172 SOCIAL CAPITAL DEFICIT AND ...

Social Capital Deficit and Environmental Sustainability Challenges in the Niger Delta Osun Sociological Review Vol.4 No.1 (172-185), 2017

SOCIAL CAPITAL DEFICIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY CHALLENGES IN THE NIGER DELTA REGION OF NIGERIA JACK, Jackson T.C.B Department of Sociology andAnthropology, Federal University Otuoke, Bayelsa State 08037598165; [email protected] ORCID:orcid.org/0000-0003-4326-8544 Abstract This paper examines the linkage between social capital deficit and environmental sustainability challenges in the oil rich Niger Delta region of Nigeria. The paper illuminates the ills associated with oil exploration with recourse to environmental degradation and its negative impacts on livelihoods of oil producing communities in the region. The human development reality of these communities which is often laden with low income, deficit in education, few material and financial assets is further exacerbated by weak social capital which ordinarily ought to be the most important resource available for them. This in turn provides them with limited capacity to initiate and pursue in collective terms, mutually beneficial actions that are considered necessary to stave off the risks associated with the oil industry especially in terms of effectively protecting their environment and livelihood systems. In the light of the following the paper recommends among others, the urgent need for oil companies to adopt environment-friendly practices for sustainable oil resources exploitation; the government should guarantee the entrenchment of accountability and transparency at all levels of governance through favourable regulatory frameworks. This is in addition to ensuring sectorial diversification by promoting rural agricultural development and guaranteeing multi-stakeholder involvements in the management of oil resources through collaborative partnership initiatives and increased human as well as social capital capacity of oil producing communities. Keywords: Deficit, Environmental sustainability, Environmental degradation, Social capital. Introduction The issue of environmental sustainability became prominent in global development discourse when the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) submitted its report otherwise known as the Brundtland Report titled “Our Common Future” in the year 1987. The report acknowledged that the pattern of development currently pursued by humans has over the decades degraded natural resources and endangered the environment and biodiversity. As a way out of this quagmire, the report suggested a new development paradigm that has become a 21st century global buzzword known as „Sustainable Development‟ which was defined as „„development that provides for the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs”. The new sustainable development framework gradually became a multidimensional, multidisciplinary and multi-sectorial yet inter-dependent and mutually reinforcing process which encompasses environmental sustainability, economic sustainability, social 172


sustainability and human sustainability (Goodland, 1995). The need for sustainability arose from the recognition that the profligate, extravagant and inequitable nature of current development patterns is inimical to the safety of the environment and its resources for the needs of generations yet unborn and the very life support systems upon which every living thing depend on for survival. On page 1 of Agenda 21 it was clearly captured that “Humanity stands at a defining moment in history. We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being”. Corroborating this view,Raimi (2015)indicted the global capitalist system when he adducedthat “capitalist expansion garnished by modernization philosophy and the need for profit maximisation at the peril of human, social, economic and ecological capitals has remained a great source of unequal distribution of resources for most part of the globe”. Nigeria‟s Niger Delta is disproportionately affected in this unequal distribution of resources due to unsustainable development practices by the oil and gas industry albeit within a porous regulatory regime of governance. It becomes clear therefore, that unsustainable pattern of development is a manifest feature of the oil and gas industry operational in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. The discovery of crude oil in commercial quantities in Oloibiri, present day Bayelsa state six decades ago, ushered in a large scale spread of operations of international and indigenous oil corporations stretching to the lengths and breadth of the region covering Rivers, Bayelsa, Delta, Edo, Cross Rivers, AkwaIbom, and some parts of Abia as well as Imo states. The region plays host to about two hundred and fifty seven (257) flow stations, with oil pipeline networks covering a land area of thirty one thousand (31,000) km2; the length of main oil and gas pipelines in the region covers seven thousand (7,000) km; ten (10) export terminals and over one thousand five hundred (1,500) communities hosting oil and gas facilities (Steiner, 2008). Oil and gas production has since 1958 till date contributed immensely to the economic growth of Nigeria amounting to about N96.212 trillion within the period (Vanguard Newspaper, August 21, 2016). However such massive economic progress stands in sharp contrast to the human development reality of the Niger Delta region who bear the brunt of oil induced degraded ecosystem thereby justifying the notion of poverty amidst plenty hypothesis (Okaba, 2005). The natural ecosystem of the region has been increasingly vulnerable to environmental degradation resulting from oil spillages, gas leakages, and gas flare among others. The impacts of large scale environmental degradation has adversely affected the people of the Niger Delta negatively as their livelihood system which is significantly dependent on the natural environment is perpetually dissipated (Ross, 2003). This is even more evident in the unfortunate depletion of traditional economic activities such as fishing, farming, wood picking, sea food picking activities as oil and gas pollution permeates the nooks and crannies of the region (Sagay, 2005). In affirming the importance of the natural environment to the Niger Delta people, the United Nation Development Programme (UNDP) in its 2006 Niger Delta Human Development Report averred that over 60% of the population in the region depends on the natural environment (living and nonliving). However, the Niger Delta people are denied of the inalienable right to a safe, and clean environment as crude oil exploration has brought untold misery, repression, and 173


unmitigated environmental devastation to the oil producing communities and the Niger Delta at large (Chijioke, 2009; Okaba, 2005). Several analysts and scholars have sought to explain the unsustainable exploitation of the environment in the Niger Delta in the context of the inability or failure of regulatory agencies to enforce existing environmental laws and the connivance of the Nigerian government with the multinational oil companies to undo, oppress and exploit the Niger Delta people (Ibaba, 2010). However, this situation is further worsened by the deficit and erosion of bonding and bridging social capital within and between communities thereby weakening their capacity to ensure environmental sustainability in their domain. With the emergence of sustainability as the central theme of community, national as well as global development agenda, and with increasing attention to create local capacity in ensuring a safe environment for all, scholars and policy makers have continually placed emphasis on the need to create conditions that would increase community‟s available stock of social capital (Coleman 1988; Putman 1993). In relation to the Niger Delta scenario, there is a dearth of literature addressing inherent factors within the communities such as social capital deficit which exacerbates environmental sustainability challenges in the region. It is these gaps in knowledge that this paper seeks to fill by examining the linkage between social capital deficit and environmental sustainability challenges in the oil rich Niger Delta region of Nigeria. Theoretical Framework The social capital theory has long been entrenched and become paramount in development literature over the years (Durlauf 2002, Gillinson 2004). The pioneer social capital theorists such as Bourdieu (1986), Coleman (1988) and Putman (1993) considered social capital as a resource for action, which is developed and accessed through membership in formal and non-formal organizations. According to Putman, social capital is the „„features of social organizations such as social networks, social interactions, norms, social trust, and reciprocity, cooperation that facilitate coordination and cooperation and that enable people to act collectively for mutual benefits‟‟. Bourdieu defines it as the “aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition—or in other words to membership in a group which provides each of its members with the backing of the collectively owned capital.” In addition to these, Lochner et al. (1999) posits that social capital has a collective dimension as it is external to the individual and the structure of social capital is hence different from economic capital (money, financial capital) or human capital, e.g., education and training, which are more individual (Woolcock and Narayan 2000). However, benefits of social capital can accrue to the individual as Portes (1998) argues in his definition that social capital is „„the ability of individuals to secure benefits through membership in networks and other social structures‟‟. Social capital hence according to Durlauf and Fufchamps (2004) captures network-based processes or aspects of social structure that generate communal benefits through norms and trust. In an attempt to re-construct the concept of social capital, Uphoff and Mijayaratna (2000) distinguish between structural and cognitive forms of social capital, thereby refining the notions of shared norms and trust at individual and household levels, and the horizontal and vertical social networks constituting social capital. They defined structural social capital 174


as “the networks, linkages and practices within and between communities, including membership in formal and informal associations, participation in decision making and the forms of social organization within which networks of relationships are located. On the other hand, cognitive social capital refers to the attitudes, values, beliefs, social norms, and behaviors that exist within a community‟‟. It then becomes clear that since it is the establishment of norms that permit people to work in groups, social capital is the consequence of intensely rooted cultural habits (Grant2001). Furthermore, in identifying the types of social capital, Pretty (2003), averred that the cognitive and structural dimensions of social capital relate to a further refinement of the concept of social capital into “bonding,” “bridging,” and “linking” social capital. Accordingly, for Pretty (op cit.) bonding social capital is the social cohesion within groups or communities resulting from relationships between people of similar ethnicity, social status and location, based on local ties, trust and shared moral values, reinforced by working together. Bonding social capital can be generally defined as “closed networks of close friends and relatives or horizontal relationships among equals within a localized community” (Claridge 2007; Beugelsdiyk and Smulders 2003). Hence according to Szreter and Woolcock (2004), it is the „„the trusting and cooperative relations between members who are similar in a socio-demographic sense‟‟. Some examples of this type of social capital include formal and informal clubs, groups, or associations. These groups may be formed through church affiliations, local traditional structures, or other localized structures held by trust and norms that exist within the social structure. Bridging social capital, on the other hand, is based on vertical relationships or networks that cross social groupings. Bridging social capital refers to “the structural relationships and networks which cross social groupings, involving coordination or collaboration with other groups, external associations, mechanisms of social support or information sharing across communities and groups” (Claridge 2007; Beugelsdiyk and Smulders 2003). In essence, these are established between people or organizations that are detached from each other and are in different communities. Bridging social capital links networks requiring collaboration and coordination with other external groups to achieve set goals; for example, it can be the link between two local groups from different villages. In analyzing bonding and bridging social capital, Leonard and Onyx (2003) used five indicators of social capital as developed by Onyx and Mullen (2000) namely: networks, reciprocity, trust, shared norms, and social agency to define bonding and bridging social capital. They defined bonding social capital as characterized by dense, multiplex networks, long-term reciprocity, thick trust, shared norms, and less instrumentality, whereas bridging social capital is characterized by large, loose networks, relatively strict reciprocity, and a thinner or different type of trust and more instrumentality. Lastly, linking social capital describes the ability of groups to engage with external agencies, either to draw on useful resources or to influence policies (Pretty2003). Linking social capital crosses status, linking poor people and those in positions of influence. Szreter and Woolcock (2004) defined linking social capital as the “norms of respect and networks of trusting relationships between people who are interacting across explicit, formal, or institutionalized power or authority gradients in society,” such as citizens‟ interactions with local government.It involves the engagement of local groups or networks with institutions or 175


agencies in higher influential positions (Sanginga et al. 2004; Woolcock and Sweetser 2007). Groups of poor people are able to access support, resources, and information from organizations and networks through linking social capital. The different aspects and dimensions of social capital determine whether a community can act as a cohesive unit, i.e., bonding, whether people comply with the norms and bylaws, i.e., structural; whether they have links with other community organizations, i.e., bridging, or whether they can access and influence institutions with more power and resources, i.e., linking, for managing natural resources, including conflicts. Woolcok and Narayan (2000) see bonding social capital as operating as a defense mechanism against poverty, whereas bridging social capital is what required for real economic growth to take place is. They see bonding social capital as what communities use to “get by” and bridging social capital as what they use to “get ahead.” Leonard and Onyx (2003), however, argue that bridging social capital should not replace bonding social capital as communities have multiple sources of social capital that they draw on for different functions. The three types of social capital, therefore, complement each other, in that the strong bonds existing in bonding social capital are diversified by the existence of bridging social capital, whose bonds are weaker but more cross cutting, hence enabling increased diversity in an otherwise closed community. Linking social capital allows for the accumulation of resources, information, and wealth, which is needed by networks to achieve set objectives. Hence, all three types of social capital can coexist in a community to different extents, but more frequently one maybe more prominent. Social Capital and Environmental Sustainability The linkage between social capital and environmental sustainability has been established by several social researchers and development institutions. Social capital theory has been applied severally in sustainability studies especially in natural resources management. According to Grootaert et al. (2002), there is an increasing interest amongst natural resource agencies and institutions in partnering with community groups to solve local resource issues including environmental resource degradation. Studies have shown that there is a beneficial effect of social capital on the capacity of individuals with shared values to come together to act in support of a common purpose and in view of this, sustainable environmental management initiatives based on the organization of participatory groups has been achieved in fishing communities, rural land management cooperatives, watershed partnerships, and a variety of sustainable development enterprises (Pretty and Ward 2001; de Wit and Blignaut 2000; Compton and Beeton 2012; Henocque 2013). It is equally argued that social capital has the capacity to reduce the costs of collective actions, increase information flows and idea-sharing, contribute to environmental conflict resolution, and improve the overall management of common pool resources (Cavaye, 2004; Pascal et al 2007). Hence, several natural resource studies have emphasized the need for leaders or influential players to activate social capital amongst communities that rely heavily on environmental systems by producing shared benefits that sustain both the community and the environment (Mindi et al 2015; Bodin and Crona 2008). Similarly, on the impacts of social capital on environmental sustainability Pilkington (2002) and Ritchie (2000) posits that social capital has served as an indication of the community‟s potential to jointly address local problems associated with 176


environmental management. Furthermore, Pretty and Ward (2001) and Mindi et al (2015) averred that social capital also presents an opportunity to link national policies like the Framework for Environmental Sustainability with community level actions such as those concerned with the Niger Delta region. Drawing from the above, the role of social capital in ensuring environmental sustainability cannot be overemphasized. In establishing this relationship, Putman (1993) using his proxy measurements of social capital identified the following impacts of increased social capital: i. Enhanced human development, opportunities, and educational achievement through family, school and community networks, and norms of reciprocity. ii. Enhanced public environments which are safer, cleaner and friendlier iii. Enhanced economic prosperity for individuals, firms, communities and iv. Enhanced health and happiness through social engagement in the community Summarily, Pretty and Ward (2001) averred that the measured benefits of social capital for natural resource management includes increasing cooperation and support, securing more investment in shared lands, and generally accomplishing more as a collective whole than individuals working alone. Hence according to Duke and Hillsborough (2013) sustainable communities require high social capital to succeed and by their nature increase that capital in an iterative synergistic process which makes them desirable places to live and work and vital to comprehensive global sustainability. Social Capital, Environmental Sustainability and the Niger Delta Question The Niger Delta region is challenged with environmental sustainability crises which has an overriding effect on the overall sustainable development of the region. Table 1: Ranking of Major Environmental Problems in the Niger-Delta Problem Type Natural Environment

Development Related

Problem Subset Coaster/River bank erosion Flooding Sedimentation/Silt Substance Exotic (water hyacinth) Land degradation/Soil fertility Loss Agricultural decline/ shortened fallow Delta forest loss(Mangrove) Biodiversity depletion Fishery Decline Oil spillage Gas flaring Sewage and waste water Other Chemical

Source: Okon and Egbon 1999, cited in Eregha and Irughe 2009. 177

Priority Ranking Moderate High Moderate Low Low High High High High High High Moderate High Moderate


The spate of environmental degradation in the Niger Delta as shown in Table 1 above is massive; several researches have shown that the entire region is at the mercy of oil related environmental degradation. Explosions from seismic surveys, dredging canals and contamination of rivers and creeks are among the grievous challenges of environmental sustainability associated with oil production in the region. During oil extraction, various chemicals and contaminants such as drill cuttings, drill mud are released into the streams and rivers and this has deleterious effect on the natural ecological balance of the Niger Delta region (Trade and Environment Data, 1997; Worgu, 2000). Oil spillage as shown in Table 2 below has contributed largely to environmental degradation in the region. Recent reports on the Niger Delta environment show an estimated 9 million – 13 million tons of oil spilled in to the Niger Delta ecosystem over the past 50 years (CEESP-IUCN 2006 cited in Kadafa 2012). It is estimated that an average of one oil spill occurs every week in the region causing grave damage in the environment (Federal Ministry of Environment, 2006). Oil spills negatively impacts communities by destroying livelihoods, economic trees, and biodiversity. Table 2: Time Line Analysis of Oil Spill in the Niger-Delta Year

1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 2005

No. of Spill

128 104 154 157 241 238 257 173 151 187 155 129 208 228 166 258 378 453 495 417 158 180

Quantity Spilled (in barrels)

Quantity Recovered (in barrels)

26157 32879.25 489294.75 94117.13 600.511.02 42722.5 42841 48351.3 40209 11876 12905 31866 9172 5956 14150.35 108367.01 51187.9 8105.32 35123.71 63677.17 39903667 10,000

7135 1703.01 391445 63481.2 42416.83 5470.2 2171.4 6355.9 1644.8 1719.3 522 25757 1955 2153 2785.96 2785.96 1476.7 2937.08 2335.93 3110.02 1183807

2006

170

20,000

2007

250

30,000

2008

170

100,000

2009

150

110,000

2010

190

28,000

Source: Uyigue and Agho, 2007; Amnesty International 2011. 178

Quantity Loss to the Environment (in barrels) 19021.5 31176.75 97849.75 630635.93 558094.2 37252.3 40669.6 41995.4 38564.2 10157.3 12358 25757 7207 3803 12057.8 105912.05 49711.2 6632.11 32787.78 60568.15 38716.87


Similarly, Gas flaring is a major environmental challenge in the region, about 19 billion cubic meters of gas is flared per year in the region (Malumfashi 2007). According to Sagay (2005), the value of the wasted gas per day amounts to 86 million dollars (780 billion naira) and the annual value of the wasted gas is about 2 billion dollars (36 billion naira) or enough to generate electricity for the whole of West Africa region. As shown in Table 3 below, gas flaring has contributed tremendously to the crises of environmental sustainability in the region. Table 3: Timeline Analysis of Gas Flare in the Niger Delta (1986-2003) Year

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Gas Production (Million Cubic Meters) 18,739.0 17,085.0 20,253.0 25,053.0 28,163.0 31,588.0 32,464.0 33,444.6 32,793.0 32,980.0 36,970.0 36,754.8 36,036.6 36,156.4 47,537.5 57,530.0 101,976.0 53,379.0

Gas Utilization (Million Cubic Meters) 4,822.0 4,794.0 5,516.0 6,323.0 6,343.0 7,000.0 7,058.0 7,536.2 6,577.0 6,910.0 10,150.0 10,207.0 10,886.5 12,664.6 21,945.3 29,639.7 26,203.4 30,583.0

Gas Flaring (Million Cubic Meters)

Gas Flaring Rate (%)

13,917.0 12,291.0 14,737.0 18,730.0 21,820.0 24,588.0 25,406.0 25,908.4 26,216.0 26,070.0 26,820.0 26,547.8 25,150.1 23,191.8 25,592.2 27,890.3 75,772.7 22,796.0

74.27 71.94 72.76 74.76 77.48 77.84 78.26 77.47 79.94 79.05 72.54 72.23 69.79 64.97 53.84 48.48 74.30 42.71

Source: CBN Statistical Bulletin, December 2004.Cited in Raimi et al. 2013 Immediate impact of gas flaring and venting manifests high and rising temperature in the communities close to flare sites and beyond, acidification of rainwater, deposits of black powder covers. These result in crop growth retardation, distortion of aquatic life and respiratory disorders, all of which combine to put health and livelihood at risk in the Niger Delta. The adverse effect of oil production on the Niger Delta environment and its impacts on livelihood insecurity is a well-established. Loubster (1995) defined livelihood as the totality of means by which people secure a living, have or acquire in one way or another, the requirements for survival and the satisfaction of needs as defined by the people themselves in all aspects of their lives. The devastating impacts of oil induced environmental degradation on the socio-economic lives of villages and communities in the region is particularly worrisome given the fact that a significant number of the population are dependent on natural 179


environmental resources such as farmlands, fishing grounds, water bodies, aquatic lives, economic trees, and other related income generating livelihood assets. The implications of these several environmental sustainability challenges includes loss of livelihood assets, health hazards, food insecurity, potential conflict over natural resources due to environmental scarcity, loss of cultural artifacts, symbols and cultural knowledge and ultimately erosion of social capital. Suffice it to note that the relationship between social capital and environmental sustainability challenges derive from two main sources. Firstly, the pervasive environmental sustainability issues in the region are largely due to deficit in social capital within and amongst communities. As an asset, social capital engenders cooperation among groups, communities and institutions. Besides this, since social capital has to do with the basic resources inherent in social relations, which facilitate collective action among groups and communities it guarantees related elements, such as information sharing, collective action and decision-making and reduction of what Grootaert and Bastelaer (2002) called “opportunistic behaviour”. Secondly, the erosion of social capital is a consequence of oil related environmental degradation as communities largely loss their material and nonmaterial cultural elements to the ills of the oil industry their social capital inadvertently grows weaker. In addressing the loss of social capital and its impact on the community, Putman (2000) averred that significant loss of social capital immediately creates a loss of other personal and social beneficial conditions. One of the greatest areas impacted is the commons – those areas for which no one has specific responsibility but for which individuals must accept responsibilities for the benefit of the community. In analyzing factors affecting social capital deficit, Chijoke (2009) strongly argued that oil capital has eroded social capital in the Niger Delta. This is hinged on the paradox of the financial capital generated from oil which seriously stands in contradiction with the massive impoverishment that is visible in the oil producing communities. Social capital resources include trust, norms, and reciprocity, which encourage bargaining, compromise and cooperation. These principles which are essential elements for governance and sustainable community development are however lacking in most oil producing communities thereby limiting their capacity for community based environmental management strategies and sustainable engagements as stakeholders in the management of natural resources in their domain. This is evident in the fact that oil wealth has caused great inequality and frustration in Niger Delta communities as most multinational oil companies operate with colonial mentality utilizing the divide and rule principle to fuel internal crises within and between communities by pitching community chiefs amongst themselves and youth groups amongst themselves in sharing oil monies emanating from the multinationals companies (Chijoke 2009; Jack 2009). In such atmosphere of chaos mutual distrust and acrimony becomes prevalent social capital becomes elusive in communities. Evidently, the failure of the government, oil companies and communities themselves to cultivate a significant scale of social capital, especially at the village and community levels has exacerbated the challenges of environmental sustainability, economic disempowerment and poverty in the region.

180


Conclusion The environmental sustainability challenges in the Niger Delta no doubt is directly linked to the oil and gas industry operating in the region and as evidently shown above the situation is further exacerbated by the deficit in social capital within and among communities which negatively limits their capacity to manage their environment sustainably and cope with the negative implications emanating from oil induced degradation. In view of these submissions, this paper concludes that the way forward for developmental progress in the Niger Delta is for the government, oil companies, non-governmental organizations and communities to harness the scarcely existing social capital in the communities such as informal women, youth and community groups and formal socio-ethnic organizations spread across the region such as the Movement for the Survival of Ogoni People (MOSOP), Ijaw Youth Council (IYC), Ijaw National Council (INC) and also the plethora of civil rights groups for environmental justice, economic development and human rights civil society groups operating in the region representing a pool of social capital. Furthermore, at the center of the development of the region should be a strong commitment to multi-stakeholder partnership and in order to ensure environmental sustainability, oil companies should endeavor to observe environment friendly practices such as the environment impact assessment and remediation of oil impacted communities; while on the other hand the Nigerian government must ensure strict adherence to standard procedures and implementation of environmental protection laws. The development of oil producing communities requires the involvement of all demographic strata at the grassroots level through collaborative partnership. This process will ensure a bottom-top participatory multi stakeholder approach to the management of oil resources and environmental sustainability through accumulation and coordination of existing social capital in the region. Moreover, social capital can be built sustainably alongside poverty reduction through the diversification of the economy away from oil to more environmentally sustainable economic activities such as development of rural agriculture and revamping of the manufacturing sector. However, for this developmental strategy to succeed it requires the institutionalization of the tenets of sustainable development by a committed government who entrenches the values of accountability and transparency at all levels of governance. References Amnesty International (2011): UN Confirms Massive Oil Pollution in Niger Delta Available online at: http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/news-item/un-confirms-massive-oilpollution-in-niger-delta Beugelsdiyk, S., and S. Smulders.(2003): Bridging and bonding social capital: which is good for economic growth. Forty-third European Regional Science Association Congress, 27–30 August 2003, Jyväskylä, Finland. Accessed online June 22, 2016. url:http://www.ersa.org/ersaconfs/ersa03/cdrom/abstracts/a517.html. Bodin, O., &Crona, B. (2008). Management of natural resources at the community level:

181


Exploring the role of social capital and leadership in a rural fishing community.World Development 36, 2763–2779. Cavaye, J. (2004). Social capital: A commentary on issues, understanding and measurement. Australia: Observatory PASCAL - Place Management, Social Capital and Learning Regions. ChijiokeEvoh J. (2009): Green Crimes, Petro-violence and the Tragedy of Oil: The Case of the Niger Delta in Nigeria.In-Spire Journal of Law, Politics and Societies Vol.4, No.1 Claridge, T. 2007.Social capital. Accessed online at http://www.gnudung.com; July 2, 2016. Coleman, J. C. (1988): „Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital,‟ .The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 94, Supplement: Organizations and Institutions: Sociological and Economic Approaches to the Analysis of Social Structure; pp. S95S120. Compton, E. and Beeton, R.J.S. (2012). An accidental outcome: Social capital and its implications forLandcare and the “status quo”. Journal of Rural Studies. de Wit, M.P. &Blignaut, J.N. (2000). A critical evaluation of the capital theory approach to sustainable development. Agrekon, 39, No. 1. Duke Farms and Hillsborough N.J (2013): Sustainability Summit, Social Capital. Sustainable Jersey. September 18, 2013 Durlauf, S. N. (2002): On the empirics of social capital. The Economic Journal 112:459-479. Durlauf, S., and M. Fufchamps. (2004): Social capital. The University of Wisconsin, Department of Economics, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Eregha P.B and Irughe I.R (2009): Oil Induced Environmental Degradation in the Nigeria‟s Niger Delta: The Multiplier Effect. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa.Vol 11, No 4, 2009. ISSN: 1520-5509 Federal Ministry of Environment (2006): Nigerian Conservation Foundation Lagos, WWF UK and CEESP-IUCNCommission on Environmental, Economic, and Social Policy, May 31, (2006). Niger Delta Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Project. Gillinson, S. (2004): Why cooperate? A multidisciplinary study of collective action. Working Paper Number 234.Overseas Development Institute, London, UK. Goodland, Robert (1995): The Concept of Environmental Sustainability. Annual Review Ecological System. 1995. 26:1-24

182


Grant, E. (2001): Social capital and community strategies: Neighborhood development in Guatemala City. In Development and Change 32:975-997. Grootaert, C. and T. Bastelaer (2002): 'Understanding and Measuring Social Capital,' USAID & IRIS Forum Series on the Role of Institutions in Promoting Economic Growth No.1 Henocque, Y. (2013). Enhancing social capital for sustainable coastal development: Is satoumithe answer? Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 116 (2013) 66-73. Ibaba S. I. (2010). “Environmental Protection Laws and Sustainable Development in the Niger Delta”.Africana, Vol. 4 o 2. Jack Jackson T.C.B (2009): Multinational Oil Corporations and Communal Crises: A Study Of Selected Oil Producing Communities in the Niger Delta. Department of Sociology, Niger Delta University, Unpublished BSc Thesis. Kadafa .A (2012); Oil Exploration and Spillage in the Niger Delta.Civil and Environmental Research ISSN 2222-1719 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2863 (Online) Vol. 2, No.3, 2012. Leonard, R., and J. Onyx. (2003): Networking through loose and strong ties: an Australian qualitative study. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations14(2):189–203. Lochner, K., I. Kawachi, and B. P. Kennedy. (1999): Social capital: a guide to its measurement. Health and Place5:259–270. Loubser, J. (1995). Sustainable livelihoods: a conceptual exploration. Paper presented at the workshop of civil society, sustainable livelihoods and women in development, 6 – 8 November, 1995, Malaysia Malumfashi, G. I. (2007). Phase-out of Gas Flaring in Nigeria by 2008: The Prospects of a Multi-Win Project.The Petroleum Training Journal 4 (2). MindiLehew, Randy Gimblett, Francisco Valenzuela (2015):Enhancing Recreation Sustainability through Social Capital Development.Natural Resources Conservation 3(4): 57-69, 2015

and

Okaba Benjamin O. (2005): Petroleum Industry &The Paradox of Rural Poverty In The Niger Delta.Ethiope Publishing Corporation, Benin City. Onyx, J., and P. Mullen. (2000): Measuring social capital in five communities. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 36 (1):23–42. Pascal C. Sanginga, Rick N. Kamugisha , and Andrienne M. Martin (2007): The Dynamics of Social Capital and Conflict Management in Multiple Resource Regimes: A Case of the Southwestern Highlands of Uganda. Ecology and Society 12(1): 6. 183


Pilkington, P. (2002). Social capital and health: Measuring and understanding social capital at a local level could help to tackle health inequalities more effectively. Journal of Public Health Medicine 24: 156-159. Portes, A. (1998): Social capital: its origin and application in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 24:1-24. Pretty, J. (2003): Social capital and the collective management of resources.Science 302:1912 Pretty, J. & Ward, H. (2001).Social capital and the environment.World Development 29: 209 Putnam, R.D., (2000): Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York: Simon & Schuster. Putman, R. D. (1993): Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy. Simon and Schuster, New York, New York, USA. Ritchie, M. (2000). Social capacity, sustainable development, and older people: Lessons from Community-Based Care in Southeast Asia.Development in Practice 10: 638-651. Raimi, L. (2015): Forming Cross Sectorial Alliance for Sustainable Community Development: Lessons from the SPDC/USAID/IITA Cssava Enterprise Development Program (CEDP) in Nigeria‟s Niger Delta. International Journal of Development and Economic Sustainability, Vol 3, No.5, pp99-109. October, 2015. Raimi L., Towobola W.L, Madueke L.I (2013): Redressing the Energy Challenge of Gas Flaring in Nigeria: The MEEs Approach. Journal of Sustainable Development Studies, Vol 2, No.2, pp242-257. ISSN 2201-4268 Ross, M. (2003): 'Nigeria‟s Oil Sector and the Poor,' Paper prepared for the UK Department for International Development “Nigeria: Drivers of Change” program. Sagay, I. (2005); Report at the National Political Conference. Sanginga, P., R. Kamugisha, A. Martin, A.Kakuru, and A. Stroud. (2004): Facilitating participatory processes for policy change in natural resource management: lessons from the highlands of southwestern Uganda. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 9(1):958-970. Szreter, S., and M. Woolcock. (2004): Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the political economy of public health. International Journal of Epidemiology 33:650–67. Trade and Environment Data, (1997): 'Nigeria Petroleum Pollution in Ogoni Region.' Accessed online 25th July 2016, URL: http://www.american.edu/TED/OGONI.HTM

184


Uphoff, N., and C. M. Mijayaratna. (2000): Demonstrated benefits of social capital: the productivity of farmers‟ organizations in Gal Oya, Srilanka. World Development 28(11)1875-1840. UNDP (2006); Niger Delta Human Development Report, UN House Abuja Uyigue, E. and Agho, M. (2007): Coping with Climate Change and Environmental Degradation in the Niger-Delta of South Nigeria. Benin. Community Research and Development Centre (CREDC). Vanguard Newspaper, August 21, 2016. N96 Trillion Oil Revenue: How Nigeria Short Changed Oil Producing Areas. Woolcock, M., and D. Narayan. (2000): Social capital: implications for development theory, research and policy. The World Bank Observer 15 (2):225-249. Woolcock, M., and A. T. Sweetser.(2007):Social capital: the bonds that connect. Asian Development Bank (ADB), Manila, Philippines. [online] url: www.adb.org Worgu, S, O. (2000), 'Hydrocarbon Exploitation, Environmental Degradation and Poverty in The Niger Delta Region of Nigeria' Lund, Lund University Sweden, January.

185