Multilevel Context. The Case of the Environ-
mental Liability Directive, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2012.

Clarke, D. (2008) Crude Continent: The Struggle for Africa's Oil Prize. Profile Books ISBN-13:
978-1846680977

CLO Blood trail: repression and resistance in Niger Delta Lagos: Civil Liberties Organisation
(2002).

Collis Jill and Hussey Roger, (2008) - Understanding Research.

Columbia Law Review, 1985a, Vol. 85, 1232-1262.

Corbett W. Dabbs, (1996) - Oil Production and Environmental Damage.

D. Schlosberg, D. Carruthers Indigenous struggles, environmental justice, and community capa-

bilities Global Environ. Politics, 10 (4) (2010)
D.N. Pellow Environmental inequality formation – toward a theory of environmental injustice
Am. Behav. Scientist, 43 (4) (2000)
D.N. Pellow Garbage Wars. The Struggle for Environmental Justice in Chicago
D.N. Pellow What is Critical Environmental Justice? Polity Press, Cambridge, UK/Medford,
MA, USA (2018)

DAVID B. Spence, (2011) - CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE OIL AND

GAS INDUSTRY: THE IMPORTANCE OF REPUTATIONALRISK. Chicago - Kent Law
Review Vol. 86 Number 1 (2011)

60
De Sadeleer, N., “Preliminary reference on environmental liability and the polluter-pays- principle: case
C-534/13, Fipa”, RECIEL, 2015, Vol. 24, 232-237.
De Sadeleer, N., Environmental Principles, from Political Slogal to Legal Rules, Oxford, Oxford Univer-
sity Press, 2002.
De Smedt, K., “The Environmental Liability Directive: the Directive that nobody wanted – part I. A reflex-
ion on achievements and challenges of the ELD pending its REFIT evaluation”, Environmental
Liability, 2015, 167-177.
De Smedt, K., “The Environmental Liability Directive: the Directive that nobody wanted – part
De Smedt, K., Environmental Liability in a Federal System. A Law and Economics Analysis, Antwerp, In-
tersentia, 2007.
De Smedt, K., Wang, H. & Faure, M.G., “Towards optimal liability and compensation for offshore oil
and gas activities”, in Faure, M.G. (ed.), Civil Liability and Financial Security for Offshore Oil and Gas Ac-
tivities, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2017, 303-382.

Department for International Development (DFID), (2000) - REALISING HUMAN RIGHTS

FOR POOP PEOPLE.

Dominic Asada, (2010) - THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY IN NIGERIA: JOINT OPERATING

AGREEMENTS, MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDINGS, COMPENSATION AND
OTHER RELATED ISSUES IN PERSPECTIVE.

Douglas Oronto, Von Kemedi, Ike Okonta, and Michael Watts, (2004) - OIL AND
MILITANCY IN THE NIGER DELTA: TERRORIST THREAT OR ANOTHER COLOMBIA.
NIGER DELTA ECONOMIES OF VIOLENCE working paper 4.

E. Gilberthorpe, E. Papyrakis The extractive industries and development: The resource curse at

the micro, meso and macro levels The extractive industries and society, 2 (2) (2015)
Earthscan Publications, London (1997)
Ekine S Blood & oil: testimonies of violence from women of the Niger Delta London: Centre for
Democracy and Development (2001).

Elisabeth Rosenthal (24 May 2010). "In Standoff With Environmental Officials, BP Stays With an
Oil Spill Dispersant". The New York Times

Eregha P.B and Irughe I.R, (2009) - OIL INDUCED ENVIRONMNETAL DEGRADATION IN
THE NIGERIA’S NIGER DELTA: THE MULTIPLIER EFFECTS. Journal of Sustainable
Development in Africa (Volume 11, No.4, 2009). ISSN: 1520-5509

ESSIEN, O E and JOHN, I A, (2010) - Impact of Crude-Oil Spillage Pollution and Chemical
Remediation on Agricultural Soil Properties and Crop Growth. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manage.
December, 2010 Vol. 14 (4) 147 - 154

Etim O. Frank and Wilfred I. Ukpere, (2012) - The Impact of Military Rule on Democracy in
Nigeria. J Soc Sci, 33(3): 285-292 (2012).

61
Etiosa Uyigue and Matthew Agho, (2007) - Coping with Climate Change and Environmental
Degradation in the Niger Delta of Southern Nigeria. Community Research and Development
Centre (CREDC) Nigeria

European Energy and Environmental Law Review, 2010, Vol. 19(2), 60-79.

Exploration and Production (E&P) forum and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP),
(1997) - Environmental Management in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production: An overview
of Issues and Management Approaches. ISBN 92-807-1639-5

F. Buell A Short History of Oil Cultures: Or, the Marriage of Catastrophe and Exuberance J. Am.
Stud., 46 (2) (2012), pp. 273-293
Faure, M., “The complementary rules of liability, regulation and insurance in safety manage-
ment: theory and practice”, Journal of Risk Research, 2014b, Vol. 17(6), 689-707.
Faure, M.G. & Svatikova, K., “Enforcement of environmental law in the Flemish Region”,
Faure, M.G. (ed.), Civil Liability and Financial Security for Offshore Oil and Gas Activities, Cam-
bridge, Cambridge Univeesity Press, 2017d.
Faure, M.G. & Svatikova, K., “Criminal or administrative law to protect the environment? Evi-
dence from Western-Europe”, Journal of Environmental Law, 2012, Vol. 24(2), 253-286.
Faure, M., “Economic approaches to environmental governance: a principled analysis”, in Fisher, D.
(ed.), Research Handbook on Fundamental Concepts of Environmental Law, Cheltenham, Edward
Elgar, 2016a, 111-145.
Faure, M., Finsinger, J., Siegers, J. & Van den Bergh, R. (eds.), Regulation of Professions. A Law and Eco-
nomics Approach to the Regulation of Attorneys and Physicians in the US, Belgium, the Netherlands,
Germany and the UK, Antwerp, Maklu, 1993.
Faure, M., Ogus, A. & Philipsen, N., “Curbing consumer financial losses: the economics of regula-
tory enforcement”, Law & Policy, 2009, Vol.mer financial losses: the economics of regulatory enforce-
ment”, Law & Policy, 2009, Vol. 31(2), 161-191.
Faure, M.G. & De Mot, J., “Comparing third-party financing of litigation and legal expenses insur-
ance”, Journal of Law, Economics and Policy, 2012, Vol. 8(3), 743-777.
Faure, M.G. & Grimeaud, D., “Financial assurance issues of environmental liability”, in Faure, M.G. (ed.),
Deterrence, Insurability, and Compensation in Environmental Liability. Future Developments in the European
Union, Wien, Springer, 2003, 7-255.
Faure, M.G. & Heine, G., Criminal Enforcement of Environmental Law in the European Union, The Hague,
Kluwer Law International, 2005.
Faure, M.G. & Partain, R.A., Carbon Capture and Storage. Efficient Legal Policies for Risk Governance and
Compensation, Cambridge, MIT Press, 2017.
Faure, M.G. & Partain, R.A., Environmental Law and Economic. Theory and Practice, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 2019.
Faure, M.G. & Raja, A.V., “Effectiveness of environmental public interest litigation in India: determin-
ing the key variables”, Fordham Environmental Law Review, 2010, Vol. XXI(2), 239-294.
62
Faure, M.G. & Van den Bergh, R., “Competition on the European market for liability insurance and effi-
cient accident law”, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 2002, Vol. 9(3), 279-306.
Faure, M.G. & Van den Bergh, R., “Restrictions of competition on insurance markets and the applicabil-
ity of EC antitrust law”, Kyklos, 1995, 65-85.
Faure, M.G. & Wang, H., “Compensating victims of a European Deepwater Horizon accident: OPOL
revisited”, Marine Policy, 2015, Vol. 62, 25-36.
Faure, M.G. & Wang, H., “The use of financial market instruments to cover liability following a major
offshore accident”, in Faure, M. (ed.), Civil Liability and Financial Security for Offshore Oil and Gas Activi-
ties, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2017, 237-265.
Faure, M.G. & Weber, F., “Potential and limits of out-of-court rapid claims settlement – a law and eco-
nomics analysis”, Journal of Environmental Law, 2015, 1-26.
Faure, M.G., “Attribution of liability: an economic analysis of various cases”, Chicago-Kent Law Re-
view, 2016b, Vol. 91(2), 603-635.
Faure, M.G., “CADR and settlement of claims – a few economic observations”, in Hodges, C.J.S. &
Stadler, A. (eds.), Resolving Mass Disputes. ADR and Settlement of Mass Claims, Cheltenham, Edward El-
gar, 2013, 38-60.
Faure, M.G., “Liability and compensation for damage resulting from CO2 storage sites”, William &
Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, 2016c, Vol. 40(2), 387-476.
Faure, M.G., “Transboundary pollution”, in Martella Jr., R.R. & Grosko, J.B. (eds.), International Environ-
mental Law. The Practitioner’s Guide to the Laws of the Planet, USA, American Bar Association,
2014a, 235-267.
Faure, M.G., “Vague notions in environmental criminal law (part 2)”, Environmental Liability, 2010c,
Vol. 18(5), 163-170.
Faure, M.G., Mühl, M. & Philipsen, N.J., “Incentives, costs and benefits: a law and economics analysis”, in
Faure, M.G. & Philipsen, N.J. (eds), Access to Justice in Environmental Matters: A Socio- Economic Analy-
sis, The Hague, Eleven International Publishing, 2014, 23-74.
Feinberg, K.R., Who Gets What? Fair Compensation after Tragedy and Financial Upheaval, New York,
Public Affairs, 2012.
Fenn, P. & Rickman, N., “The empirical analysis of litigation funding”, in Tuil, M. & Visscher, L. (eds.),
New Trends in Financing Civil Litigation in Europe. A Legal, Empirical and Economic Analysis, Cheltenham,
Edward Elgar, 2010, 131-148.
Fisch, J.E. & Davidoff Solomon, S., “Should corporations have a purpose?”, University of Pennsylva-
nia Law School, Institute for Law and Economics Research Paper, No. 20-22, March 2020
Fogleman, V., “The temporal provisions of the Environmental Liability Directive: the start date, direct effect
and retrospectivity”, Environmental Liability, 2014, 137-155.
Fogleman, V., Stevens and Bolton LLP. Improving Financial Security in the Context of the Environ-
mental Liability Directive, No. 07.02.03/2018/789239/SER/ENV.E.4, March 2020, Study prepared for the
European Commission.

63
Francis Paul, Deirdre Lapin and Paula Rossiasco, (2011) - SECURING DEVELOPMENT AND
PEACE IN THENIGER DELTA: A Social and Conflict Analysis for Change. ISBN 1-933549-
76-9 (PB)

Freedman, M., “The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits”, The New York’s Time
Magazine, New York, 13 September 1970.
Friedman, L., “In defence of corporate criminal liability”, Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 2000,
Vol. 23, 833-858.
G. Bridge Contested Terrain: Mining and the Environment Annual Rev. Environ. Re-
sour., 29 (2004), pp. 205-259
G. Bridge The Hole World: Spaces and Scales of Extraction New Geographies, 2 (2009)
G. Mohan, K. Stokke Participatory development and empowerment: the dangers of localism
Third World Quart., 21 (2) (2000)
Gaber, M., The Effect of D&O Insurance on Managerial Risk-taking: A Law and Economics Approach to
the Managerial Liability Risk and the Role of D&O Insurance, Maastricht, Maastricht University Press,
2015.
Gallanter, M., “Why the ‘haves’ come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change”, Law & So-
ciety Review, 1974, Vol. 9(1), 95-160.
Gardner, M., “Results of a case-control study of leukaemia and lymphoma among young people near
Sellafield nuclear plant in West-Cumbria”, British Medical Journal, 1990, 423-434.
Garoupa, N., “The theory of optimal law enforcement”, Journal of Economic Surveys, 1997, Vol. 11, 267-
295.
Gilead, I., Green, M. & Koch, B.A., “General report: causal uncertainty and proportional liability: analyti-
cal and comparative report”, in Gilead, I., Green, M. & Koch, B.A. (eds.), Proportional Liability: Analyti-
cal and Comparative Perspectives, Berlin, De Gruyter, 2013, 1-73.
Goodwin B Using political ideas 7th ed Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd (1982).
Greenspan, D. & Neuburger, M., “Blow out: legacy of the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe: ‘settle or
sue’? The use and structure of alternative compensation programs in the mass claim context”,
Roger Williams University Law Review, 2012, Vol. 17(1), 97-136.
Gunningham, N., “Enforcing environmental regulation”, Journal of Environmental Law, 2011, Vol. 23(2),
169-201.
Gunningham, N., “Negotiated non-compliance: a case study of regulatory failure”, Law & Policy,
Halbern, P., “Limited and extended liability regimes”, in Newman, P. (ed.), The New Palgrave Dictionary
of Economics and the Law, London, MacMillan, 1998, 581-590.
Halbern, P., Trebilcock, M. & Turnbull, S., “An economic analysis of limited liability in corporation
law”, University of Toronto Law Journal, 1980, Vol. 30, 117-150.

Hamilton I. Donald I, (2011) - Oil and Gas Companies and Community Crises in the Niger
Delta. American Review of Political Economy, June 2011: 3-17.

Hansmann, H. & Kraakman, R., “Toward unlimited shareholder liability for corporate torts”, Yale Law

64
Journal, 1991, Vol. 100, 1875-1934.
Harrington, W., “Enforcement leverage when penalties are restricted”, Journal of Public Economics,
1988, Vol. 37, 29-53.
Heidemann-Robinson, M., “The emergence of European Union environmental criminal law: a quest for
solid foundations”, Environmental Liability, 2008, 71-91.
Helland, H. & Tabarrok, A., “Contingency fees, settlement delay and low-quality litigation: empirical
evidence from two datasets”, Journal of Law, Economics and Organisation, 2003, Vol. 19, 517-542.
Hensler, D.R., “Financing civil litigation: the US perspective”, in Tuil, M. & Visscher, L. (eds.), New
Trends in Financing Civil Litigation in Europe. A Legal, Empirical and Economic Analysis, Chel-
tenham, Edward Elgar, 2010, 149-174.

HEYDOVA Jitka, Mansoor MAITAH, Farhat HAMMAD, (2011) - THE REASONS AND THE
IMPACTS OF CRUDE OIL PRICES ON WORLD ECONOMY. Economic Journal ISSN 1804-
5839 vol.2 pp.38

Hist. Theory, 42 (Dec. 2003)

Hodges, C.J.S. & Stadler, A. (eds.), Resolving Mass Disputes. ADR and Settlement of Mass Claims, Chel-
tenham, Edward Elgar, 2013.
Hornborg, J.R. McNeill, J. Martinez-Alier (Eds.), Rethinking Environmental History: World-
System History and Global Environmental Change, AltaMira, Lanham, MD (2007)
I. Okonta, O. Douglas Where Vultures Feast: Shell, Human Rights, and Oil
II. An assessment of the ELD REFIT evaluation of 14 April 2016”, Environmental Liability, 2016, 5- 15.
Innes, R., “Violator avoidance activities and self-reporting in optimal law enforcement”, Journal of Law,
Economics and Organisation, 2001, Vol. 17(1), 239-256.

International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), (2009) - Access to Justice: Human Rights Abuses
Involving Corporations - Federal Republic of Nigeria. ISBN: 978-92-9037-150-1

Ioannidou, M., “Compensatory collective redress for low-value consumer claims in the EU: a reality
check”, European Review of Private Law, 2019, Vol. 27(7), 1367-1388.
J. Peasant. Stud., 43 (3) (2016)
J. Auyero, D.A. Swistun Flammable: Environmental Suffering in an Argentine Shantytown
Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)

J. Martinez-Alier, et al. Is there a Global Environmental Justice Movement?

J. Martinez-Alier, L. Temper, D. Del Bene, A. Scheidel Is there a global environmental justice
movement? J. Peasant Stud., 43 (3) (2016)
J. Verweijen, A. Dunlap The Evolving Techniques of the Social Engineering of Extraction: Intro-
ducing Political (Re)actions ‘From Above’ in Large-scale Mining and Energy Projects Polit. Ge-
ogr. (2021)
J.G. Frynas Corporate social responsibility and international development: Critical assessment
Corporate Governance, 16 (4) (2008)
J.H. Dunning, F. Fortanier Multinational enterprises and the new development paradigm: Conse-
quences for host country development Multinational Business Review, 25 (1) (2007)
J.R. McNeill Observations on the Nature and Culture of Environmental History
65
Jans, J.H. & Vedder, H.H.B., European Environmental Law. After Lisbon, 4th edn., Groningen, Europa
Law Publishing, 2012.

Jedrzej George Frynas, (2009) - Beyond corporate social responsibility: oil multinationals and
social challenges. Cambridge University Press. 2009. 207pp. ISBN 978-0-52186-844-0.

Joseph C. Ebegbulem, Dickson Ekpe and Theophilus Oyime Adejumo, (2013) - Oil Exploration
and Poverty in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria: A Critical Analysis. International Journal of
Business and Social Science Vol. 4 No. 3; March 2013.

Jost, B.J., “Limited liability and requirement to purchase insurance”, International Review of Law and Eco-
nomics, 1996, 259-276.
Journal of Economic Literature, 2012, Vol. 50(1), 51-84.
Journal of Law and Economics, 1993, Vol. 36, 757-802.
K.G. Aiken “Not Long Ago a Smoking Chimney Was a Sign of Prosperity”: Corporate and
Community Response to Pollution at the Bunker Hill Smelter in Kellogg, Idaho Environ. History
Rev., 18 (2) (1994), pp. 67-86

Kahan, D.M., “Social meaning and the economic analysis of crime”, Journal of Legal Studies, 1998,
Vol. 27, 609-622.
Kakade, S. & Haber, M., “Detecting corporate environmental cheating”, University of Maryland King
Francis Carey School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper, No. 2020/10,
Kalintrini, A., “Revisiting parental liability in EU competition law”, European Law Review, 2018, Vol.
43(2), 145-166.
Kaplow, L. & Shavell, S., “Optimal law enforcement with self-reporting of behaviour”, Journal of Politi-
cal Economy, 1994, Vol. 102(3), 583-606.
Karpoff, J. & Loth, J., “The reputational penalty firms bear from committing criminal fraud”,
Keating, G.C., “The theory of enterprise liability and common law strict liability”, Vanderbilt Law Review,
2001, Vol. 54, 1285.
Keske, S., Renda, A. & Van den Bergh, R., “Financing and group litigation”, in Tuil, M. & Visscher,
Khanna, A. & Widyawati, D., “Fostering regulatory compliance: the role of environmental self- auditing
and audit policies”, Review of Law and Economics, 2011, Vol. 7(1), 129-164.
Killian, M., “Alternatives to public provision: the role of legal expenses insurance in broadening access to
justice: the German experience”, Journal of Law and Society, 2003, Vol. 30(1), 31-48.
Kitzmueller, M. & Shimshack, J., “Economic perspectives on corporate social responsibility”,
Koch, B.A., “Punitive damages in European law”, in Koziol, H. & Wilcox, V. (eds.), Punitive Dam-
ages: Common Law and Civil Law Perspectives, Vienna, Springer, 2009, 179-209.
Kolk, A., “The social responsibility of international business: from ethics and the environment to CSR and
sustainable development”, Journal of World Business, 2016, Vol. 51, 23-34.
Kraakman, R., “Economic policy and the vicarious liability of firms”, in Arlen, J. (ed.), Research Handbook
66
on the Economics of Torts, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2013, 234-261.
L. (eds.), New Trends in Financing Civil Litigation in Europe. A Legal, Empirical and Economic Analysis,
Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2010, 57-91.
L. Pulido Geographies of Race and Ethnicity II: Environmental Racism, Racial Capitalism and
State-sanctioned Violence Prog. Hum. Geogr., 41 (4) (2017)
La Rocca, L., “The controversial issue of the parent company liability for the violation of EC competi-
tion rules by the subsidiary”, European Competition Law Review, 2011, Vol. 32(2), 68-76.
Lange, B. & Gouldson, A., “Trust-based environmental regulation”, Science of the Total Environment,
2010, Vol. 408, 5235-5243.

Law Pavilion, (2008) - Oronto Douglas vs. Shell Petroleum Development Company LTD and
ORS, [online].

Leebron, D., “Limited liability, tort victims, and creditor”, Columbia Law Review, 1991, Vol. 91, 1565-1650.

Lehigh University Environmental Initiative, (2007) - Petroleum (Oil): A fossil Fuel.

Leupold, B., “Effective enforcement of EU competition law going too far? Recent case law on the presump-
tion of parental liability”, European Competition Law Review, 2013, Vol. 34(11), 570- 582.
Leyens, P.C. & Faure, M.G., “Directors’ and officers’ liability: economic analysis’, in Deakin, S. & Koziol,
H. (eds.), Directors’ & Officers’ (D&O) Liability, Berlin/Boston, De Gruyter, 2018, 769-808.
Liu, J., Compensating Ecological Damage. Comparative and Economic Observations, Antwerp, Intersen-
tia, 2013.
Liu, J., Faure, M. & Mascini, P., Environmental Governance of Common Pool Resources. A Compari-
son of Fishery and Forestry, London, Routledge, 2018.
Lloyd, A., “UK Supreme court considering parent company liability for environmental harm caused by
oversees subsidiary”, 1 May 2019.

London school of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Friends of the Earth, (2011) -
Environmental Justice: Rights and means to a healthy environment for all. Special Briefing No 7
November 2001.

Loos, M., “Towards civil justice in the EU: the European Commission’s new deal for consumers. An in-
troduction to this issue”, European Review of Private Law, 2019, Vol. 27(6), 1219-1226.
Lu, M. & Faure, M.G., “The regulation of corporate environmental responsibility”, in Philipsen,
Lu, M., Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility. Another Road to China’s Sustainable Devel-
opment, Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2018.

Lucy Allen, Michael J. Cohen, David Abelson, and Bart Miller, (2011) - Fossil Fuels and Water
Quality, [online].

M. Arboleda Planetary Mine: Territories of Extraction Under Late Capitalism

Verso, London (2020)
67
M. Ranganathan, C. Balazs Water marginalization at the urban fringe: environmental justice and
urban political ecology across the North-South divide Urban Geogr., 36 (3) (2015)
M.A. Okoji Petroleum Oil and the Niger Delta Environment Int. J. Environ. Stud., 57 (2000)
M.L. Ross The Oil Curse: How Petroleum Wealth Shapes the Development of Nations
Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 2001, Vol. 8(2), 167-188.
Macrory, R.B., Report for Cabinet Office, London, Regulatory Justice: Making Sanctions Effective, 2006.
McBarnet, D., “Corporate social responsibility beyond law, through law, for law: the new corporate
accountability”, in McBarnet, D., Voiculescu, A. & Campbell, T. (eds.), The New Corporate Ac-
countability: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Law, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,
2007, 9-56.
Meade, W., “Recent decisions in the UK on parent company liability cases show the need for law re-
form”, s.d., available at: https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/recent-decisions-in- the-uk-on-parent-
company-liability-cases-show-the-need-for-law-reform.
Meerman, P., “Compliance management open change, because it must happen and certainly can”, in
Baldwin, G. et al. (eds.), Special Report on Next Generation Compliance, Washington, INECE, 2015, 40-
41, http://inece.org/topics/.
Milieu & IUCN, Experience gained in the application of ELD biodiversity damage. Final report, February
2014, ISBN 978-92-79-35535-6.
Miller, G., “Group litigation in the enforcement of tort law”, in Arlen, J. (ed.), Research Handbook on the
Economics of Torts, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2013, 262-278.
Mullenix, L., “Prometheus unbound: the Gulf Coast Claim Facility as a means for resolving mass tort
claims: a fund too far”, Louisiana Law Review, 2011, Vol. 71(3), 819-912.
Murphy, J.J. & Stranlund, J.K., “An investigation of voluntary discovery and disclosure of envi-
ronmental violations using laboratory experiments”, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of
Resource Economics, Working Paper, No. 2005-7.
N. et al. (eds.), Market Integration: The EU Experience and Implications for Regulatory Reform in China,
Berlin, Springer, 2016, 239-265.

Nancy S. Dorsey and Yousif K. Kharaka, (2005) - Environmental issues of petroleum

exploration and production: Introduction. Environmental Geosciences, v. 12, no. 2 (June 2005),
pp. 61-63

National Institute of Environmental Health Science (NIEHS), (2013) - Environmental

Justice...What does that mean? [online].

NRC, (2010) - Violence rules Niger delta since Saro-Wiwa's death, [online].

Ntido F. Fredrick, (2013) - Multinational Oil Companies and Community Relations in the Niger-
Delta: A Look at Dispute Resolution.

Nwilo P.C. and Badejo O.T., (2012) - MANAGEMENT OF OIL SPILL DISPERSAL ALONG
THE NIGERIAN COASTAL AREAS.

68
O. Adunbi Oil Wealth and Insurgency in Nigeria Indiana University Press, Bloomington (2015)

O.H. Grytten The wealth of a nation: Norways road to prosperity NHH Dept. of Economics Dis-
cussion Paper (17) (2020)

Obadina Ibrahim, (2011) - Petroleum Production and Environmental Pollution: the long awaited
revolution, [online].

Ochuko Thompson Oghifo, (2011) - “Gas Flaring/Power plants in Nigeria: Socio-economic and
Environmental Impact on the People of Niger Delta”

Oded, S., Corporate Compliance. New Approaches to Regulatory Enforcement, Cheltenham, Edward El-
gar, 2013.
Oded, S., Inducing Corporate Pro-active Compliance: Liability Controls & Corporate Monitors, diss. Erasmus
University Rotterdam (the Netherlands), 30 March 2012.
OECD Global Material Resources Outlook: Economic Drivers and Environmental Consequences
OECD, Paris (2018)

Ogbeidi M. Michael, (2012) - Political Leadership and Corruption in Nigeria Since 1960: A
Socio-economic Analysis. Journal of Nigeria Studies Volume 1, Number 2, Fall 2012.

Ogbonnaya Ufiem Maurice and Ehigiamusoe Uyi Kiziti, (2013) - Niger Delta Militancy and
Boko Haram Insurgency: National Security in Nigeria. Global Security Studies, Summer 2013,
Volume 4, Issue 3.

Ogoni News, (2013) - Oil Spill, Government Negligence put Ogoni Community at Risk

Ogus, A. & Abbot, C., “Sanctions for pollution: do we have the right regime?”, Journal of Environ-
mental Law, 2002, Vol. 14, 283-300.

Ojakorotu Victor, (2009) - From “Authoritarian Rule” to “Democracy” in Nigeria: Citizens’

Welfare a Myth or Reality. Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences (2009) Vol
1, No 2, 152-192.

Ong, D.M., “The impact of environmental law on corporate governance: international and comparative
perspectives”, EJIL, 2001, Vol. 12(4), 685-726.
P. Anreiter (Ed.), Mining in European History and Its Impact on Environment and Human Soci-
eties, Innsbruck University Press, Innsbruck (2010)
P. Steyn Oil, ethnic minority groups and environmental struggles against multinational oil com-
panies and the federal government in the Nigerian Niger Delta since the 1990s
Marco Armiero, Lise Sedrez (Eds.), A History of Environmentalism: Local Struggles, Global
Histories, Bloomsbury, London (2014)
P.J. Buckley, P.N. Ghauri Globalisation, economic geography and the strategy of multinational
enterprises Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (2004)

Patrick Kameri - Mbote and Philippe Cullet, (1996) - Environmental Justice and Sustainable
Development: Integrating Local Communities in Environmental Management. IELRC Working
Paper 1996 - 1.
69
Pfaff, A. & Sanchirico, Ch., “Big field, small potatoes: an empirical assessment of EPA’s self-audit policy”,
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2004, Vol. 23(3), 415-432.
Porter, M.E. & Vanderlinden, C., “Toward a new conception of the environment- compar-
ativeness relationship”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1995, Vol. 9(4), 97-118.
Princeton University Press, Princeton (2012)
R. Guha, J. Martinez-Alier Varieties of Environmentalism: Essays North and South
R. Nixon Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor Harvard University Press, Cam-
bridge MA (2011)
R. Peet, M. Watts (Eds.), Liberation Ecologies: Environment, Development, Social Move-
ments (2nd Edn.), Routledge, London (2004) N.L. Peluso
R.M. Auty Sustaining Development in Mineral Economies: The Resource Curse Thesis
Routledge, London (1993)
Richardson, B.J., Environmental Regulation through Financial Organisations. Comparative Perspectives
on the Industrialised Nations, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2002.
Ringleb, A. & Wiggins, S., “Liability and large scale, long-term hazards”, Journal of Political Econ-
omy, 1990, Vol. 98, 574-595.
Roberts FON Managing the minorities and development problem in Nigerian federalism: the
OMPADEC initiative NISER Monograph Series 11 Ibadan: NISER (1998).
Roberts FON, Adeyeye VA, Ogundele O, Oladeji A, Merem EN, Carim-Sanni A, Offiong PA,
Ekaette MN & Tijani HO Oil exploration and socio-economic development of the South-South
zone of Nigeria Ibadan: NISER (2013).
Roberts N The state, accumulation and violence: the politics of environmental security in
Nigeria's oil producing areas NISER Monograph Series 1 Ibadan: NISER (1999).   
Robertson D The Penguin dictionary of political science London: Penguin Books (1986).   
Rousseau, S., “Evidence of a filtered approach to environmental monitoring”, European Journal of Law
and Economics, 2010, Vol. 29, 195-209.
Ryland, D., “Protection of the environment through criminal law: a quest of competence unabated?”,
European Energy and Environmental Law Review, 2009, 91-111.
S. Kirsch Mining Capitalism: The Relationship Between Corporations and Their Critics Univer-
sity of California Press, Berkeley (2014)
S. Vermeylen Special issue: Environmental justice and epistemic violence Local Envi-
ron., 24 (2) (2019)
S. Wilson, A. Carlson, I. Szeman (Eds.), Petrocultures: Oil, Politics, Culture, McGill-Queen's
University Press, Montreal (2017)
S.D. Odell, A. Bebbington, K.E. Frey Mining and Climate Change: A Review and Framework
for Analysis Extract. Ind. Soc., 5 (2018), pp. 201-214
Scalet, S. & Kelly, T.F., “CSR rating agencies: what is their global impact?”, Journal of Business Ethics,
2010, Vol. 94(1), 69-88.
Schäfer, H.B., “The bundling of similar interests in litigation. The incentives for class action and legal ac-
tions taken by associations”, European Journal of Law and Economics, 2000, Vol. 9, 183- 312.
Scheltema, M., “An assessment of the effectiveness of international private regulation in the corporate
social responsibility arena. A legal perspective”, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law,
70
2014, Vol. 21(3), 383-405.
Schlosberg D Environmental justice and the new pluralism: the challenge of difference for
environmentalism Oxford: Oxford University Press (1999).
Schoenbaum, T.J., “Liability for damages in oil spill accidents: evaluating the USA and international
law regimes in the light of Deepwater Horizon”, Journal of Environmental Law, 2012, Vol. 24(3), 395-
416.
Scholz, J.T., “Cooperation, deterrence and the ecology of regulatory enforcement”, Law and Society Re-
view, 1984, Vol. 18, 179-224.
Shavell, S., “Criminal law and the optimal use of non-monetary sanctions as a deterrent”,
Shavell, S., “Uncertainty over causation and the determination of civil liability”, Journal of Law and Eco-
nomics, 1985b, 587-609.

Shell Development Petroleum Company, (2011) - Environmental Performance - Oil Pills.

Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC). People and the Environment. Annual
Report; 1995.
Short, J.L. & Toffel, M.W., “Coerced confessions: self-policing in the shadow of the regulator”, Working
Paper, 2007.
Short, J.L. & Toffel, M.W., Making self-regulation more than merely symbolic: the critical role of the legal
environment”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 2010, Vol. 55, 361-396.
Sina, S., “Environmental criminal law in Germany”, in Farmer, A., Faure, M.G. & Vagliasindi, G.M. (eds.),
Environmental Crime in Europe, Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2017, 95-117.
Sjåfjell, B. & Taylor, M., “Planetary boundaries and company law: towards a regulatory ecology of cor-
porate sustainability”, University of Oslo, Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series, No.
2015-11.
Sjåfjell, B., “Why law matters: corporate social irresponsibility and the futility of voluntary change
mitigation”, European Company Law, 2011, Vol. 8, 56.
Skogh, G. & Stewart, C., “An economic analysis of crime rates, punishment and the social conse-
quences of crime”, Public Choice, 1982, 171-179.
Skogh, G., “The combination of private and public regulation of safety”, in Faure, M. & Van den
Bergh, R. (eds.), Essays in Law and Economics: Corporations, Accident Prevention and Compensation
for Losses, Antwerp, Maklu, 1989, 87-101.
T.C. Mitchell Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil Verso, London (2011)
Telle, K., “Monitoring and enforcement of environmental regulations. Lessons from a natural field experi-
ment in Norway”, Journal of Public Economics, 2013, Vol. 99, 24-34.

The Guardian, (2013) - Shell to Resume Niger Delta Oil spill compensation talks, June 19,
2013.]

The Law and Economics of the Environment, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2001, 92-115.

71
The Power of Punitive Damages. Is Europe Missing Out?, Antwerp, Intersentia, 2012, 471-497..

Thomsen R.B. Mads, (2012) - CSR in the Oil Industry: An institutional approach, [online].

Tilove, Jonathan (21 May 2010). "BP is sticking with its dispersant choice". Times-Picayune. Re-
trieved 22 May 2010.

Ugochukwu Prince Ihekoronye, (2013) - Corporate Social Responsibility in the Nigerian Oil and
Gas Sector: Legal Barriers Facing claims of Environmental liability against Multinational
Companies in the Nigerian Courts (Milieudefensie v Royal Dutch Shell).

Ukoli MK. Environmental factors in the management of the oil and gas industry in Nigeria;
2005.
UNDP Niger Delta Human Development Report UNDP, Garki (2006)
UNDP Niger Delta human development report Lagos: United Nations Development Programme
Nigeria (2006).
UNEP Environmental assessment of Ogoniland Nairobi: United Nations Environmental
Programme (2011).
V. Schwach The sea around Norway: Science, resource management, and environmental con-
cerns, 1860-1970 Environmental History, 18 (1) (2013)
V. Smil Feeding the World: A Challenge For the Twenty-First Century MIT Press, Cambridge
MA (2001)
Van Erp, J., Faure, M.G., Nollkaemper, A. & Philipsen, N. (eds.), Smart Mixes for Transboundary Environ-
mental Harm, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2019.
Verso, London (2003)
Visscher, L., “The law and economics of punitive damages”, in Meurkens, L. & Nordin, E. (eds.),
What’s Nature Got to Do With It? A Situated Historical Perspective on Socio-natural Commodi-
ties Dev. Change, 43 (2012)
Williams C Environmental victims: new risks, new injustice London: Earthscan Publications Ltd
(1998).

72
73
i
The Cultural Politics of Environmental Justice Activism: Race-and Environment-Making in the Contemporary Post-Civil
Rights Period Kimberly Renee Allen
ii
Evolution of the environmental justice movement: activism, formalization and differentiation To cite this article:
Alejandro Colsa Perez et al 2015 Environ. Res. Lett. 10 105002