Climate Change, Poverty and Public Policy in Nigeria’s Niger Delta:
The Role of Local communities1
Fidelis Allen
Abstract
Climate change has adverse implications for low-income communities. Like most of Africa,
Nigeria does not seem prepared to deal with either adaptation or mitigation (even from
notorious gas flaring in the Niger Delta). This paper highlights the relationship between
climate change and poverty, and explores how communities are contributing to public policy,
arguing that with Nigeria’s delta governments at the local, state and federal levels’
unwillingness or weakness to develop comprehensive climate change policies to enhance
adaptation and ensure mitigation, local communities must find a responsible role to play
through organising, awareness creation and effective demand on government to fight climate
change.
Introduction
Climate change is a global reality, affecting humanity, changing weather events, threatening
the existence of natural species of non-human life and cooking the earth at alarming
proportions. It is one of the most troubling development issues of our time of which
international and national public policy actors must address with seriousness. As well
predicted, climate change will worsen poverty conditions of people in the vulnerable
communities of the developing world. It will make the challenge of fighting or reducing
poverty unachievable. As we will see, the Niger Delta is one exemplar of a region where the
visible impact of climate change is already present. Already, farming communities, fisher
folks, villagers and the general public in rural and city settlements have started to encounter
this reality, manifesting as unusual warmth in weather, deaths, diseases, hardship and so on.
1
Fidelis is a post-doctoral fellow of the UKZN School of Development Studies, a lecturer in the
University of Port Harcourt Department of Political and Administrative Studies. He obtained his
doctorate in Politics at UKZN. He was a recipient of a doctoral research award from the International
Development Research Centre to study implementation of oil-related environmental policy, and
government inertia and conflict in the Niger Delta. He is also a member of the Board of Ethnicity and
Politics Research Committee at the International Political Science Association and has been active in
the Nigerian Political Science Association.
Horrifying floods, storms, erosion and variations in rainfall are now before us as evidence.
The worry is how to contain the increasing level of global temperature. For now, it appears
that politicians in Africa, in fact, the global political and economic elites, cannot be trusted to
address this problem alone with the seriousness it requires to quickly reverse the changing
climate. Regarding the case of the Niger Dellta, the question arises as to what local
communities in the region --where oil companies, known to be key contributors to poverty
and global greenhouse gas emissions continue to violate the environment through gas flaring
and massive oil pollution -- are doing to get the governments of Nigeria to decisively
contribute to stemming the tide. This is in view of the notion that as relevant policy actors
with potential for influencing policy preferences and outcomes, the role of local communities
world-wide is important for a successful struggle for climate justice, something that is now
being promoted in other parts of the world by the global civil society. I then argue that the
Nigerian government is a late-comer in climate change policy with regards to adaptation and
mitigation. As such, local communities must integrate climate change issues within known
struggles for better life with governments and oil companies in the region, to the point of
ensuring a comprehensive public policy response that clearly outlines the social, political,
technological, cultural, educational and economic processes on which the attainment of
alternative systems that support human and non-human life rests, while discouraging all
forms of damage to the environment and atmosphere through pollution and emission of
greenhouse gases in the Niger Delta.
Climate Change
The myth around climate change has either disappeared or reduced to the point of norecognition, as the divide between cynics and adherents has thinned away significantly over
the last two decades, due to credible scientific clarity provided by climate scientists. This
clarity, reinforcing the reality of rising temperatures in the universe with diverse negative
results in the social, economic, political and environmental world of people, no doubt, is now
largely responsible for the expanding campaigns for appropriate policy response of
governments and the United Nations against causes of this problem -- mainly economic
activities of man – by widening global environmental groups and networks framing the issues
as that of climate justice. This development is serious enough to stir both local communities
and governments of nations around the world into responsible actions. Appropriate roles by
local communities whose governments have depended on the extraction of petroleum
resources and on the neo-liberal development models for national prosperity is necessary to
stem the already devastating social, economic and political consequences of climate change.
Already, recent report of United Nation’s Environment Programme (UNEP) on Ogoni
confirms an impending doom on the Niger Delta from oil company activities with regards to
their overall contribution to climate change problems which the scientific literature has
revealed time and again. Now, no one can in any measure of honesty or sincerity continue to
doubt this reality, except as an ideological or political instrumental process of projecting
barefaced interest of mindless neoliberalism.
This debate has been on for more than two decades and has turned from a mere scientific,
classified or technical issue to a public one because of the already existing anticipated
dangerous effects of change in weather events. Linking up with this debate is not only
necessary or required for pressing for massive global reduction of dangerous human activities
on the environment, it is needed for pushing for the right policy and behaviour that support
life and nature. To date, local communities in the Niger Delta have mainly canvassed for
development that seems devoid of climate change adaptation and mitigation measures with
revenues generated from the exploration and sale of oil (sometimes referred to as resource
control). Ironically, oil exploration and production is highly implicated in the massive
pollution of the environment in the Niger Delta and by scientific conclusions contribute
immensely to climate change.
Climate change is a global problem which has in the past two decades or so transformed from
being merely an issue that attracted a few climate change scientists and academics loyal to
neoliberals who thought that the problem was a fallacy or at best a misleading scientific idea.
Of course, over time, as earlier noted, a controversial divide between those who saw climate
change, causes and effects on humanity or welfare of citizens as illogical, and those who saw
it as a reality which the world must accept and systematically respond to by behaviour and
policy has pushed the debate forward and increased its importance with regards to its social,
environmental, political, economic and conflict implications at multilateral and national
levels for many nations. It is interesting to note that the controversy fed a gap in public
awareness and appreciation of the link between climate change, poverty and public policy at
the national level and may have been partly responsible for the current inadequate response of
the Nigerian state to the risk of climate change for the world and local communities in the
Niger Delta.
Apparently, it has had extensive implications for the poor for which national or local
governments and local communities must play a role in tackling. This link has been drawn by
scholars, activists and acknowledged by governments around the world. But, like several
other countries in Africa, Nigeria does not seem prepared (even with notorious oil and gas
pollution of the environment by oil companies in the Niger Delta) to deal with the problem of
climate change with regards to adaptation and mitigation (See for example, Uyigue and
Ogbeibu 2007; Zabbey and King 2000). Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to
demonstrate the link between climate change, poverty and public policy in Nigeria’s delta
region, with an eye on the role of local communities. This will be achieved by drawing from
experiences of my previous research, interviews and data obtained from secondary sources
and workshops on environmental issues in the Niger Delta.
Rising trend in global temperatures have long been observed by scholars (See for example
Hensen et al 2006). As shown in Graph 1, between 1960 and 2000, the trend became even
sharper, suggesting a faster rate at which global temperature was rising. Now, we are even
told that all climate is local (Rosenzweig 2011: 7)), suggesting how affected everyone can be,
concerned every community should be about it and its impact, as sea level rises, floods
devastate communities and heat-waves reshuffle nature.
Graph 1: Global Temperature
Source: Hensen et al (2006)
Climate change means a long period of time in which a region experiences variation in
weather events. There is no standard time, but certainly it is sufficiently long, perhaps within
a range of 30-35 years in which specific attention is paid to the patterns of weather events,
episodes and extent of storms, cloud, rainfall, drought and so on (Zabbey and King 2007).
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defines climate change as any
change in the climate over time that may result from natural occurrences or human activities.
Its manifestations include modification in average weather conditions, variation in frequency
of rainfalls, rise in sea levels, deforestation, erosion and so on, and the extent to which these
events threaten life (Eboh, 2009). The IPCC was established by the World Meteorological
Organisation and the United Nations Environment Programme in 1988. It would appear that
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change remains the background
international policy direction for countries’ climate change policies. To further illustrate what
the IPCC means by climate change, one must note that weather conditions vary on a regular
basis, say from day to day. So also does the climate from year to year, sometimes without
notice by ordinary people except by climatologists. Nevertheless, climate change occurs
when these changes take the form of sustained patterns in weather conditions over fairly long
time (Anyadike 2009).
The theory of climate change as contained in the literature reviewed for this paper points to
three principal causes, namely: astronomical, volcanic eruptions, and human socio-economic
activities. Our focus is on the latter, accounting mainly for build-up of extensive carbon
dioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); Sulphure oxide (So2) and so on in the atmosphere. These are
greenhouse gases, chiefly responsible for global warming.
The North – USA, Europe and other big economic and industrial powers-- contribute great
amount of global greenhouse gas emissions, scientifically proven to be a major cause of
global warming. Developing countries like Nigeria with low adaptive capacity, poor
technologies, rising poverty and least ready for tackling climate change impacts remain major
victims (Ozor 2009).
As a result, Nigeria faces diverse climate related environmental challenges, including desert
encroachment, deforestation and drought as in some states (11 out of the 36 states) in the
northern part of the country. Flooding and threat of being swallowed by it due to rising sea
levels continue to associate with the coastal communities including the Niger Delta. For
instance, by 1985, deforestation, had eaten up about 1,544 sq miles of Nigeria’s land. Shortly,
in 2008, the late President, Umaru Musa Yar’ Adua announced during an Earth Summit that
the Nigerian government had spent or lost USD5.1 billion to reverse the trend of climate
change (Agwu and Okhimambe 2009). Presently, observable impact of climate change in
Nigeria includes: low agricultural productivity, deepening poverty; food insecurity; water
stress; death; unemployment; health problems and so on. The next section will elaborate.
Climate Change, Poverty, Public Policy
Climate change affects livelihoods, employment and sustainable economies. This is very
pronounced in the Niger Delta where coastal communities are seriously vulnerable to diverse
occurrences linked to climate change such as erosion, flooding, variation in rainfall,
occurring quite frequently. In October 2010, more than 5000 people, mainly rural dwellers,
were internally displaced in two communities in Sagbama and Kolokukuma/Opokuma local
government areas of Bayelsa State.2 Water overflowing from River Nun through swamps,
creeks, ground and tributaries, flooded the communities – Okorozi and Odi. Not only did
children stop going to school for weeks, farms and living houses, fishing settlements were
devastated. The one of 1997, as recalled by Mr. Owoupele Owuous, a youth leader in one of
the communities was even worse. Ironically, the Speaker of the Bayelsa State House of
Assembly, Nestor Binabo who visited the communities merely called on well meaning
citizens to assist the affected communities. One would imagine that as Speaker, he is number
three man in the state who should begin to think of tabling these issues in the context of
climate change in the House for discussion. To date, neither the Bayelsa State House of
Assembly nor any other state in Nigeria has done so.
Agriculture is a major victim. The community where I was born and grew as a child – Isua
Joinkrama in Rives State – provides a touching experience of the connection between climate
change and poverty. Floods are yearly events in Nigeria but in this case, regarding the coastal
communities and magnitude, they invade like enemy attackers in the night. It happens once in
about every decade and is usually devastating. The one of 1999 rendered people homeless
and worsened poverty. Not only did a good majority without alternative homes to relocate
were internally displaced (climate refugees) in communities far away, but had no food to live
on. Farms were devastated and sicknesses threatened to wipe out the very vulnerable who had
no support from the government or buoyant relatives.
2
See The Nigerian Voice (2010) Friday 22
There is no question that agriculture remains a major provider of employment for local
communities, although mainly at subsistence levels. Sustenance has long turned very difficult
for coastal communities of the Niger Delta. By all accounts, poverty in these communities
presents strong burden to community adaptive capacity to climate change.
Poverty in the region is basically human-induced, of which the oil industry has been
implicated through its massive oil pollution and regular flaring of gas. As at 2005, Nigeria
had over 600 oil fields, 5, 284 oil wells, 75 oil flow stations, 10 gas plants, 10 export
terminals, 1 liquified natural gas project and over 10,000 kilometers of oil pipelines
((Ikelegbe 2010: 26; Watts 2008). Oil companies, through this oil complex and processes
have long introduced severe burden of unproductive farming and fishing to the people and
produced a bloated and corrupt state system and governmental agencies, weak and unwilling
to respond adequately to the needs of the people. Instead, steady emissions of greenhouse
gases have continued with no known serious attempt by the government to curb, in the
interest of the climate. To date, even with the oil economy, agriculture remains the main
occupation of the rural population of the Niger Delta. But, whether as inadequate income,
poor consumption level, exclusion from the social, political and economic processes, poor
access to affordable health care and education, unemployment level, or underemployment,
incidence of poverty is high in the region (see table 1 and 2).
Table 1. Unemployment Rate on the basis of Geo-Political Zones in Nigeria
Zones
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
National
487.2
467.4
525.6
468.2
774.5
North
60.7
61.9
57.0
62.3
56.3
South
39.3
38.1
43.0
37.7
43.7
South-west
19.3
16.8
17.8
27.4
26.9
South-East
37.9
38.5
33.9
29.8
23.4
South-South
35.8
38.0
42.3
34.5
43.9
Source: Nigeria’s National Bureau of Statistics 2009
The framing of climate change impact as climate justice, from socio-economic, security,
political, technological and cultural perspectives in literature, by climate change nongovernmental actors clearly identify poverty as a key component. This is even more
pronounced as the global movement for climate justice prepares and mobilise for UNFCCC
COP17 holding in Durban November 28- 9 December 2011. Of course these issues are
interlinked, cutting across a range of human and environmental problems. Table 1 above on
levels of unemployment in the Niger Delta states serves the purpose of showing shifting
signals to the high incidence of poverty in the Niger Delta, christened as South-South region
of Nigeria.
As earlier noted, specifically, climate change impact in the Niger Delta manifests in several
ways including: coastal erosion and floods; flooding; variation in rainfall patterns; loss of
livelihoods; conflict and so on. The social consequences are even more alarming. This is
more like saying that the IPCC’s linking of rising sea level to climate change has been truly
reflected in the experiences of the region. Between 1960 and 1970, barely a decade, the
coastal communities in Nigeria experienced 0.462m rise in sea levels (Uyigue 2007). This is
responsible for increasing cases of erosion of farmlands and human settlements. By rough
estimates, this will worsen by the year 2100 with a meter rise in sea levels, of which more
than 15,000 square kilometres of land are expected to be lost to erosion. There is every reason
to believe this estimate as the trend shown in Graph 1 below points, similarly, to rising level
of global ocean temperature and loss of land. It is further estimated that more than 80 per cent
of people in the region will be displaced by that year, while Nigeria will lose about US$9
billion. Already, the impact on livelihood and human settlements in the region remain
deplorable. Total land loss due to increasing erosion estimated under different climate change
scenarios of rise in sea level is alarming as shown in table 2 below. Again, Graph 2 aligns
with data in table 2 for the fact that both capture the same trend, time in sea pressure or rise
and loss of land, although the former is specific to the Niger Delta.
Graph 2: Global Land-Ocean Temperature Index
Source: Hensen et al (2006)
Table 2: Total land loss (Km2) due to coastal erosion estimated from different scenarios of
sea level.
Low Estimate
High Estimate
Rise in sea level
Niger Delta
0.2m
0.5m
1.0m
2.0m
0.2m
0.5m
1.0m
2.0m
2,846
7,453
7,453
15,125
2,865
7,500
15,332
18,803
Source: Uyigue (2007)
The above scenarios spell danger for the farming communities of the coastal areas of the
region, who are certainly not prepared to cope with impacts of climate change. As earlier
noted, flooding and erosion are major, compounding the problem of survival for the 31
million people of the region, such that farming and fishing, which are the main occupations
of rural dwellers, have declined greatly. Variation in patterns of rainfall has further
compounded the problem. Agriculture in this part of the world is predominantly rain-fed. But,
rainfall has become unpredictable since the beginning of the 1960s, such that farmers who
depend on it to start planting, say in March being the dry season, expect the first phase of
seasonal rains in April to wet the soil. This is expected to continue until July-August when
some break is observed, thereafter comes the second phase of the season. This is to say that
rainfall is expected to start and end towards the end of September to give way to the dry
season which begins sometime in October. This trend has changed, making it difficult for
farmers to access rainfall during farming seasons. The net result includes food insecurity,
hunger, poverty and local adaptation measures that hardly yield good results for alternative
means of livelihood. Change of occupation, internal migration, use of locally fabricated
pedestrian bridge to cope with flooding, youth engagement in criminal activities and service
to local political leaders for money, as well as involvement in oil bunkery are some of the
main adaptive measures taken. These experiences have fuelled campaigns by the civil society
and non-governmental organisations, including ethnic mobilisations led by Ogoni
environmentalist, late Ken Saro Wiwa, against the Nigerian state and oil companies who have
been linked to various oil-related environmental problems resulting from activities of the
global oil industry for which Nigeria has been highly implicated, even by the failure of the oil
companies and Nigerian governments to use huge amount of money generated from
exploration and sale of the oil to address the consequences of change in the environment and
damage caused by activities of the oil companies. This social disorder, unemployment,
poverty and so on in the region, might as well have been the multiplier effects on the
unrestrained years of degradation of the environment by big polluters like those in the oil
industry for which public policy is required to address in order to save the earth from a final
cataclysm (Eregha and Irughe (2009: 160). The next section gives some details on the role of
the oil industry in this discourse.
The Oil Factor
Despite 50 years of mining oil, generating over US$600 billion by oil companies in joint
venture with the Nigerian federal government, social and economic conditions of the people
of the Niger Delta have not improved. Instead, it gave birth to a very corrupt state, with
interest in constructing and maintaining economic, social and political institutions that have
to make the oil industry sustainable in order to depend on it for funding. The net result has
been decades of damage to the environment through regular oil spillages and gas flaring by
oil companies. Currently, Nigeria flares more gas than any other oil producing country in the
world. From the background of the environmental consequences of oil company activities,
underdevelopment and difficult living conditions amidst the so called oil wealth, developed
various theses, such as Affluence versus Affliction; Paradox of Plenty; Resource Curse and so
on in the analyses of oil-related issues in the Niger Delta (Ibeanu 2008). For example, as
Ibeanu notes
...Niger Delta’s poverty is in part the consequence of oil production, especially in the
environmental consequences, which have destroyed livelihoods by destroying
farmland and fishing waters.
More than 30million barrels of oil were spilled in Ogoniland in 1970 alone. Substances
(metals) dangerous to human health such as cadmium, mecury, lead and chromium that cause
damage to effective functioning of human metabolism are constantly discharged from oil
refineries into fresh water and farmland in the region. Sadly, food crops are able to absorb
these substances, including fish which is able to store the substances in its brain and move
around until it is caught and eaten by man. This way, metals are easily transferred to man,
causing serious health damage to human metabolic activity. Between 1985 and 1993 when
Shell pulled out of Ogoni as a result of the crisis there, over 5,352 barrels of oil, scattered in
87 cases had spilled in Ogoniland. In three seminars held with participants from Ogoniland
and other oil producing communities in Rivers, Bayelsa and Delta states in 2009, 2010 and
2011 which I facilitated, issues raised which reinforced grievances against oil companies in
Nigeria’s delta region include: damage to the ecosystem; underdevelopment; poverty, social
and political exclusion of these communities. They do not only feel cheated, mistreated,
oppressed
and abused,
the issues
are
framed as
environmental
injustice and
underdevelopment. It does not quite matter that climate change is not common in their
language, the incidence of climate change impact itself is a complex web of socio-economic
and political dynamics that sustain practices that pollute the atmosphere while generating
wealth for industries and their sidekicks in government.
Public Policy
The Nigerian government is a late-comer when it comes to climate change policy, in national
combat of climate change. Tackling the problem – adaptation and mitigation -- have come
seriously on the political agenda of politics but politicians have remained basically reserved.
Despite its direct and indirect manifestations through decline in health, economy and
livelihoods of people in the region, politicians seem only at best, able to have commended the
North’s tricky market fix which treat the issue from the point of levity, and by so doing have
been more concerned about economic growth than development. The Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, in a recent report argues that global greenhouse gas emissions
must reduce by at least 80 percent in order to keep temperatures below 2.O degrees Celsius
(Ujah 2009). Despite being the main culprits, signs following decisions and dispositions of
the industrialised countries show open lack of political will to follow through on binding
commitments for target reductions in greenhouse gas emissions as initiated in the Kyoto
Protocal. Subsequent UNFCCC Conferences of these countries –COPS -- especially ones of
2009 (Copenhagen) and 2010 (Cancun) have clearly shown that the industrialised countries
are unwilling to tackle the threats of climate change with the seriousness it deserves as they
have mainly rested their policy responses on voluntary regimes. It appears that these
countries have formed a “fossil fuel oligarchy” with their sidekicks in national political
spaces of the developing countries and multinational business world to frustrate the desire of
the mass of global citizens who want the earth protected from greenhouse gas emissions,
from dangerous activities of fossil fuel energy companies.
Incidentally, it would appear that there are a number of climate-related laws in Nigeria that
might be useful for fighting climate change in the Niger Delta. For example, in Chapter 2,
Article 28, of the 1999 Constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria “the state shall protect
and improve the environment and safeguard the water, air and land, forests and wildlife of
Nigeria.” By implication, this puts the burden of proactive actions in protecting the
environment in the Niger Delta on governments at the local, state and federal levels. Sadly,
this has not been invoked by any levels of the government to address climate change issues.
There are several other related laws and regulations as shown below.
Table 3. Some Climate Change Related Environmental Laws and Regulations Awaiting
Federal Government Gazetting in Nigeria.
1.
The Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999
2.
Federal Environmental Protection Agency, FEPA
3.
National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency
(NESREA)
4.
Water Resources Act of 1993.
5.
National Park Services Act of 2004.
6.
Endangered Species (Control of International Trade and Traffic) Act 2004.
Regulations facilitated by NESREA for gazetting by the federal government.
1.
Watershed, Mountainous, Hilly and Catchment Areas Regulations of 2009.
2.
Wetlands, River Banks and lake Shores Regulations of 2009.
3.
Ozone Layer Protection Regulations of 2009.
4.
Desertification Control and Drought Mitigation Regulations of 2010.
5.
Soil Erosion and Flood Control Regulation 2010.
6.
Coastal and Marine Area Protection Regulation 2010.
7.
Control of Bush Forest Fire and Open Burning Regulations 2010.
8.
Surface and Ground Water Quality Control Regulations 2010.
The Federal Environmental Protection Agency, FEPA, the first institutional manifestation of
environmental concern in Nigeria, had responsibility for protecting the environment in
Nigeria, but was soon integrated with the Federal Ministry of Environment. In its short time
of existence, climate change issues were marginally considered within its operations. This
was understandable as there was no formal framework within its operations, even though
climate change remains largely part of the frame of environmental issues. But much more, is
the fact that climate change is beyond mere environmental concern, encompassing diverse
socio-economic and political wellbeing of society.
The National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA)
was established by an Act in 2007 as an agency of the Federal Ministry of Environment to
oversee enforcement of all environmental laws, policies and regulations and standards meant
to protect people and the environment in Nigeria. It has responsibility to ensure sustainable
extraction of natural resources, conservation of biodiversity and use of proper technology for
adequate protection of the environment in Nigeria. At the national level, this role can be
exploited to pursue massive reduction of greenhouse gas emissions which have contributed to
global climate change. But one continues to wonder what could be hindering it from pursuing
such goals vigorously. Again, this may not be unconnected with the way the Nigerian state
has been wired to protect its source of national revenue –oil – by those it is supposed to
regulate and extract compliance to relevant environmental laws.
NESREA’s effort at ensuring gazette of various regulations considered to be climate change
impact related is commendable, given the objectives of some of the regulations. For example,
Watershed, Mountainous, Hilly and Catchment Areas Regulations of 2009 is intended to
regulate economic activities in order to ensure best practice in mountains and hilly areas that
are fragile and sensitive to climate change impact. Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores
Regulations of 2009 has objectives of conserving, and ensuring good use of wetlands and
their resources, control of water catchment and flood and minimizing of pollution for the
purpose of tourism and ecological habitation of species and fauna and flaura. The Ozone
Layer Protection Regulations seem even more useful for addressing climate change with its
objective of prohibition of production and utilization of ozone-depleting substances such as
greenhouse gases.
Regarding regulations directly related to adaptation to climate change impact, now before the
federal government for gazetting include: the Desertification Control and Drought Mitigation
Regulation of 2010. This regulation clearly mentions climate change in its objectives, to
ensure 25 per cent forest cover as a way of improving the adaptive capacity against climate
change impact by ensuring sustainable agricultural practice, addressing poverty and
preserving livelihoods of local communities in areas prone to climate change impact. The
regulation also aims to encourage use of modern technologies in the practice of agriculture in
order to improve yields of which the problem of food insecurity would be less troubling as
climate change impact frills (Oladipo 2010). Soil, Erosion and Flood Control Regulation
2010, tackles protection of human life and the environment, through reduction in erosion
related losses and regulation of distribution of land. Its work includes helping to avoid
pollution of water and build up of sediments accelerated by erosion and flooding. Coastal
and Marine Area Protection Regulation 2010 is perhaps one of the most suitable for
addressing climate change issues in the coastal communities of the Niger Delta; whereas
fighting emission of gaseous substances through burning of bush or forest fire will be handled
with implementation of the Control of Bush Forest Fire and Open Burning Regulations 2010.
Despite existing environmental laws and regulations Nigeria is yet to make appreciable mark
in addressing climate change impact in the Nigeria’s delta with regard to adaptation and
mitigation. The basic problem though, is that these policies or laws are neoliberal in nature
and promote rather than discourage fossil fuel industrial activities. By the nature of
neoliberalism even the laws and policies must meet basic requirement of unrestricted
activities of the private sector. In most cases, foreign investors indirectly design such laws to
ensure protection of their interests. Nigeria does not yet have a comprehensive climate
change policy that focuses on adaptation and mitigation. None of the regulations mentioned is
intended to comprehensively handle adaptation and mitigation of climate change impact in
the coastal communities, let alone Nigeria. It would appear that any policy meant to handle
the climate problem as it affects the Niger Delta is needed. Far from it. A comprehensive
policy that will not short-change the interest of the environment and socio-economic
wellbeing of the people is needed. Such a policy will depart from the business as usual
practice of government seeing the oil companies as source of revenue for Nigeria as the
emphasis will shift from fossil fuel production to an alternative regime that depends on
renewable energy. Such a policy will promote modest growth of the economy to harmonise
with nature and give attention to implications of every economic activity to the depletion of
the ozone-layer. Such a policy will promote employment through provision of climate jobs
and will de-emphasize over-consumption which the rich capitalist class is known for. It then
encourages minimal levels of consumption sufficient for living well in the Nigerian society.
The value of agriculture would have been more than doubled for such society as use of
relevant technology and ecological integrity will be part of the entire process. The flaring of
gas and oil pollution by oil companies would have gradually reduced or eliminated
completely. It should tackle the problem of development of agriculture which is currently
hindered. The overall gain for the climate will be gain for the Niger Delta people who are
currently under threats from seasonal rise in water from the ocean through flooding. How
might this policy be? The next section explains some of the challenges in the way on the
basis of which rural dwellers and local community groups must find a responsible role to
play.
Challenge for Policy
It was only in the month of April 2010 that the House of Representative Committee on
Climate Change convened a roundtable of professionals to give direction to a climate change
policy in Nigeria. Again, this is a wrong approach—market approach.3 One of the greatest
challenges facing the emergence of a comprehensive climate change policy is the market
approach of commodifying the environment which flows from the global economic capitalist
traditions of making every effort to make sure the growth economy survives. The rich people
and political class are threatened by the economic implications of a climate change policy
that threatens growth. Sadly, growth has never meant development or wellbeing for the mass
of people in developed nor emerging markets of the developing world. Sorrowfully, the cost
of growth with regards to climate change impact is sounding out very clearly against
everyone.
While such a policy should aim to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions to about
1.05 degrees Celsius as recommended by climate scientists in order to avoid the danger of a
boiling earth in the years ahead, one doubts the seriousness of the step taken whether the lawmakers have any sense of the risk ahead as characteristic of climate change cynics. Such a
policy should aim to also create strong institutional framework with command-and-control
powers over greenhouse gas emissions such as the one generated by burning of fossil fuels by
oil companies operating in the Niger Delta. Much more will be expected with regards to the
vulnerability and adaptive capacity of local communities which the law should incorporate as
components. Such a policy should aim at protecting the ecosystem and address the problem
of climate change implications of dependence on oil resources for national growth.
Nigeria’s institutional capacity to respond effectively to climate change is inadequate and
weak. Apart from the Special Climate Change Unit (SCCU) at the Federal Ministry of
Environment and the Climate Centre in Minna at the national level, there are no institutions
for combating climate change impact at the state and local government levels. Apparently,
Nigeria does not presently have the structure for climate change adaptation. In short, as yet,
Nigeria does not have a climate change policy which comprehensively addresses the socioeconomic consequences of change in weather patterns or of the effects such as extensive
flooding, deforestation, desertification and so on.
Climate change policy in Nigeria requires complete end to gas flaring, control of automobile
emissions, ban on machineries that emit gaseous and hazardous substances into the
atmosphere, effective check on burning of biomas by farmers, elimination of pollution
3
They were mainly consultants with profit making motives. A public good such as the climate cannot be
commodified and marketized as is being done at both the international and national policy levels.
through oil spillages, establishment of framework for alternative sources of energy such as
solar, biofuel, wind and mini hydros at all levels of government. Local and state
governments, as well as relevant agencies and commissions must be involved in the entire
process by formulating and implementing climate change laws, regulations that are based on
the contributions of the poor and those most affected by the problems of climate change
impact in Nigeria. Such policies and regulations must interlink sectorally and encourage
aforestation and planting of trees as part of a new culture of attaining the alternative
economic, socio-political and cultural life that is based on ecological sanity.
The biggest challenge is the character of the national political process and global economic
processes which deter effective and radical approaches to the issue of climate change.
What Role for Local Communities?
The sense of anger and mobilisation against oil companies for their destructive activities to
the environment and government neglect of oil producing communities by local communities
in the Niger Delta from the time of Isaac Adaka Boro in the 1960s to the 1990s have no
match in matters of climate change impact in the region. They engaged the Nigerian state
severally, turned violent at some point and secured for themselves international sympathy on
the key issues of development and damage to the environment pursued. These later informed
specific policy responses of the government such as the creation of the Oil Mineral Producing
Commission (OMPADEC); Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC); Niger Delta
Ministry and, improvement in revenue allocation from the Federation Account from 3 to 13
percent. They came because of series of agitation and struggles for change in the region, even
though one can hardly say the specific ways in which these institutions and policies of
government have influenced change in the region.
In a seminar held on 3 September 2011 at the Niger Delta Wetland Centre in Yenegoa,
Bayelsa state of Nigeria on the theme: Facing the Reality of Climate Change in the Coastal
Communities of the Niger Delta, participants, drawn mainly from the oil producing
communities and government functionaries of the region, called for an end to exploration of
oil until all oil-related polluted sites through oil spillages in the region have been properly
cleaned up. This rose from exposition on the link drawn between contributions of the oil
industry and climate change impact. They equally called for an end to gas flaring by oil
companies in the region. It was however not surprising that some participants initially lagged,
while government functionaries like law makers from State Houses of Assembly and local
government councils expressed limited awareness of the problem of climate change, even as
a serious policy problem for the Nigerian state. The seminar which was organised by Social
Action, Ogoni Solidarity Forum and the Centre for Global Nonviolence Nigeria speaks
volumes about the role that some non-governmental organisations have assumed over the past
six to seven years in raising awareness on the issues of climate change as a serious policy
problem in Nigeria.
At the forefront of this is Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth, working with
local oil and non-oil producing communities in Nigeria over various environmental problems
including climate change. ERA engages government officials at the Federal Ministry of
Environment and other government officials in policy oriented seminars and workshops on
climate change impact in Nigeria. There are a good number of other non-governmental
organisations involved in research on climate change issue, helping to in raise awareness on
the issue.
In July 2011, arising from a conference in Port Harcourt, organised by Kebetkache Women
Development Resource Centre under the leadership of Emem Okon, two hundred and fifty
women threatened to start mobilising youths and communities in the region against oil
companies if they fail to end gas flaring. They argued that the oil industry is responsible for
the change in climate, already affecting local communities negatively.
While it appears that a local environmental movement with climate justice as part of its
frame is now developing or at its formative stages in the Niger Delta, it is worthy of note that
as yet, the effort of the global community has not yielded significant result with regards to
measurable massive reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions except for the fact that
climate change has come seriously on the global political and policy agenda and declarations.
The global climate justice movement is active, but all climate is local, meaning that the
emerging local movement for climate justice should think both locally and globally in these
matters.
Emerging local climate justice group in the Niger Delta should to link up with the global
climate justice movement and press the local political system operators to respond to the
problem of climate change. This is urgent, as the government will not on its own, without
pressure, protect the environment from the gaseous emissions affecting the earth system. It is
true that this may be very difficult to achieve as it is even difficult to tell whether or not
sections of the global climate justice movement have not reconciled with capitalist strategies
of productive and consumption patterns that sustain the incidence of climate change impact
as the developed North devises escapist routes through market-based and voluntary
mechanisms of handling climate change threats. Patrick Bond calls it ‘climate capitalism.’ By
the way, it is now clear that carbon dioxide is number one greenhouse gas that warms the
earth and changes nature in ways that creates negative socio-economic, environmental and
political consequences especially for the poor in the developing world.
Knowing this truth, including the fact that the developed countries are unwilling to reduce
their greenhouse gas emissions at the rate required to save the planet, as they seek to maintain
lifestyles that run contrary to the climate and the poor, local communities, including farmers,
students, labour, rural dwellers should be actively mobilised to the stakes, so that it does not
take the government too long a time to pursue, not only policies that can help vulnerable
communities cope or adjust to the reality of climate change (adaptation) but also prevent
actions and behaviours responsible for change in the climate (mitigation).
At the multilateral levels of negotiations, the developed countries are manifesting this in their
behaviours despite their collective resolve in 1972 in Rio de Janero, Brazil and later in Kyoto,
to address the problem of climate change. Since Kyoto, there has been enough evidence to
show that the developed North is rather not prepared to comprehensively address the problem
of climate change. Ensuing Conferences of the Parties have shifted from the proposed legally
binding format that the Kyoto Protocol provided to voluntary non-legally binding strategies
master-minded by a few developed countries and compromised by a few aid-seeking
developing nations. As the next Conference of the Parties in Durban approaches, local
communities in the Niger Delta and anywhere else in the world where carbon dioxide is
emitted from sectors such as coal mining, oil and transport, must find the appropriate issues
to pursue beyond the mere demand for improved revenues from natural resource extraction.
Such issues must then inform politics with the local and national players. Apparently,
knowing that the binding Kyoto Protocol is a threat to the major greenhouse gas emitting
nations, and that a position that will complement the Copenhagen Accord by way of simply
seeking replacement is likely in Durban with the big polluters, local communities in the Niger
Delta should not fail to join the global climate justice movement to mobilise local social
movements to insist on what the science of climate change is saying about safe levels of
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions with ragards to the argument that temperature rise
must go down at least to 1.05 degrees Celsius (Bond 2010). The failure of the market fix
approach is distracting. They must put pressure on the Nigerian negotiators to ask for such
reductions and use of ‘comand and control’ mechanisms at the negotiations and by the
Nigerian state to move into a global post-carbon era.
In constructing a responsible role, it is worth noting that the seeming failure of states in the
North and South, with regards to climate change and poverty can partly by explained by the
nature of the political economy of poverty. Climate change issues are basically political as
much as economic. Who benefits from climate change? Certainly not the poor as climate
change itself is expected to worsen the living conditions of thousands of poor people in the
Niger Delta, not merely because livelihoods for these people are vulnerable, have depended
on the climatic conditions as farmers and fisher folks, but because local communities have
not understood the chronic nature of their poverty. Chronic in the sense that it can last all
through life if nothing is done about it from the point of review of their understanding of
poverty and second mobilising non-violently against socio-political and economic structures
that drive and sustain poverty. Coming out of it will not depend on policy alone but on the
understanding that poverty is equally a political problem that requires conscious mobilisation
and pressure.
Chronic poverty is the worse form of poverty which climate change orchestrates. In this
sense, poverty is more of a socio-political relationship that resists change (Bebbington 2007).
Local communities must move beyond accepted wisdom about poverty reduction strategies to
understanding the crucial role of the political economy of climate change politics in public
policy at the national and global levels. As properly conceptualised, chronic poverty is driven
and sustained by political forces whose interest might reflect in behaviour and policy of
which only the poor can consistently call for a change by mobilising to influence the content
and direction of policy. Traditional notions of poverty reduction will make only little sense in
the context of chronic poverty without the social mobilisation that challenges socio-political
and economic structures that drive and sustain poverty.
The idea of chronic poverty of local communities in the Niger Delta speaks volumes about
looking beyond mere economic matters to the bigger issues of socio-political relationships
that sustain climatic conditions that impact poor people, to understand those policies and
political processes that make climate change issues difficult to handle, and keep people poor
and unable to respond to consequent negative impacts. As Green and Hulme note, ‘poverty
reduction does not simply require “good” policy: it requires creating the capacity of poorer
people to influence and hold accountable, those who make policies’ (Green and Hulme
2005).
Having identified serious flaws with the ‘Conference of Parties’ since Kyoto, with regards to
the willingness of the parties to tackle the problem of climate change by reducing global
greenhouse gas emissions to as low as 1.5 degrees Celsius, 35,000 civil society activists
gathered in Cochabamba to design an agreement, now known as the ‘Peoples Agreement’ on
the right global and national policy path that nations should follow to tackle climate change
problems.
Local communities should link up with the global environmental movement by incorporating
these calls into their engagement with the Nigerian state over climate change impact with
regards to policy.
Specifically, communities can ask for a national reduction target in greenhouse gas emissions
by 2020. This can be achieved by drastic curtailing of investments in non-renewable energy,
while substantial public spending or investment in alternative energy sources – renewable
energy sources like solar, wind and mini hydro-power -- should begin. Best, press for
conservation, withdrawal from planned investment in nuclear energy by the federal
government and demand with vigour, decommodification of the environment, food security
and keeping the oil in the soil.
Conclusion
It makes substantial analytical sense to link climate change, poverty in the Niger Delta and
Public Policy in Nigeria. The effort shows that the Nigerian government is slow to making
climate change policy to enhance both adaptation and mitigation. As yet, there are no
political institutions at the state and local government levels to address the critical issue of
climate change impact. Massive gas flaring and oil spillages are continuing in the Niger
Delta. As potentially relevant policy actors, local communities should understand the
implications of all this and work towards getting the government to act correctly. First this
role should be embedded in the global environmental struggle for climate justice since
climate change itself is a global phenomenon although threatening the existence of all
including human and non-human life. The challenge therefore is for a non-violent consistent
engagement with the Nigerian state within the context of the understanding that chronic
poverty which more characterises the people of the Niger Delta is more of a socio-political
relationship that is difficult to change. What is required is social mobilisation that challenges
structures that drive climate change and sustain its impact in the Niger Delta.4 Clearly, failure
by government to establish a policy framework on climate change impact to guide actions
and policy at the local and state government levels challenges any assertion that the Nigerian
government is prepared to handle the threat of climate change in the delta region of Nigeria.
References
Anyadike, R. N.C. (2009) “Climate Change and Sustainable Development in Nigeria: Conceptual and
Empirical Issues” in African Institute of Applied Economics, Debating Policy Options for
National Development, Implications of Climate Change for Economic Growth and Sustainable
Development in Nigeria, Enugu: AIFAE, pp.13-18.
Agwu, J. and Okhimamhe, A.A. (2009) “Gender and Climate Change in Nigeria: A Study of Four
Communities in North-Central and South-Eastern Nigeria, Lagos: Heinrich Boll Stiftung.
Bebbington, A. (2007) “Social Movements and Politicization of Chronic Poverty” Development and
Change, 3(5), 793-818.
Bond, P. (2010) “From Renewed Climate Hope to Realizable Market Expectations” Business Day, 24,
December.
Eboh, E. (2009) “Introduction” in African Institute of Applied Economics, Debating Policy Options for
National Development, Implications of Climate Change for Economic Growth and Sustainable
Development in Nigeria, Enugu: AIFAE.
Eregha, P.B. and I. R. Irughe (2009) “Oil Induced Environmental Degradation in Nigeria’s Niger Delta:
The Multiplier Effect,” Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, Volume 11, No. 4.
Green, M. and D. Hulme (2005) ‘From Correlates and Characteristics to Causes: Thinking about
Poverty from a Chronic Poverty Perspective’, World Development 33(6): 867–79.
Hensen, J., M. Sato, R. Ruedy, K. Lo, D. W. Lea and M. Medina-Elizade (2006) “Global Temperature
Change” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sc. 103, September.
Ibeanu, O. (2008) “Affluence and Affliction; The Niger Delta as a Critique of Political Science in
Nigeria” An Inaugural Lecture of the University of Nigeria, Nsukka delivered on February 20.
Ikelegbe, Augustine, O. (2010) “Oil, Resources Conflicts and the Post-Conflict Transition in the Niger
Delta Region: Beyond the Amnesty”, CPED Monograph Series No. 3.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) Working Group 1: The Physical Basis of Climate
Change Report, Valencia, Spain: IPCC.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2001) Climate Change : Impacts Adaptation and
Vulnerability, Valencia, Spain: IPCC.
4
Now morribond, Act retained as CAP FIOLFN 2004- repealed in 2007 by NESREA Act of 2007.
Maxwell, Simon (2009) “The Meaning and Measurement of Poverty” Odi Poverty Briefing, 3
February.
Oladipo, E. (2010) “Towards Enhancing the Adaptive Capacity of Nigeria: A Review of he Country’s
State of Preparedness for Climate Change Adaptation,” Report submitted to Heinrich Boii
Foundation, Nigeria, September.
Ozor, N. (2009) “Implications of Climate Change for National Development : The Way Forward” in
African Institute of Applied Economics, Debating Policy Options for National Development,
Implications of Climate Change for Economic Growth and Sustainable Development in
Nigeria, Enugu: AIFAE.
Rosenzweig, C. (2011) “All Climate is Local: How Mayors Fight Global Warming,” Sci. Amer., 305, No.
3, 7-73
Ross, L.M. (2003) “Nigeria’s Oil Sector and the Poor,” prepared for the UK Department for
International Development, Nigeria, Drivers of Change Programme.
Ujah, O. (2009) “The Development Challenge of Climate Change and Impacts on Nigeria,” in African
Institute of Applied Economics, Debating Policy Options for National Development,
Implications of Climate Change for Economic Growth and Sustainable Development in
Nigeria, Enugu: AIFAE.
Uyigue, E. and Ogbeibu, A. E. (2007)”Climate Change and Poverty: Sustainable Approach in the Niger
Delta Region of Nigeria”www.2007amsterdamconference.org/Downloads/AC2007_UyigueOgbeibu.
pdf (Accessed 17 September, 2011).
Unigue, E. (2007) “Climate Change in the Niger Delta” Community Research and Development
Centre (CREDC) Nigeria. www.ciel.org/publications/climate/casestudy-Nigeria-Dec07.pdf (Accessed
on 17 September, 2011).
Watts, Micheal (2008) “The Rule of Oil: Petro-Politics and the Anatomy of an Insurgency”, presented
at International Conference on The Nigerian State, Oil Industry and the Niger Delta,
organised by the Department of Political Science, Niger Delta University in collaboration with
the University of Missouri Kensas City inYenagoa, March 11-13
Zabbey, N. and King, D. (2007) “ Climate Change and Flooding: Fate of Riverine Communities in the
Niger Delta,” paper presented at an interactive roundtable organised by Stakeholder
Democracy Network (SDN) in commemoration of World Environment Day, at SDN
Conference Room, Port Harcourt, on the 5th of June.