Content uploaded by Igazeuma Adikema Okoroba
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Igazeuma Adikema Okoroba on Feb 12, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
J
ournal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities
JASSH 6 (2), 1131–1139 (2020) ISSN (O) 2395-6542
Corporate Social Responsibility and Community
Development Outcomes in the Niger Delta : An Empirical
Analysis of the SPDC Global Memorandum of
Understanding (GMoU)
Okoroba, Igazeuma Adikema⋆,†
Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Port Harcourt, Choba, Rivers State, Nigeria
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15520/jassh.v6i01.469
Accepted 20 Jan 2020; Received 24 Dec 2019; Publish Online 11 Feb 2020
ABSTRACT
As corporations adopt innovative ways to secure business interests, they seek to in-
uence social space. Stakeholder’s increasing awareness of their rights serve to hold
corporations responsible for their actions and inactions to foster sustainable develop-
ment in their operational areas. While not all stakeholder demands can be met by
corporations, managing stakeholder expectations of Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR) outcomes proves dicult partly due to the ambiguity of dening the content of
development investments. This study evaluated the nature and types of development
projects and outcomes implemented through the GMOU in selected clusters in Rivers
and Bayelsa States. The study disaggregated the programme and project content of
the SPDC GMoU in selected Rivers and Bayelsa State clusters. The study relied on the
qualitative approach with the adoption of key informant interviews and focus group
discussions as methods of data collection. A key nding of the study was that CSR and
Community Development outcomes in the Niger Delta indicates a preference for quick
win infrastructural projects over other forms of human development programmes such
as income, poverty, health, education, and individual socio-economic development.
The paper concludes that at every stage of development, people know what their
needs are and can prioritise according to expediency, available resources and future
development needs. While there are no pre-ordained paths to development, the study
makes a case for expansion of development focus beyond infrastructural projects to ac-
commodate human capital development and other forms of interventions in a broader
community framework in order to meet more stakeholder needs in a sustainable way.
Key words: Corporate Social Responsibility–Global Memorandum of
Understanding–Community Development–Shell Petroleum Development Company–
Niger Delta.
1 INTRODUCTION
Literature on Corporate Social Respon sibility (CSR) prac-
tice is replete with eorts about how to balance business
objectives and the social good of communities where such
businesses operate. (Okodudu, 2008; Aaron, 2012; Lebura,
2013; Ite, 2015; Beih et al, 2016) [21][1][18][16][3]. However,
rural poverty persists in Nigeria especially in oil producing
areas of the Niger Delta despite the prosperity created by
⋆Corresponding author.
†Email: igazeuma@gmail.com
the country’s oil wealth. The lack of basic survival needs
in communities that host the operations of International
Oil Companies (IOCs) exacerbates the socio-economic con-
dition of people in the region. Environmental degradation
which is the most harmful consequence of oil exploration
hampers the livelihoods of the host communities. According
to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),
Nigeria’s Human Development Index (HDI) value ranked
158 out of 189 countries at 0.534 in 2018. This puts the
country in the low human development position. The HDI
is a measure for assessing long-term progress in dimensions
1132 Okoroba, Igazeuma Adikema
of human development: a long and healthy life, access to
knowledge and a decent standard of living (UNDP, 2019)
[30].
As the oil producing region of Nigeria, host communi-
ties look to the IOCs as a pathway to addressing devel-
opment problems in the absence government intervention.
The failure of IOCs to meet host community expectations
has resulted in conicts between both parties. This in turn,
has incited IOCs to adopt models for engaging stakeholders
to earn social licenses to operate. Memorandum of Under-
standing (MoU) agreements are a way to show their com-
mitment to the development of host communities. The out-
come of such agreements are activities intended to provide
communities with benets generated through the stake-
holder relationship. Scholars allude that such activities in
developing nations like Nigeria often take the form of philan-
thropic rather than strategic Corporate Social Responsibil-
ity (Dobers & Halme, 2009; Kolf & Lefant, 2010; Ojo, 2012;
Dashwood, 2014) [5] [20] [4]. Hence, the IOCs as primary
funders of community development, exercise an overriding
power and discretion over community stakeholders.
In the case of Shell Petroleum Development Company
(SPDC), studies that have earlier attempted to assess the
extent to which the Global Memorandum of Understanding
(GMoU) contributes to development relied on data derived
from either secondary sources from SPDC (Okoro 2017; Eg-
bon et al, 2018) [ 22] [8] or data generated by SPDC’s in-
ternal evaluation tool, SPDC Community Transformation
and Development Index (SCOTDI) (Ite, et al. 2015; Isike,
2016) [16] [15]. In the search for empirical evidence on Sus-
tainable Community Development (SCD) outcomes of the
GMoU, the existing literature is scanty in this regard. As
the GMoU policy which started in the year 2006 enters its
thirteenth year of implementation, there is need to investi-
gate the content of its contributions to development in the
host communities. Obtaining empirical data on the content
of the model is an attempt to address CSR intervention
preferentialism, thereby making a case for the disaggrega-
tion of CSR investments in future Community Development
Community Development Plans (CDP). The study hence
focused on disaggregating CD outcomes in an attempt to
match them with advertised CSR goals of IOCs.
Based on the foregoing, the main aim of this study was to
provide empirical evidence on the programme and project
content of SPDC GMoU in the selected Clusters as distin-
guished from the reported outcome of the GMoU by SPDC.
The specic objective of the study was to advocate the dis-
aggregation of items contained in CD plans to address a
‘CSR preferentialism problem’ which may have an adverse
eect on the community development goals.
Conceptual Framework
The theory identied to provide focus for this study was
the modernization theory, which was anchored on Max We-
ber’s work, upon which Talcott Parsons developed the mod-
ernization paradigm. Modernization theory is an attempt by
Euro-American scholars to explain Third World’s underde-
velopment. Proponents of the theory argue that wealth is
created through adopting the features of technological in-
novation and education as evidenced in modern societies.
According to the theory, development of the Third World
is predicated on adopting modern capitalist policies that en-
able them to recreate the image of modern societies that are
more productive, where children are better educated and the
downtrodden receive more welfare. From the perspective of
public policy decisions, the economic theory of moderniza-
tion views modernization as a phased process based on the
ve stages of development from Rostow’s model: the tradi-
tional society, precondition for takeo, the takeo process,
the drive to maturity, and high mass consumption society.
Other assumptions based on Parson’s sociological theory
hold that modernization is systematic process. Moderniza-
tion is also seen as a transformative process where tradi-
tional structures and values must be replaced by modern
values for a society to transform to modernity (Reves, 2001)
[26]. This assumption that economic growth is achieved
when urban expansion is part of a natural transition from
agrarian to industrial society, informs the CSR approach
in developing countries. As Okodudu (2008) notes, this as-
sumption theoretically poses a challenge in its application
to the design of the GMoU model because it inuences a
faulty assumption about the traditional state of Niger Delta
host communities. He argued that while the dearth of in-
frastructure constitutes a part of the major parameters that
qualies the level of development in the region, it is rather
the unsuitability of available infrastructure to the needs of
host communities that denes their development situation.
It is upon this premise that the study adopts its conceptual
framework.
SPDC Community Development Approach
and the Global Memorandum of Understanding
(GMOU)
The Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC)
claims to have undergone three major paradigm shifts
within the context of CSR and sustainability namely Com-
munity Assistance, Community Development and Sustain-
able Community Development. Sustainable Community De-
velopment (SCD) as a strategy of SPDC emerged in 2004.
SCD was dened as “all the activities, eorts and expendi-
ture harnessed to supporting communities to improve and
maintain their capabilities to generate and sustain their own
socio-economic progress and quality of life” (SPDC, 2004a)
[28]. The goal of SCD was to put communities in the ‘driving
seat’ of their own development, with a view to enhancing
the sustainability of development programmes and projects.
Following the success recorded by Chevron as a result of
its implementation of the GMoU, Shell Petroleum Devel-
opment Company (SPDC) adopted the GMoU model in its
engagements with communities in its operational areas in
2006. The GMoU was adopted by IOCs as a tested strategy
of delivering sustainable development to host communities
following the conicts that emanated from previous mod-
els of community engagements in the region. Scholars have
noted that among factors that undermined the ability of
SPDC’s previous CSR strategies to contribute to commu-
nity development was lack of sense of ownership of CSR pro-
cess and initiatives by host communities. Idemudia (2009b)
[13] noted that due to the absence of community control
Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities, Vol 6Iss 2, 1131–1139 (2020)
Corporate Social Responsibility and Community Development Outcomes in the Niger
Delta : An Empirical Analysis of the SPDC Global Memorandum of Understanding
(GMoU) 1133
over CSR initiatives, communities often lacked both the ca-
pacity and interest to maintain such CSR projects as they
were seen rather as SPDC’s projects. Among other widely
advertised objectives, the GMoU was intended to facilitate
sustainable development of communities through the set-
ting up of structures that can drive and implement projects
in partnership with government and civil society organiza-
tions.
A Global Memorandum of Understanding (GMOU) is an
agreement between SPDC and a group (or cluster) of several
communities. Cluster formation are based on certain criteria
such as local government area, or clan/historical anity as
advised by the relevant state governments. The governing
structure includes a 10-person Community Trust (at com-
munity level), Cluster Development Board (CDB) and a
Steering Committee chaired by the State Government. The
Cluster Development Board (CBD) functions as the main
supervisory and administrative organ, ensuring implemen-
tation of projects and setting out plans and programmes.
By the end of 2011, SPDC had signed and implemented
agreements with 27 clusters, covering 290 communities,
about 30% of the local communities around their business
operations in the Niger Delta. In 2011, a total of 596 projects
had been successfully completed through GMoU (including
pre-GMoU projects). SPDC reports that N44.36 billion has
been disbursed to the 39 active GMoU clusters in Rivers,
Delta, Bayelsa and Abia States in the last 13 years since
the introduction of the GMoU. In Bayelsa alone, the com-
pany claims her nancial contribution to the development of
host communities is now over N23 billion under the Global
Memorandum of Understanding (SPDC, 2019) [28].
Idemudia (2014c) compared the GMoU with the other
models noting that GMoU and the corporate-community
foundation model share similarities in the form of commu-
nity participation in the CSR initiatives. A policy analy-
sis of the GMoU which evaluated the GMoU policy as a
stakeholder interface, identied the strengths of the pol-
icy as guaranteeing the economy of eort, however, certain
weaknesses of the GMOU approach were also identied. A
drawback in the policy was the inuence of the modern-
ization theory of development which assumes that the pro-
vision of infrastructure translates into development Oko-
dudu’s (2008). The reduction of community interface fronts
under the GMOU regime obviates the peculiar needs of the
individual community which end up providing what com-
munities do not need thereby intensifying disparate needs
of communities.
The Prioritization of Community Development
Needs
Over the past decades, development economists have rec-
ognized urban regeneration as a comprehensive action to
improve the economic, physical, social and environmental
conditions of deprived areas. Physical infrastructure is por-
trayed as the predominant eect of economic development
over other kinds of interventions (Ercan, 2010) [8]. Parallel
to the debate on urbanization, a study of oil companies in
Rivers state, Nigeria by Igbara et al (2014) [14], factors that
determine development include infrastructure, health, agri-
culture, security, education, and job/empowerment. The
study which surveyed community development priorities,
community stakeholders ranked infrastructure third after
education and job/empowerment. Similarly, in a survey of
32 African countries, Bentley et al (2015) found that the
most frequently cited citizen priorities for development are
unemployment, health, and education, with poverty and
food shortage as dominant concerns.
Past studies have taken cognizance of the nexus that
exists between development infrastructure and human de-
velopment index (HDI) outcomes such as income, poverty,
health, education, and individual socio-economic status. It
is important to note that regardless of what type of initia-
tive, development outcomes overlap in terms of how they
contribute to sustainable development. For the purpose of
nding a basis for prioritization, we note that the nature of
programmes reported by authors diers based on the area
of interest of the research. For instance, Uzoagu (2015) 29]
reports the nature of projects dierently from Pegram et al
(2015) [15].
The choice of a development intervention is inuenced
by the expected benets it brings the stakeholders. Com-
munities typical hope that development interventions will
address their socio-economic problems. For corporations,
community development can be used as opportunities to
address business interests (Muthuri, J. Moon J., Idemu-
dia U., Owen., 2012) [20][25]. This assertion is supported
by Igbara et al (2014) case for recognizing the importance
of identifying perceived and prioritized needs of the host
community. It is argued that perceived needs of host com-
munity dier signicantly with that of the oil companies in
most cases. As the paternalistic tendencies of IOCs_ who
are providers of funding for community development, often
leave them endorsing infrastructure projects, other forms of
development which do not produce tangible outcomes. The
absence of a universal evaluation of community development
continues to pose a challenge for following up practical CSR
outcomes on the ground.
Debates articulated around the concept of CSR have
evolved into dierent areas of interests. Some Scholars sug-
gest that CSR schemes such as road building, hospital con-
struction and similar projects do not adequately compen-
sate for the high levels of oil pollution, gas aring that the
Niger Delta people surfers (Idemudia & Ite, 2006a) [13].
Another school of thought advocates for community partic-
ipation, whatever the people’s demands, to be paramount
in deciding development actions (Valente, 2012; Andrews,
2013; Enuoh & Inyang, 2014) [2][31][9b]. The integration
of stakeholder’s preferences in community development can
be hampered by the nature of the model adopted. It can
be argued that the mode of prioritizing community devel-
opment activities can either meet the community’s develop-
ment needs or give room for ‘CSR preferentialism’, a situ-
ation which empowers IOCs to exert inuence on how the
funds they provide to communities benet them.
Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities, Vol 6Iss 2, 1131–1139 (2020)
1134 Okoroba, Igazeuma Adikema
2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study employed a qualitative cross-sectional research
design. The qualitative type of research design is deemed
transparent (Bryman 2004, cited in George et al. 2005)
while the cross-sectional design represents data collection
on subsets of a population in a given time-period (Bryman
2004:41). The study population consists of indigenes and
residents of the communities which make up GMOU Clus-
ters in Rivers and Bayelsa states Nigeria’s 2016 population
forecasts based on 2006 National Population Commission
and National Bureau of Statistics puts the population of
Bayelsa and Rivers states at 2,277,961 and 7,303,924 re-
spectively. SPDC presently has signed agreements with 33
GMoU clusters, covering communities in Rivers and Bayelsa
states. The study population therefore includes benecia-
ries and individuals involved in the GMoU process, selected
from twenty-eight (28) communities in Rivers and Bayelsa
states.
There are currently 39 active GMoU clusters in the Niger
Delta, out of which 33 are in Rivers and Bayelsa state. The
research adopted the simple random sampling and purpo-
sive sampling technique for the three levels of determining
the sample size of the study. Out of the 33 GMoU clusters
which make up the study population, 7 clusters with a total
of 70 communities were selected for the survey. Participants
were drawn from indigenes of the GMoU Cluster Commu-
nities, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and the
Cluster Development Boards involved in the GMoU pro-
cess. The clusters selected in Bayelsa State were Gbar-
ian/Ekpetiama, Okordia/Zarama, Oporoma and Kolo creek
while in Rivers State, the clusters are Engenni, Ekpeye and
Greater Port Harcourt. The sample size of the study was 68
comprising 65 Community respondents and 3 respondents
from SPDC.
Field trips were conducted to determine the functionality
and sustainability of GMOU projects in the communities.
The secondary method of data collection involved sourcing
information from SPDC’s reports, brochures of the Com-
munity Development Boards and web-based or internet re-
sources. Data collected in this study was analyzed using
thematic content analysis procedures and descriptive statis-
tics. This was done by categorizing content from interviews,
FGD’s and other secondary sources.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The study was conducted in the Niger Delta States of
Bayelsa and Rivers. Clusters highlighted in Figure 1below
represent various communities that host oil and gas facili-
ties of SPDC or are impacted in some way by the activities
of the company.
Figure 2presents the geo-ethnographic location of the
study where the GMoU is operational in Rivers and Bayelsa
states. Bayelsa and Rivers are states in southern Nigeria,
the core Niger Delta region. Bayelsa, which has one of the
largest crude oil and natural gas deposits in Nigeria, lies
between Delta State and Rivers State.
Four clusters selected for the study in Bayelsa state are
the Gbarain/Ekpetiama, Kolo creek, Okordia/Zarama and
Oporoma. The Gbaran tribe of the Ijaw people lives along
Taylor Creek ‘Gbarantoru’ in Central Bayelsa State. The
Ekpetiama clan is located by the River-Nun, also in Central
Bayelsa State. The Gbarain/Ekpetiama Cluster is made up
of ten Gbarain clan communities. Kolo creek is a fresh water
non-tidal creek that ows through a region of Niger Delta.
The Kolo Creek Cluster has 4 communities that are in Ogbia
Local Government Area. Okordia-Zarama Cluster is made
up of coastal communities along the River Nun, a tributary
of River Niger. Oporoma is headquarters of Southern Ijaw
Local Government Area, the largest local government area
by population in Bayelsa State, after Yenagoa local govern-
ment area. The Oporoma cluster consists of 12 communities.
At boundary between Rivers and Bayelsa states is where
the Engenni cluster is located. Other Rivers state clusters in
the study are the Idu-Ekpeye cluster and Greater Port Har-
court clusters. The Idu-Ekpeye cluster communities found
in Ahoada East and West Local government consists of eigh-
teen communities. The Ubie Oil Field ow station belonging
to SPDC is hosted by this cluster. Greater port Harcourt
cluster consists of nine communities. The cluster which is a
metropolitan area the government plans to implement and
enforce infrastructural development,hosts the SPDC’s resi-
dential area and some of her oces.
Table 1above presents empirical evidence of projects and
programmes completed in the study communities under the
GMoU. While some of the projects were sighted by the re-
searcher, others were obtained from secondary sources such
as GMoU commissioning brochures and cluster development
board reports. On investigation of the criteria for the alloca-
tion of a mandate (GMoU funds) for each community, con-
icting reasons were oered by the Cluster Chairmen and
SPDC ocials. SPDC was accused of arbitrarily allocat-
ing funds, thereby favouring some communities and short-
changing others. SPDC on the other hand claimed to allo-
cate funds based on the value of oil produced by each com-
munity/cluster in a process that the regulatory agency, De-
partment of Petroleum Resources (DPR) validates. These
divergent positions give indication that the community are
not involved in consultations or negotiation to determine
the GMoU fund due them.
An analysis of empirical evidence on completed projects
and programmes of the GMoU in the Niger Delta, shown
above, is organized in themes of community development
planning, the nature of community development priorities,
perceived versus experienced needs and the quick-win inter-
ventionism approach.
Community Development Planning
The GMoU process was designed to solicit community
insights on development problems through a Sustainable
Livelihood Assessment (SLA). The outcome of the SLA is a
community development plan assumed to provide guidance
for communities to take ownership in the implementation
of development decisions. When asked what development
problems had been resolved under the GMoU, respondents
listed a variety of initiatives contained in their community
Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities, Vol 6Iss 2, 1131–1139 (2020)
Corporate Social Responsibility and Community Development Outcomes in the Niger
Delta : An Empirical Analysis of the SPDC Global Memorandum of Understanding
(GMoU) 1135
Figure 1. GovernanceStructure of the SPDC GMoU. Source: SocialPerformance and Social Investment, SPDC, 2019
Figure 2. Map ShowingGMoU Clusters studied in Rivers and Bayelsa states Source: Author, 2019
Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities, Vol 6Iss 2, 1131–1139 (2020)
1136 Okoroba, Igazeuma Adikema
Table 1. Schedule of CompletedProjects, Programmes and Mandate of Study Clusters Source:Author, 2019
STUDY
CLUSTERS
& COMMU-
NITIES
COMPLETED PROJECTS COMPLETED PROGRAMMES MAN-
DATE
Gbarain-
Ekpetiama
118 SPDC recorded none. However, respondents
claimed to be enjoying some scholarships and
the Gbarain kingdom football talent hunt
scheme
34 1.247B
Ayama Includes Community town hall, a guest house, six
concrete walkways within the community and
community sound system
Obunagha Sta quarters,
Okolobiri community town hall, a guest house, six concrete
walkways within the community and community
sound system
Polaku Ninety something completed, 26 commissioned,
electrication upgrade
Kolo creek 45 SPDC recorded none. Respondents
mentioned scholarships only
31 687,497,073
Elebele Construction and completion of 300mx6m concrete
road, 3 concrete roads, 1 culvert
Imiringi Extension of 340x6m concrete roads in Ekata,
Otokopiri, Ekurugha and Ayan lands, 7 concrete
roads,
Oruma Extension of concrete road with dual drainage of
220x6m, provision of medical equiptment for primary
health care centre, a block of shops, renovation of
civic centre
Otuasega Construction of 80x6m concrete road, 3 units of
one-bedroom ats
Okordia-
Zarama
60 SPDC recorded 2. Respondents mentioned
scholarships
105M
an-
nu-
ally
Agbobiri concrete walkways
Ayambele water project, classroom renovations, construction of
four classroom block and classroom renovations
Freetown A town hall, construction of internal roads, a guest
house
Zarama-Epie construction of roads
Oporoma Infrastructure 13 418M
Agbura Extension of 1.7km 33kv Inter-town electricity
distribution line
Oporoma Construction of 107x 6m, 130mx6m concrete
walkway and 120mx6m concrete walkway, completion
of 2-bedroom bungalow (doctors’ quarters)
Otuege Town hall
Otuokpoti Completion of 6 classroom block
Idu Ekpeye 36,116,000
Engenni 2 SPDC recorded none at the cluster level. 45M
Mbiama 12 open market stalls
Greater Phc Infrastructure Scholarships 13
Elekahia Construction of Community Market, Transformer
Installation
Undergraduate scholarships
Gbundukwu Completion of community town hall, Transformer
Installation
Oroije Installation of solar streetlights, Installation of
transformers
Undergraduate Scholarships
Rumuodara Completion and equipment of community town hall,
transformer installation
Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities, Vol 6Iss 2, 1131–1139 (2020)
Corporate Social Responsibility and Community Development Outcomes in the Niger
Delta : An Empirical Analysis of the SPDC Global Memorandum of Understanding
(GMoU) 1137
development plans as shown in Table 1 above. From the list
of projects completed so far, more of the mandate funds are
invested in projects that meet physical needs. The GMoU
falls short of recognizing the interrelationship of economic,
physical and social development in a more robust mapping
of needs. The term ‘needs’ was applied in the study to mean
a population’s perception of their most important problems
and priorities for their general well being and good quality
of life. A good planning project should leave a community
not just with more immediate “products” e.g., housing–but
also with an increased capacity to meet future needs. Eec-
tive community development planning takes a comprehen-
sive approach to meeting community needs
The Nature of Community Development (CD)
Priorities
Project management literature distinguishes between
projects and programmes. Programmes are known to have
a wide scope, focusing on benets and may have to change
scope dramatically during their execution to meet the
changing needs. They typically span multiple functional
units and are executed over a timescale. The prevailing
understanding among development practitioners in Nigeria
which the IOC’s have adopted recognizes programmes as
‘soft’ activities _ those in which the result is not in itself a
tangible asset. This includes the more intrinsic needs that
may not be tangible like health, security, education, and
employment opportunities.
On the other hand, a project is not an on-going activ-
ity. Projects success is measured in terms of producing spe-
cic deliverables in terms of time, quality and cost. Projects
typically end with a specic accomplishment and result is
a distinguishing characteristic. For the study, the term is
applied as commonly used to describe the ‘hard’ projects
in which the result is a relatively unique tangible product,
such as infrastructure, an electricity plant or ‘utility’. Based
on the nature of projects, the GMoU recorded the comple-
tion of more infrastructure than programmes. It was also
found that the process of obtaining approval and the sign-
ing of cheques for the release of the funds was easier for
infrastructure priorities than programmes.
Perceived versus Experienced Needs
The study observed that the geographic terrain of GMoU
communities in Bayelsa state poses a problem for construc-
tion of infrastructural projects. Respondents complained
that infrastructure projects were not durable. The water-
logged areas made construction work challenging for con-
tractors without the use of sophisticated machinery. Many
completed GMoU facilities were said to depreciate after
months of using them. An example cited was the major road
linking Imiringi and Elebele which collapsed shortly after
it was commissioned. This failure of projects has deprived
communities of enjoying other sustainable initiatives that
could have been executed with the funds. Local economic
development initiatives like skills acquisition and micro-
credit were alternative programmes some community mem-
bers believe could have been prioritized. A respondent’s re-
marks below captures this suggestion:
“If they add money generating projects, some of these
concrete roads they can on their own maybe hatch some of
those places that are going bad to give a longer lifespan to
the road”. (KII/Male/CT Member/Imiringi)
In support of this assertion, other respondents alluded
that SPDC had not demonstrated their ownership of the
projects by participating in the maintenance of services after
projects have been commissioned. The consensus notion was
captured in the statement of a respondent below:
“SPDC push it to the cluster and hands o expecting
the communities to use their little money to do everything.
Prior to the GMOU they were doing our major projects,
all those roads were done by SPDC and if you should
take the cost of those roads, they are millions of naira,
but in this case, we are not seeing hundreds of millions”.
(FGD/Male/33yrs/Community Member/Elebele)
In a similar vein, the problem of uncompleted projects
which signicantly reduced under the GMoU regime per-
sists in some communities. SPDCs position on this issue
was a denial that uncompleted projects ever existed under
the GMoU, however, the company respondent provided no
evidence of rebuttal.
The Quick-win Interventionism Approach
The UN Millennium Project In 2005 dened quick wins
as simple, proven interventions with “very high potential
short-term impact that can be immediately implemented”.
The quick wins unlike other interventions which are more
complicated and can take a decade of eort, produce delayed
outcomes or benets. Although the terminology has evolved
from “quick wins” to “quick impact initiatives” and then to
“high impact interventions”, the constraints of the approach
remains. Evidence from the study shows that the GMoU
has not created room for every initiative to scale through
medium and long-term strategies for sustainability.
In the study, respondents drew attention to socio-
economic problems pervading communities such as the envi-
ronmental degradation, poverty and lack of avenues for eco-
nomic self-reliance that were not considered. Infrastructure
projects were adopted as a form of ‘quick win’ intervention-
ism for many reasons. From the perspective of Community
Trust (CT) and Cluster Development Board (CDB) mem-
bers, infrastructure is viewed as visible evidence that serve
to earn SPDC a ‘social license to operate’ in the short term.
Programmes were considered more by clusters that re-
ceived higher funds after infrastructure had been prioritized.
Greater Port Harcourt cluster however was observed to have
moved beyond the basic needs approach of viewing needs to
proposing self-reliance programmes among its needs. The
less funded communities did not consider programmes as
priority. Even if development outcomes may not be tangible
within the timeline of a 5-year GMoU agreement, fast-track
GMoU interventions need to be complemented by mid and
long-term strategies, cutting across experienced needs not
merely perceived ones.
4 CONCLUSION
The GMOU has so far promoted a sense of human agency
and structure of communities that host the activities of
Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities, Vol 6Iss 2, 1131–1139 (2020)
1138 Okoroba, Igazeuma Adikema
SPDC. It is a remarkable attempt at community-driven de-
velopment that teaches communities self-reliance and im-
proves ownership of projects. There is no doubt that the
GMOU fund has provided basic amenities like roads and
power supply to o-grid communities contained in the
CDP. However, the study found that development gaps
and long term socio-economic and environmental problems
persist in communities. of the evidence from the study re-
vealed GMoU outcomes have more completed infrastructure
projects executed than human capital development which
are less favoured by SPDC for the release of funds. Infras-
tructure projects ensured that the IOCs obtains visible evi-
dence of performance to enhance her corporate image, how-
ever, this preference gives the SPDC overbearing power to
inuence or limit the development potentials of her host
communities.
5 RECOMMENDATIONS
The GMoU framework aspired to be a holistic approach of
identifying community needs. While projects such as com-
munity lighting, power generation, and small-scale grid in-
frastructure projects are needed. No economy develops with-
out skilled human resources to drive that growth, hence,
SPDC and her host communities must prioritize human
capital development for sustainable economic growth in the
communities.
Poor company CSR budget was identied as a constraint
to the execution of CSR projects. It is therefore recom-
mended that MNCs to follow the tenets of the Stakehold-
ers rather than be inuenced by the modernization theory.
When stakeholders are satised, the business thrives to sat-
isfy the shareholders in the long run. Therefore, let the CD
budget be determined after the prioritization of the needs
of host communities not before.
The dependency of clusters on the GMoU fund weak-
ens community groups that they are unable to develop
into self-sustaining institutions. The limited funding ulti-
mately constrains communities to view development from
the basic needs approach which limits their capacity for
self-suciency. There is also the possibility of disenfran-
chisement when GMoU funds don’t match or cater reason-
ably for their pressing problems. SPDC needs to address the
beaurecratic process of disbursing funds.
6 REFERENCES
[1] Aaron K. (2012), New corporate social responsibility
models for oil companies in Nigeria’s delta region: What
challenges for sustainability? Progress in Development
Studies 12, 4 (2012) pp. 259–273. Sage Publications.
[2] Andrews, N. (2013), Community Expectations from
Ghana’s New Oil Find: Conceptualizing Corporate Social
Responsibility as a Grassroots-Oriented Process, Africa To-
day, Vol. 60, No. 1 pp. 55-75
[3] Beih R. L., Nwoke N., Boroh S.E., (2016), How Demo-
cratic Is Community Driven Development? A Focus on
SPDC Global Memorandum of Understanding (GMOU) in
the Niger Delta Region, Nigeria, International Journal of
Development and Management Review Vol. 11 June 2016
[4] Dashwood, H. (2014), Sustainable Development and
Industry Self-Regulation: Developments in the Global Min-
ing Sector. Business & Society 2014, Vol. 53(4) 551–582.
[5] Dobers, P. (2009), Corporate Social Responsibility and
Developing Countries,Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management Corp. Soc. Responsible. Envi-
ron. Mgmts. Halme, M.16, 237–249.
[6] Duruigbo, E. (2005), The World Bank, Multinational
Oil Corporations, and the resource curse in Africa, U. Pa.
J. Int’l Econ. L. Vol. 26:1.
[7] Ecumenical Council for Corporate Responsibility
(ECCR), (2010) www.eccr.org.uk
[8] Egbon, O, Idemudia, U & Amaeshi, K (2018),
Shell Nigeria’s Global Memorandum of Understanding and
corporate-community accountability relations: A critical ap-
praisal, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,
vol. 31, no. 1
[9] Ercan Müge A. (2010), Challenges and con icts in
achieving sustainable communities in historic neighborhoods
of Istanbul,Habitat International 35 (2011) 295-306
[9b] Enuoh R., Inyang B., (2014), Eective Management
of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for Desired Out-
come: The Niger Delta Issue in Nigeria, International Jour-
nal of Business Administration Vol. 5, No. 4. Sciedu Press
[10] Gonzalez A. (2016), Poverty, oil and corruption: the
need for a Quad-Sector Development Partnership (QSDP)
in Nigeria’ s Niger Delta,Development Policy Review, 2016,
34 (4): 509–538
[11] Idemudia, U.(2009), Assessing corporate–
community involvement strategies in the Nigerian oil in-
dustry: An empirical analysis, Resources Policy 34 (2009)
133–141. Science Direct.
[12] Idemudia, U. (2017), Shell–NGO Partnership and
Peace in Nigeria: Critical Insights and Implications, Or-
ganization & Environment. Sage Publications.
[13] Idemudia, U. and Ite, U. (2006), Corporate–
Community Relations in Nigeria’s Oil Industry: Challenges
and Imperatives. Corporate Social Responsibility and Envi-
ronmental Management,
[14] Igbara, F. N., Okpara N., Etu, N. O., Collins M. A.,
Naenwi, M-Epbari O. (2014), Corporate Social Responsibil-
ity and the Role of Oil Companies in Community Develop-
ment Projects in Rivers State Nigeria: An Evaluation, IOSR
Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS)
[15] Isike, C., (2016), Women, Inclusiveness and Partic-
ipatory Governance in Nigeria’s Niger Delta: A Focus on
Shell’s Model of Community Development in the Region,
Journal of Social Sciences.
[16] Ite U., Osayande N., Onaolapo B. (2015), The Shell
Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited To-
wards Sustainable Community Development: A Case Study
of SPDC Community Transformation and Development In-
dex. Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Nigeria Annual
International Conference and Exhibition, At Lagos, Nigeria,
Volume: SPE Paper No 178485.
Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities, Vol 6Iss 2, 1131–1139 (2020)
Corporate Social Responsibility and Community Development Outcomes in the Niger
Delta : An Empirical Analysis of the SPDC Global Memorandum of Understanding
(GMoU) 1139
[17] Kolk A. and Lenfant F. (2012), Business–NGO Col-
laboration in a Conict Setting: Partnership Activities in
the Democratic Republic of Congo, Business & Society 51(3)
478–511. Sage Publications.
[18] Lebura S. (2013) Stakeholder Relationships in the
Nigerian Oil Industry
[19] Muthuri, J. Moon J., Idemudia U., Owen. (2012),
Kemp Assets, Capitals, and Resources: Frameworks for Cor-
porate Community Development in Mining, Business & So-
ciety 51(3) 355–381. Sage Publications.
[20] Ojo, G. U. (2012). Community perception and oil
companies corporate social responsibility initiative in the
Niger Delta. Studies in Sociology of Science, 3(4), 11-21.
[21] Okodudu, S. (2008), Corporate Social Responsibility
Policy and Crisis in the Niger Delta: An appraisal of SPDC
Global Memorandum of Understanding, IPS Monograph
[22] Okoro E. (2017), The SPDC and Challenges of Cor-
porate Social Responsibility: Evidence from the Niger Delta
Region, Nigeria, Journal of Policy and Development Stud-
ies. Arabian Group of Journals.
[23] Onuoha G. (2016) A ‘rising Africa’ in a resource-
rich context: Change, continuity and implications for devel-
opment, Current Sociology Monograph 2016, Vol. 64(2) 277
–292, Sage Publications Retrieved from http://csi.sagepub
.com
[24] Owen, J. & Kemp, D. (2012), Assets, Capitals, and
Resources: Frameworks for Corporate Community Develop-
ment in Mining, Business & Society 51(3) 382–408, Sage
Publications Retrieved from http://bas.sagepub.com
[25] Pegram G. et. al. (2015), The political economy of
long-lived decisions in Africa. Framework Report, Climate
and Development Knowledge Network. Seddon-Daines D.,
Reddy S., Sulieman N. and Baletta H.
[26] Reves E. G. (2001), Four Main Theories of De-
velopment: Modernization, Dependency, Word-System, And
Globalization, Nomads Mediterranean Perspectives, Euro-
Mediterranean Institute
[27] Sawada, Y. (2015), The Impacts of Infrastruc-
ture in Development: A Selective Survey, ADBI Work-
ing Paper 511. Tokyo: Asian Development Bank Insti-
tute. http://www.adbi.org/working-paper/2015/01/20/652
6.impacts.infrastructure.in.dev/
[28] Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC).
2004. 2003 People and the Environment Annual Report.
SPDC, Lagos.
[29] SPDC (2019), Shell’s Community Support Fund in
Bayelsa Hits N23b, https://www.shell.com.ng/media/2019
-media-releases/shell-community-support-fund-in-bayelsa-
hits-n23b.html
[30] UNDP (2019), Inequalities in Human Development
in the 21st Century, Human Development Reports- Nigeria
[31] Uzoagu Ifeoma F. (2015), Corporate Social Responsi-
bilities of Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC)
and Nigeria Agip Oil Company (NAOC) for Socio-Economic
Development of the Host Communities in Rivers State, Jour-
nal of Economics and Sustainable Development Vol.6, No.3,
2015
[32] Valente. (2012), Indigenous Resource and Institu-
tional Capital: The Role of Local Context in Embedding
Sustainable Community Development, Business & Society
51(3) 409–449. Sage Publications.
[33] World Bank. (2001), World development report
2000/2001: Attacking poverty, Oxford University Press.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY
Okoroba, Igazeuma Adikema Department of Sociology,
Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Port Harcourt,
Choba, Rivers State, Nigeria
Journal of Advances in Social Science and Humanities, Vol 6Iss 2, 1131–1139 (2020)
