The Niger Delta militancy ravaged the Nigerian upstream petroleum sector between 2004-2009, bringing it to a standstill. In response, the Nigerian state adopted an amnesty policy―a globally recognized tool for conflict resolution and peacebuilding―to protect the sector and the economy from collapse. Little is known, however, about the unintended consequences of the amnesty implementation for the Nigerian upstream petroleum sector. Thus, the purpose of this study was to fill this gap in the research literature on the Niger Delta amnesty program. Polarity management was the conceptual framework applied; relative deprivation and polarities of democracy constituted the theoretical foundation for this qualitative case study. Face-to-face interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with 29 purposefully selected participants from the senior ranks of the petroleum industry, sector trade unions, relevant government agencies, and a regional university. Data were inductively coded as part of content analysis, the data analysis strategy. Participants viewed the amnesty policy as being poorly conceived and implemented due to the many unintended negative consequences arising from the policy implementation. The key finding from the study indicates that both the sector and the Niger Delta region are worse off post the amnesty policy implementation. The study concludes that by adopting and implementing the study recommendations, stakeholders may be able to mitigate the identified unintended consequences, position the Nigerian upstream petroleum sector for sustainable growth, address the root causes of the militancy, and deliver a positive social change for the residents of Niger Delta.

The disposal of waste from agricultural activities has been recognised as a source of environmental contamination by endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). The New Zealand dairy industry produces a large volume of dairy farm effluent, which contains EDCs in the form of estrogens. Most of this dairy farm effluent is applied onto the land for disposal. Groundwater and soil contamination by estrogens following waste application on the land have been reported overseas, but our understanding of the processes and factors governing the fate of estrogens in the soil is poor. Therefore the main goal of the present study was to better understand the fate and transport of estrogens, in particular 17β-estradiol (E2) and estrone (E1) in soil. In order to quantify E1 and E2 in drainage water and soil samples, chemical analysis by gas-chromatography mass-spectrometry (GC-MS) was carried out. This included sample extraction, sample clean-up through silica gel and gel permeation chromatography, and sample extract derivatisation prior to analysis. In order to develop a reliable method to extract estrogens from soil, research was conducted to optimise E1 and E2 extraction conditions by adjusting the number of sonication and shaking events, as well as the volume and type of solvent. Among five solvents and solvent mixtures tested, the best recovery on spiked and aged soil was obtained using an isopropanol/water (1:1) mix. A microcosm experiment was carried out to determine the dissipation rates of E2 and E1, at 8°C and at field capacity, in the Templeton soil sampled at two different depths (5-10 cm and 30-35 cm). The dissipation rates decreased with time and half-life values of 0.6-0.8 d for E1 and 0.3-0.4 d for E2 were found for the two depths studied. A field transport experiment was also carried out in winter, over three months, by applying dairy farm effluent spiked with estrogens onto undisturbed Templeton soil lysimeters (50 cm in diameter and 70 cm deep). The hormones were applied in dairy farm effluent at 120 mg m⁻² for E2 and 137 mg m⁻² for E1. The results of the transport experiment showed that in the presence of preferential/macropore flow pathways 0.3-0.7% of E2 and 8-13% of E1 was recovered in the leachate at the bottom of the lysimeters after 3 months, and 1-7% of the recovered E2 and 3-54% of the recovered E1 was leached within 2 days of application. These results suggest that leaching of estrogens via preferential/macropore flow pathways is the greatest concern for groundwater contamination. In the absence of preferential/macropore flow pathways, a significant amount (> 99.94%) of both hormones dissipated in the top 70 cm of soil, due to sorption and rapid biodegradation. Surprisingly, in all cases, estrogen breakthrough occurred before that of an inert tracer (bromide). This could not be explained by the advection-dispersion transport of estrogens, nor by their presence as antecedent concentrations in the soil. It was therefore suggested that colloidal enhanced transport of estrogens was responsible for the earlier breakthrough of estrogens and caused the leaching of a fraction of the applied estrogens to a soil depth of 70 cm. A two-phase model, adapted from a state-space mixing cell model, was built to describe the observed estrogen transport processes under transient flow. The model takes into account 3 transport processes namely, advection-dispersion, preferential/macropore flow and colloidal enhanced transport. This model was able to successfully describe the estrogen transport observed from the lysimeters.

Universally complications exist concerning insurance cover for the risks posed by pollution damage. Environmental insurance cover can be procured under first-party or third-party insurance. For the latter, the polluter's statutory or civil liability is required. The determination of liability for compensation, especially delictual liability, remains problematic. The right to the environment in section 24 of the Constitution creates a general duty of care. The introduction of a strict liability regime can be recommended to alleviate the burden of proving fault and contributory negligence. Where there is multiple or cumulative causation or the exact identity of the polluter is unknown, potential solutions regarding the allocation of liability include a pollution-share, joint and several, market-share or, as a last resort, a proportional allocation. Actionable damages should include property damage, pure economic loss, clean-up costs and natural resource damages, including compensation for reduced aesthetic value. Due to the uncertainty and potential magnitude of pollution-related claims, insurers have attempted to avoid or limit these risks by including specific pollution exclusion and limitation clauses in policies. Statutory regulation of policy content and prescribed wording for clauses could address problems relating to the interpretation of policy provisions. Various other issues such as the coverage of gradual pollution, the effect of the various triggers of coverage and the potential long-tail liability of insurer, the lack of information and the unpredictability of the risk cause further complications for both the insured and the insurer. Policies should preferably be issued on a `claims-made' basis linked to retroactive dates. Mandatory third-party insurance to the benefit of a third party should be required within specific high-risk industries, specifically for the benefit of the prejudiced person or an environmental remediation fund. The right of a prejudiced party to claim directly from the polluter's liability insurer should be introduced. Currently, the focus appears to be more on protection and environmental remediation than on civil compensation. There is an urgent need for the development of statutory and civil liability compensation mechanisms and for an increased regulation of insurance policies and practices to ensure effective insurance cover to provide compensation for environmental damage. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.

Universally complications exist concerning insurance cover for the risks posed by pollution damage. Environmental insurance cover can be procured under first-party or third-party insurance. For the latter, the polluter's statutory or civil liability is required. The determination of liability for compensation, especially delictual liability, remains problematic. The right to the environment in section 24 of the Constitution creates a general duty of care. The introduction of a strict liability regime can be recommended to alleviate the burden of proving fault and contributory negligence. Where there is multiple or cumulative causation or the exact identity of the polluter is unknown, potential solutions regarding the allocation of liability include a pollution-share, joint and several, market-share or, as a last resort, a proportional allocation. Actionable damages should include property damage, pure economic loss, clean-up costs and natural resource damages, including compensation for reduced aesthetic value. Due to the uncertainty and potential magnitude of pollution-related claims, insurers have attempted to avoid or limit these risks by including specific pollution exclusion and limitation clauses in policies. Statutory regulation of policy content and prescribed wording for clauses could address problems relating to the interpretation of policy provisions. Various other issues such as the coverage of gradual pollution, the effect of the various triggers of coverage and the potential long-tail liability of insurer, the lack of information and the unpredictability of the risk cause further complications for both the insured and the insurer. Policies should preferably be issued on a `claims-made' basis linked to retroactive dates. Mandatory third-party insurance to the benefit of a third party should be required within specific high-risk industries, specifically for the benefit of the prejudiced person or an environmental remediation fund. The right of a prejudiced party to claim directly from the polluter's liability insurer should be introduced. Currently, the focus appears to be more on protection and environmental remediation than on civil compensation. There is an urgent need for the development of statutory and civil liability compensation mechanisms and for an increased regulation of insurance policies and practices to ensure effective insurance cover to provide compensation for environmental damage. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.