In recent times, greater emphasis has been placed on the need for good corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices that have the capacity to advance community development. It is essential to community growth, especially in developing countries where infrastructural developments are lacking (Idemudia, 2014; Imomotimi & Collins, 2014). CSR is ‘the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society’. In looking at the concept, Simon, Powers, and Gunnemann (1972) suggest that the conceptualization of business responsibility engagements must draw from the valuable distinction between two fundamental interests that underpin CSR obligations: the positive affirmative duties and the negative injunction duties. The positive affirmative duties require the pursuit of moral and social good, while negative injunction duties entail avoiding and correcting social injury caused by the corporation (Idemudia, 2008).
Purpose of the Paper
Existing literature on CSR acknowledges that national institutional contexts matter for how CSR is understood in distinct geographical settings. Nevertheless, institutional perspectives on CSR have, until recently, mostly overlooked areas of limited statehood. Areas of limited statehood mean those states that are unable to provide effective governance either within its territory or within a particular sector. A lot has been written about the CSR practices of non-state oil sector actors (corporations) in the Niger Delta area of Nigeria. Yet, none has looked at these social responsibility engagements from the angle of governance in ‘an area of limited statehood’. This paper, while looking at the governance practices of corporations in the area, argues that the oil sector in Nigeria qualifies as an area of limited statehood.
Findings/Conclusion/Recommendations
The research found that many inhabitants of the Niger Delta believe that the area clearly qualifies as an area of limited statehood. Fundamentally, while the state is not totally absent in the area, it does not have the ability to implement and enforce regulations over oil corporations. Additionally, the state lacks the legitimate monopoly over the means of violence (i.e., the ability to control and discipline erring actors) in the area. This weakness means that the state is unable to take proactive measures to adequately regulate the activities of the corporations. In this context, the idea that the Niger Delta region is an area of limited statehood is, thus, reinforced.
Even more importantly, the research found that while the corporations in the area have embarked on some business responsibility projects (the affirmative duties), they have largely ignored the negative injunction duties. Unfortunately, it is the latter duties that contribute meaningfully to the sustainable development of the Niger Delta communities. The underlying reason ultimately driving the CSR engagement of corporations in the Niger Delta (as it is for most developing countries) is that of corporate self-interest. The thinking is that majority of the projects performed by these corporations are mostly public relations “smoke screens,” employed to hide the fact that corporate activities undermine the Niger Delta ecosystem. Nevertheless, this is without prejudice to the argument that some host-communities may have high expectations which the corporations cannot fulfill.
The Anglo-American model of CSR in Nigeria appears utterly deficient in grasping indigenous challenges and ways of tackling them. Most corporations in the Niger Delta neither appreciate nor acknowledge host-communities’ peculiarities and local interpretations of CSR, but instead concentrate either on CSR directives from their home-countries or on CSR actions that are primarily aimed at the goal of profit maximization. Essentially, the governance intervention of non-state actors in the area does not allow for variety in its application, thus, resulting in a forceful legitimization of Western-oriented CSR. This fixation with Western values has arguably led to the inability of the social responsibility activities of corporations to contribute meaningfully to the development of the area.
The study recommends that multinational corporations in the Niger Delta review their current CSR practices to make them more effective. A CSR regime grounded in the neoliberal ideal imported from the West cannot, and does not, work, nor is it meaningful, in a developing country like Nigeria. Local peculiarities must be considered and the communities should be involved. Civil society organizations, activists and NGOs must ensure that oil corporations in the area are held accountable and that the applied CSR variant can have a meaningful impact on the communities.
References:
Idemudia, U. 2008. Conceptualising the CSR and development debate: Bridging existing analytical gap. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 29: 91-110.
Idemudia, U. 2014. Oil companies and sustainable community development in the Niger Delta, Nigeria: The issue of reciprocal responsibility and its implications for corporate citizenship theory and practice. Sustainable Development, 22: 177-187.
Imomotimi, E. K., & Collins, A. E. 2014. Corporate social responsibility and community development in the Niger Delta. Africology, 1: 1-12.
Simon, G. J., Powers, W. C., & Gunnemann, P. J. 1972. The responsibilities of corporations and their owners. In T. L. Beauchamp & N.E. Bowie (Eds.), Ethical theory and business (pp. 61-65). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Nwoke, U. 2021. (In)Effective Business Responsibility Engagements in Areas of Limited Statehood: Nigeria’s Oil Sector as a Case Study. Business and Society: 60 (7): 1606-1642.