Shell is an international company that has operated in Nigeria economic, politics and development for over 50 years. The company is responsible for numerous projects such as lighting and electric power to small businesses and the general population. The company has also created thousands of job, training and educating thousands of people. Shell has used millions of money collaborating with community development organizations and NGOs to strengthen, healthcare, education and provide educational training to the people. The company generated billions of dollars through export earnings and also provides the government with revenues.
Shell has been accused of taking part in the government military actions which has led to the killing of a nonviolent community, environmental activists, and human rights and the local villagers as well. Shell Company has also been blamed for taking part in oppressing the ethnic minorities. They have been implicated in promoting corruption and the enrichment of the powerful individuals and government officials. They are also viewed as key agents of the widespread degradation of the environment in wheat are identified as one of the biodiversity hotspots in the world. Operating in a nation that has experienced various changes in the government, and the shifts from the dictatorship of a military to the current democracy, Shell is subject to shifting economic, political and the popular current.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Ogoni and Shell Oil Company
Social, Political, Environmental and Economic Problems
The Ogoni live in the southeastern part of Nigeria in river state which is approximately 100 square kilometers. The Ogoni people are around 500000 in numbers, distributed in the six kingdoms. Numerous linguistic reports posit that these people settled in Ogoni nearly 2000 years ago. The Ogoni people were and still are toady involved in agriculture and fishing. They Ogoni argue that their land was formally known as the “breadbasket’ until the 1960s ( Boele et.al, 2001) . However, oil exploration in the Niger Delta led to numerous negative consequences to the Ogoni people. Numerous people living around the Niger Delta rely on fishing and agriculture for their survival. The oil and most notably the revenues rapidly subjugated the Nigerian economy and hence governing over the oil resources was a major affair for the Nigerian government.
Shell estimated that, since its start with oil production up to 1993 when it suspended its oil operation in Ogoni land nearly 634 barrels of oil were produced which are valued at US $5.2 billion. 79% of these profits were directed to the government through royalties, equity take and taxes. The dissemination of this oil wealth is a principal concern for the Ogoni as well as other subgroups in the Niger Delta ( Boele et.al, 2001) . The Ogoni people have never controlled the petroleum revenues directly. The federal government has always received the revenues, and its duty is redistributed among the states of the country. Initially, the Nigerian constitution had stipulated that 50% of the profits made by the oil activities would trickle to the regions responsible for oil production. Even though the oil company may have contributed to industrialization in the area, the Ogoni argued that their quality of life had not improved whatsoever ( Boele et.al, 2001) .
The Ogoni people felt the impacts of the oil production through the social and environmental costs. Initially, the communities were faced with seismic assessments and constructing jobs and later on the impacts of extraction of oil lie oil spills, leaks and gas flaring. The conflict between Shell Company and the Ogoni heightened in the1990s. The formula distribution of the revenues was federal government (55%), state government (32.5), local government (10%), funds for amelioration ecological challenges (1%), and Oil and Minerals Producing Areas Development Commission (OMPADEC) (1.5%). The body had the responsibility of channeling the funds, particularly to the oil generating communities ( Boele et.al, 2001) . Recently the figure was amplified to 3% and later to 13%.
Sadly these funds did not reach the oil producing communities because most of the money evaporated due to corruption and hence failed to trickle down to the Ogoni people and the other minorities’ communities. Additionally, no actual developments were realized, and some of the projects launched were often unsustainable. Hence the communities saw that this share in the oil revenues was decreasing gradually whereas other nonproducing majority communities, the federal government as well as the oil compares were growing wealthier. Apart from the pollution to the environment, the communities also felt the heavy pressure on the land in a country that is already densely populated in Africa (( Boele et.al, 2001) . Nonetheless, Shell claims that it only utilized 0.3% of the Niger Delta for its activities and its does believe that its operations have a substantial effect on land pressure.
The production of oil, oil installations and oil workers led to significant changes in the society such as migration of the oil workers into a region, the increasing prominence of the revenue in the economy and the growing prices in food. Additionally, temporary employment was especially destructive to the workers ( Boele et.al, 2001) . The youthful men were paid relatively high for little periods and hence their expenditures habits were altered. They copied the mainstream values which led to division detaching them from their people. The farm workers and the women recounted having being hit hard by the social and environmental issues of the oil production. They noticed their regions being seized for oil production and yet they did not receive adequate compensation and secure jobs.
They Ogoni claimed that Shell was causing devastating consequences to the environment from the inception of its activities in 1958 ( Boele et.al, 2001) . Shell responded to these accusations by stating that they had recognized the environmental problems, and it was devoted to handling them, but these problems were not devastating. The Ogoni pinpointed the outdated equipment used which were poorly maintained and which led to numerous spills over the years, Ogoni oil infrastructure was established in the 60s and 70s. Oil spills remain a major challenge and source of conflict in various communities and the company. Based on shell’s statistics, it pointed out the Ogoni actively contributed to the oil spills at 69% of the oil spills that occurred from 1989 to 1994 (( Boele et.al, 2001) . The figure was strongly disputed by the people because they highlighted that it was not logical for farming people to pollute their land for inadequate compensation that was highlighted by the shell company as their main motive.
In 1992, shell’s pipeline breach destroyed an entire river, and the spills occur in one week. The river provided the Ogoni people with a source of drinking water. Unfortunately the river was the only source of drinking water and as a result life in the river came to an end. Most of the farms that depended on the river were labeled as biological dead zones. Despite their poor maintenance and corrosion of the pipeline the shell official have argued that the pipelines are sabotaged. Therefore they do not take immediate measures to respond to the oil spills ( Idemudia, 2007) . The shell company causes 40% of the oils spills that occurred in the Niger Delta. In that note, the oil spills that occur in the Niger Delta are three times higher compared to any other spillage of the shells facility operating outside Nigeria. The Ogoni people view shell as a hindrance and a direct assault to both their ways of lives and their rights to life as well.
During the demonstrations, Shell collaborated with the Nigerian government after they sought assistance from “Mobile Police” which is recognized as a notorious police unit to handle the problem. Additionally, they presented the military with cars, boats, and weapons in what it was referred by one of the shell scientists as the militarization of commerce, many people lost their lives and housed were burned down. The Nigerian forces were targeting the Ogoni community which was involved in the protests against the shell. With no doubt, shell oil activities in the Delta shave contributed to extensive and significant degradation in the environment. Flaring is considered to be one of the cheapest ways of disposing of unwanted natural gasses while extracting oil. This is one of the major problems that Shell was facing during its oil extraction operation in Nigeria.
The flaring rate is remarkably high in Nigeria compared to other countries that exports oil. For instance, flaring makes up 76% of all the excess disposed gasses in Nigeria contrasted to Saudi Arabia (20%), Mexico (5%), and the Soviet Union (1.5%) and in the US (0.6%) ( Idemudia, 2007) . Flaring is a detrimental issue to the environment in various ways such as carbon dioxide and methane emissions into the atmosphere. These gasses cause global warming and additionally flaring has been recognized as a cause of acidic rain. These gasses flares out daily and they are a continuous challenge facing the Ogoni people. Based on studies from various scholars, the intense gasses and heat produced during these flares have impacts on the nearby home. They destroy food crops, and the make the farms barren and hence wasted ( Obi, 2009) . Moreover, these gasses are hazardous to the human beings.
The acidic rain produced denies the Ogoni people from drinking their rainwater and affects the crops severely as stunted growth is observed. The Ogoni people depend on these lands for survival and hence these harmful effects are destructive to the people. There are other ways of disposing of the natural gasses, but shell relies on flaring because it is the cheapest technique. Some laws limit the amount of flaring in industrialized nations, but unfortunately, Nigeria does not have these laws ( Opukri & Ibaba, 2008) . Shell has continued to claim that flaring does not have any effect on the Ogoni. Shell officials have even claimed that the Ogoni uses these flares to dry different crops, and thus they benefit from these flares.
Role Played by the Nigerian Military
The cooperation that exists between the military dictatorship and the oil companies was a concern that the Ogoni people experienced. From their perspective, the two destructive forces had combined to fulfill their interests. They claimed that the Nigerian military dictatorship relied on the oil money for survival and hence its violence was steered at oil generating regions such as Ogoni. They argued that the control of the military dictatorship in their areas through violence was a means of promoting the shell company to operate its activities without hindrance. Consequently, the Nigerian government and the shell company benefited from the oppression of the Ogoni. Essentially there is always a degree of cooperation required between the government and business. Nevertheless, the Ogoni argued that the collaboration between the company and the Nigerian government was more than a typical business association.
Shell was accused of assisting and seeking security forces interventions to confront the demonstration campaigns by the communities. Shell relied on the military protection and hence it was also responsible for the acts of violence committed by the military. The Nigerian forces and shell installation became intertwined in suppression of the marginalized groups in the oil generating areas. The Ogoni saw the partnerships as acts that were against their interests. Shell has attempted to invest in various community projects that have not been successful because the Ogoni feel that these developments are insufficient and they do not concentrate on the real problems that are the basis of division among the communities.
The Emergence of Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP)
A society that is characterized by frustration and dissatisfaction has a high tendency of new movements emerging to raise their issues and promote central vicissitudes in the social order. In Ogoni, a prominent and influential movement emerged known as MOSOP to bring to an end the alleged environmental degradation, economic strangulation, and political marginalization. The set Nigerian political scheme had failed, and the Ogoni were certain that they had no other alternatives but regress to a direct social action. MSOP decided to engage non-violent campaigns highlighting the struggles of the minority and their rights and social and ecological injustices ( Obi, 2010) . In 1990, MOSOP established the Ogoni Bill of right. The bill highlighted their loyalty to the government and pinpointed their right to autonomy and expressed their demands on environmental, social and economic justice.
The oil problem was the major concern in the Ogoni Bill of rights. Seven out of the twenty listed concerns highlighted oil exploration, the relative poverty, revenues distribution, disregard to the Ogoni in comparison with the oil resources produced. MOSOP became the major social movement which voiced the Ogoni demands which were expressed in the bill of rights. In 1992, Ken Saro-Wira, the spokesperson of MOSOP, gave the first global speech which articulated the troubles of the Ogoni directed to the UN working groups in the native populations (Obi, 2010). Consequently, a link was formed between Ogoni and the international allies regarding human rights and support of the indigenous groups worldwide. In 1993, the organization was approved as a member of the unrepresented countries and people organizations (UNPO). With their admission in UNPO, Ogoni got their first international media exposure from various international media channels such as time magazine and CNN. The international presses were happy to execute MOSOP allegations against Shell Company.
On December 1992, shell, chevron, and Nigerian national petroleum corporation were issued a demand notice by MOSOP. They were given 30 days to react to the list of demand which comprised of payment compensations for past impacts and damages of the oil operations. However, Shell and other oil companies did not react and hence they were considered ‘persona non grata” on 4th January 1993 by MOSOP and this day was marked the Ogoni day ( Mouawad, 2009) . Over 300000 people observed the year of indigenous people and no single incidence of violence were reported. Nevertheless “ Say No to Shell ‘could be heard in the rallies. Shell Company extracted all its personnel from Ogoni after an employee was supposedly beaten. The Ogoni denied that the staff was hurt, but they admitted that the company facilities were shut down.
The Nigerian government reacted to MOSOP with disturbing actions when the story of the Unite Nation broke out. A task force was established known as The Rivers State Internal Security Force that was meant to deal with the protesters. The task force used military over the regions of the Ogoni people. The military presence led to grave repercussions as more than 2000 civilians who were unarmed died and over 37 villages were destroying causing displacement of nearly 30,000 individuals. The clash was very intense as it forced the shell to close down its production activities in the Ogoni region.
Ken Saro-Wiwa who was the principal leader of MOSOP was seen as a threat to the Nigerian government and hence fabricated charges were raised against him and other associates ( Eweje, 2007) . They were sentenced for conspiracy to commit murder, and any independent witness was considered to be illegal. However later on it was identified that the witnesses who testified against Saro-Wiwa had been bribed. Even though a massive outrage from the world including a request from Nelson Mandela was aired out, Saro-Wiwa and eight associates were executed by hanging in November 1995.
Worldwide Protests against the shell company were felt especially from human right activists who accused the company of funding and collaborating with the Nigeria Security forced to practice their tortuous acts against the MOSOP leaders as well as the Ogoni people ( Mouawad, 2009) . They also failed to overturn the death sentences and hence the company receives a global contempt. Headlines appeared all over the world painting shell as callous and a follower of the Nigeria military dictators. Diverse publications depicted shell as a destructive company. Hence the company instituted various communication campaigns which comprised of several advertisements in prominent newspapers like the New York Times.
Nevertheless, the ethical responsibilities that had been raised could not be ignored. During the executions, the company had to defend itself by claiming that it had no connection with the executions and the oppression of the Ogoni people ( Mouawad, 2009) . The company has to defend itself consistently from criticism especially from the conservation groups, human activists and elite societies who did not want any connection with the company. In 1996 and 1997 during the annual general meeting of the shell company in the UK and Netherlands the company was asked to be more transparent about its environmental and social responsibilities.
The account of Shell oil operations in Nigeria and the problems faced by Ogoni offers various valuable lessons for an organization in quest of operating ethically and successfully in developing countries. The story depicts charisma and courage of Ken Saro-Wiwa in the fight for social and environmental justices. The plight of the Ogoni people might not have been known by the international communities especially the human right activists and the environmental protectionists if it were not for the bravery of Ken-Saro Wiwa. Shell Company committed social, political and environmental injustices to the Ogoni people. Shell Company earns million dollars through the production of oil in the Niger delta.
However the Ogoni have raised concerns that did not see major advantages rather the extraction of oil has adverse effects regarding environmental deterioration, underdevelopment and as a result, a fruitful national and worldwide campaign was launched against the company and the Nigerian government. Even though the campaign was not violent, the military actions caused thousands of deaths to the Ogoni, beaten, raped, exiled, detained and the principal leaders executed. As a result, the shell company pulled out from the land of Ogoni in 1993. Most of the concerns presented by the Ogoni in their efforts doer social and ecological justice against Shell company and the government are the need for a local sustainable development, community projects, distribution of the oil fortune, and environmental issues. However, the company has tried to internalize some lessons from these events. The company has changed its strategic business plan in connection with the rules of sustainable growth as well as the tactic to the stakeholder dialogue.
References
Boele, R., Fabig, H., & Wheeler, D. (2001). Shell, Nigeria and the Ogoni. A study in unsustainable development: I. The story of Shell, Nigeria and the Ogoni people–environment, economy, relationships: conflict and prospects for resolution1. Sustainable development , 9 (2), 74-86.
Boele, R., Fabig, H., & Wheeler, D. (2001). Shell, Nigeria and the Ogoni. A study in unsustainable development: II. Corporate social responsibility and ‘stakeholder management ’versus a rights‐based approach to sustainable development. Sustainable Development , 9 (3), 121-135.
Eweje, G. (2007). Multinational oil companies' CSR initiatives in Nigeria: The skepticism of stakeholders in host communities. Managerial Law , 49 (5/6), 218-235.
Idemudia, U. (2007). Community perceptions and expectations: reinventing the wheels of corporate social responsibility practices in the Nigerian oil industry. Business and Society Review , 112 (3), 369-405.
Mouawad, J. (2009). Shell to pay $15.5 million to settle Nigerian case. New York Times , 6 , B1.
Obi, C. (2009). Nigeria’s Niger Delta: Understanding the complex drivers of violent oil-related conflict. Africa Development , 34 (2).
Obi, C. I. (2010). Oil extraction, dispossession, resistance, and conflict in Nigeria's oil-rich Niger Delta. Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d'études du development , 30 (1-2), 219-236.
Opukri, C. O., & Ibaba, I. S. (2008). Oil induced environmental degradation and internal population displacement in the Nigeria’s Niger Delta. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa , 10 (1), 173-193.
