{"title":"From resource curse to institutional incompatibility: a comparative study of Nigeria and Norway oil resource governance","authors":"F. Onditi","doi":"10.1080/09744053.2019.1631658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article seeks to address a policy quandary: despite Nigeria’s history of oil exploitation since 1956 and institutionalization of the Nigeria Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (NEITI) in 2004, why has the country not been able to address the resource wealth–poverty dilemma? Is it that the EITI’s governance model is too Western to address Nigeria’s resource curse? It has been established that a country’s propensity to integrate EITI principles in the oil industry is largely dependent not only on the existence of institutions, but also on the level of institutional development. Norway and Nigeria both created policy and regulatory systems. Norway’s more competent administrative structures grew into a self-regulatory system but, by contrast, Nigeria’s indigenous civil service never developed institutional arrangements sufficient to integrate the oil industry into the entire national or regional institutional framework. Considering these historical and contextual differences between Nigeria and Norway, this article employs ‘stakeholder analysis’ to construct a framework of ‘thinking’ regarding how the oil sector could be effectively governed in Nigeria (Figure 7), a country with a robust civil society but a complex political system: in such countries, evolution of what I call a ‘self-reinforcing system of institutional incompatibility’ is inevitable, but institutionalization of foreign models such as EITI is often difficult to achieve.","PeriodicalId":41966,"journal":{"name":"Africa Review","volume":"26 1","pages":"152 - 171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Africa Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09744053.2019.1631658","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article seeks to address a policy quandary: despite Nigeria’s history of oil exploitation since 1956 and institutionalization of the Nigeria Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (NEITI) in 2004, why has the country not been able to address the resource wealth–poverty dilemma? Is it that the EITI’s governance model is too Western to address Nigeria’s resource curse? It has been established that a country’s propensity to integrate EITI principles in the oil industry is largely dependent not only on the existence of institutions, but also on the level of institutional development. Norway and Nigeria both created policy and regulatory systems. Norway’s more competent administrative structures grew into a self-regulatory system but, by contrast, Nigeria’s indigenous civil service never developed institutional arrangements sufficient to integrate the oil industry into the entire national or regional institutional framework. Considering these historical and contextual differences between Nigeria and Norway, this article employs ‘stakeholder analysis’ to construct a framework of ‘thinking’ regarding how the oil sector could be effectively governed in Nigeria (Figure 7), a country with a robust civil society but a complex political system: in such countries, evolution of what I call a ‘self-reinforcing system of institutional incompatibility’ is inevitable, but institutionalization of foreign models such as EITI is often difficult to achieve.
期刊介绍:
Africa Review is an interdisciplinary academic journal of the African Studies Association of India (ASA India) and focuses on theoretical, historical, literary and developmental enquiries related to African affairs. The central aim of the journal is to promote a scholarly understanding of developments and change in Africa, publishing both original scholarship on developments in individual countries as well as comparative analyses examining the wider region. The journal serves the full spectrum of social science disciplinary communities, including anthropology, archaeology, history, law, sociology, demography, development studies, economics, education, gender studies, industrial relations, literature, politics and urban studies.