OIL POLITICS IN NIGER DELTA

ATTENTION:

BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!

INFORMATION:

YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420

WHATSAPP US ON 08137701720

OIL POLITICS IN NIGER DELTA

Background of the study

Oil has become a dominant element within the power capability profile of any nation. Nations enter into war because of oil. The Gulf War in 1991 is an example. In Nigeria the crisis is between the federal

government and oil producing communities in the Niger Delta region. Despite the abundant oil wealth, there has been unimaginable mass poverty and negligible development in the region. Efforts by the federal government and oil companies to improve the quality of human lives and to provide infrastructural development have been insufficient to ameliorate the problems. Presently, the insensitivity of government and oil companies have created more tensions and crises which not only threaten the industry, but also national security. In fact, youths within the area, by association of various ethnic militia groups, have become restive in their bid for greater control of their natural resources. The paper, therefore, examines developmental issues in oil producing communities against background of government establishing an internal security task force to deal with the youths. The paper concludes that the federal government and oil companies should change their current hostile approaches in order to work towards infrastructural development of the region.

1.2 Statement of the problem

During the last two decades, the Niger Delta region of Nigeria has been enmeshed in crisis, which has resulted from total neglect and lack of infrastructural development. It is estimated that about 2.5 million barrels of crude oil is produced daily within the region. According to a Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) report, the production contributes almost 95% of Nigeria’s foreign exchange earnings and 90% of its revenue (CBN Annual Report, 2003). However, little substantive progress has been made, which addresses development issues in the producing region.

Hence, the region continues to witness unimaginable mass poverty and low levels of human development, environmental degradation, social inequalities, unemployment, and so on. It is, therefore, an irony of fate that the area, which produces a bulk of the oil is the least

developed in the country.

This situation may be attributed to the nature of revenue allocation formula which has been dysfunctional. It may also be traced to the non performance of the contented disposition of the political leaders who ordinarily should have been the voice of the masses. As a result, every

effort to develop the region through policy reforms and socio-economic and political measures, have yielded little or no result. The absence of any meaningful development has necessitated the control of resources that are within the region. As expected, the youths by way of various ethnic militia groups have become restive in their bid for greater control of their natural endowment.

Presently, this restiveness has manifested in activities such as kidnapping, pipeline vandalization, oil bunkering and other anti-social behaviors that are directly resultant of failed leadership. Hence, the country has not only witnessed an economic crisis, but also political instabilities.

1.3 Objectives of the study

1. To understand the contradictory roles which are played by the Nigerian state; first, in terms of the allocation of resources and, second, as the major recipient of oil revenue.

2. To examine the rate of development in the oil producing Niger Delta area whether it is commensurate with the environmental damage as a result of oil exploration.

3. To highlight the oil industry and politics that have impinged development within the region.

1.4 Research Questions

1. Have the various governments of Nigeria played a fair role in the allocation of oil revenue to the Niger Delta region.

2. Has the rate of development in the oil producing Niger Delta been commensurate with the environmental damage as a result of oil exploration
3.Has the oil industry and politics impinged development within the region.

1.5 Research Hypothesis

H01: The various governments of Nigeria have not played a fair role in the allocation of oil revenue to the Niger Delta region.

H1: The various governments of Nigeria have played a fair role in the allocation of oil revenue to the Niger Delta region.

H02: The oil industry and politics impinged development within the region.

H2: The oil industry and politics impinged development within the region.

1.6 Limitations of the study

Firstly, most of the respondents were uncooperative with giving out unbiased information. This is in addition to insufficient funds and limited time for the research.

1.7 Definition of terms

-Niger Delta:

The Niger delta of Nigeria is also referred to as the south-south. It consists of oil producing states in the country.

development as a process, which is concerned with peoples’ capacity in a defined area over a defined period to manage and induce positive change, namely to predict, plan, understand and monitor change and reduce or eliminate unwanted or unwarranted change. In other words, development concerns people, since they constitute a repository of energy for development and it is the careful release of this energy that constitutes development. According to them, development entails several aspects. It is not only about consuming, it is also about producing. However, it is concerned with creation by

people themselves of technology, which is required for development, as well as development, by people of thecapacity to manage their own affairs. In relation to the Niger Delta, the exploitation that continues to exist within the oil communities because of their outcry against neglect and marginalization by federal government, is an epitome of contradictions in respect of development. Some scholars argue that development is a qualitative and quantitative improvement in the lives of the people. Soyombo (2005), whilst explaining national development, defines it as qualitative and quantitative improvement in the living conditions of people of a state in line with national objectives, as indicated in its national development plans.

He argues that rapid improvement of the standard of living of the average Nigerian has always been a major objective of the country’s national development plans. According to him, other key objectives of the development plans include: Reduction in the level of unemployment; equitable distribution of income; reduction in the incidence of poverty; improvement in the quality of life of the people; more employment opportunities; greater access to and ownership of houses; and access to basic necessities of life such as qualitative health services, potable water, education and electricity. It is when these objectives are achieved that one can talk of national development.

National development goes beyond growth in economic indicators such as the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Per Capita Income. It also concerns itself with discrepancies between economic indicators and quality of life that have led to the development of the “Human Development

Index” as alternative indicators of development (Soyombo, 2005: 210). However, Soyombo (2005) concludes that at all levels of development three essential developmental concerns are for people to live a long and healthy life; to acquire knowledge; and to have access to resources that are necessary for a decent standard of living. Accordingly, Afonja and Pearce (1986) believe that development is aimed at fulfilling four conditions of stabilities, which include: The stability of normative patterns; level of commitment of acting units; acceptance of a common definition of the situation; and integration of the system itself into the larger system of which it is part.

They argue that these four conditions are given because of the fact that traditional societies resist innovations so that fulfillment of any condition does not necessarily mean that growth and development has occurred. Similarly, Sanda (1985: 1 – 3) assert that development is a transitional process, which sustains a multifaceted improvement in human conditions, which result from structural and functional changes in social, economic,

political, techno-scientific as well as other spheres of human existence. According to Sanda (1985), development entails normative and organizational changes in society, which result in:

Improvement and expansion of the mental horizon of

the population arising from functional education, and

Sustenance of positive and highly functional values,

customs and practices regarding all aspects of life and living.

Wilnesky and Lebeaux (1995), therefore, defines development as being formally organized and socially sponsored institutions, agencies, programmes, which function to maintain or improve economic conditions,

health or inter-personal competence for a part or all of a population. Kundan (1997 cited in Akintoye and Awosika, 2000) describes sustainable development as a construct, which envisions development as meeting the needs of a present generation without compromising the needs of a

future generation. It implies that while development meets the needs of the present, it does not compromise the ability of a future generation in order to meet their own needs. However, this ability to meet needs is determined by human capital (via education, health care, technological advancement, and so on) and physical capital (machine, tools and so on). He argues that

continued sustainable development is only possible or assured when it is agreed upon and indeed concrete steps are taken to raise the level of literacy in any society. Furthermore, he emphasises good governance.

Afr. J. Bus. Manage.

He states that it depends on the extent to which government is perceived and accepted as being legitimate; committed to improving peoples’ well-being; responsive to the needs of its citizens; competent to guarantee law

and order; able to deliver public services; enabling a policy environment for productive activities; and is equitable in its conduct. In relation to the Niger Delta, the statement of the former Governor of Rivers State, Dr. Peter Odili is apt. He opined that if the federal government has realised its responsibility and has sufficiently focused on the neglect of the Niger Delta, its difficult environment and the needs of its people, should have

been transformed into sustainable development. Nyerere (1971) has a similar viewpoint. He argues that in developing nations, the tendency has always been to conceive of development in terms of socio-economics

solely. There is also a need to look beyond mere economic indices and to place emphasis on human development, namely the full realization of human potential and maximum use of the nation’s resources for the benefit

of all. This realization was echoed by leaders such as the late Indira Gandhi who asserted that development policies should benefit all strata of the population, and not merely a favoured minority.

Development, according to Adedeji (cited in Onimode and Synge, 1995) refers to a process of bringing about fundamental and sustainable changes within society. He notes that development transcends as well as encompasses growth and embraces aspects of quality of life such as social justice, equality of opportunity for all citizens, equitable distribution of income and democratization of the development process. Eze (2005: 1)

refers to development as a goal that should precede development actions, whether it concerns people, organizations, or nations. When it concerns people, the goal is human development; when it concerns organizations, the concern is organizational development, and, when it concerns

societies, the goal is national development. Regarding each of these, the goal of development should first of all be clearly set out in the form of directions, destinations and action plans, followed by implementation of the

action plans, and finally by the realization or otherwise of development itself. Accordingly, he opines that it is quite certain that a society, which is in a state of learned helplessness, cannot meaningfully embark on genuine

national development without first achieving successful emancipation.

In Africa, however, the line of confrontation are often drawn because of issues of exclusions, identity, frustrations and denial of basic needs to certain areas of communities by those who maintain forces of coercion.

According to Anyadike (1997), conflicts in Africa arise as a result of a global economic system that keeps the continent locked in a vicious cycle of poverty and domination, which is aggravated by local conflict for power and wealth. This seems to hold true in the Niger Delta. Since the Nigerian state lacks autonomy, it simply expropriates by using coercive instruments to sustain its dominance. This leads to penury, acute environmental

degradation and gross underdevelopment in oil – producing areas. Hence, conflict occurs in the area as a result of protests against injustices such as

environmental damages and displeasure with successive government policies regarding programmes of oil companies that are perceived to be unjust, inadequate and repressive. As a result, peoples’ economic future has led to an intensification of the struggle for survival at individual

and group levels. The consequence is the social conflict profile of the country. Every society is expected to improve the conditions of its people particularly their quality of life. It should be concerned with provision of basic needs such as food, water, education, good healthcare, shelter, and so on for all people. Any concerted effort to achieve this is called

development. Our discourse, therefore, when situated within the theoretical realm of distributive justice, provides an analytical framework in order to understand the situation within the Niger Delta. The “theory on rights” asserts that basic rights should be enjoyed within a state and protected through legal and extra-legal instruments. Rights can be categorized into political, social and economic rights. The denial of social rights explains the

pervasive poverty and underdevelopment within the region. The Niger Delta’s agitation is premised on right denial particularly and access to oil wealth to boost living standards.

Drawing from this theoretical argument of what development concerns, the present study argues that the basic problem in the Niger Delta region is a lack of development. Neo-liberal scholars regard development as being beyond the economic indices, as well as the totality of changes that occur on the social system within a given period of time, which can impact on the lives of the people. It is therefore imperative that the government should design a more comprehensive development package that is people-oriented in the Niger Delta region.

HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)

After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to

08068231953 or 08168759420

(1) Your project topics

(2) Email Address

(3) Payment Name

(4) Teller Number

We will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert

BANK ACCOUNTS

Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI

Account Number: 0046579864

Bank: GTBank.