Post on 11-Feb-2022
Partnerships in the Oil and Gas Industry
B I O D I V E R S I T Y C A P A C I T Y B U I L D I N G
C L I M A T E C H A N G E C O M M U N I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T
F U E L S A N D T R A N S P O R T A T I O NH E A L T H
H U M A N R I G H T S O I L S P I L L R E S P O N S E
T R A N S P A R E N C Y
Partnerships in the Oil and Gas Industry
International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association5th Floor, 209–215 Blackfriars Road, London, SE1 8NL, United KingdomTelephone: +44 (0)20 7633 2388 Facsimile: +44 (0)20 7633 2389E-mail: info@ipieca.org Internet: www.ipieca.org
© IPIECA 2006. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without the prior consent of IPIECA.
The information in the case studies was accurate at the time of printing.
This publication is printed on paper manufactured from fibre obtained from sustainably grown softwood forests and bleached without any damage to the environment.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
1
Contents
Introduction 2
IPIECA Foreword 2Chris Morris, IPIECA General Secretary
A global business view 2Guy Sebban, Secretary General, International Chamber of Commerce
A partnership perspective 3Ros Tennyson, Director, Development Partnership Solutions—International Business Leaders Forum
Background and purpose of this publication 4
Sustainable development progress through partnerships 6
Benefits of working in partnership 8
Practical tips for effective partnerships 10
Key to the case studies: 14
Colour-coded matrix listing all 40 case studies by theme and title, and indicatingthe partners, geographical level, location and oil company involvement
The case studies: partnership in practice 16
Forty case studies of partnerships in the oil and gas industry, arranged by the following themes:
• Biodiversity 16
• Capacity building 32
• Climate change 48
• Community development 58
• Fuels and transportation 68
• Health 74
• Human rights 82
• Oil spill response 86
• Transparency 92
A guide to resources 97
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
Introduction
2
A global business view
Public-private initiatives have emerged as one of the most promising ways for oil and gas companies to develop
and to contribute to the Millennium Development goals, especially when operating in difficult environments in
undeveloped regions. More than 200 partnerships were struck in Johannesburg at the World Summit on
Sustainable Development in 2002, many involving companies from the oil and gas sector. These partnerships
are now bearing their first fruits.
Such initiatives bring a wide assortment of non-governmental and intra-governmental groups around the
same table with local government and energy executives. Business, governments and NGOs must cooperate, as
The past decade or so, particularly since
the World Summit on Sustainable
Development in 2002, has seen the
formation of a number of multi-
stakeholder partnerships to contribute
to sustainable development goals.
In this context, IPIECA decided to
compile a number of case studies to draw out the lessons
learned and explore the benefits and challenges of working in
partnership in the oil and gas industry. The case studies reflect a
growing recognition that oil and gas companies can better
achieve sustainable development goals by working with others.
Companies are indeed collaborating increasingly with a range of
partners including other business entities, government
agencies, non-governmental organizations, community-based
organizations, and academic research institutes.
Forty case studies, consisting of 32 company case studies and
8 industry-wide partnerships, highlight work in the areas of
biodiversity protection, climate change, air quality, oil spill
response, the provision of health care and education, and
community capacity building.
The 40 case studies offer an opportunity for oil and gas
companies to better understand the process of partnering. In
addition, the process of developing and writing the case studies
represented a learning journey for all involved. By working with
IPIECA Foreword
the Partnering Initiative on case study writing guidance, we were
able to ask the right questions to draw out a balanced voice of
the partners as well as tease out the learnings from the
partnering process.
The publication looks at how partnerships have evolved,
what can be learned about a collaborative process and what the
future of working in partnership might look like. Partnership
benefits include: stepping more rationally and safely into the
field of sustainable development; delivering higher quality
project outcomes; promoting the sustainability of projects; and
contributing to the communities within which the oil and gas
companies operate. Moreover, working in partnership is not
always an easy option and, in some cases, will not necessarily be
a unique solution.
A wealth of lessons are to be found throughout the 40 case
studies included in the publication; they comprise a body of
evidence that can usefully be analysed to inform other
collaborative efforts. We hope that all those who are, or are likely
to become, involved in a partnership will find this publication
useful, and we look forward to the oil and gas industry making a
continued contribution to sustainable development.
Chris Morris
IPIECA General Secretary
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
3
NGOs and governments are often the only organizations on the ground in least developed countries which
have credibility and in-depth local understanding. On the other hand, business is often the only source of
technological and managerial know-how, with financial means and access to a supply chain, that crucial
resources communities can now tap to achieve long-term, complex projects. Rebuilding after the 2004 Asian
tsunami is a case in point.
Partnerships offer one of the best ways for oil and gas companies to assure the sort of stable operating
environments necessary for underdeveloped areas to attract further investment and grow the local economy.
But forging a partnership among actors who have diverse interests is a major challenge for the workability
of this arrangement. It will take time and commitment by business, NGOs and governmental organizations to
build trust, essential to any long-term business relationship.
The first few years have shown there is scope to streamline and therefore to speed up the creation of these
arrangements. At the same time, there is also an ongoing need to share best practices, to ensure the ultimate
success and durability of the partnership model.
Guy Sebban
Secretary General, International
Chamber of Commerce
A partnership perspective
For more than 15 years, the Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum (IBLF) has been dedicated to
promoting responsible business practice by working together with business to evolve new mechanisms for
systematic business engagement in sustainable development. Increasingly such engagement has been through
the setting up and management of multi-sector partnerships—and some notable successes have been achieved.
It is a new and exciting paradigm, but it is rarely easy for partners to work in new ways with non-traditional
partners. This may be requiring approaches and skills that are well beyond their day-to-day business
relationships. It requires—on all sides—some radical re-thinking, a considerable investment of time, some
changes in behaviour and a willingness to take a level of risk in meeting old challenges in new ways.
The extractive industries have been—and continue to be—leaders in this field. There is only ever one reason
to enter into a cross-sector partnering arrangement: because you (as a sector or an organization) recognize that
you simply cannot achieve your sustainable development goals alone. This is the single driving force behind
successful partnerships and it is this that keeps good partnerships highly focused and highly productive.
However, there are characteristics that seem to underpin all effective cross-sector collaboration: a
commitment to partnering as a mutually beneficial arrangement; increasing openness and transparency in the
day-to-day working relationship; a sense of shared ‘ownership’ and engagement between partners; and a
willingness to build individual and organizational capacity to work across traditional sector boundaries.
We appreciate the way the oil and gas sector has engaged in a wide range of collaborative arrangements
with all sectors and feel confident that (as these case studies demonstrate) there are invaluable lessons not just
for the oil and gas industry but far beyond to other sectors that still lag quite far behind.
Ros Tennyson
Director, Development Partnership Solutions,
International Business Leaders Forum
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
The United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, held in Rio in 1992, initiated much
debate on the role of different actors in society. A key
message from this conference was that sustainable
development would only be achieved if all nations and
all sectors of society find effective means of working
together. The IPIECA publication, Technology
Cooperation and Capacity Building: Contribution to
Agenda 21 (produced in association with UNEP in
1994) picked up on this theme, highlighting an
evolution in oil and gas industry cooperation with
stakeholders: from being narrowly focused on
technology cooperation to embracing broader
sustainable development goals.
In 2002, the Johannesburg World Summit for
Sustainable Development (WSSD) recognized that
multi-stakeholder partnerships are essential for
implementing sustainable development goals.
Governments formally ‘endorsed’ the view that
business has a role to play and business agreed that
they were part of the solution. A report on the oil and
gas industry’s contribution to sustainable
development was published in 2002 in the joint
4
Background and purpose of this publication
Partnerships in the oil and gas industry—why, where, what and who
The OGP/IPIECA ‘WSSD Report’(published 2002)
The jointUNEP/IPIECApublication TechnologyCooperation andCapacity Building:Contribution toAgenda 21 shows howcooperation withstakeholders hasevolved to embracebroad sustainabledevelopment goals.
The joint OGP/IPIECA publicationThe oil and gas industry fromRio to Johannesburg andbeyond—Contributing tosustainable development (2002)demonstrates how the oil and gasindustry is helping to produce moreaffordable, accessible and cleanerenergy in ways which are responsibleand ethical, and within acceptablelimits of environmental impact.
OGP/IPIECA publication The oil and gas industry from
Rio to Johannesburg and beyond—contributing to
sustainable development (pictured on page 4).
The past decade has seen a step change in the
number of multi-stakeholder partnering initiatives in
the oil and gas industry. This publication consciously
adopts a broad understanding of the concept of multi-
stakeholder partnership to recognize the value that
can be brought by different variations on the
partnering set-up. In this context, the publication
explores partnerships that are variously research,
policy or product driven; that involve different
combinations of NGOs, governments, international
governmental organizations, community groups, and
oil and gas companies; that encompass varying
degrees of contractual obligation; and that span from
2 to 200 participants.
The 40 case studies that make up this publication
have been selected to reflect a diversity of experience
from 19 IPIECA member companies and associations, and
to cover a broad range of sustainability challenges and
themes. The partnerships were selected for their ability to
draw out the lessons that the partners learned through
their collaboration and to identify what key ingredients
may contribute to a partnership’s effectiveness.
Through recording the experiences of the partners,
this publication aims to document the progress that is
being made towards sustainability goals by the oil and
gas industry and its partners, and to explore how
partnering mechanisms have evolved during this
period. It is hoped that, through frank examination of
the partners’ lessons learned, this publication will
serve as a useful learning tool for others embarking on
multi-stakeholder partnerships.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
5
Case study development process
In order to explore the relationships in oil and gas industry partnerships, IPIECA decided to step away from
traditional approaches to case study collection—where an industry representative writes from his or her
own experience. IPIECA, in association with the Partnering Initiative*, designed a common framework for
writing the case studies and included sample questions to guide the case study writer through semi-
structured interviews with key stakeholders. The guidance encourages the writer to capture information on
the partnering process and to attempt a ‘balanced voice’ between the partners in portraying the partnering
experience. A copy of the guidance document can be found on the IPIECA website: www.ipieca.org.
Administering such a process was a new departure for IPIECA: one which brought its own challenges as
well as rewards. Following an initial review of the case studies, case study authors were encouraged to
reflect more deeply on the partnering process as well as project outcomes. On the whole, where external
consultants were appointed they were less likely to rely on previously recorded information about the
projects and had more time to contact key players and interview them with a neutral agenda.
Developing the case studies following this approach took longer than had first been anticipated but we
believe the extra effort was worthwhile, bringing real insights into the partnering relationship and
achievements. With a little extra support and prompting, the case study authors were able to draw
interesting and varied process lessons from their experiences.
* The Partnering Initiative is a global programme of the Prince of Wales InternationalBusiness Leaders Forum (IBLF) in association with the University of Cambridge Programmefor Industry. It focuses on developing and disseminating cutting-edge knowledge andmethodologies for effective cross-sector partnerships for sustainable development.
The case studies in this publication show
multi-stakeholder partnerships enabling
greater progress towards sustainable
development goals than could be achieved
by any of the partners acting alone.
The eight industry initiatives profiled
within this collection (in summary
opposite) reveal an extensive range of
objectives and achievements: from delivery
on technical targets (lead phase out, flaring
reduction) to innovative research and
development projects (carbon capture
project, ‘Well-to-Wheels’ study) to policy
collaboration (oil spill preparedness,
revenue transparency, human rights,
biodiversity). This impression is reinforced
by the 32 company partnerships included
in this publication (indicated opposite by
the broken lines).
The 40 case studies contained in this
publication are grouped into 9 main
themes and meet a range of challenges
from long-term global issues to an
assortment of more local socio-economic
concerns: healthcare, transport needs,
sustainable jobs and livelihoods, and
community development.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
Sustainable development progress through partnerships
6
Fuels and transportation
Biodiversity
Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles (PCFV)
In December 2005, the PCFV celebrated lead phase out in sub-Saharan Africa.This was a goal jointly set in 2001 by the partners(governments, automotive industry and the oil and gas sectors—represented by IPIECA) and jointly achieved through partnership, inrecognition that no one sector could individually bring about cleanerfuels in developing countries. UNEP support was instrumental to thesuccess of this partnership.
The Global Initiative (GI)
Since the launch of thepartnership in Africa in1995, 16 African countrieshave ratified the OPRCconvention.TheIMO/IPIECA GlobalInitiative is an umbrellaprogramme under which thepartners bring togetherrelevant national/regionalactors from both governmentand industry to develop andimplement sustainable oilspill contingency plans andpromote the ratification ofoil spill-related internationalconventions.
The Energy and BiodiversityInitiative (EBI)
The Energy and BiodiversityInitiative has developed a guidancetool for integrating biodiversityconservation into upstream oil and gasdevelopment that is broadly acceptedby industry and the NGOcommunity. Participation by bothNGOs and companies broughtcredibility to the partnership’s outputsin the eyes of both parties.
Oil spill response
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
7
Carbon Capture Project (CCP)
The CCP partnership enables industry experts to work with governmentagencies to develop technologies to reduce costs and improve efficiencies ofCO2 capture, and to demonstrate that storage can be safe and secure.Akey achievement of the partnership has been to integrate stakeholderdialogue into an advanced research and development project, and henceaddress some of the concerns of NGOs and policy makers.
Climate change
Health
Community development
The Voluntary Principles for Security and Human Rights (VPSHR)
The Voluntary Principles for Security and Human Rights partnership has enabledgovernment, industry and NGO partners, sometimes in opposition to one another, toidentify common interests and work together constructively to address security and humanrights concerns at a global level. Levels of trust between the partners have improved over thepast five years and work continues to support companies in implementing the principles.
Human rights
Global Gas FlaringReduction (GGFR)
Since its inception in2002, the GGFRpartnership has developeda global voluntary flaringand venting standard thathas gained broad globalacceptance.Thepartnership, involvinggovernments, oil and gascompanies and ‘neutralbroker’ the World Bank,also assists countries toimplement this and otherglobal programmes at anational level.
The ‘Well-to-Wheels’ study
A key output from the partnership between theEuropean downstream oil industry, the Europeanauto manufacturers and the EC joint research centrewas the ‘Well-to-Wheels’ study.This study has beenused as a basis for discussions and policyrecommendations in many forums.The collaborativeprocess brought increased mutual understanding tothe partners as well as sound facts and figures toinform a debate that had been dominated by‘emotive and ill-founded assertions’.
Transparency
The Extractive IndustriesTransparency Initiative (EITI)
This collaborative effort amongoil and gas companies, NGOsand governments has succeededin bringing wide acceptance thatknowing what governmentsreceive, verified by whatcompanies pay, is a critical firststep towards holding decisionmakers accountable for the use ofthose revenues.The voluntarynature of this initiative has beencritical to its success, as has thebuy-in from resource-richcountries who gain ‘ownership’in this way.
Capacity building
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
Benefits of working in partnership
The challenges of sustainable development in the oil
and gas sector frequently pivot around competing
interests. The industry is working with other
stakeholder groups at all levels all over the world to
address these challenges. Each partnership is unique,
shaped by the demands of the common task and by
the individual needs of the partners: the forty case
studies brought together in this collection show forty
different circumstances for working in partnership.
That said, looking across the whole set of case studies,
some common benefits and pitfalls of working in
partnership can be identified.
Stepping more safely into the field ofsustainable developmentPartnerships enable oil and gas companies to contribute
to sustainable development initiatives with a reduced
risk of being responsible for deliverables outside their
expertise, while at the same time offering their
competencies to assist partners in project development
and implementation. Partnerships also enable the
sharing of costs, benefits, risks and liabilities of an initiative,
and can provide some legitimacy to oil and gas companies
that step outside their core business operations.
Delivering higher quality project outcomesMulti-stakeholder partnerships can enhance the quality
of development initiatives. Involving a number of
parties—particularly if they come from different sectors
and have not worked together before—can leverage
additional resources, bring new knowledge, and create
a fertile platform for innovation and creativity.
Promoting long-term sustainability ofprojects The overall benefit delivered by partnering initiatives is
also linked to their ‘sustainability’. The case studies
show that when partnering initiatives include local
government (or another actor capable of long-term
commitment) and integrate institutional capacity
building, the long-term sustainability of the
programme is better assured than if the company were
to act alone. In some cases, when the partnering
project objectives align with the government’s national
strategy and when ministry staff are integrated in all
phases of the project, benefits can result for all parties.
Facilitating development and growth ofprojectsThe quality and long-term success of a sustainable
development initiative can also be linked to
‘scalability’. One of the strengths of oil and gas
companies working in partnership with non-
traditional partners is the business know-how of what
it takes to scale up pilot initiatives. Many of the case
studies in this publication indicate that partnerships
can be a vehicle not only for introducing innovation,
but also for taking innovations to scale.
Improving stakeholder engagementPartnerships are essentially about joint action. As such,
they are a special and altogether more influential form
of stakeholder engagement that goes beyond
conventional information disclosure, dialogue, public
consultation programmes and participation in
decision making. The act of negotiating a partnering
agreement, jointly designing and managing an
initiative, and sharing risks, costs and benefits is an
intensive undertaking requiring, even generating, a
close working relationship. And the act of working in
partnership enables companies to demonstrate their
commitment to common goals. Even where ‘project’
outcomes are weak, the level of mutual understanding
built through partnerships can rapidly surpass other
forms of stakeholder engagement.
8
Creating open communication channelswith local communities A partnership approach can be very effective when
significant social tensions exist between local
communities and oil companies. Where a company
and an NGO have a long-standing, strategic
partnership, the NGO is able to act as a conduit for the
company in engaging with local communities. These
relationships then act as a form of conflict prevention,
generating open channels of communication, levels of
trust and ‘social capital’ that companies can draw on
when they need to better understand local grievances.
Some of the case studies demonstrate a new
understanding of partnership in which the act of
collaboration can help resolve grievances and
transform adversarial situations.
Contributing to local economicdevelopment of host communities Creating direct local employment or providing
opportunities for domestic enterprises presents a
special challenge for the oil and gas industry because it
is a highly technical industry driven by global sourcing.
This is particularly the case for offshore operations. The
situation is most acute where operations are located in
economically disadvantaged countries or regions that
are characterized by an absence of the right skills, a
weak supplier base and inadequate physical
infrastructure. By engaging with local stakeholders who
may have insights into the local economy, partnerships
offer an important vehicle to address these challenges.
Contributing to wider regional or globalsustainable development effortsSome of the case studies demonstrate how efforts by
single companies to address environmental and social
issues can be transformed through partnerships into
programmes that bring benefits to whole geographic
regions. A collaborative initiative that involves a range
of oil and gas companies, industry bodies for the
sector, environmental regulators, NGOs and
international development agencies can result in a
pan-regional or even global approach to development
issues, something no single company or government
could conceivably achieve alone.
But partnerships are only ‘a good thing’ if they
work, and will only continue to work if they are shown
to deliver benefits. It is important to recognize that
partnerships are not always the right answer and that,
in some cases, there may be a need to focus on
building trust and better stakeholder relations before
moving to partnership activities.
Partnering works because it involves an
appreciation and leveraging of differing but
complementary competencies, but it can take much
longer to deliver outcomes. It is therefore important
for partners to focus on areas either where the desired
outcomes cannot be attained except through
partnership, or where particular benefits will be
derived from the process of partnering.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
9
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
10
Practical tips for effective partnershipsThe case studies in this publication reveal important lessons about current approaches to partnerships in the oil and gas industry.These partnerships have evolved to a stage where they can provide useful road maps for the future: the text below presents anumber of tips intended to assist organizations in effective partnering at different stages of the partnering lifecycle.
Practical tips:
■ Since partnering involves high transaction costs (time, human resources), partners should focus on those activities that can
be accomplished only through partnering, or where the partnering process can deliver particular benefits.
■ Don’t avoid high risk partnerships but be clear about why the risk is worthwhile.
■ The organization that first perceives common possibilities should be prepared to invest more time and resources during
partnership exploration until others see the full value of their involvement.
The actual drivers for entering into multi-stakeholder partnerships are many and varied. Through the case studies,
there are examples of long-term strategic partnerships providing a mechanism for initiating targeted projects, tackling
challenging global issues and responding to situations where relationship building is more important than project outcomes.
The drive to partner is not only one-way. Increasingly as the mutual benefits are more visible and measurable, the NGO
community, academia and other parts of civil society are seeking partnerships with the private sector.
Partnership drivers
Practical tips:
■ Take time to identify the right organizations to work with in terms of skills, profile and organizational role: community
groups and other beneficiaries can help to ensure wider local support; government partners can help to ensure long-term
sustainability; NGOs and IGOs can often offer independent scrutiny of process and research outcomes.
■ Ensure the right individuals are representing the partner organizations within the partnership (i.e. with the appropriate level
of knowledge and authority).
■ Participation from local organizations can be a good way of generating local buy-in and assuring long-term sustainability of
projects.
■ Be realistic about working as an equal partner with government agencies.
■ A systematic selection process can be used and will help clarify what is required from each partner.
There is growing awareness of the need to select partner organizations carefully to access the appropriate array of
resources and competencies needed—and, equally importantly, to identify the appropriate representatives in terms of skills,
status and organizational role from within the organizations. An increasingly competitive environment, when even NGOs
sometimes compete for corporate partners, also suggests the need for a careful partner selection process.
There is increasing recognition that thought should be given to sustaining the partnership activities beyond the life of the
partnership itself. Therefore, it is important to attract certain types of partners—such as government authorities—who will go
on to assume responsibility for sustaining or scaling up project outcomes once the initial resources supporting the partnership
comes to an end.
Partner selection
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
11
Practical tips:
■ Ensure there are some early and concrete ‘win-wins’ for the partners to maintain motivation and momentum within the
partnership.
■ Use of small teams and subgroups working within a bigger partnership can deliver some aspects of a project quickly, maintain
high levels of creativity and build a wider sense of ‘ownership’ of the whole.
■ Continue to build partnering and delivery capacity during the life of the partnership.
■ Agree on external relations positions and strategies that fit for all partners.
■ Provide for regular contact between the partners so that any partnership challenges can be addressed before they cause problems.
■ Prepare for resolving differences—which inevitably arise—by agreeing on appropriate dispute resolution procedures and
grievance mechanisms.
■ Be prepared to renegotiate the terms of partner engagement if required. This possibility needs to be planned for.
At the stage of project implementation it is critical to maintain the partnership to address any flagging momentum.
The case studies uncover a number of approaches being used in the oil and gas sector to ensure all partners retain focus and
commitment throughout the project.
Managing the partnership
Practical tips:
■ Ensure all partners ‘invest’ in the partnership so that equity exists between the partners.
■ At an early stage, provide opportunities for partners to learn about each others’ organizations so that:
a) the partnership benefits from sectoral diversity;
b) the partners are clear about each others’ individual aims in joining the partnership (as well as the common objective); and
c) partnering structures take account of different partners’ needs, in particular the cash flow needs of some smaller organizations.
■ Clearly define the partners’ roles and expected outputs from the start and at all stages of the partnership.
■ Do not underestimate the time it takes to build robust working relationships or rush the transition from partnership
negotiation to joint implementation.
■ A narrow project brief can help partners to focus on areas of overlapping interest rather than on their differences.
■ Third-party facilitation and brokering can be useful in the early stages and also for more complex partnerships. The increase in
initial transaction costs may be offset by time saved later if the partnership starts off on a sound footing.
■ Use of partnership ‘champions’ within and outside the partner organizations can be helpful for promoting the partnership to
other key players and stakeholders.
The first phase of engaging in partnership is often characterized by a high degree of enthusiasm and goodwill. Building on
this initial commitment and creating a strong foundation better equips partnerships to meet challenges at later stages. Equally,
many of the partnerships in this publication functioned well simply by drawing on the relationship management skills of
experienced staff within the partnering organizations.
Partnership building
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
12
Practical tips for effective partnerships(continued)
Practical tips:
■ Agree and articulate a set of performance indicators in the early stages of the relationship.
■ Assess the lessons learned for partner organizations from the partnering process.
Very few of the partnerships in this publication precisely measure their actual impacts. It is, however, in the interest of
all partners to assess the value of their investment in a partnership. The individual outcomes of the partnership (i.e. for each
participating organization) should be assessed as well as the common project outcomes. This is likely to reveal a number of
unexpected, as well as expected, benefits for each partner.
Evaluating the success of the partnership
Practical tips:
■ Collaborative projects have room for both a contractual and a partnership approach; organizations may have to make a
considerable cultural shift to move from a ‘contract’ approach to a ‘partnering’ approach.
■ Contracting out certain aspects of the delivery of programmes can be an effective and efficient way of working, but attention
should be paid to balancing which aspects are contractually based and which come under the partnership relationship.
■ Partnerships are likely to involve memorandums of understanding (MOUs), agreed project plans and other forms of written
agreements. These should be distinguished from specific aspects of work that a partner delivers under contract.
■ Partnerships need clear accountability mechanisms:
a) between the partners for the partnership as a whole; and
b) for the delivery of specific pieces of work.
■ Keep paperwork simple, understandable and as flexible as possible.
Contracts and agreements play an important role in almost all the partnerships profiled in this collection: a spectrum
emerges ranging from partnerships that contain only minimal contractual elements to those that are mostly contract-based.
This may be a particular characteristic of partnerships in the oil and gas industry, stemming from the complex drivers
underpinning the partnerships, and from the involvement of multiple stakeholders.
It is necessary to distinguish between partnering agreements and contracts: a partnering agreement signals a voluntary
collaboration and describes shared risks and implementation on terms that are jointly decided and renegotiable. In contrast, a
contract is legally binding and focuses on transferring risk to the implementing party. Terms are often decided by the party
contracting out. The trend in the industry appears to be that, even where the partnership contains contractual elements, more
of a partnering approach is used in its development by consulting and pre-agreeing the content of the contract.
Agreements and contracts
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
13
Practical tips:
■ Pay care and attention to the exit aspects of a partnership—equally when key individuals or organizations are departing
during the life of a partnership or when the partnership itself is being terminated.
■ At the end of a partnership (or when an individual or organization leaves the partnership), ensure shared credit and joint
ownership, and celebrate achievements and outputs.
■ Jointly prepare your ‘messages’ to explain or contextualize the moving-on strategy with a focus on outcomes rather than on
the end of the partnership.
Many of the partnerships described in this publication were launched without a clear understanding of how the
experiment would end; a plan for ‘closure’ or ‘exit’ is rarely built from the beginning. The need to move on is often only
addressed (and then rather poorly) at a late stage or when an exit is imminent. Furthermore, departure or moving on is often
interpreted as failure. In reality, however, a partner (whether an individual or an organization) leaving or a partnership being
disbanded—specifically where a task has been completed—can be a significant indicator of success. And even when it is not,
an exit can itself be a trigger for an interesting entry or an opening up to a range of new possibilities.
Exit strategies and moving on
Expertise from The Partnering Initiative assisted greatly in drawing together the hints and tips contained in this section.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
14
Key to the case studies
Theme:
■ Biodiversity ■ Community development ■ Human rights
■ Capacity building ■ Fuels and transportation ■ Oil spill response
■ Climate change ■ Health ■ Transparency
Key wordsThe case studies
The AgriBioDiversity Project in Italy environmental management systems; integrated planning
The Save The Tiger Fund endangered species protection; project funding mechanism
Developing a Biodiversity Action Plan in Peru pipelines; sustainable resource use; educational and social development; EBI
The Energy and Biodiversity Initiative integrated planning; guidance products; informal network post-partnership
Environmental Preservation in the Arabian Gulf marine ecosystems; scientific research
Monitoring and assessment of biodiversity in Gabon environmentally protected areas; in-country capacity building
The Port-Cros National Marine Park, France sustainable management and tourism; stakeholder engagement
Marine Biodiversity and Coastal Livelihoods Project in Indonesia sustainable livelihoods; education and outreach; marine protected areas
Expanding a water pipeline network in Egypt infrastructure; community economic development; skills transfer
Building NGO capacity for pipeline monitoring in Azerbaijan international monitoring and audit practices; transparency; good governance
Sustainable development in the Gulf of Paria, Venezuela biodiversity; community development; health; oil spill response and planning
The Emergency Medicine Development Initiative in Azerbaijan pipeline construction; emergency medicine; training
The Ormen Lange Slide Risk Project gas field development; geological risk; R&D; external verification
Oil Industry Workforce Development in Yemen development of local workforce; training; stakeholder engagement
Sustainable harvesting of biodiversity resources in South Africa sustainable resource use; sustainable livelihoods; partnership KPIs
The development of a strategic relationship institutionalization of NGO consultative partnership
The Carbon Mitigation Initiative technical research programme; carbon mitigation; CO2 capture and storage
The Global Climate and Energy Project greenhouse gas emissions; energy technology; research capacity building
The CO2 Capture Project risk-based evaluation tool; R&D; intellectual property management
The Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership gas flaring and venting reduction; voluntary industry standard
The Partnership for Fuels and Vehicles Research air quality; research and technology development; EU policy support
The Oro Community Development Trust in coastal Nigeria NGO intermediary; participatory model; capacity building; transferable model
Vocational training and sustainable livelihoods for women in Pakistan participatory model; women’s empowerment; vocational training
The Bhit Rural Support Project in Pakistan income generation; capacity building; health; education; water resources
An education and rural development programme in Patagonia community economic development; education
Rural electrification in Morocco rural electrification; transferable model
Florida’s first hydrogen energy station demonstration project; transportation; hydrogen technology; energy efficiency
Strengthening the hydrocarbon road transport sector in Madagascar transport safety standards; economic development; training; global compact
The Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles air quality; vehicle emission controls; gasoline and fuel quality; UN umbrella
The Alliance Program’s Safe Tank Alliance safe work practices; cooperative regulatory environment; education; outreach
The prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV/AIDS maternal and child health; community education; capacity building
The use of insecticide-treated bednets in malaria prevention community health; education and outreach; product distribution
The Bioko Island Malaria Control Project community health; capacity building; sustainability assurance
The Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights voluntary guidelines; risk assessment; in-country working groups
Human rights training of Sharia judges in Nigeria human rights; legal training
Action on oil spills: the IMO/IPIECA Global Initiative contingency planning; regional cooperation; international conventions
Oil spill response exercise in Martinique international exercise; global initiative; awareness raising and capacity building
The National Oil Spill Control and Contingency Plan in Malaysia oil spill training and exercises; national planning and international cooperation
The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative revenue management; reporting and validation; voluntary initiative
Revenue Transparency in Azerbaijan revenue management and transparency; consensus decision making; EITI
Biod
iver
sity
Capa
city
bu
ildin
gCl
imat
e ch
ange
Com
mun
ity
deve
lopm
ent
Fuel
s and
trans
port
atio
nH
ealt
hH
uman
righ
tsO
il sp
illre
spon
seTr
ansp
ar-
ency
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
15
Partners:
GOV = government O&G = multiple oil and gas COM = community groups
IGO = intergovernmental organizations B&I = business and industry
NGO = non-governmental organizations RI = research institution
Partners Level The companies Page no.Location
NGO • O&G • RI national Europe Eni 16
NGO international Russia ExxonMobil 18
GOV • NGO • COM national South America Hunt Oil 20
NGO • O&G global global Industry 22
GOV • RI regional Arabian Gulf Saudi Aramco 24
RI local Africa Shell 26
GOV • NGO • RI • COM local Europe Total 28
NGO local/provincial Southern Asia Chevron 30
GOV • O&G • B&I • COM local Africa BG 32
O&G • NGO national Caspian BP 34
GOV • IGO • NGO • RI • COM local/national/international South America ConocoPhillips 36
GOV • NGO • B&I local Caspian Hess 38
GOV • RI regional Europe Hydro 40
GOV • RI national Middle East Nexen 42
NGO • B&I regional Africa Shell 44
NGO local/provincial global Shell 46
B&I • RI global global BP 48
B&I • RI global global ExxonMobil 50
GOV • IGO • O&G • RI global global Industry 52
GOV • O&G global global Industry 54
IGO • O&G • B&I regional Europe Industry/CONCAWE 56
NGO • O&G • COM local Africa Nexen 58
GOV • NGO local/provincial Southern Asia BHP Billiton 60
GOV • NGO • O&G local Southern Asia Eni 62
NGO local/provincial South America Repsol YPF 64
GOV • NGO • B&I national Africa Total 66
GOV • B&I national USA Chevron 68
GOV • IGO • B&I • RI global/national Africa Total 70
GOV • IGO • NGO • O&G • B&I global Africa Industry/IPIECA 72
GOV • NGO • O&G national USA API 74
GOV • NGO • RI national Africa Eni 76
GOV • NGO regional Africa ExxonMobil 78
GOV • NGO • O&G • RI local Africa Marathon 80
NGO • COM global global Industry 82
NGO national Africa Statoil 84
IGO • O&G global global IPIECA members 86
GOV • IGO • O&G regional Caribbean Clean Caribbean 89
GOV • O&G regional Southern Asia Petronas 90
GOV • NGO • O&G global global Industry 92
GOV • O&G global/national Caspian BP 94
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
16
The AgriBioDiversity Project in Italy
Eni E&P Division and Shell Italia E&P established a working
group that, in 2003, launched the AgriBioDiversity project, a multi-
partner collaboration for biodiversity monitoring in the ecologically
sensitive area of Val d’Agri, southern Italy.
Background
Biodiversity monitoring facilitates evaluation of the
status of ecosystems and the impact of human activities
upon them. The oil and gas industry recognizes the
importance of biodiversity conservation and is fully
aware of potential impacts at all stages of E&P projects.
In this respect, focusing on biodiversity and developing
best practices to manage and reduce the impacts—and
the associated reputational risks—of development
projects have become key issues for the industry.
Val d’Agri is a biodiversity-rich and ecologically
sensitive area in southern Italy. Part of the area is a
national park containing some EU sites of Community
Importance and of protected flora and fauna.
As the operator of the Val d’Agri concessions, and in
collaboration with its partner Shell Italia E&P, Eni E&P
invited a number of organizations with complementary
skills and roles to take part in a multidisciplinary
working group to explore biodiversity issues in the
area. In 2003, the working group set up the
AgriBioDiversity project to address the biodiversity
issues that it had identified.
The AgriBioDiversity Project
The AgriBioDiversity project has two main objectives:
1. To develop a biodiversity monitoring programme
as a tool to assess and reduce or mitigate the
impacts of E&P activities.
2. To define best practices for integrating biodiversity
conservation into environmental management
systems and operations.
The approach and process for developing the
monitoring programme draw on the Energy and
Biodiversity Initiative (EBI) guidelines (see the EBI case
study on page 22) and include both site visits, to
conduct ecological baseline assessments, and
consultations with representative stakeholders, to
identify issues of significance to the local community.
The monitoring is carried out at both landscape
and site-specific levels to better understand the
environmental and socio-economic changes in the
area, identify their drivers and evaluate the potential
impacts of oil operations that need to be addressed,
mitigated and avoided in the future. One report has so
far been produced describing the results of the
monitoring programme, the site visits and the
stakeholder consultations.
The outcomes of the AgriBioDiversity project are to
be incorporated into operating best practices in the
Val d’Agri concessions, as well as into the wider Eni
and Shell organizations, and will also contribute to the
EBI trials.
The partners’ contributions
The partners brought a range of skills and experience
to the project:
■ EniTecnologie—technical background and in-
house expertise;
■ Shell Italia—know-how on biodiversity, in
compliance with the EBI;
■ Fauna and Flora International (FFI), an international
NGO also involved in the EBI—an independent and
science-based approach to biodiversity;
■ The World Conservation Union (IUCN), a global
conservation network—expertise in conservation,
biodiversity monitoring and sustainability;
■ The University of Basilicata—consolidated and
internationally acknowledged scientific expertise,
fieldwork, and knowledge of the territory and the
stakeholders.
Particular responsibilities in the project work are as
follows:
■ Together with Eni’s Technology Development and
Technology Transfer divisions, EniTecnologie
manages and supervises the project, provides
logistical support in the field and promotes the
integration of project partners.
■ Shell helps integrate the outcomes of the
monitoring programme into operations.
■ FFI acts as a strategic advisor, particularly in the
stakeholder engagement process, and as a partner
Key partners
• Eni Exploration &Production Division
• EniTecnologie
• Fauna & FloraInternational (FFI)
• Laboratorio GruppiSanguigni
• Shell Italia Exploration& Production
• University of Basilicata
• The WorldConservation Union(IUCN)
KEYWORDS: environmental management systems; integrated planning
17
in the local scientific community. FFI’s involvement
has provided an independent ‘verification and
certification’ of:
i) the approach and methodology adopted;
ii) the quality of the protocols developed; and
iii) the experimental data collected.
■ Supported by the Laboratorio Gruppi Sanguigni, a
stockbreeders’ cooperative, the University of
Basilicata is responsible for the fieldwork activities
and participates with a team of 15 people. The
university’s team has also been crucial in
understanding and analysing the social context of
the Basilicata region, and in optimizing the process
of stakeholder engagement.
Lessons learned
In setting up the project, the partnership faced the
following issues:
■ The need to engage with biodiversity both
strategically and operationally.
■ The project’s high national and international
visibility.
■ The attention of national NGOs that recognize the
ecological significance of Val d’Agri.
■ The region’s complex socio-economic context.
■ The reputational risk in the event of failure.
The partnership work sought to address the above
issues, and in the process the following key lessons
resulted:
1. Knowledge of biodiversity is a tool for evaluating
how an oil company performs and how to minimize
the impacts of E&P activities. This knowledge
emerged from the integrated vision of the various
perspectives (business, ecological and social) of the
partners in addressing biodiversity.
2. A long-lasting and effective partnership between
organizations with different backgrounds requires
clearly defined roles and tasks from the start, as
well as ongoing monitoring of progress through
meetings and corporate reviews.
3. Regular meetings of the project team give each
member the opportunity to address the
partnership challenges as they arise.
4. Holding local stakeholder consultations at regular
intervals throughout the project enables useful
suggestions from the stakeholders to be
incorporated, as appropriate, into the design of the
monitoring protocols.
5. Local stakeholder engagement demonstrates
respect for the local community’s views and
resulted in greater inclusion of the local community
in the AgriBioDiversity project, and increased
community ownership of the project and its
outcomes.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Biodiversity
PARTNERS: NGO • O&G • RI
LEVEL: national
LOCATION: Europe
Conclusions
Building and carrying out a multi-partner project has
not been and is still not an easy task. It is a learning
process towards how best to integrate differing
expertise, cultures and value systems.
Having a common goal to address biodiversity
helped to guide the process and integrate all the
partners’ contributions. A fundamental step was the
understanding that the fieldwork activities needed to
be designed so that the resulting information would
improve company practices and biodiversity
protection, help with risk management and lead to
other opportunities for the partners to work together.
This successful experience suggests a working
format for partnership that can be applied in other
operational contexts worldwide to address
biodiversity issues.
Val d’Agri is abiodiversity-rich andecologically sensitivearea in Southern Italy.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
18
The Save The Tiger Fund
In 1995, partners ExxonMobil Foundation and the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation established the Save The Tiger Fund dedicated to
supporting the conservation of the world’s remaining wild tigers.
Background
At the beginning of the 20th century, an estimated
100,000 wild tigers were living in Asia, from Siberia in
the north, to Sumatra and Bali at the southernmost
reach of their known range. A century later, fewer than
5,000 of the big cats remain in the wild.
In 1987, trafficking of all tiger species was banned
by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Despite the treaty,
however, many dangers still threaten the world’s tigers.
Loss of habitat, poaching and illegal trade in tiger skins
and parts for use in clothing, folk medicine and other
purposes pose the most significant threats to the
animal’s survival.
ExxonMobil has been associated with the tiger since
the early 1900s, when the cat’s image first symbolized the
oil company’s (then Exxon’s) products. In 1992, the
company began supporting efforts aimed at ensuring the
wild tiger’s continued existence. Around this time, the
company began looking for a partner with a history of
collaborating effectively with the private sector and
investing strategically in conservation. In response to this
objective, Exxon approached the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation (NFWF), a private non-profit
organization established by the US Congress in 1984.
Thus began the partnership between the NFWF and
ExxonMobil Foundation.
The Save The Tiger Fund
In 1995, the partnership set up the Save The Tiger Fund
(STF). Under the direction of the Save The Tiger Fund
Council, which includes international conservation
experts, STF resources are allocated twice each year to
projects in such areas as field study and management;
conservation education and advocacy; anti-poaching
programmes; habitat restoration and protection; and
human-wildlife conflict resolution.
The STF works with international organizations such
as the World Wildlife Fund, Wildlife Conservation
Society, Conservation International, WildAid, Fauna and
Flora International, and local organizations in tiger-
range countries.
ExxonMobil Foundation brought significant
financial support, management expertise and a long-
term commitment to the partnership to address the
problems facing wild tigers. The ExxonMobil
Foundation counsels the STF on operational, strategic
and organizational matters, and company
representatives participate in STF events worldwide.
The company provides more than US$1 million
annually to support the STF, with grants totalling more
than $11 million by the end of 2005. The STF has also
received nearly $2 million in donations from the public
over the past decade. In 2004 and 2005, the Critical
Ecosystem Partnership Fund was also a major
supporter of STF.
The Campaign Against Tiger Trafficking
Recognizing the increase in the illegal tiger trade, in
September 2005 the STF established a three-year
initiative known as the Campaign Against Tiger
Trafficking (CATT). CATT galvanizes support, leadership
and cooperation among various parties—governments,
conservation organizations, traditional Chinese medicine
practitioners, businesses and communities—to stop the
poaching, smuggling, trade and use of tiger parts. CATT
has already become a respected clearinghouse for news
and information on tiger trafficking, and the campaign
regularly issues updates on the illegal trade.
‘CATT is organizing a global response to what is now
the number one threat to tigers in the wild,’ CATT
director Judy Mills says. ‘Habitat destruction is still a
problem, but if we can’t stop the trade, we may end up
with habitat but no tigers.’
Key partners
• ExxonMobilFoundation
• National Fish andWildlife Foundation
KEYWORDS: endangered species protection; project funding mechanism
19
Mills, a veteran environmentalist, credits
ExxonMobil for its commitment to saving tigers. ‘The
company’s been willing to support the Save The Tiger
Fund and go in this new critical direction through CATT,’
Mills says. ‘I believe it’s especially commendable in the
corporate world.’
Progress
Since its inception, the STF has awarded 284 grants
totalling more than $14 million to support tiger-focused
projects in 13 of the 14 countries where wild tigers are
known to exist. Worldwide, STF grants represent nearly
one-third of all funds invested in tiger conservation
efforts by NGOs.
According to Dr Mahendra Shrestha, the STF
director, ‘to save tigers in the wild, we have to work with
people who live with the tiger. In our recent field visits in
Nepal,’ Dr Shrestha adds, ‘we heard from men and women
who expressed great appreciation for the programmes
that have developed as a result of STF’s community
support efforts, such as savings and credit operations,
milk producers’ cooperatives and eco-tourism businesses.’
These projects demonstrate the added benefits that
can accompany habitat restoration in cooperation with
local communities.
The STF’s strategy of encouraging cooperation and
communication among diverse groups, seeking advice
from experts, promoting partnerships, delivering
effective conservation strategies, building local
conservation expertise and linking community benefits
with conservation has been vital to its success.
Because of the efforts of the STF and its partners,
organizations are working together to stabilize the
relationship between people and wildlife. Tiger habitats
are being protected and rebuilt. Poachers are being
persuaded to become tiger guards. Additional
legislation has been passed to reduce the international
trade in tiger parts, and other actions are strengthening
law enforcement. Awareness campaigns are also being
launched to gain public support.
Challenges
Allocating available funds to ensure maximum benefit
is one of the challenges of operating within the STF
partnership, particularly in light of the difficult nature
of tiger conservation. Unfortunately, as with many
efforts of this type, the development of a good
investment evaluation process is still evolving.
Therefore, STF continues to make investments
specifically designed to improve both the data used for
decision making—such as updates on tiger habitat
assessments and enhanced tiger census information—
and the evaluation methodology. It is also nearing the
completion of a rigorous review of all of its project
investments, which will provide STF with invaluable
learnings for future investment decision making. These
factors, along with the wisdom and expertise that the
Council brings, are resulting in constant improvements
in meeting this challenge.
Perhaps the greatest challenge is attracting
additional funding partners. Sustained funding is
essential given the long-term, multilateral and complex
nature of tiger conservation. Creating both a stable and
an expanding funding base with partners that reflect a
broad donor community with sufficiently similar
priorities and practices is an ongoing challenge.
Conclusions
Despite the ongoing challenges, hopeful signs point to
better prospects for wild tigers. They are being brought
back from the edge of extinction, and nearby
communities are increasingly reaping the benefits that
come from protecting the tigers and their habitat.
While working to protect tigers in the wild remains
the most important aspect of the NFWF–ExxonMobil
Foundation partnership, the partnership has also led to
improved communications with like-minded
environmental groups.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Biodiversity
PARTNERS: NGO
LEVEL: international
LOCATION: Russia
Sumatran Tigers—mother and her cub
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
20
Developing a BiodiversityAction Plan in Peru
Hunt Oil, the operating partner for Peru LNG, is working with local
communities, the Peruvian government, NGOs and biodiversity
consultants to promote sustainable resource use and conservation along
the route of a proposed natural gas pipeline through the Andes.
Background
Peru LNG is proposing a natural gas liquefaction
project, which includes the construction of a 400-km
pipeline to carry natural gas across the Andes, from the
Camisea fields in the rainforest, to the proposed
terminal site on the Pacific coast near Cañete. The
pipeline project will transect four ecological regions
and several political regions. Approximately half of the
identified area of influence has primarily indigenous
populations comprising around 68,000 inhabitants.
The United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP) has designated Peru as a ‘megadiverse’ country.
Most of its natural resources are located in rural areas,
and communities rely heavily on them for their
livelihood—a dependency that often leads to pressures
on biodiversity conservation.
Unsound agricultural and grazing development,
heavy poaching of vulnerable species and threats to
the conservation of valuable resources, such as
medicinal plant species, and to traditional knowledge
are increasing problems. Locals are seeking the
assistance and expertise of government and other
organizations in addressing these issues.
Hunt Oil (Peru LNG’s operating partner) formed a
partnership with Peru’s National Council for the
Environment (CONAM) to pursue the common goal of
sustainable development by funding projects in line
with Peru’s national biodiversity strategy and other
conservation programmes.
The Biodiversity Action Plan
The partners identified that a Biodiversity Action Plan
(BAP) for the pipeline construction and operation
project would promote sustainable use of natural
resources and open a dialogue between the company
and local stakeholders. The BAP would help highlight
investment opportunities, increase local capacity to
conserve biodiversity and address local people’s basic
needs through education and social programmes. To
gain community acceptance and participation, the
programmes would need to be tailored to the needs of
more than 70 communities or districts along the
pipeline right of way.
The partners realized early on that a multi-
stakeholder consultation process was needed to obtain
meaningful and accurate information. Participatory
Rural Appraisal workshops, focus groups and
one-on-one interviews were conducted with
communities and NGOs. In these meetings, participants
identified existing community resources, priority
species to conserve and other organizations already
doing effective conservation work in their
communities. Around 4,500 local people participated in
the meetings.
Coordinating the consultation effort with the local
stakeholders was not an easy task, however. First, the
distance and remoteness of some of the communities
made it extremely difficult to access the people.
Second, the consultation meetings required fluency in
the traditional tongue of Quechua, spoken almost
exclusively in the most remote and typically most
ecologically significant areas of the Andes. Third, an
understanding of the traditions and cultural nuances
was essential to ensure that the locals felt comfortable,
and to encourage them to contribute at the meetings.
The NGOs and local organizations that participated
in the process understood the cultural and social
conditions of each community and were sensitive to
their real needs and expectations. For example,
traditional meals were served prior to, or during, the
meetings, and participants were often seated on the
ground, not at tables and chairs. In addition, the
Key partners
• Hunt Oil Company
• National Council forthe Environment, Peru(CONAM)
• Walsh Peru
• 35 community-basedorganizations
• Panel of local, nationaland internationalspecial interest groups,provincial governmentrepresentatives andlocal universities
KEYWORDS: pipelines; sustainable resource use; educational and social development; EBI
Communicating withcommunity leader fromthe Ayachucho region ofPeruvian Andes
21
organizations themselves made decisions by consensus
in communal sessions in the traditional Incan way and
used this form in the meetings.
In spring 2005, Peru LNG initiated an Environmental
and Social Impact Assessment for the pipeline project.
Additional specific biological and social data were
collected along the length of the pipeline.
Lessons learned
■ The partners need to understand the positions and
viewpoints of the various stakeholders. When
identifying key species requiring conservation,
international NGOs tend to focus on high-profile or
flagship species, such as the Andean condor, while
locals might select species with spiritual, economic
or medicinal value. Even among the NGOs,
priorities vary widely depending on the
geographical area. The different opinions indicate
that coordination of conservation goals may not
always be possible.
■ To maximize resources, Peru LNG and CONAM have
sought to build partnerships with NGOs or other
organizations that have objectives and perhaps
ongoing initiatives that align with the partnership
goals for biodiversity conservation. They have also
looked for organizations that have established
relationships with the communities and that the
local people trust. CONAM and the community-
based organizations have been helpful in identifying
past partnerships that could be built on—or,
conversely, avoided if they had a poor track record
with the community or had mismanaged funds.
■ Managing the expectations of the various
stakeholders is an ongoing challenge. Educating
local community members and working with them
to establish mutually agreeable and realistic targets
are important first steps to correcting any
misperceptions of the capacity of a Biodiversity
Action Plan.
■ Developing an early partnership with government,
NGOs and local stakeholders allows multiple views
to shape the BAP, improving interaction
throughout the process and allowing effective
working relationships to be built on trust. Priorities
and targets were agreed early on, allowing for
greater focus and coordination among all parties.
■ The most successful projects are conducted
through partnerships that directly involve the
community, enhance cultural traditions and
provide some type of a benefit to the local
stakeholders. Ensuring buy-in from the
communities and their active participation in a
project right from the start increases the likelihood
of the project becoming self-sustaining, leading up
to the time when the sponsor exits the programme.
Conclusions
Partnerships are a useful means to maximize available
resources, and they permit greater outreach and
improve the exchange of information with local
communities, local organizations and NGOs. Such
partnerships are likely to be most effective when oil
companies work with experts and organizations that
understand the cultural and social differences of each
community, and that have established working
relationships based on trust and goodwill.
Coordinating programmes through multi-partner
initiatives requires the partners to work outside their
comfort zone through consensus building to draw in
other perspectives and consider a range of cultural
viewpoints. A consensus approach will broaden the oil
company’s objectives and perspective.
Although this collaborative partnership required a
great deal of effort in the early stages of BAP
development, the model works, and Peru LNG and
Hunt Oil are likely to replicate it in similar initiatives in
South America and beyond.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Biodiversity
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO • COM
LEVEL: national
LOCATION: South America
Children at acommunity workshopin the area near theproposed pipeline right of way in thePeruvian Andes
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
22
The Energy and Biodiversity Initiative
The Energy and Biodiversity Initiative is a partnership of four energy
companies and five conservation organizations created to develop and
promote practices for integrating biodiversity conservation into
upstream oil and gas development.After four years the formal
partnership came to a close, but partners continue more informally to
explore opportunities to be a positive force for biodiversity conservation
within the oil and gas industry.
Background
Oil and gas exploration, production and transmission
are increasing in sensitive ecosystems of concern to
conservation organizations. The Center for
Environmental Leadership in Business (CELB) at
Conservation International (CI) initiated a collaborative
effort among multiple energy companies and
conservation organizations to improve biodiversity
conservation in oil and gas operations. CELB approached
two distinct communities: energy companies committed
to improving their biodiversity conservation performance
and conservation organizations with field experience
working with the energy industry. After two years of
discussions, the Energy and Biodiversity Initiative (EBI)
was formally created in 2001 as a partnership.
Development of the Energy andBiodiversity Initiative
EBI’s goal was to develop practical guidelines, tools and
recommendations to promote integration of
biodiversity conservation into oil and gas operations
throughout the industry. The member companies and
CI provided financial support; each partner also made a
major commitment of senior staff involvement. All
participants equally shaped and developed EBI’s
objectives, structure and outputs through a dynamic
and inclusive dialogue. Agreeing on objectives was a
lengthy process, in part because only a general mission
statement was defined at the outset.
The EBI evolved over four years. Phase 1 focused on
developing recommendations, tools and guidance on
key topics. Phase 2 piloted, disseminated and
promoted industry application of the EBI products. At
the end of Phase 2, the group concluded that the
principal purpose of the partnership—development
and launching of the guidance—had been achieved.
Rather than continuing EBI as a formal entity, partners
agreed to maintain an informal network to continue
contributing to dissemination and use of the products.
Progress and lessons learned
The EBI offers valuable lessons for prospective
multilateral corporate-NGO partnerships:
■ Setting realistic estimates of schedules and
resource requirements is not always easy. The
amount of work involved in managing a multi-
partner initiative, building trust and synthesizing
large amounts of information into usable outputs
was difficult to predict accurately.
■ Building trust and understanding takes time. Trust
underpinned the ability to talk openly and frankly
about issues. It depended on partners coming to
know and understand each other. The process was
strengthened by meetings in locations outside the
reach of e-mail and telephones; however, the
meetings were difficult to schedule and created a
long project lead time. Using a facilitator in the
early stages helped build trust and understanding
among the partners. However, the partners decided
that long-term reliance on a facilitator would reduce
their sense of ownership of the project and did not
use one after the first few meetings.
■ Having the right organizations and people around
the table is critical. The initial choice of partners was
a pragmatic one, targetting committed companies
and conservation organizations that could work
together. Restricting participation facilitated
decision making and production of outputs in a
reasonable time frame with the available resources.
Key partners
• BP
• Chevron
• ConservationInternational
• Fauna & FloraInternational
• The NatureConservancy
• Shell
• SmithsonianInstitution
• Statoil
• World ConservationUnion
KEYWORDS: integrated planning; guidance products; informal network post-partnership
23
However, this approach left EBI open to accusations
of elitism, plus some members think that the lack of
diversity may have made ‘selling’ the EBI products1
to some potential users more difficult.
■ Developing outputs ‘by committee’ brings both
benefits and challenges. Joint writing of the EBI
products by the partners led to a strong sense of
ownership. However, finding adequate time to plan
and produce the products was a significant
challenge for all involved. Furthermore, the need to
bring in consultants to help finalize the EBI
products maintained the project schedule, but also
introduced significant unforeseen costs that had
not been built into the budget.
■ Outreach and dissemination plans should be
defined as early as possible. Although the
participants developed engagement and
communication plans to disseminate information
and consult relevant parties, some partners think
these efforts have not been wholly successful.
Earlier development and implementation of an
outreach strategy, including enhanced stakeholder
engagement, might have strengthened EBI’s
credibility with some stakeholders and facilitated
product dissemination and uptake.
■ Multi-partner initiatives can be effectively self-
regulating if certain criteria are met:
• Flexibility—a willingness to give and take was
essential for group consensus decision making.
• Transparency—progress in the EBI work plan
was simply monitored by regular meetings and
formal and informal dialogue.
• Continuity—maintenance of a consistent core
of key staff from all member organizations
strongly contributed to supporting a high level
of trust and understanding among partners.
• Commitment—willingness by each member to
persist through times of uncertainty and
discomfort enabled a successful outcome.
• Coordination—selecting one organization (i.e.
CI-CELB) to act as Secretariat provided focus,
accountability and more timely execution of
deliverables.
■ Partnerships do not need an indefinite life to have
a continued positive impact. The EBI has been the
springboard for new relationships outside the
original partnership that can help maintain EBI
momentum in the wider oil and gas industry. EBI’s
work has been taken up by more companies and
conservation organizations, particularly through
the IPIECA- International Association of Oil & Gas
Producers Biodiversity Working Group.
Conclusions
Developing guidance and recommendations in a joint
industry- NGO initiative builds on intellectual capital
and promotes greater buy-in from both sectors.
However, the EBI experience indicates that even a
major bi-sector partnership with multiple partners can
face problems in influencing wider industry and NGO
communities.
The EBI has been successful in further catalysing
and supporting interest in, and attention to,
biodiversity conservation in the energy sector. It has
contributed to EBI member companies and other
companies incorporating biodiversity more extensively
in their policies, management systems and processes.
The EBI represents an innovative and non-
adversarial approach that has delivered robust outputs
with positive potential impact far beyond that
achievable by individual participants. The inter-
organizational benefits—building constructive
relationships, understanding the motivations or
behaviour of other organizations and exchanging
information—have added value beyond development
of the EBI products themselves.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Biodiversity
PARTNERS: NGO • O&G
LEVEL: global
LOCATION: global
1 The EBI recommendations and products can be found atwww.TheEBI.org
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
24
Environmental preservation in the Arabian Gulf
Saudi Aramco is working with its academic and government partners
over the long term to research, protect and restore the marine
ecosystem of the Arabian Gulf.
Background
The Arabian Gulf is a major source of food, as well as of
two of the most precious and coveted resources—fresh
water and oil. The Gulf is also a highly productive body
of water with extensive coral reefs, seagrass beds, and
other marine plant and animal habitats. However, this
rich and diverse ecosystem is experiencing physical and
climatic stresses. Population growth and industrial
development, and the resulting increases in
recreational and commercial activities, have added to
the stresses on the natural resources. An understanding
of the mechanisms of environmental impacts on the
Gulf’s ecosystem is therefore required to allow for
rational development and exploitation of resources.
Saudi Aramco’s early environmental stewardship of
the Gulf started more than 30 years ago and was
demonstrated in its two publications on the marine
environment, Biotopes of the Western Arabian Gulf and
Coral Fauna of the Western Arabian Gulf. The company
continues to treat the marine ecosystem with the
utmost care and respect.
The ‘Sustaining Research Project—MarineEnvironmental Studies’ programme
To continue its stewardship, in 1984 Saudi Aramco
established a partnership with the Research Institute
of King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals
(KFUPM/RI) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to
conduct a long-term research programme. The
collaborative research programme, titled ‘Sustaining
Research Project—Marine Environmental Studies’, has
the primary aim of documenting biological and
physical baseline conditions and recording possible
impacts and mitigations of industrial activities on the
marine environment.
The partnership maintains a group of marine
scientists able to advance the university’s research
capabilities and to respond to the company’s and the
Kingdom’s marine environmental concerns. The ‘Marine
Environmental Studies’ programme consists of marine
projects designed to be implemented in discrete
phases, each phase spanning five years and having a
distinct set of research topics.
The first phase (1984–89) of the programme
established baseline biological conditions in the
coastal bay areas and produced comprehensive
oceanographic measurements in these areas. The
scientific findings revealed both the biodiversity and
the socioeconomic significance of the bays, which are
fishing and nursery grounds for shrimp and other
commercial species. The collected information also
helped in clarifying the causes and consequences of
various changes in the Gulf.
Key partners
• King Fahd Universityof Petroleum &Minerals, ResearchInstitute (KFUPM/RI)
• Ministry ofAgriculture, Kingdomof Saudi Arabia
• National Commissionfor WildlifeConservation andDevelopment
• Saudi Aramco
KEYWORDS: marine ecosystems; scientific research
Marine scientists from KFUPM/RI studying coral reefsand other benthic organisms in the Arabian Gulf
The Gulf is a highly productive body of water withextensive coral reefs.
25
During the second phase (1990–94), more specific
investigations were carried out on operational impacts,
in particular those associated with dredging, landfilling
and marine discharges, as well as the construction of
offshore structures. Two key aspects of this phase were
the study of near-shore coral reefs and the
development of oceanographic computer models. As
part of Saudi Aramco’s marine environmental
partnership with KFUPM/RI, the company funded
development of extensive habitat maps of the Gulf
coastline from Kuwait to Tarut Bay. These maps have
been widely distributed in the country and were the
subject of an appreciation certificate received from the
Arab League acknowledging Saudi Aramco’s efforts in
‘Integrated Environmental Management and
Development of Coastal Areas’.
During the third phase (1995–2000), the
partnership programme directly addressed the
Kingdom’s environmental objectives for the protection
of the marine environment. Both Saudi Aramco and
KFUPM/RI concurred on the scientific and practical
significance of the reorientation in the research
agenda. Investigations during the third phase focused
on water-quality monitoring, transplantation of
mangrove seedlings, primary production estimates and
coral reef monitoring.
The work is continuing in the programme’s fourth
phase (2001–06).
The coral reef monitoring that began in the third
phase of the ‘Marine Environmental Studies’
programme is to continue over the long term. The
monitoring of the coral reefs in the Saudi waters of the
Gulf consists of periodic photographic documentation
of coral cover and diversity. Fish and invertebrate
populations along transects in the reefs are also
periodically counted and identified.
The mangrove transplantation project
The mangrove is more than just a tree; it is an entire
ecosystem providing habitat close to shore for fish in
particular and serving as a valuable food source.
Mangroves also help to stabilize the shoreline.
Mangrove forests once extended the length of the
Arabian Gulf but are now confined to smaller areas,
with major stands only at Tarut Bay. The virtual
disappearance of the mangrove from the Gulf coast can
mostly be attributed to landfilling for land reclamation.
Because Saudi Aramco recognizes the importance
of near-shore intertidal and shallow subtidal habitats to
fisheries production in the Kingdom, the company has
taken a special interest in ensuring the integrity of
these sensitive mangrove areas. These are the habitats
most likely to be impacted from an inadvertent oil spill.
As part of its ongoing commitment to the
environment, Saudi Aramco has adopted policies
designed to protect mangroves. In addition to large-
scale studies of existing mangroves in sheltered bays
and along the coastline, the company initiated efforts
to investigate the feasibility of transplanting
mangroves to various coastal areas where they once
grew or where none previously existed.
A transplantation project with other partners,
primarily the National Commission for Wildlife
Conservation and Development and the Ministry of
Agriculture, has met with great success. An outreach
programme educated the community about the
mangroves, and organized and carried out mangrove
transplant campaigns. More than 500 schoolboys, boy
scouts and families helped transplant thousands of
mangrove seedlings along the Gulf coastline. As a
result, the few remaining stands of mangrove trees of
10 years ago have become a flourishing area of
thousands of trees.
Conclusion
Saudi Aramco recognizes the value of working in
research and community-based partnerships to restore
and protect the marine ecosystem of the Arabian Gulf.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Biodiversity
PARTNERS: GOV • RI
LEVEL: Regional
LOCATION: Arabian Gulf
Students from localschools transplantingmangroves on the RasTanura coastline
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
26
Monitoring and assessment ofbiodiversity in Gabon
Shell and the Smithsonian Institution Monitoring and Assessment of
Biodiversity Program are working together to increase understanding
of biodiversity in an energy development area in Gabon, building on
a relationship that began in Peru in 1995.
Background
The capacity to develop energy resources without
harming biodiversity is increasingly necessary as
exploration and production activities in critical
biodiversity habitats become more frequent. Shell
recognizes that effective planning for biodiversity
conservation requires more than a standard
company-consultant relationship. In 1995, Shell
Prospecting and Development Peru (in conjunction
with Mobil Exploration and Production Peru) invited
the Smithsonian Institution Monitoring and
Assessment of Biodiversity Program (SI/MAB) to assist
with biodiversity assessment and monitoring at a major
natural gas field in the Camisea region of Peru. Shell’s
willingness to listen to and act on advice, coupled with
a clearly stated desire to improve operations, helped
overcome SI/MAB’s initial reservations about working in
partnership with an oil company.
In 1998, Shell withdrew its interest in the Camisea
concession, by which time SI/MAB had completed
several comprehensive baseline biodiversity
assessments and trained a large number of Peruvian
biologists. The quality of the resulting data and
SI/MAB’s training convinced Shell that continued
development of the relationship was worth exploring.
The Shell Foundation then came to the table, bringing
with it the capacity to support development of an
innovative partnership. In 1999, the way forward was
defined, with the Shell Foundation agreeing to
sponsor/co-finance work by SI/MAB in 2000–05 as part
of the piloting of the innovative business-research
model in the Gamba Complex of Protected Areas in
southwest Gabon. The Gabonese government also
provided critical support to the initiative.
The Gamba Complex of protected areas
The Gamba Complex is a protected area system that
hosts both rich biodiversity and Gabon’s largest
onshore oil reserves. Balancing energy resource
development with biodiversity protection represents a
major challenge, which the partnership sought to
address using objectives defined at the outset of the
project in a stakeholder consultation process. The
objectives were to increase and disseminate the
knowledge from the biodiversity assessments while
building the in-country capacity to conduct the
assessments, promoting links among the stakeholders
and advancing the business-research model.
Progress and lessons learned
Progress of the programme was monitored in regular
steering committee meetings. The meetings also gave
each partner an opportunity to discuss issues and
challenges presented by the project or the partnership.
Progress in the development and implementation
of the partnership can be measured by the quality of
the outcomes and assessment of the challenges within
the partnership itself. From an outcomes perspective,
progress has been excellent. Fieldwork has catalogued
nearly 3,000 species, with new species recorded for
fish, amphibians, reptiles, insects and trees. Thirty-two
Gabon nationals have been trained in standard
sampling protocols, and a Biodiversity Center has been
established as a science centre for Gabon and learning
laboratory for local communities. Furthermore, SI/MAB
will continue to work in the Gamba Complex with Shell
Gabon, conducting longer-term ecological monitoring
against key indicators of impacts, as well as supporting
the integration of biodiversity into Shell Gabon’s
business processes and management system.
Creating the unique partnership has been a
learning process. Initially, the partners took a cautious,
phased approach, to ensure each partner gained trust
Key partners
• Shell Foundation
• Shell Gabon
• Shell International
• SmithsonianInstitution Monitoringand Assessment ofBiodiversity Program(SI/MAB)
KEYWORDS: environmentally protected areas; in-country capacity building
27
and was satisfied with the outcomes before committing
to the next phase. As expected, significant issues and
challenges arose. Some of these have been resolved,
and some have not:
■ SI/MAB’s credibility and reputation were
questioned when it began working with industry.
■ Shell Gabon initially viewed the relationship as a
standard contractor arrangement—the partnership
idea was innovative and took time to define.
■ The partners operate within two quite different
value systems; at times there is a clash between
maintaining an objective, science-based approach
(SI/MAB) and managing operational issues and
time constraints (Shell).
■ Continuity and momentum of the partnership are
negatively affected by changes in staff position and
responsibilities. Such changes are more common in
Shell, where staff redeployment is standard
practice. New staff often require ‘nurturing’ before
they reach the same level of understanding and
enthusiasm as the staff they have replaced.
■ Despite the excellent fieldwork, the comprehensive
resulting data and the applied research in 2004–05,
using this information to modify operations,
improve biodiversity protection and reduce the
operational footprint has so far proven difficult.
Lessons have been learned as a result of the
challenges and of the increased understanding
between the partners over time:
■ Define the timing and format of outputs—ensure
every partner understands what each output will
be used for.
■ Clearly define the role of each partner from the
outset.
■ Spend more time ‘inside’ the other partner
organizations to better understand their expectations,
requirements and organizational culture.
■ Take time to anticipate as many potential issues
and challenges as possible, particularly those
related to the expectations of each partner.
■ At an early stage, establish governing principles
and performance indicators to assess the
partnership process (not just the outcomes) and
give an early indication of potential issues.
■ Exposure to knowledge can generate real change
in energy companies when the knowledge is
delivered in an easily understandable form at the
appropriate time, and when there is interest to use
the information.
■ A ‘champion’ is needed to push the biodiversity
agenda within the operational company and help
embed biodiversity in the way that the company
conducts its business.
■ Partnerships between organizations with different
cultures are hard work but ultimately deliver
multiple benefits.
Conclusions
Since its beginnings in Peru in 1995, the partnership
has continued to develop, becoming one of Shell’s
longest and most involved relationships with a
research/conservation organization. With time and
hard work, the Shell-SI/MAB partnership has gone a
long way to being a ‘successful partnering relationship’.
Despite the challenges the partnership has faced, the
proof of its success is the commitment to continue the
SI/MAB-Shell Gabon relationship beyond 2005.
Ultimately, the goal is for Shell to build on what it
has learned from this partnership and transfer
experience and knowledge to other Shell operations
and the industry in general. SI/MAB has also been
invited to discuss potential biodiversity-industry
projects in Russia and Venezuela.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Biodiversity
PARTNERS: RI
LEVEL: local
LOCATION: Africa
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
28
The Port-Cros National Marine Park, France
The 13-year partnership between the Total Corporate Foundation for
Biodiversity and the Sea and the Port-Cros National Park has
spawned a number of partnerships and programmes to enhance
biodiversity conservation and sustainable management of the protected
marine area around the island of Port-Cros in southern France.
Background
Port-Cros, a tiny island off the Mediterranean coast of
France, is home to the Port-Cros National Park, Europe’s
first national marine park. Created in 1963, the park
encompasses all of Port-Cros, the sea around it and
some of the mainland coast, and is a protected area of
outstanding and representative biodiversity.
The park works to conserve marine and coastal life
and raise public awareness of the diversity of fauna
and flora in and around the sea. It also assists the
Coastal Protection Agency with the scientific and
technical management of the wetlands in the salt pans
on the nearby coast at Salins d’Hyères, the site of the
old salt mines.
Each year, the national park has around one million
visitors. A major focus of the work is to help these
visitors enjoy the beauty of the park, provide them
with informative brochures, raise awareness of the
ecosystem’s sensitivity and promote behaviour change
over the long term.
The partnership
The Port-Cros National Park has been a major partner of
the Total Corporate Foundation for Biodiversity and the
Sea since 1992. The partners’ objective is to show that a
strong partnership with a common vision and involving
all stakeholders can enable successful conservation and
sustainable management of a complex marine and
coastal ecosystem subject to multiple conflicting interests,
such as those of fisheries, tourism and local communities.
The local, national and international partners have
a range of reasons for participating in the partnership
work. For example:
Total Corporate Foundation for Biodiversityand the SeaThe Total Foundation provides a forum for developing
knowledge and understanding of biodiversity and for
bringing together all parties in the quest for
sustainable development. Putting its experience into
practice, it promotes scientific programmes and
research studies in a Mediterranean marine ecosystem
of major interest.
Port-Cros National ParkThrough its partnership with the Total Foundation, the
national park has gained access to the foundation’s
experience and network of expertise in marine
conservation at the international level.
City of HyèresHyères, on the mainland across from Port-Cros, supports
the partnership work, not least because a well-
managed park can be a draw for sustainable tourism in
the region and provide a source of income for the city.
Park usersThe anglers’ interest is in protecting sustainable fishing
resources, while the divers’ interest is in maintaining the
remarkable beauty of the underwater biodiversity so that
they can continue to operate their diving businesses.
The success of the partnership has resulted from
the national park’s long-term efforts to involve local
stakeholders in the management of the park and to
build new behaviours among them. For example, the
park has encouraged divers to restrict their dives to
certain areas. Diving guidelines were first created on a
voluntary basis, and after about 10 years, in response
to divers’ wishes, were regulated and translated into
legal obligations. Diving is now only permitted within
designated areas of the park.
Key partners
• City of Hyères, France
• Coastal ProtectionAgency (Conservatoiredu littoral), France
• Conseil Général desAlpes de HauteProvence
• Conseil régionalProvence-Alpes-Côted’Azur
• Ifremer (FrenchResearch Institute forExploitation of theSea)
• NationalOceanography Centre,Southampton, UK
• Port-Cros NationalPark (Parc national dePort-Cros), France
• Total CorporateFoundation forBiodiversity and theSea
• Users of the park (e.g.anglers, divers)
• The WorldConservation Union(IUCN)
KEYWORDS: sustainable management and tourism; stakeholder engagement
Port-CrosSymposiumparticipants ©
Tot
al
29
Promoting other partnerships andprogrammes
As a result of the mutually beneficial relationships built
during the past 13 years, the partnership now has a life
of its own, encouraging the partners to follow up on,
and deepen, their current activities, as well as develop
innovative projects and programmes. For example, the
Port-Cros National Park has set up a programme to
enhance knowledge of biodiversity through the
collection and conservation of several thousand
Mediterranean plants on the island, which has
increased interest in the park.
From its partnership with the Total Foundation, the
national park has also built the capacity to successfully
develop its own partnerships with local stakeholders
and therefore implement further action at the local
level. Seeking the widest possible local support, the
national park has involved local stakeholders in
designing innovative conservation measures. These
include working to eradicate toxic and invasive species
such as algae and building a new anchoring system for
ships to protect the seagrass beds on the sea floor.
The partnership has also promoted the development
of other international partnerships—for example
between the Total Foundation and the UK’s National
Oceanography Centre in Southampton (described
below)—and the involvement of other international
stakeholders in the work of developing a valid model of
conservation and management. The Port-Cros
Symposium is one such international initiative.
The Port-Cros Symposium
The Port-Cros Symposium, which is now organized
every two years, attracts participants from all over the
world and has spawned similar initiatives elsewhere.
The symposium aims to initiate discussion on, and
generate solutions for, reaching a balance between
economic growth and biodiversity conservation. The
symposium themes have been sustainable tourism
(2000), sustainable fisheries (2003) and deep-sea
biodiversity (2005).
The 2005 symposium was organized by the Total
Foundation in partnership with the Port-Cros National
Park, Ifremer, The World Conservation Union, the UK
National Oceanography Centre (Southampton) and the
Institut de Ciences del Mar de Barcelona (CMIMA–CSIC).
The symposiums have given participants the
opportunity to present projects and programmes
including, for example, the Census of Marine Life
programme—a growing network of researchers
engaged in a 10-year initiative to assess and explain
the diversity, distribution and abundance of life in the
oceans. Publishing and distributing the proceedings of
each symposium is widening the network of stakeholders
and creating additional opportunities for engagement.
As the UK National Oceanography Centre reported,
sharing experiences has resulted in identification of
synergies, commonalities and new partnerships. In this
regard, the Total Foundation will be participating in the
Census of Marine Life programme notably with the UK
National Oceanography Centre, specifically through the
Biogeography of Deep-Water Chemosynthetic
Ecosystems project, one of 14 field projects in the
programme.
The fourth Port-Cros Symposium is planned for
2007 on the theme of marine biodiversity and climate
change.
Conclusion
The partnership has made excellent progress in
biodiversity conservation, and its work demonstrates
environmental management that benefits all
stakeholders. The achievements of the partnership are
a source of inspiration and suggest a model for
conservation in marine and coastal ecosystems that is
replicable elsewhere.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Biodiversity
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO • RI • COM
LEVEL: local
LOCATION: Europe
Caulerpa Taxifolia
Port-Cros—La Palud bay
© P
ort-
Cros
Nat
iona
l Par
k
© P
ort-
Cros
Nat
iona
l Par
k
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
30
Marine Biodiversity and Coastal Livelihoods Project in Indonesia
In 2002, Unocal (now a subsidiary of Chevron) and The Nature
Conservancy launched a partnership in East Kalimantan, Indonesia,
to build local conservation capacity, promote sustainable livelihoods
and protect the region’s valuable natural resources.
Background
East Kalimantan is home to some of Southeast Asia’s
last remaining lowland rainforests, which host diverse
primates including the orangutan. With 34,000 miles
of coastline, the islands and waters of Indonesia are
also at the heart of the world’s coral triangle,
representing 75 per cent of the world’s known corals.
Rili Djohani, Director of The Nature Conservancy’s
Indonesia Program, explains: ‘The coral triangle has the
most coral diversity in the world. For a marine biologist
this is a paradise. For a first-time diver, it’s like being on
another planet.’
Indonesia’s seas and forests offer a natural and
abundant source of capital that feeds the needs of the
Indonesian people, the region and the world, providing
timber, seafood, oil, gas, coal and minerals, including
copper and gold. The forests, seas and coral reefs also
provide vital services: absorbing greenhouse gases,
producing oxygen and clean drinking water, and
buffering the coasts. ‘In such a vast place,’ Djohani adds,
‘the threats are correspondingly large.’ Two of the biggest
threats are illegal logging and destructive fishing
practices. But another threat is more basic:
overexploitation—overuse of coastal resources
(especially fish and coastal vegetation) to meet the
needs of a growing population.
The economic realities for East Kalimantan
communities present challenges. In response to local
and foreign demand, giant sea-turtle eggs, for
example, bring up to US$17 each, a significant amount
of money in that region. What equally appealing
incentives can conservation offer residents? How can
local communities develop more sustainable economic
options for wealth generation? In biodiversity and
environmental conservation, how can business be part
of the solution?
The Derawan Islands Marine Biodiversityand Coastal Livelihoods Project
Unocal and The Nature Conservancy launched a
partnership to advance the Conservancy’s efforts and
the company’s corporate responsibility strategy. Unocal
joined the Conservancy’s International Leadership
Council in 2001.
In 2002, the Conservancy was selected as a Unocal
Foundation Special Global Partnership, which brought
corporate financial assistance and employee
involvement to the Conservancy’s ‘Ridges to Reefs’
project in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. The project’s
focus is community environmental awareness, marine
research and conservation in the Berau district and the
Derawan archipelago. The goals are to build local
conservation capacity, promote sustainable livelihoods
and protect the region’s valuable natural resources.
In East Kalimantan, the partnership established the
Derawan Islands Marine Biodiversity and Coastal
Livelihoods Project, which engages the local
community in research and conservation activities
focused on coastal resources, sustainable livelihoods
and creation of a marine protected area that will
contribute to the survival of the reef systems.
Although Berau and the Derawan archipelago are
not in the immediate vicinity of its operations, the
company does have offshore oil and gas production
facilities in the Makassar Strait. The conservation
activities provide a way for the company to learn more
about the region’s resources, local economy and
community livelihoods.
Unocal Foundation has provided partial project
funding totalling US$675,000 since 2002. Company
employees participate in planning and field visits to
gain first-hand knowledge of project activities, which
Key partners
• The NatureConservancy
• Unocal (now asubsidiary of Chevron)
• Unocal Foundation
KEYWORDS: sustainable livelihoods; education and outreach; marine protected areas
Fishing village onDerawan island
© M
ark
God
frey
/TN
C
31
include counting manta rays, monitoring turtle nesting
areas and disseminating conservation materials.
After assessing the partnership in 2004, the
partners renewed investments.
Benefits and outcomes of the partnership
Scott Stanley, the Conservancy’s East Kalimantan
Programme Manager, notes a challenge in Indonesia
also found in other developing countries, ‘Even when
local government is amenable to conservation activity, it
lacks funds to make significant investments of its own,
and at this point it lacks the ability to offer viable
economic alternatives. The reality is that such behaviours
cannot be changed when basic human needs are not
being met. The solutions seem easy by Western
standards, but they are very difficult on the ground.’
Stanley adds, ‘Business engagement helps. A company
can lead by example by supporting the activities of
conservation organizations and changing its corporate
practices. It can also communicate the importance of
conservation to employees, customers, suppliers, peers
and the communities where it operates.’
Josh Knights, the Conservancy’s Director of
Corporate Partnerships, says, ‘Global companies like
Unocal are taking a leadership role, supporting
conservation efforts that reach from the global
marketplace to the local community.’
Brian Marcotte, former head of Unocal’s operations
in Indonesia and later the company’s Vice President for
Public Policy, Health, Environment, and Safety,
explained the company’s rationale for involvement: ‘We
were very interested in how to create a “win-win-win”
approach—environment, community and business. One
aspiration was to involve employees actively. Such
engagement would enhance employees’ awareness and
allow our related expertise to be channelled into the
project where possible.’
Two company employees, Satria Djaya and Suta
Vijaya, were not initially convinced about
involvement, as the project ‘seemed too far away from
the company’s core area of activity’. Both now remark
on its strategic value from business and community
standpoints, and in the context of East Kalimantan’s
natural resources. The partnership has enhanced
environmental awareness among employees, fostered
better understanding of each organization’s character
and competence, and provided an opportunity for
candid discussion.
Community residents may not necessarily
distinguish between business and NGOs. Both need to
earn and keep community acceptance. Communities
want employment opportunities, and many believe
their livelihoods may be threatened by conservation
activity. Local governments also want direct,
immediate community benefits. In the partnership, the
company and the Conservancy jointly face these issues.
Unocal employee Adji Setijoprodjo helped focus
attention on these sensitivities: ‘We do not pretend to
have the answers, but deliberate efforts to engage
communities are vitally important and help ensure
long-term success.’
As one company employee reflected, three years is
not enough time to address these complex challenges.
But there are meaningful actions to take, and they
provide stepping stones to ultimate success.
Conclusions
Conservation actions in Indonesia provide hope and
perhaps models. Governments, businesses, local
communities and NGOs are developing ways to
manage resources that are ecologically sound, socially
responsible and economically viable.
‘The challenge for us always is to make people think in
a larger context than just their own reef in front of the
island,’ notes the Conservancy’s Djohani. ‘So the idea is
to have lots of dialogue on how we can implement
effective management for this large marine protected
area. Perhaps most promising, from each of these
successful projects emerges a new generation of
conservation leaders.’
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Biodiversity
PARTNERS: NGO
LEVEL: local/provincial
LOCATION: Southern Asia
Dense foliage, driftwoodand palms line the coastof Kakaban Island in theDerawan island chain
Above: the coast ofSangalaki Island in theDerawan island chain
Below: fishing village onDerawan island
© M
ark
God
frey
/TN
C©
Mar
k G
odfr
ey/T
NC
© M
ark
God
frey
/TN
C
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
32
Expanding a water pipelinenetwork in Egypt
A partnership between Egyptian LNG and the Behera Water and
Drainage Company led to an enlarged water distribution network
that provides mutual benefits to the companies and the residents of
the surrounding towns and villages.
Background
Egyptian LNG (ELNG) is a liquefied natural gas (LNG)
company which operates in the governorate of Behera
in Egypt. The company has five shareholders: BG Group
(35.5 per cent); Petronas (35.5 per cent); Egyptian Gas
Company (12 per cent); Egyptian General Petroleum
Company (12 per cent); and Gaz de France (5 per cent).
ELNG’s plant near the town of Idku, on the
Mediterranean coast east of Alexandria, required a
secure and reliable source of clean water for its
production process, domestic utilities and fire
emergencies. Because the volume of water required
was not available on site, ELNG studied various options
to acquire the water. It considered extracting
groundwater and treating waste water but, after some
deliberation, these options were abandoned owing to a
combination of technical, economic and socio-
economic factors. The company then approached the
municipal water facility serving the region, the Behera
Water and Drainage Company (BWADC), about drawing
water from the municipal system.
It was soon determined that the municipal water
distribution network lacked capacity to supply ELNG
with the volume of water needed for its industrial
operations. The same distribution constraints were also
preventing BWADC from supplying sufficient water to
the residences and businesses in the communities near
the ELNG facility.
BWADC was already working to expand the entire
water system. It had recently used a grant from the
Hungarian government to upgrade the system’s main
treatment station at Edfena, 12 km away on the Nile
River, as a first step in addressing the shortage. But the
necessary upgrades to the pipelines in the distribution
network were not in the budget for at least five more
years. As a result, the new potable water capacity was
‘trapped’ at the treatment station and could not be
distributed to either ELNG or the under-served
communities.
ELNG saw an opportunity to partner with the
municipal water company for a common purpose. The
LNG company had determined that building a 315-mm
polyethylene pipe would supply its needs. However, to
improve supply to the nearby towns and villages, a
12-km, 700-mm cast iron pipe was installed with a
315-mm polyethylene pipe spur off this into the LNG
plant—at an additional US$1.5 million for the
oversized pipe. BWADC was eager to lay the pipeline
and alleviate the water shortage, but the total project
cost of $4.8 million plus taxes was greater than ELNG’s
allocated budget.
After extensive negotiations, which included the
governorate of Behera, an agreement was reached.
ELNG agreed to pay the full $4.8 million, while the
municipal water company agreed to contribute the
engineering and construction workers, the machinery
and the costs of applying for legal permits for the
project as well as ongoing maintenance of the pipe.
The partnership also secured a large tax advantage
on the imported iron pipe. The Egyptian government’s
General Authority for Foreign Investment had
designated ELNG’s facility as a ‘Free Zone’, entitling ELNG
to import certain manufactured goods into the country
tax free, as long as the goods were for use at its facility.
ELNG and BWADC worked jointly with the foreign
investment authority to explain that the imported iron
pipe was primarily for ELNG’s use, with extra benefits for
the surrounding communities. The iron pipe was
subsequently exempted from taxes that would have
pushed up the cost of the pipe by 50 per cent, and the
project became financially viable for both parties.
The project enjoyed significant regional media
coverage, especially when the Behera governor
presided over the signing of the water supply
agreement. Newspapers published articles about the
successful public-private partnership, and interviews
with instrumental individuals were broadcast on
television and radio.
Two hundred jobs were created during construction
and ongoing maintenance. Technical, project
management, and health, safety and environment (HSE)
skills were transferred from ELNG to BWADC employees
and their subcontractors during the planning and
Key partners:
• Behera Water andDrainage Company
• Egyptian LNG
• General Authority forForeign Investment,Egyptian government
• Governorate of Behera
• Towns of Rashid, Idkuand El Mahmoudia,and six villages
KEYWORDS: infrastructure; community economic development; skills transfer
33
construction phases. Ongoing maintenance of the
pipeline is to be performed by BWADC, reinforcing the
skill transfer process. In addition, permits for river and
railway crossings were granted on time, as the
authorities recognized the positive outcomes of the
project and were eager to assist.
The work was completed ahead of schedule and
below the approved budget. The project has increased
the water supply to the nearby towns and villages by
50 per cent, benefiting 405,200 end users.
Progress and lessons learned
All the parties involved in the construction of the water
pipeline learned a great deal about community
development and public-private partnerships.
Although ELNG seeks ways to help develop the local
communities in which it operates and plans for many of
its social investments, it had not anticipated that the
pipeline project would be a community development
effort. ELNG learned that it can be beneficial to be
pragmatic about community development initiatives,
because opportunities frequently arise that may be
more worthy, more necessary or more sustainable than
other alternatives. The pipeline evolved into a
community development project when ELNG and the
municipal water company recognized that both would
benefit from working together.
The success of the project is due, in part, to the
balanced engagement of private sector and public
sector organizations. This balance made it possible to
divide responsibility for financing and delivering the
project; neither could do everything alone. This
efficiency in turn reduced costs and made the project
financially viable.
The partners learned that effective community
development projects require extensive dialogue and
negotiations. Without such dialogue, ELNG would
probably have constructed a smaller polyethylene
pipeline fitted only to its own needs, and the water
company would have gone without the upgrade to its
network. The dialogue was not always straightforward,
however. When the time came to draft the working
contract between the two parties, it became clear that
ELNG was accustomed to establishing many (lengthy)
written rules and guarantees, while the water company
was used to simpler, one-page agreements.
This was also the first public-private partnership
that both parties had entered into, and it took extra
time to reach agreement on a unit price for water over
the 20-year project life, given that rates would escalate
with inflation and because each party had different
pricing methods and expectations. Despite these
complications, the dialogue and negotiations persisted,
and a fruitful project was eventually realized to the
satisfaction of both parties.
Conclusion
Through extensive negotiation and cooperation, the
partnership managed to efficiently divide the project
responsibilities between the public and private sectors
to the mutual benefit of all involved. Besides an
expanded water supply, the project delivered
significant socioeconomic benefits such as good jobs
and the transfer of skills.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Capacity building
PARTNERS: GOV • O&G • B&I • COM
LEVEL: local
LOCATION: Africa
Laying and backfillingthe polyethylene pipe
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
34
Building NGO capacity for pipeline monitoring and audit in Azerbaijan
In Azerbaijan, BP and the Open Society Institute-Assistance
Foundation are working together to support national NGOs’ capacity
development through facilitated monitoring and audit of the
Baku-Ceyhan-Tbilisi and the South Caucasus Pipeline projects.
Background
The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) project represents a
US$3 billion investment to unlock energy from the
Caspian Sea, with the construction of a 1,768-km oil
pipeline from Azerbaijan, through Georgia and on to
Turkey, for onward delivery to world markets. The
South Caucasus Pipeline (SCP) runs parallel to the BTC
pipeline and will transport gas from the Caspian Sea to
the Georgia/Turkey border.
BTC (and SCP to a lesser extent) has been subject to
an unprecedented degree of monitoring by
international and national bodies wishing to assess the
project’s openness to public scrutiny and compliance
with international standards.
BP initiated a partnership with the Open Society
Institute-Assistance Foundation (OSI-AF) to provide
training, mentoring and facilitation to the NGOs doing
the monitoring in Azerbaijan. OSI-AF’s main goal is to
foster the transition of a closed society to a more open
one. Farda Asadov, OSI-AF’s executive director, explains:
‘In Azerbaijan our aim is to increase civil society’s
involvement in the democratic process and to oversee
good governance and transparency in the use of national
resources.’ The partners signed a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) and commenced the NGO
Monitoring Programme in April 2004.
The NGO Monitoring Programme
The NGO Monitoring Programme was to focus on five
key areas: environment; social issues; human rights;
historical, cultural and archaeological heritage; and use
of local suppliers for goods and services. Key objectives
of the programme were to:
■ develop the proficiency of local NGOs in
conducting effective BTC pipeline monitoring;
■ introduce successful international monitoring
standards and practices to Azerbaijan; and
■ improve BP activities in Azerbaijan via feedback
from the NGO monitoring process.
OSI-AF and BP were keen for the process to be as
inclusive as possible. A self-selection process involving
all 88 programme applicants resulted in 27 NGO
representatives divided into five Working Groups
covering the five key areas. It was apparent from the
outset that many of the Azerbaijan NGOs needed help
to develop skills in methodology, planning, data
collection and audit analysis, interview techniques,
report writing and presentations. BP provided OSI-AF
with funds to organize the necessary training and
mentoring components of the programme, while
OSI-AF met the other costs.
During the programme, the NGO representatives
visited more than 100—or approximately 75 per
cent—of the communities situated along the pipeline
in Azerbaijan. The NGOs published their findings in May
2005 and reviewed them in meetings with OSI-AF and
BP. Dan Bliss, BP’s Community and NGO Programmes
manager, reflects: ‘The process of this dialogue was the
most important thing. We were able to discuss issues with
the NGO participants in a very constructive way. We were
in a dialogue as equals.’ However, the dialogue with
NGO representatives, many of whom were initially
hostile towards BP, took time and effort, especially to
develop trust and to become productive.
This NGO initiative provided local insights on how
to improve project performance. The recommendations
that BP agreed to take on board include ensuring that
Key partners
• BP
• Open SocietyInstitute-AssistanceFoundation
• Local NGOs
KEYWORDS: international monitoring and audit practices; transparency; good governance
BULGARIA
Istanbul
TurkishStraits
MEDITERRANEAN SEA CYPRUS
Ankara
TURKEY
Ceyhan
SYRIA
Erzurum
GEORGIA
IRAQ
RUSSIA
ARMENIA
Tblisi
IRAN
AZERBAIJANTURKMENISTAN
KAZAKHSTAN
Supsa
Novorossiysk
BLACK SEA CASPIAN
Baku
Sangachaly
ACG
The BTC pipeline runsfrom Baku inAzerbaijan, throughGeorgia and on to theTurkish Mediterraneanport of Ceyhan.TheSCP pipeline follows thesame route as far as theGeorgia/Turkey border.
35
local communities are aware of the avenues to
communicate their concerns to the company; increasing
and focusing efforts to address community concerns
about pipeline safety and security; and strengthening
efforts to procure goods and services locally.
Each party contributed significantly to the process:
■ OSI-AF was the facilitator and an independent and
well-informed link with civil society and BP;
■ the NGO representatives provided a local perspective
on how BP could improve its performance and
establish broader links with civil society; and
■ BP contributed project management skills and the
information the NGOs required to play a
constructively critical role.
A new cycle focusing on the South Caucasus
Pipeline (SCP) was launched in August 2005 to promote
transparency, to identify opportunities for
improvement in how BP manages the environmental
and social impacts of its investments in Azerbaijan, and
to introduce NGO representatives to the principles and
practice of auditing. The aim is to build local capacity to
audit large infrastructure projects such as BTC and SCP.
Challenges and lessons learned
The partnership has been a big learning experience for
all parties. One challenge was addressing OSI-AF’s
concern about its reputation—how the external
community and civil society would perceive its
‘partnering with an oil major’. Another challenge was
meeting OSI-AF’s need to involve the broader NGO
community in building consensus. With the two
organizational cultures of BP and OSI-AF being so
distinct, both parties took a cautious approach and had
to compromise and exercise dialogue and patience to
achieve a common goal.
By the end of the first cycle, both parties realized
that the original MOU was not sufficiently detailed to
reflect some of the programme’s management
challenges. For instance, the time and resources
required from all parties in such areas as training,
planning, data gathering and report preparation were
drastically underestimated. A more focused and
specific MOU was developed following a BP and
OSI-AF exercise of ‘lessons learned’ to identify areas of
improvement—for instance, more clearly defining
roles and responsibilities, improving the selection
criteria for new participants and enhancing OSI-AF
management capabilities.
Conclusions
The BP and OSI-AF partnership continues to evolve. It
has required time and hard work on the part of all
involved to make the partnership a success, but it
represents a good example of how international
companies and national NGOs can work together
towards a mutually advantageous goal.
The capacity-building element of the programme
has resulted in the emergence of an ‘advanced group’
of civil society representatives that will use their skills
for other initiatives. Examples of projects where NGOs
will apply their knowledge are the EU’s European
Neighbourhood Policy Civil Society Forum and OSI’s
Revenue and Civil Society participation in the
Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (see the
EITI case study on page 92). As Julie McCarthy, director
of OSI’s Revenue Watch programme, indicates, ‘The NGO
Monitoring Programme, while by no means perfect, is
certainly one of the best examples to date that civil
society, extractive industries and the host government can
point to as a mutually beneficial endeavour. BP can
attempt to replicate the monitoring programme in other
key countries of operation.’
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Capacity building
PARTNERS: O&G • NGO
LEVEL: national
LOCATION: Caspian
Pipeline monitoring teamin Azerbaijan
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
36
Sustainable development in the Gulf of Paria, Venezuela
ConocoPhillips has lessons to share from conceptualizing, improving
and implementing a sustainable development framework in
collaboration and partnership with local and international stakeholders
in the Gulf of Paria in Venezuela.
Background
ConocoPhillips Venezuela and its partners discovered
offshore oil resources in the Gulf of Paria, Venezuela, in
1999. Plans are to begin production in the near future
and to remain in the area for more than 20 years.
The Gulf of Paria is an environmentally sensitive
estuarine region with high biodiversity. Communities
including indigenous Warao and fishermen rely on the
natural resources. Initial evaluations and meetings with
stakeholders identified many needs among those living
closest to the future oil operations, including income-
generating opportunities, education, skills and basic
services. However, the lack of an organized and
empowered community, a high staff turnover rate within
institutions and low capacity were seen as jeopardizing
investments. Efforts in the 1990s to improve conditions
heightened local expectations and communities became
accustomed to infrastructure donations and handouts.
The Sustainable Development Framework
To meet these complex challenges, in 2000
ConocoPhillips designed a sustainable development
framework with input from communities and local,
national and international stakeholders. The goals of
the framework were to:
■ establish and maintain a vision and principles for
how ConocoPhillips implements oil and gas
activities and investment programmes in the
region;
■ select, execute and monitor the investment
programmes to ensure that they fit regional
priorities and have tangible, near-term benefits for
key stakeholders;
■ establish, over the longer term, a common vision
for development among stakeholders; and
■ integrate feedback and continuously improve the
overall framework.
Progress
With the input of about 15 local and 40 international
stakeholders, ConocoPhillips has conceptualized and
executed more than 20 programmes in environmental,
socio-economic and operational areas since 2000. In
some cases, the collaboration has evolved into formal
partnerships with resource-sharing agreements:
Empowering Guiria fishermen to becomeentrepreneurs Since 2001, ConocoPhillips has worked with a local NGO,
the Venezuelan government and the fishing community
to deliver a comprehensive educational programme to
members of a fishermen’s association. In 2005, the
regional government donated a fish-gathering facility
to the fishermen. Fishermen leveraged this new asset
and transformed their association into a successful,
community-managed enterprise benefiting 600
people. ConocoPhillips plans to replicate this
partnership in other parts of the Gulf of Paria.
Putting Gulf of Paria biodiversity on the map Following a year of dialogue, in 2003 ConocoPhillips
signed a Memorandum of Understanding with
Conservation International to conduct and disseminate
studies, raise awareness and achieve consensus on
conservation priorities among more than 20 cross-
sector organizations. The partners published a
biodiversity action plan in 2004 and are now exploring
the feasibility of a community-based biodiversity
monitoring programme. In parallel, an agreement was
made with the Ministry of the Environment and the
United Nations Development Programme to work on a
regional conservation initiative for the Orinoco Delta.
Building capacity In 2003, ConocoPhillips partnered with the Inter-
American Foundation, and contracted the Synergos
Institute and local consultants to address the long-term
goal of encouraging local stakeholders to participate in
the development of the Gulf of Paria. Organizations
jointly assessed the community’s ability to identify
regional priorities, summon interest groups, raise funds
and allocate resources. In 2004, ConocoPhillips
convened workshops to explore ways to increase
community and institutional capacity and improve the
Key partners
Multiple local andinternational stakeholders,including:
• Communities
• ConocoPhillipsVenezuela
• ConservationInternational (CI)
• Inter-AmericanFoundation
• Ministry of theEnvironment andother governmentinstitutions
• United NationsDevelopmentProgramme (UNDP)
KEYWORDS: biodiversity; community development; health; oil spill response and planning
The lessons welearned from
implementation
Input fromstakeholdersand resultsof studies
ConocoPhillips• core values• policies• experience
Our LocalityManagement Strategy
Programmeimplementation
Evaluating programmeachievements
Stakeholder engagement,collaboration andpartnering are central toConocoPhillips’ approachto sustainable developmentin the Gulf of Paria.
37
quality of life in the gulf. Results of this participatory
process are being used to refine the company’s
2006–08 sustainable development investments.
Challenges and lessons learned
Early engagementIt is challenging to justify partnership exploration during
project planning. However, an early start increases the
chance of creating partnerships built on mutual and
strategic interests, rather than collaborations compelled
by controversy later in the project cycle. It also provides
time to explore desired outcomes, co-design strategies
and ‘test’ competencies prior to a formal agreement.
Common interestsDifferences in the level of understanding of issues and
lack of shared interests or perceived benefits hinder
partnership exploration and building. It is necessary to
accentuate areas of overlapping interests and to ensure
that benefits for each party outweigh burdens.
Community participationCommunity involvement is crucial to the long-term
viability of investments, but communities are unlikely
to participate unless they perceive benefits. Cross-
sector alliances structured around a local productive
activity with rapid and tangible economic benefits are
particularly successful at involving the community.
Institutional participationPartnerships should not encroach on the role of the
government; they should consider the government
investment focus—or gaps—in deploying resources.
RolesThe roles and responsibilities of the different
organizations need delineating early, to avoid
misrepresentation, minimize redundancy and
optimize resources.
CommitmentWillingness to dialogue should not be mistaken for
interest in partnering. Ownership and responsibility
partially result from the contribution of resources (in
kind, financial or other) commensurate with the size,
nature and means of each partner.
CapacityPartnership building is often challenging because of
the differing capacity of those involved. Training and
educational programmes can empower communities
and local institutions to assume their roles in
sustainable development.
Governance/operational differencesIntrinsic administrative and operational differences
between NGOs, government institutions and companies
can complicate working together. Organizations should
remain flexible to the procedures of others.
Competition/creditCompetition can hinder partnership building. Some
stakeholders may opt to create their own programme
instead of joining a well-established partnership.
Others may compete for a place in the partnership for
the financial leverage that this could represent.
Collaborative opportunities for investment can offer
synergistic benefits that outweigh competitive gains
from independent action.
ChampionEstablishing partnerships invariably requires a
‘champion’ organization, usually the first to perceive
common possibilities. This organization should be
prepared to invest more time and resources during
partnership exploration, until others see the full value
of their involvement.
Conclusion
Partnerships depend on mutual understanding and
trust, which naturally take time to develop. It is
therefore crucial to select the ‘right’ individuals capable
of inspiring, leading and instilling a sense of shared
purpose through frequent, preferably in-person,
communications, while allowing the time needed to
nurture lasting cross-organizational relationships.
For more information on the partnership work see
www.ConocoPhillipsParia.com
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Capacity building
PARTNERS: GOV • IGO • NGO • RI • COM
LEVEL: local/national/international
LOCATION: South America
ConocoPhillips hasconceptualized andcarried out more than20 programmes inenvironmental,socio-economic andoperational areassince 2000.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
38
The Emergency MedicineDevelopment Initiative in Azerbaijan
Hess, International Medical Corps and other partners are working
together to improve emergency health care services for communities in
and around the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) and South Caucasus
Pipeline (SCP) corridor in Azerbaijan.
Background
In 2003, Hess approached International Medical Corps
(IMC) to identify a project that would have a long-
lasting, positive impact on north-west Azerbaijan. The
partners developed the Emergency Medicine
Development Initiative (EMDI) to address road
accidents and other emergencies, among the leading
causes of morbidity and mortality in Azerbaijan.
The Emergency Medicine DevelopmentInitiative
The EMDI has improved patient outcomes and access
to effective emergency medical care provided by well-
trained and equipped physicians and nurses. The
initiative is focused on First Medical Emergency
Hospital No. 3, the main emergency hospital serving
Ganja (the second-largest city in Azerbaijan) and the
surrounding districts, which was in poor condition. The
three main objectives of Hess and IMC were to:
1. improve the skills of emergency medical personnel;
2. improve the infrastructure of the emergency
department and emergency surgery ward; and
3. provide new medical equipment, pharmaceuticals
and supplies.
The initiative was implemented in partnership with
the Ministry of Health, the Ganja Executive Committee,
the hospital and Ganja residents. The beneficiaries of
the EMDI are the more than one million people living in
Ganja and the surrounding districts. Additional
beneficiaries are hospital staff, employees working near
the BTC/SCP pipeline corridor and travellers on the new
Silk Road from Baku to Tbilisi (Georgia) via Ganja.
Progress
Johns Hopkins University emergency medicine experts
provided advanced training for the hospital’s
emergency medical team, as well as medical staff from
McDermott (an engineering firm working on the
pipelines) and doctors from the national landmine
removal programme. The hospital’s emergency
department was completely rehabilitated and
specialized equipment provided.
Hess’s support included developing project
workplans, implementing civil works and construction,
and obtaining the necessary government approvals. In
contrast to many development projects where donors
commit to funding technical support and training only,
Hess funded the full spectrum of needs, including
equipment and construction costs.
Widespread consultation with local stakeholders in
the community greatly increased the likelihood of
long-term sustainability for the initiative, with local
support leveraged from the very early planning stages.
The local community provided 25 per cent of the
project costs, including building materials, skilled and
unskilled labour, transportation services and cash
contributions.
Key partners
• Hess
• First MedicalEmergency HospitalNo. 3, Ganja
• Ganja ExecutiveCommittee(governor’s office forthe Ganja region)
• International MedicalCorps
• Johns HopkinsUniversity, BloombergSchool of PublicHealth and School ofMedicine
• Ministry of Health,Azerbaijan
KEYWORDS: pipeline construction; emergency medicine; training
An example of theimprovement in thequality of the hospitalwards at the Ganjahospital: the photographimmediately right showsone of the wards beforethe partnership project;the photograph on the farright shows how thewards look today.
39
NGOs working in Azerbaijan also contributed to the
initiative. The high degree of local support encouraged
the Azerbaijan government to recognize the value of
the project, assist with the hospital renovation and
revisit the national policy on accident care.
Challenges
The key challenge early on was to create a cohesive
project team from culturally diverse organizations.
Significant patience and team building were required
during the first months of the initiative to create the
necessary confidence and mutual respect to move the
project forward and to cement the new working
relationships.
The project team also faced an initial learning
curve in terms of financial reporting and project
implementation. Some key hospital staff, for example,
debated which parts of the hospital were priorities for
repair and which equipment was essential to meet the
project’s objectives. In addition, there was some
difficulty early on in securing assistance from regional
health authorities, as well as in controlling expectations
of both the regional government and the hospital
administrators.
Constant contact and close coordination between
Hess, IMC, regional health authorities and hospital staff
helped build confidence and trust. The arrival of
building materials on site and the commencement of
construction activities marked a key milestone, after
which came significant support from government
authorities and hospital staff.
Lessons learned
Including regional health authorities on the project
team was fundamental to overall success. It not only
helped with approvals to remodel the hospital, but also
created government ownership and commitment to
maintain the physical infrastructure and care for the
new equipment.
Similarly, securing buy-in and support from the
hospital administrative team was also vital to the
project’s success. Since all major decisions were made
as a team, the hospital staff rapidly acquired
confidence in the overall direction of the project and
increased their sense of ownership.
Conclusions
Hess and IMC worked in partnership with national and
international agencies to raise the quality of
emergency medical services at First Medical Emergency
Hospital No. 3. They provided modern training, life-
saving equipment and medicines to a once-dilapidated
emergency department that each year will benefit
thousands of people living in north-west Azerbaijan.
An important outcome of the EMDI is that its
success has sparked greater interest in emergency
medicine by other donors. As a result of the work of
Hess and its partners, the United Stated Agency for
International Development (USAID) approached IMC to
design an expansion programme for the EMDI in
partnership with corporate partners under USAID’s
Global Development Alliance mechanism.
In September 2005, Phase II of the EMDI was
launched. A much larger project, its budget is US$2.1
million over two years. Funders are USAID, Hess, Unocal
(Chevron), BP and the BTC/SCP Company. The scope of
the work and the geographic coverage have also
expanded, to cover five hospitals located along the
BTC/SCP pipeline route, to create national emergency
medicine training centres and to improve national
policy on emergency medicine services—in particular,
ambulance and in-hospital care.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Capacity building
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO • B&I
LEVEL: local
LOCATION: Caspian
Ganja hospitaladmission facilities, beforeand after the project
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
40
The Ormen Lange Slide Risk Project
Hydro and a group of universities, institutes and companies
collaborated in order to better understand the geology and historical
subsea slide mechanisms in the Storegga region on the Norwegian
continental margin.
Background
The Ormen Lange field is Norway’s second-largest gas
discovery. It is located off the north-west coast of
Norway within the scar of the Storegga Slide, which
took place about 8,200 years ago and is one of the
largest known submarine slides in the world. It created
tsunamis that reached the coast of Norway, Scotland,
and the Shetland and Faroe islands.
When the Ormen Lange licence was awarded in
1996, knowledge about the Storegga Slide was limited.
Also, the stability of the seabed in this area and the
timing and number of slides were uncertain. Risk
relating to development of the Ormen Lange field in
the slide area had to be assessed before the
development could be declared safe and feasible.
Questions concerned the slope stability, the probability
of a new large slide and the risk of tsunami.
Hydro decided to resolve these questions through
the ‘Ormen Lange Slide Risk Project’, a major joint effort
between industry and academia that ran from 1997 to
2003. The project involved national and international
research institutes and universities. Some parts of the
project were included in the Norwegian Deep Water
Programme, while other parts were performed in
cooperation with EU-funded projects.
The Ormen Lange Slide Risk Project
The mapping of slides and evaluation of slide risk
started in 1996, after the first deepwater licences were
awarded in the Møre/Vøring area. The Ormen Lange
project partners then conducted comprehensive data
acquisition, from 1999 to 2003, to establish the
database needed for the slide risk assessment. The
fieldwork included acquisition of seismic data, seabed
mapping, geological and geotechnical borings, in-situ
pore pressure measurements, seabed sampling for
dating and video inspections. In addition, mapping and
coring in fjords, lakes and bogs helped date earlier
tsunami events.
The study was complex, as many disciplines were
involved, and its conclusions were vital for the
development of the major gas field. The partners
therefore established an independent ‘verification
team’ of experts to follow up on the work. SINTEF (the
Foundation for Scientific and Industrial Research at the
Norwegian Institute of Technology) was contracted to
establish and lead the verification team.
The verification team had the freedom to deal with
those items that it considered as most critical. On two
occasions, the team was strengthened with additional
members as new issues came into focus. The expert
team comprised 17 individuals from 8 institutions in
Europe, Canada and the USA.
Progress and lessons learned
During the Ormen Lange project, workshops were
organized at least annually to monitor the progress of
the work. The workshops also gave participants an
opportunity to discuss issues and challenges that they
and the whole group were facing.
Particular features of the project required special
consideration—for example:
1. Working with several alternative explanation
models simultaneously was extremely useful,
however, it required significant resources (e.g. to
conduct additional fieldwork) to decide on the
most suitable model. Working in a large
partnership between academia and industry
increased the access to a wide range of expertise,
as well as to financial resources.
2. As a result of the multidisciplinary nature of the
project, the scope of the work expanded over time.
This ‘rolling snowball’ effect made long-term
planning difficult, and mobilization of
computational tools to comply with the expanding
scope sometimes required extensive effort. Again,
the partnership offered pooling of resources and
thereby easier adaptation to changes in the scope.
3. Key persons within the project experienced
significant long-term strain, as they were not
initially prepared for the increased project scope
during the later stages. Although budgets to
increase the resources were available and resources
Key partners
• British GeologicalSurvey
• Geological Survey ofNorway
• Hydro
• NORSAR
• NorwegianGeotechnical Institute
• Scandpower
• Svitzer
• University of Bergen
• University of Oslo
• University of Tromsø
KEYWORDS: gas field development; geological risk; research and development; external verification
41
were added when possible, the complex nature of
the project represented a challenge with regard to
knowledge transfer and update of new personnel,
especially in the later stage of the project.
4. The partners operate with different types and levels
of quality assurance and quality control systems
that are generally incompatible. Introduction of a
verification team proved to be useful in this
connection.
Main lessons learned from challenges during the
project are as follows:
■ It is important to avoid bottlenecks in the flow of
information between the partners, not least when
deadlines are tight. The expected output from each
partner should be clearly defined at all stages.
■ Exchange of information should serve a purpose.
Intermediate and ad hoc specialized workshops or
project meetings involving only a subset of the
partners can be efficient ways of ensuring this
exchange.
■ The role of and efforts required from each partner
should be clearly defined from the outset. The roles
may have to be redefined if the scope of the work
changes.
■ The partnership involved organizations with
different ‘cultures’, which represented both a
challenge and a source of mutual inspiration and
exchange of skills.
Conclusions
The project was able to conclude that developing the
Ormen Lange field was safe with respect to geohazards,
and that the development would not cause
unacceptable risk to third parties. The conclusions were
verified by an international verification team
comprising specialists in the relevant areas.
The study was unprecedented as a field
development site survey, not only in its size and its free
exchange of data, but also in its use of external parties
(the verification team) to guide the research.
The project helped build expertise in academia as
well as in the industry. This expertise is now applied to
evaluate geohazards for other developments along
continental margins. The results of the study have also
been extensively disseminated via journal articles and
conference papers, including special issues of selected
journals.
The development of Ormen Lange was dependent
on a scientifically based and publicly accepted
declaration that the area was safe from future slides.
This assurance could only be achieved through a
partnership, as no single academic institution had
sufficient breadth of expertise. It was equally important
that all questions that could be raised were raised and
resolved within the project. The partnership ensured an
open and transparent process between the academic
institutions and industry.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Capacity building
PARTNERS: GOV • RI
LEVEL: regional
LOCATION: Europe
Location of the Storegga Slide on theNorwegian Continental Shelf, with the slidefanning into the deep Norwegian Sea.TheOrmen Lange field is located at the head ofthe slide scar.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
42
Oil industry workforce development in Yemen
Canadian Nexen Petroleum Yemen has partnered with local and
national governments to build the skills of Nexen’s employees, in the
process developing Yemen’s oilfield expertise for the long term.
BackgroundSince Canadian Nexen Petroleum Yemen’s (Nexen)
entry into Yemen in the early 1990s with its Masila
Block project, a large-scale, multi-million-dollar oil
exploration, development and terminal operation, the
Yemeni workforce at this facility has grown to exceed
expatriate employees and now accounts for more than
70 per cent of the operational workforce.
Nexen’s partnership and profit-sharing agreement
with the Ministry of Oil & Minerals included a
development plan with the regional Hadhramout
Governorate to enhance local economic growth and
build the capacity of the local population.
The partnership evolved from its origin in the
profit-sharing agreement, to a process of engagement
with local and regional stakeholders, to develop the
capacity and capabilities of Yemen’s national oil
industry and to involve them in the staged growth of
national employees through what would become
Nexen’s ‘Yemenization’ programme.
The training and Yemenization programme
Nexen’s Yemenization programme is designed to
increase the percentage of Yemenis in the company’s
workforce by recruiting them and then engaging them
in a formal training and development programme
called the Individual Development Programme (IDP).
The localization programme also seeks to enhance the
professional development of Yemenis in the oil and gas
industry in their country.
In the IDP, every national employee has a tailor-
made plan that identifies the employee’s specific
training and development needs. Each employee’s
progress is monitored and mentorship is provided to
guide that employee’s development. Upon successful
completion, national employees may be promoted to
replace selected positions held by expatriate staff.
Nexen has training facilities at all three of its main
locations: the central processing facility (CPF), the marine
export terminal (Terminal) and the office at Sana’a,
Yemen’s capital. The main Training Centre is located at the
CPF and consists of a variety of classrooms as well as shop
facilities. The Terminal and Sana’a facilities have multi-
purpose classrooms and computer training facilities.
The training programme at Nexen has four levels:
■ Level 1: The new trainee begins the technical
courses and also enters an intensive English
language instruction programme. The need for a
single working language is emphasized for
operational and safety reasons.
■ Level 2: The trainee selects a discipline (operations
vs. maintenance) and commences intensive study
of theoretical and practical aspects of that
discipline. Simultaneously, the Environmental
Health & Safety department provides a full range of
mandatory training.
■ Level 3: The trainee is relocated to the relevant
department and assumes the daily requirements of
the job, with mentoring and supervision.
■ Level 4: The trainee reaches the target level for
Yemeni employees and can function independently
in the position.
Flexibility in the programme allows Nexen to reduce
the length of training time considerably, if the trainee’s
abilities allow for it. Not all training can be given at the
training centres; some specialized training is held off-
site or out of country as required, and often subject-
matter experts are brought in to conduct training.
Periodic evaluations are done on the training
programmes in Yemen, to ensure that they meet the
standards and objectives set.
Key partners
• Canadian NexenPetroleum Yemen
• ConsolidatedContractors Company
• HadhramoutGovernorate, Republicof Yemen
• Ministry of Oil &Minerals, Republic ofYemen
• Occidental Peninsula Inc.
KEYWORDS: development of local workforce; training; stakeholder engagementYe
men
i nat
iona
ls (%
of w
orkf
orce
)
2000 2001 20020
20
40
60
80
2003 2004
Yemeni nationals nowcomprise 77 per cent ofNexen’s workforce(including contractors) atMasila, continuing anupward trend. In Yemen,Nexen employs almost1,000 people.
Yemeni nationals in the Masila block workforce, 2000–04
43
With high unemployment and a minimum of
technical opportunities in the area, recruitment is
managed through an operating committee, to ensure
fair and equitable allocation of positions to qualified
individuals. Nexen’s human resources division works
closely with the governorate and with the oil ministry’s
Yemenization manager to advertise, test candidates
and fill positions as they become available.
Taking this work further, in 1998 Nexen and its
partners in the Masila Block project adopted a
scholarship programme in Yemen designed to enhance
national capacity by providing scholarships to Yemeni
students to pursue post-secondary studies at Canada’s
University of Calgary or the Southern Alberta Institute
of Technology, in disciplines that will positively impact
economic development in Yemen.
Upon graduating, these students return to Yemen
to take on positions external to Nexen, filling both a
societal need and building Yemen’s national capacity.
The scholarship programme exemplifies the strong
partnership between the government of Yemen, its
people, Nexen and its Masila Block partners.
Progress
Since the start of the Masila Block project in the early
1990s, the number of Yemeni nationals employed at
Nexen has increased significantly. These employees are
also more skilled and hold more responsible positions
within the company. In Yemen, Nexen employs almost
1,000 people.
For the continued success of the programme,
Nexen and its partners conduct regular stewardship
meetings and work from a business plan that is
updated and approved annually. The increasing
localization will continue as long as Nexen is a partner
in the Masila Block project.
Challenges and lessons learned
As with any regulated programme, flexibility, equity
and transparency are issues that need to be faced in a
collaborative and open environment if the programme
is to be successful and sustainable.
Working closely with its partners and the operating
committee, Nexen has been proactive in understanding
issues associated with culture, language, customs,
nepotism and education, to bring balance and a long-
term vision of success to the programme.
Capturing and sustaining a culture of safety and
environmental stewardship in the absence of specific
regulation necessitated new and innovative ways to
train and communicate.
Critical to the success of this public-private
partnership was (and is) transparency and a willingness
to work with regional governments, local customs and
the Yemeni culture. Nexen learned early in the process
to be open and responsive to the suggestions of its
partners (government) and to treat these opportunities
as gateways to lasting relationships.
Conclusions
The Yemenization programme helps ensure continued
safe and effective operations, and is building an
experienced oilfield workforce as a lasting legacy once
Nexen completes the terms of its current production-
sharing agreement with the Yemeni government. Nexen’s
commitment to this programme has resulted in a positive
and lasting relationship of trust and cooperation with the
government of Yemen and its people.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Capacity building
PARTNERS: GOV • RI
LEVEL: national
LOCATION: Middle East
EN
TR
Y
OR
IE
NT
AT
IO
NFJQ
PJQ
PJQ
FT
FJQ = fully job qualified PJQ = part job qualifiedFT = full-time trainee OJT = on-the-job trainee
FU
LL
Y J
OB
EX
PE
RE
NC
ED
Low tech.
Low English
sk
ills
la
dd
erOJT
OJT
OJTFTtraining
FJQ
FJQ
FJQ
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
IND
IVID
UA
L D
EVEL
OPM
ENT
PAN
Far left: Nexen’sIndividual DevelopmentProgramme (IDP) hasfour basic levels:1. Level 1: entry;2. Level 2:training for a
specific trade;3. Level 3: on-the-job
training; and4. Level 4: individual
development plan(IDP).
Near left: the programmeprovides extensive hands-on practice, both in theworkshops and the field.
Nexen’s Individual Development Programme (IDP)
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
44
Sustainable harvesting of biodiversity resourcesat Flower Valley, South Africa
Through a fusion of conservation expertise, financial investment,
business skills and long-term access to consumer markets, Shell and its
partners are working in South Africa to conserve biodiversity, generate
jobs, and improve the quality of life for local people through the
sustainable harvesting and sale of flowers and associated products.
Background
South Africa’s Cape Floral Kingdom is one of the world’s
most botanically rich habitats, with nearly 70 per cent
of the plant species found nowhere else on Earth. It is
home to the heath-like fynbos (or fine bush) vegetation
belt, the global record holder for floral diversity.
However, the fynbos is at great risk from agricultural
(for example vineyards) and urban development,
commercial tree planting and invasive plant species.
Reducing the pressure on this unique habitat in a way
that could also deliver social and economic progress in a
low-income, high-unemployment area was the challenge
that the Flower Valley project sought to address.
Between 1999 and 2002, with the support of
various donors, Fauna and Flora International (FFI)
purchased 1,338 hectares of globally important fynbos
land including Flower Valley Farm, a pre-existing
flower-harvesting operation. FFI then established the
Flower Valley Conservation Trust (FVCT) to take on
ownership and assess opportunities to link
conservation and local economic development
strategies through the sustainable use of natural
resources. FFI introduced Shell to the project, and the
company quickly recognized that a strong trading
operation would support the conservation and
community initiatives in Flower Valley.
Development of the partnership
The project has evolved in two distinct phases, involving
two overlapping sets of partners. In the first phase
(started in 2002), Shell South Africa, Shell International
and FVCT worked together to improve the flower
production process and develop a business model that
cultivated downstream retail outlet opportunities at
Shell retail stations in South Africa and the UK while
addressing conservation and local poverty issues. Shell
also contributed almost US$ 258,000 over three years to
support the management of FVCT and purchase much-
needed equipment at Flower Valley Farm.
The second phase began in 2003, when changes in
South African tax legislation required FVCT to separate
its non-profit and commercial activities. Fynsa (Pty) (Ltd)
was created when a group of UK-based investors
bought the business from FVCT. Shell Foundation came
into the project, motivated by an opportunity to
develop increased market access in an environmentally
and socially sustainable fashion in an area with high
unemployment rates.
The Shell Foundation’s innovative partnership with
Marks & Spencer (M&S) is being used to facilitate access
to a much larger retail market. The Foundation is
assisting Fynsa to build both its capacity and its ability
to meet M&S supplier standards, and also helping fund
around 15 neighbouring farms to meet international
labour standards, supply Fynsa with flowers in
accordance with M&S standards and meet South
African conservation agency CapeNature’s best-practice
criteria for harvesting in the wild.
Progress and lessons learned
Partnerships sometimes come together quickly in
response to an urgent issue (in this case, dual
conservation and poverty pressures), often without
time to develop a solid foundation before beginning
work. For this project, the immediate need for
investment was clear—the partnering arrangement
and supply chain opportunities were only considered
Key partners
• Fauna and FloraInternational
• Flower ValleyConservation Trust
• Fynsa (Pty) (Ltd)
• Marks & Spencer
• Shell Foundation
• Shell International
• Shell South Africa
KEYWORDS: sustainable resource use; sustainable livelihoods; partnership KPIs (key performance indicators)
45
in detail as the project developed. In the absence of
initial targets, partners had to pay greater attention to
communication and governance to keep the project
on track.
The absence of initial targets could be considered a
major constraint to quantifying progress and optimizing
the business/partnering process, but in reality it
facilitated a flexible, ad hoc approach in the early
stages, when the eventual outcomes from applying a
commercial model in a development setting were still
uncertain. As the uncertainties have diminished, key
performance indicators have been developed for use in
the second phase to monitor progress and assess how
effectively the partnership is working.
The creation of Fynsa gave rise to new commercial
opportunities. However, the split also led to significant
tensions between this new commercial entity and
FVCT. In resolving these tensions, the partners learned
a number of lessons:
■ The four- to six-month period between the start of
the negotiations and the transfer of the business
aspects to Fynsa was too short, and appropriate
agreements and management processes were not
in place. Sufficient time to prepare and to develop
trust is necessary before partners move from
negotiation to implementation. The process of
building a successful partnership should not be
rushed or accelerated beyond its natural pace.
■ The people initially brought in to manage Fynsa
had little prior exposure to the project. A
breakdown in the relationship with FVCT led to
Fynsa agreeing to change its management and
board leadership in January 2005. These changes
have revitalized communications and brought
extensive marketing experience and an
entrepreneurial spirit to Fynsa. Successful roll-out is
clearly as much about getting people with the right
approach and style on board as it is about getting
the management structure and plans in place
before launching the partnership.
■ The potential clashes between a public benefit
conservation partner and a commercial partner
used to a more aggressive and competitive
environment were unforeseen. An exercise such as a
SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats) analysis of the partners could have
eliminated or reduced this potential and could also
have formed the basis for partnership agreements
detailing the roles and expectations of each partner.
The tensions between FVCT and Fynsa highlight
the difficulty other partners may face in controlling or
influencing some partner interactions. In this case, the
resolution of issues between FVCT and Fynsa was
largely outside the direct control of Shell or the Shell
Foundation.
Conclusions
The Flower Valley project has highlighted the strength
of partnerships in developing and taking forward
innovative approaches to conservation—alone, none
of the partners had the capacity or skills to successfully
deliver the desired conservation and livelihood outcomes.
The project also indicates that the private sector
can provide business skills to help the conservation
community achieve its goals hand in hand with social
and economic development. Although the partnership
is still developing, Fynsa is well positioned to become a
strong player in the marketplace for sustainably
produced goods.
The partnership project has demonstrated the
viability of a business model for resource conservation
and sustainable livelihoods, with the potential for
replication within and beyond South Africa.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Capacity building
PARTNERS: NGO • B&I
LEVEL: regional
LOCATION: Africa
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
46
The development of a strategic relationship
The partners—Royal Dutch Shell and Living Earth Foundation—
have been working together on a range of sustainable development
issues for the past 16 years and are now developing their partnership
into a ‘strategic institutional relationship’.1
Development of the partnership
Shell is a global group of energy and petrochemical
companies under the umbrella of the corporate centre
known as Shell International. Living Earth Foundation,
based in the UK, is an international environmental NGO
working in more than 11 countries and specializing in
environmental education and community development.
The relationship began when Living Earth
approached Shell International to discuss a Shell
subcontractor’s statements about the environmental
impact of Shell’s work in Venezuela. Shell’s openness to
dialogue enabled a relationship to develop between
individuals in the organizations, which eventually
evolved into a partnership.
Shell and Living Earth began formally working
together in 1991, when Shell International in London
provided financial support for Living Earth to move an
existing project in Venezuela into a new phase. Shell
International then invited Living Earth to participate in
several internal staff workshops. As a result, Living
Earth built a reputation within Shell as a pragmatic and
honest NGO.
In 1995, Shell was experiencing considerable
difficulties in Nigeria. Living Earth, already working in
Cameroon, provided Shell with its perspective on the
issues and problems. As a result, Living Earth proposed
to Shell to undertake ongoing work in Nigeria. The
subsequent work included community engagement
panels, workshops and capacity building.2
Over the past 16 years, Shell and Living Earth have
extended their collaboration into three continents and
nine countries, including South Africa, Northeast Russia
and Alaska. This global relationship has allowed Living
Earth to magnify its positive impact on communities
and the environment, and has resulted in genuine
business benefits for Shell.
Challenges
Research into partnerships frequently indicates
setbacks and difficulties. In the Shell–Living Earth
relationship, activity and contact have been limited
during some periods. Both partners have identified
problems in the following areas:
Partnership working Historically, the Shell group of businesses has tended to
engage with other organizations on a contractual basis,
rather than through a partnership approach. Effecting a
transition to partnership working requires a shift in
thinking, culture and working practices.
Staff and department changes Changes of staff and departments within Shell have
meant that Living Earth has needed to renegotiate
many aspects of the relationship with new staff
members, including the building of trust and mutual
confidence.
CompetitionShell has actively integrated a number of Living
Earth’s suggestions. While this receptivity clearly
indicates the NGO’s contribution to the relationship,
‘community development’ departments within Shell,
which have a similar remit, have on occasion viewed
Living Earth as competition.
Financial management Shell deals in billions of dollars, rather than
thousands, and pays its bills at long intervals, rather
than monthly. While Shell has difficulty understanding
the need for regular payments, especially when they
are deemed to be ‘small’, Living Earth is reliant on
such payments and consequently has difficulty
managing its cash flow.
Key partners
• Living EarthFoundation
• Royal Dutch Shell
KEYWORDS: institutionalization of NGO consultative partnership
1 The terms ‘institutional’ and ‘institutionalization’ are used here toindicate several distinct but complementary processes:regularization, formal establishment of working principles andpractices, and stability.
2 For more on the Shell–Living Earth partnership work in Nigeria, seeSimon Heap’s book, NGOs Engaging Business: A World of Difference and aDifference to the World, published by INTRAC, Oxford, UK, in 2000.
Nigeria—SustainableLivelihoods programme(Shell PetroleumDevelopment Corporationand Living EarthNigeria Foundation):rattan cane beingprocessed into fishbaskets.
47
Continuity and fund allocationAt times, particular partnership projects have been
proposed and agreed in principle, but financing has
not been available. While the resulting lapses of
continuity have been frustrating for Living Earth, the
difficulty for Shell stems from its need to allocate funds
from within specific budgets. Despite their appreciation
of the need for particular projects, Shell International
and its local businesses have been uncertain which of
them is responsible for fund allocation in some cases.
Organizational trust Few people within Shell have the experience and
understanding of either the concept or the practice of
conducting a strategic relationship with an NGO. Shell
acknowledges that some of its staff have reservations
about Living Earth, finding it difficult to believe that an
NGO can possess an informed or deep understanding
of a large, multi-layered and complex company.
The process of recognizing these problems has
yielded recent changes in structure, focus and direction
for the partnership.
Benefits and advantages
A subtle, multi-faceted and interactive relationship has
emerged between the two partners. For Shell, there is a
good business case for working with Living Earth. The
organization brings an external perspective and
specific expertise to Shell, and its ability to bring
together players from different sectors enables Shell to
better understand and engage with local communities,
organizations and individuals, and to actively address
their concerns.
As Barnaby Briggs, head of the Social Performance
Management Unit, Shell International, says, ‘We are
delighted with the way the partnership is working. The
relationship we have with Living Earth is open, critical and
constructive, and there is no doubt that it is helping us to
achieve our business and social objectives in sensitive
locations around the world.’
For Living Earth, working with Shell is a powerful
way of furthering its charitable objectives. The
relationship also provides ‘leverage’—that is, ‘if they do
it right with Shell’, then the NGO acquires greater
credibility and better positioning in relation to other
companies and organizations. Furthermore, through
working with Shell, Living Earth now knows how to
approach and talk to the private sector, plus it has
become more adept at ‘walking Shell employees through
various processes’.
Roger Hammond, Living Earth Foundation’s
development director, notes that ‘with Shell we are
working with a company that is willing to share risks and
work with us to build solutions in real-life situations. We
are not dealing with PR platitudes but are engaged in
work that neither entity could achieve on its own. This is
what we call partnership.’
Conclusions
As trust has developed in the partnership, both Shell
International and Living Earth have become more
appreciative of their partner’s strengths and
weaknesses and more confident in questioning each
other’s objectives, perspectives and approaches. The
original patterns of working through individual
projects are evolving into an institutionalized
strategic relationship.
The well-established practice whereby Living Earth
provides external perspectives to Shell is likely to bring
benefits at an increasingly high level of decision
making. The following specific consequences can be
envisaged:
■ Shell will adopt an increasingly systemic approach
to sustainable development in all of its work.
■ Living Earth’s systemic approach will support better
risk management.
■ Shell will enjoy cost benefits with more effective
planning and management from the outset.
■ Shell International and Living Earth’s strategic
institutional relationship will serve as a model for
Shell’s local businesses.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Capacity building
PARTNERS: NGO
LEVEL: local/provincial
LOCATION: global
What’s the catch? Many people are stillvery suspicious of NGObusiness partnerships, sofocus on the impact ofwhat you do together.
Ghana—Living Earthfacilitated Shell Ghanato work with a cluster oflocal stakeholders toestablish a viable fishfreezing business.Thishas resulted in positiveenvironmental and socialimpacts.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
48
The Carbon Mitigation Initiative
The Carbon Mitigation Initiative—a partnership between BP, the
Ford Motor Company and Princeton University—is seeking
compelling and sustainable solutions to the carbon and climate change
problem through a long-term research programme.
Background
Scientific evidence points toward a future constrained
by the consequences of a relentless increase in
atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Continuing to use
fossil fuels will require implementing new technologies
on an unprecedented scale to capture and store the
majority of the predicted 1,000 billion tons of carbon
emissions this century.
The new technical approaches must not only
address atmospheric carbon and associated climate
impacts, but also be environmentally benign and avoid
prohibitive costs and disruption of energy consumption
patterns. Solutions to this unique challenge must be
delivered at an accelerated pace and in a way that the
public accepts.
Development of the partnership
Rising to this challenge, BP sought to engage with an
academic institution to undertake long-term research
that could clarify the issues and identify solutions to
the climate change problem. BP was not looking for a
service provider but for a partner that could give it
access to long-term thinking and technology
development, and could think ‘outside the box’. As an
environmentally aware energy company, BP could offer
field and technical experience, access to data, support
for new thinking and an industry perspective on global
policy issues.
In 2000, BP chose Princeton University to establish
a ‘carbon mitigation research institute’, based on the
university’s proposal and its access to key staff and
resources, particularly for CO2 capture and storage
technology, the hydrogen electric economy and earth
system modelling.
Ford Motor Company, with which BP was already
developing a strategic alliance, also joined as a key
partner, increasing financial support and extending
involvement across the supply chain. Ford brought a
useful perspective on transportation issues, along with
its technical knowledge on fuel cells, fuels and
efficiency, and experience in product development.
In October 2000, the three partners formed the
Carbon Mitigation Initiative (CMI), its mission to
develop new approaches to carbon management.
Recognizing the complexity and longevity of the issues,
both industrial partners made a substantial 10-year
commitment, with BP contributing US$15.1 million and
Ford contributing $5 million.
Current work is focused via four groups:
1. The Carbon Capture Group—assessing the
feasibility and potential costs of reducing carbon
emissions from electricity, hydrogen and synfuels
production, and exploring hybrid fossil-renewable
energy schemes.
2. The Carbon Storage Group—evaluating the
effectiveness and leakage potential of
underground storage.
3. The Carbon Science Group—quantifying natural
CO2 sources and sinks, and creating impact models
for global carbon cycle management.
4. The Integration Group—assessing the economic
and environmental impacts of carbon mitigation
strategies, as well as synthesizing and
disseminating CMI research.
Lessons learned and challenges
In adopting a multidisciplinary and multi-sectoral
approach, the CMI opened the door both to technical
and policy solutions and to partnering-related
challenges and opportunities:
Interaction of industrial and academic partnersBusiness and academic institutions are very different
types of organizations, but both have a lot to learn
from each other. By working together, the partners
have been able to facilitate innovation and delivery.
Engaging in ‘big picture’ discussions (see chart) can
build bridges between participants whose fields of
interest do not clearly overlap. Both BP and Ford have
adopted this approach in their carbon mitigation
efforts. Both companies encourage CMI staff and
directors to visit their offices to promote the two-way
flow of information.
Key partners
• BP
• Ford Motor Company
• Princeton University
KEYWORDS: technical research programme; carbon mitigation; CO2 capture and storage
THEME: Climate change
PARTNERS: B&I • RI
LEVEL: global
LOCATION: global
49
Relationship building As for most, if not all, flourishing partnerships, the
successful development of CMI has relied on the growth
of trust and respect between the partners. Developing
trust takes time, and there are few, if any, shortcuts.
As trust builds, an open, transparent and close
working relationship develops, along with the mutual
desire to ensure that each partner benefits.
Playing to the partners’ strengthsLinks between partners are stronger on some topics
than on others. For example, BP and Princeton are
working closely on underground storage, where both
parties have a clear interest. Each partner must play to
its strengths, with the ultimate goal being to maximize
the overall benefits for the partnership, rather than for
any one organization.
Development of capacity to deliver outcomesWhile researchers with long-standing collaborations
(such as in the Carbon Science and Carbon Capture
groups) were able to quickly generate results, work in
new areas delivered new thinking more slowly,
underlining the need for the partners’ commitment to a
long-term partnership.
By the end of the first year, more than 50 staff
members had been added to the CMI roster. This
extraordinary success in recruitment reflects not only
the compelling nature of the challenge, but also the
10-year life of the partnership. The opportunity to
develop solutions over an extended period has helped
attract and retain key academics and researchers.
All CMI partners understand the need to remain
informed on alternative thinking, competing
technologies and innovative research from other
initiatives and organizations. As one mechanism, an
active six-person advisory committee brings external
perspectives to CMI. The initiative also undertakes
scouting activities on relevant topics, which enhances
capacity building for both the staff and the partnership.
Management of the partnershipMicro-management by the industrial partners has been
minimized to ensure that academic freedom,
innovation and a sense of ‘adventure’ can flourish. For
example, CMI’s Carbon Capture Group analyses
scenarios using a variety of energy sources, including
coal, natural gas, biomass and wind power. Rather than
steer the research towards BP- or Ford-related interests,
the industry partners have encouraged the group’s
explorations and have gained a broad perspective on
the future of energy as a result.
The partners have adopted a ‘light-touch’
management style, relying on frequent informal
contact and regular CMI team meetings, supplemented
by annual progress reviews and formal reviews every
three years for contract renewal purposes.
Conclusions
The complex subject matter, the nature of the specific
sector partners and each partner’s way of collaborating
have challenged the partnership. However, the
partners’ common interests and their continuing desire
to work together have contributed to overcoming the
challenges.
Partnerships are hard work—they rarely happen by
accident, and if they do, they tend to have a limited life.
CMI is entering its sixth year and continues to go from
strength to strength.
Successful partnerships can deliver exceptional
results, and CMI has delivered innovative analyses and
concepts that have contributed to industry and
government thinking on solving climate change issues.
The results are beyond what any partner could have
achieved individually, highlighting the strengths of a
well-managed partnership.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
carb
on e
mis
sion
s ( b
illio
n to
nnes
/yea
r)
1955 20050
7
14
2055 2105
historicalemissions
currently
projected path
seven ‘wedges’
towardtripling
CO2
avoiddoubling
CO2
flat path
Over the next 50 years,about 200 billion tons ofcarbon emissions willneed to be avoided toprevent a doubling ofatmospheric CO2 andavoid the worst predictedconsequences of climatechange. CMI’s‘stabilization wedges’concept divides thisamount into seven equal‘wedges’ that grow fromzero now to mitigating1 billion tons of carbonemissions per year by2055. CMI researchershave identified 15existing strategies—including renewableenergy, carbon captureand storage, efficiencyimprovements, andnuclear energy—thateach already have thecapacity to reduceemissions by one wedge.The concept has proved asuccessful tool forcommunicating the scaleof the mitigation effortneeded and promotingdiscussion amongstakeholders.
The CMI’s ‘stabilization wedges’ concept
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
50
The Global Climate and Energy Project
An industry-academia partnership has established the Global
Climate and Energy Project at Stanford University to research
energy technology that addresses climate change.
Background
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions while
simultaneously meeting the world’s growing energy
needs requires innovative and cost-effective
technology. To promote this objective, the Global
Climate and Energy Project (GCEP) between Stanford
University in the USA, ExxonMobil and three other
companies (General Electric, Schlumberger and Toyota)
has been established. GCEP seeks to mobilize the most
creative research and development (R&D) processes in
academia to accelerate the generation of breakthrough
leads for advanced energy technologies with low
greenhouse gas emissions.
GCEP at Stanford University is the largest privately
funded programme of academic research on energy
technology to address climate change. ExxonMobil,
General Electric, Schlumberger and Toyota plan to
contribute US$225 million to the project over 10 or more
years, with ExxonMobil providing up to $100 million.
Stanford University is well suited to generate and
explore innovative leads arising from fundamental
science, and it has the wide range of expertise
required. ExxonMobil recognizes the advantage of
bringing independent, imaginative minds in academia
into the effort, to complement its in-house R&D. In
addition, an important by-product of working with
academia is the ability to build strategic, long-term
capacity. This occurs by refocusing traditional
engineering disciplines to address long-term energy
challenges and training a new generation of highly
skilled students with enthusiasm to contribute to
solutions in the coming decades.
The Global Climate and Energy Project
Begun in 2002, the 10-year Global Climate and Energy
Project aims to accelerate development of
breakthrough leads in commercially viable
technologies that are able to meet global energy
demand while dramatically lowering greenhouse gas
emissions. According to Stanford University’s President
John Hennessy, ‘GCEP is building a scientific foundation
for creative solutions to bear on some of the Earth’s most
daunting challenges.’
In establishing GCEP, all participants agreed on
three principles that would be essential for its success
in an academic setting:
1. Individual research programmes must be of the
highest quality and directed at high-risk, high-
reward opportunities.
2. Full academic freedom is vital for everyone
involved in the project—faculty, students and
others.
3. Results will be published in peer-reviewed
literature and publicized widely.
The partners worked to ensure that these principles
were clearly expressed in the GCEP Agreement and
continue to stress them as the project proceeds.
GCEP’s areas of research include the study of
biomass, wind, solar and other renewable energies;
advanced combustion; production and use of
hydrogen; carbon capture and storage; advanced
transportation; advanced materials; advanced coal; and
power production, distribution and storage. In
addressing these areas, researchers seek technological
leads that may overcome current barriers to large-scale
commercial applications, such as cost, performance,
safety, environmental and regulatory compliance, and
consumer acceptance.
Stanford University is responsible for developing
and managing GCEP research, using a variety of
approaches to stimulate cutting-edge research,
including visiting other institutions around the world
and convening workshops on particular theme areas
(for example advanced transport), to identify
potential research leads and current barriers. Stanford
then solicits step-out, breakthrough research
proposals that are subject to a rigorous peer review
and approval process.
A unique aspect of GCEP is the creation of
academic research at Stanford to evaluate the potential
of the GCEP research portfolio in making a significant
contribution to reducing future greenhouse gas
emissions. This capability will enable research priorities
to be readjusted within GCEP and throughout the
Key partners
• ExxonMobil
• General Electric
• Schlumberger
• Stanford University
• Toyota
KEYWORDS: greenhouse gas emissions; energy technology; research capacity building
51
global research community, allowing the project to
adapt and to focus on the most promising
opportunities.
Progress and outcomes of the partnership
Roughly three years into the project, GCEP has now
awarded nearly 30 research programmes totalling close
to $55 million. At Stanford, the research programmes
involve more than 100 students and post-doctoral
fellows and 37 faculty from 13 departments. Another
13 faculty are engaged from eight other institutions in
Australia, Japan, Europe and the United States.
Current GCEP-funded research efforts include work
in solar energy, biomass, hydrogen production, fuel
cells, advanced combustion, and carbon capture and
storage. In the future, other areas will be assessed and
added to the portfolio. For example, advanced coal and
transportation are now under consideration.
The alliance of scientific researchers and
technology-driven companies supports GCEP studies
at Stanford, as well as collaborative and independent
efforts with other research institutions in the USA and
around the world. Of particular importance is the
involvement of institutions in developing countries
with fast-growing economies, where energy demands
will increase most rapidly in the years ahead.
Scientists and engineers from developing countries
regularly participate in GCEP workshops on the
current state of the art in various technology areas.
For example GCEP hosted a workshop in August 2005
in Beijing on advanced power generation with carbon
capture and storage.
The role of private sector partners involves more
than funding. Long-term experience in research,
development and commercialization of technologies
on a global scale enables companies to contribute
technical expertise and practical insight into the
barriers that may limit the commercial success of new
technologies. According to Professor Lynn Orr, the
GCEP project director at Stanford, ‘industry perspectives
can illuminate the university research process in very
important ways: posing questions, challenging
researchers and helping the research groups understand
current barriers to technology implementation.’
Lessons learned
After three years, it remains a challenge to generate
truly innovative research proposals with the potential
for game-changing outcomes to energy technology on
a global scale. In part, this occurs because the issues
addressed have been under consideration for many
years by many smart scientists—so potentially
promising leads have already been explored in great
depth. In addition, academic scientists typically
compete for funding from sources with far more
structured mandates—so they have become
accustomed to framing proposals that are more
conventional, incremental and likely to succeed. It
requires significant ongoing effort to communicate
GCEP’s mandate to seek out high-quality, high-risk
research with the potential for a major breakthrough.
Conclusions
A diverse set of research programmes are now under
way, with more in the pipeline as the project evolves to
a steady state level of activity. GCEP has galvanized a
renewed interest by faculty and students in the role of
advanced energy technologies to provide solutions to
global challenges.
GCEP’s results are available to any interested party.
In particular, ExxonMobil and the other GCEP partners
will harvest promising research leads and, through
their efforts and in collaboration with others, seek to
turn leads into commercial technologies that can be
deployed on a global scale.
For more information on GCEP activities see
http://gcep.stanford.edu
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Climate change
PARTNERS: B&I • RI
LEVEL: global
LOCATION: global
A GCEP graduate-student researcherinvestigates more efficientcombustion engines inthe Advanced EnergySystems Laboratory atStanford University.
KEYWORDS: risk-based evaluation tool; research and development; intellectual property management
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
52
The CO2 Capture Project
An international group of energy companies, in conjunction with
government agencies and in cooperation with educational institutions
and NGOs, are pursuing technological breakthroughs for the capture
and storage of CO2.
Background
As the world demand for energy increases, with fossil
fuels accounting for most of the energy generation, CO2
concentrations in the world’s atmosphere are expected
to reach twice the pre-industrial level by the end of this
century. A number of adverse effects, including global
climate changes, could result. The potential risks
associated with taking no action—coupled with the
length of time required to stabilize CO2 concentrations
in the atmosphere—argue for taking immediate action.
No single technology is capable of providing a
solution. Instead, a mix of approaches, including using
alternative energy and more efficiently using conventional
fuels, will be required. Another approach that is part of
the solution is capturing CO2 from the combustion of
fossil fuels and storing the captured CO2 underground.
To look further at CO2 capture and storage, eight
oil companies and three government agencies set up
the CO2 Capture Project (CCP – Phase I) in 2000.
The CO2 Capture Project
The partnership is taking a multi-phase approach to:
■ develop technology that will reduce the costs and
improve efficiencies of CO2 capture through the use
of advanced technologies;
■ demonstrate storage is safe and secure; and
■ communicate the project findings for use by policy
makers to support the implementation of CO2
capture and storage.
The CCP is providing answers to questions
regarding well integrity and storage in saline aquifers,
and developing a certification framework for storage
applications.
An Executive Board, composed of representatives
of the participating companies, directs the CCP. Five
technical project teams, working with external
technical experts, oversee five areas of development:
1. Capture: evaluating and advancing specific capture
technologies.
2. Storage: verifying the feasibility of underground
storage, and developing improved monitoring and
verification methods.
3. Economics: understanding and comparing the
costs and benefits of various approaches to capture
and storage.
4. Communications: building awareness of the
technical developments among policy makers and
interested stakeholders.
5. Policy: assessing the impact of proposed
government policies and regulations on CO2
capture and storage.
An independent Technical Advisory Board of private
and public sector representatives unassociated with the
participating companies objectively evaluates the research
and guides the project teams’ developmental work.
The CCP works with governments, industry, academic
institutions and environmental interest groups, and
subjects the products of its research to vigorous peer
review. The programme has now entered Phase II.
Key partners
Companies:
• BP
• BR Petrobras **
• Chevron
• ConocoPhillips**
• EnCana *
• Eni
• Norsk Hydro
• Shell
• Statoil *
• Suncor Energy
Government agencies:
• European Commission
• The Research Councilof Norway (Norgesforskningsråd)
• UK DTI (Departmentof Trade and Industry)
• U.S. Department of Energy
* Phase I only
** Phase II only
CCPExecutive Board
TechnicalAdvisory
Board
AssociateParticipants
(Phase II only)
Technology Providers
Econ
omic
s Tea
m
Capt
ure
Team
Com
mun
icat
ions
Team
Polic
y Te
am
Stor
age,
Mon
itorin
g an
dVe
rific
atio
n (S
MV)
Team
Progress
In Phase I the CCP developed a risk-based tool for
evaluating the most appropriate storage sites, and also
successfully integrated research and development of
storage, monitoring and verification with the concerns
of NGOs and policy makers. More than 200 capture
technologies were evaluated for potential application
to full-scale development. Phase I was completed in
2003 with the broad publication of its results, including
a two-volume compilation of findings.
CCP2 Programme Structure
53
Phase II (2004–08) is focused on further
development of cost-effective and versatile capture
and storage technologies, with the objective of moving
to operational demonstration in Phase III in 2009.
The most promising technologies studied have
shown large potential for cost-efficient capture of CO2
emissions and are adaptable for use in many of the
world’s major emission sources. Pre-combustion capture
is suitable for all fossil fuels, and also may produce
enough hydrogen to open the way for a future
hydrogen fuel-based economy.
Lessons learned
Positive experiences in Phase I to date reveal some
lessons for a large international partnership project:
1. A robust project management process and
reporting system ensure that work is aligned with
project objectives, information supports the proper
allocation of financial and other resources, and the
work of external contractors is monitored and
directed appropriately. The use of teams focused
on particular areas of responsibility is an effective
way of monitoring contract work and providing
timely direction.
2. Similarly, an effective technology review process
ensures rigorous review at specific points,
confirming that development is in line with project
objectives and is focused on the most promising
technologies.
3. An unbiased technological screening process
provides NGOs with assurance that the technologies
being pursued are the best available and are
appropriate to the companies involved, and that the
choice of technologies rests on a comprehensive and
objective evaluation. The challenge of demonstrating
that a better technology does not exist is analogous
to the difficulty of proving a negative. Nevertheless,
the presence of a Technical Advisory Board is useful
to show a reasonable, scientific and economic
rationale for the choice of technologies.
4. Communication skills are essential for team leaders,
so that the CCP Executive Board receives the type
and amount of information needed for timely and
appropriate decisions. This is especially true for
projects that involve advanced technology, when
project review meetings could easily concentrate
on discussing technical aspects, rather than on
identifying the key issues requiring a decision.
5. Government participation can help with financial
support and with a project’s credibility. However,
participants must anticipate the government’s
requirements for reports and readily provide the
information using prescribed formats.
6. An effective intellectual property management
programme can address participants’ concerns about
the creation and ownership of intellectual property.
7. Sharing findings through stakeholder meetings
assists in clarifying public concerns about CO2
storage.
8. Clear communication with external groups helps
establish the relevance of technical approaches
and choices.
Lessons learned include the need for the following:
1. More detailed and standardized objectives in
contracts with external providers.
2. Cost considerations at the earliest stages of
development projects to identify promising
technologies as early as possible.
Conclusion
The work of the CCP demonstrates that public-private
partnerships result in breakthroughs in technology
development quickly through involvement of
interested parties from all perspectives: technology
users, policy makers and educational institutions.
For more information on the CO2 Capture Project see
www.co2captureproject.org
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Climate change
PARTNERS: GOV • IGO • O&G • RI
LEVEL: global
LOCATION: global
cost
redu
ctio
n (%
)
oxyfuel postcombustion
precombustion
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
29%
38%
23%
55%
14%
60%
maximum reduction
minimum reduction
The CO2 CaptureProject (CCP) has underdevelopment newtechnologies that couldreduce the cost of CO2capture (from US$60–80to US$20–30 per ton).
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
54
The Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership
Launched at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development,
the Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership supports the efforts of
the petroleum sector to progressively reduce flaring and venting of
natural gas associated with crude oil production.
Background
When crude oil is extracted from the earth, natural gas
comes to the surface as well. The gas is typically used
to meet power and other operational requirements,
with excess gas processed and sold if gas infrastructure
and markets are nearby. In areas of the world lacking
infrastructure and markets, the excess gas is usually
flared or sometimes vented. The World Bank estimates
that the annual volume of flared and vented natural
gas is more than 150 billion cubic metres, or
approximately the combined annual gas consumption
of Germany and France. Greenhouse gas emissions
from flaring are also about 13 per cent of committed
emission reductions by developed countries under the
Kyoto Protocol.
For the past 20 years, global flaring levels have
remained virtually constant despite successful efforts
by individual governments and companies to use the
associated gas and thereby reduce flaring. The overall
effect of these efforts has been limited because of
(1) the increase in global oil production and associated
gas production and (2) the lack of regulatory and
contractual structures, and the constraints on gas
utilization, infrastructure and market development.
The Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership
(GGFR1) is a forum of governments of oil-producing
countries, state-owned companies and international
oil companies. The partnership aims to support
national efforts to use the associated gas and to
reduce flaring and venting. The GGFR steering
committee approved a three-year work programme
beginning in January 2003 and coordinated by a small
team of World Bank staff and industry secondees
based in Washington, DC. The work programme
focuses on four areas of activity:
1. commercialization of associated gas;
2. regulations for associated gas;
3. a voluntary standard for associated gas flaring and
venting reduction; and
4. carbon credits.
The GGFR programme contributes to poverty
reduction and quality of life improvements by
developing concepts for how local communities close
to the flaring sites can use natural gas and liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG) that may otherwise be flared. The
programme has evaluated two opportunities for small-
scale gas utilization in Ecuador and Chad.
Benefits
A key attribute of the partnership is the diversity of
partners, each bringing different experience and
expertise. While all the partners recognize the need to
address the flaring issue, they express several other
reasons for joining the initiative.
Company members note that GGFR is better able to
engage with governments than industry associations,
as it is coordinated by the World Bank. Being ‘at the
table’ brings broader recognition, as well greater
influence on the partnership’s direction and output. For
instance, during the development of the GGFR
voluntary flaring and venting standard, companies
actively provided their input to ensure that the
standard was both commercially realistic and aligned
with their company policies and approaches.
For some government partners, GGFR has
supported the development of new policies on
natural gas and related fiscal policies, while in other
cases, it has helped countries achieve their flaring
reduction objectives more rapidly. The government
partners recognize that the World Bank’s position as a
‘neutral broker’ enables it to bring the right
stakeholders together. GGFR also provides a forum for
governments to share regulatory approaches and
learn from each other.
Over the three years of the partnership, the focus
has shifted to putting the global programmes—such
as the voluntary flaring and venting standard—into
practice in national initiatives and demonstration
projects. For example, in Equatorial Guinea, GGFR has
helped facilitate better collaboration between
Key partners
Governments:
• Angola
• Cameroon
• Canada
• Chad
• Ecuador
• Equatorial Guinea
• Indonesia
• Kazakhstan
• Khanty-Mansiysk
• Nigeria
• Norway
• United States
Companies:
• BP
• Chevron
• Eni
• ExxonMobil
• Marathon
• Norsk Hydro
• Shell
• Sonatrach
• Statoil
• Total
Internationalorganizations:
• World Bank
KEYWORDS: gas flaring and venting reduction; voluntary industry standard
55
operators, the national oil company and the regulator.
GGFR is also cooperating with several flare elimination
demonstration projects in Angola, Algeria and
Nigeria, to evaluate their potential to earn
greenhouse gas credits through the Clean
Development Mechanism (CDM).
Lessons learned
Effecting change in flaring and venting practices
requires time, effort and persistence. GGFR has been
most successful where there is country buy-in, high-
level support and an effective local partnership
between government and industry, as well as
ownership and leadership within the participating
organizations. The process takes sustained effort over
many years.
As expected, the partnership has faced a number of
challenges, which have raised some key issues and led
to some lessons being learned:
■ As the responsibility for gas flaring regulation may
be fragmented or may overlap several ministries, it
is important to identify the responsible counter-
party within the host government.
■ Government agencies need to play a leadership
role in promoting and sustaining in-country gas
utilization, commercialization and flare reduction
initiatives.
■ GGFR is reliant on the willingness of operators to
cooperate and share gas volumes and technical
information that may be commercially or
politically sensitive. Care must be exercised in how
the data is aggregated and used. Often,
confidentiality agreements require all partners in a
joint venture to give their approval before data can
be released externally.
■ To focus its limited resources efficiently, GGFR could
do more to clearly define success and to assess the
likelihood of success in each of its activities.
■ GGFR could be more selective and prioritize which
countries and projects have the greatest chance of
achieving significant flare reductions.
■ Some suggest that better engagement of
environmental NGOs could bring more
transparency and credibility to the partnership.
Conclusions
GGFR has been successful in raising the profile of gas
flaring and venting as an issue and has organized two
major flaring conferences.
In July 2005, the G8 joint statement at Gleneagles,
Scotland called for GGFR to be extended beyond 2006.
There is broad acceptance of the flaring and venting
standard and the collaborative approach it encourages.
In certain circumstances, the CDM Executive Board may
consider flare elimination projects acceptable for
carbon credits.
The partners recognize the role of the GGFR
initiative in reducing gas flaring and venting. The GGFR
partnership, and the voluntary standard in particular,
have encouraged better cooperation among a broader
set of stakeholders in addressing the issue. The
partners also recognize that there is more work to be
done and agreed in principle in November 2005 to
extend the GGFR partnership for three more years
beyond 2006.
For more information on on the GGFR initiative see the
GGFR website: www.worldbank.org/ggfr
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Climate change
PARTNERS: GOV • O&G
LEVEL: global
LOCATION: global
Land-based flare withproduction installationnearby
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
56
The partnership for fuels and vehicles research
The European Council for Automotive R&D, the European
Commission’s Joint Research Centre and CONCAWE formed a
partnership in 2000 to carry out joint studies on automotive fuels
and vehicles.
Background
In 2000, the European Commission’s Joint Research
Centre (JRC), which carries out extensive scientific and
technical research in support of EU policies, was
looking at developing its activities in the field of
automotive fuels and powertrains. JRC approached the
European Council for Automotive R&D (EUCAR) and
CONCAWE (the oil companies’ European association for
environment, health and safety in refining and
distribution), and in that year the three organizations
signed a Memorandum of Understanding for carrying
out joint studies on topics of common interest.
An association of European vehicle manufacturers,
EUCAR carries out pre-competitive research on such
topics as safety, future powertrains and advanced
vehicles. EUCAR members represent the bulk of
European automotive industry and include BMW,
DaimlerChrysler, Fiat, Opel, Porsche, PSA Peugeöt-
Citroën, Renault, Volkswagen and Volvo.
CONCAWE’s 23 full members, which own more than
90 per cent of the EU25 oil refining capacity, are BP,
CEPSA, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Dow, Eni, ExxonMobil,
Hansen & Rosenthal, Hellenic Petroleum, Kuwait
Petroleum International, Mazeikiu Nafta, MOL, Neste
Oil, Petrogal, Nynas, OMV, PKN Orlen, Preem, Repsol,
SARAS, Shell, Statoil and Total.
The main purpose of the EUCAR/JRC/CONCAWE
partnership is to generate scientific and technical
information on the development of road vehicles and
associated subjects. The motor manufacturers and the
fuel providers can then develop consensus on the
soundness of the technology, while the regulating
authorities can use the information to support EU
decisions and regulations.
The partnership is managed by a Supervisory Board
comprising two delegates from each of the three
partners. The Board meets twice a year, or more often
as the need arises.
From CONCAWE’s perspective, the partnership is
crucial to establish:
■ a solid and shared technical basis to support future
EU regulations on fuels and vehicles;
■ a constructive working relationship between the oil
industry and the automotive industry; and
■ an effective working relationship between industry
and JRC.
In the words of Alain Heilbrunn, CONCAWE’s
Secretary General, ‘the ongoing debate on alternative
fuels is dominated by emotion and ill-founded assertions.
The only correct way to proceed is through collaborative,
in-depth technical work to bring sound facts and figures to
the table.’
The ‘Well-to-Wheels’ study
At the end of 2000, the partners launched the first
cooperative study, titled the ‘Well-to-Wheels Analysis of
Future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the Joint
European Context’—in short, the ‘JEC WTW study’. The
study objective was to develop a consensual view of
the relative merits of a large number of alternative
fuels and powertrain pathways for 2010 and beyond.
The primary focus was on well-to-wheel energy use
and greenhouse gas emissions assessment.
For the study, EUCAR and CONCAWE brought their
respective knowledge of the automotive and oil
industries to bear. JRC provided essential input on
issues of biomass, having direct access to the most
appropriate European Commission services such as the
Directorate-General (DG) for Agriculture and Rural
Development. JRC also facilitated contacts with other
Key partners
• CONCAWE (oilcompanies’ Europeanassociation forenvironment, healthand safety in refiningand distribution)
• EUCAR (EuropeanCouncil forAutomotive R&D)
• JRC (Joint ResearchCentre, EuropeanCommission)
KEYWORDS: air quality; research and technology development; EU policy support
THEME: Climate change
PARTNERS: IGO • O&G • B&I
LEVEL: regional
LOCATION: EU
57
‘customer’ Commission services such as the DG
Transport and Energy and the Environment DG.
For the specific purpose of the JEC WTW study, the
partnership was extended with the use of two
consultants. A coordination group arranged for
external experts to review the study results.
Progress and study impacts
Although the partners decided at the end of 2000 to
go ahead with the project, the work was delayed for
more than a year, mainly because of a major
reorganization at JRC, including the transfer of some
activities to a new site and a change of JRC personnel
assigned to the partnership. Also, by the end of 2001,
the European Commission’s interest in alternative
fuels had heightened and a sound WTW analysis was
clearly needed.
The first version of the study report was published in
December 2003. The study successfully anticipated the
European governments’ and regulators’ increased focus
on alternative road fuels and vehicles to address issues
of CO2 emissions and long-term security of supply. The
study results were used as a basis for discussions and
policy recommendations in many forums, including
meetings of the European Commission’s Alternative
Fuels Contact Group during 2004.
The timeliness and relevance of the first WTW
report, as well as the process whereby the study was
carried out, increased the partners’ recognition of each
other’s issues and problems and strengthened their
working relationships. The report also helped
CONCAWE develop improved relations with other
Commission services.
A report update was released at the end of 2005, as
part of the process of keeping the study evergreen.
Other partnership projects
Identifying other projects of common interest in
anticipation of EU needs proved to be a more
challenging task. A second project was eventually
agreed on in early 2004 to measure the evaporative
emissions of vehicles with different fuels, in support of
the European Commission’s review of the EU fuels
directive on gasoline vapour pressure and particularly
ethanol blending. The project, mostly consisting of
vehicle testing by JRC in its new facilities, with the
European Automobile Manufacturers Association
(ACEA) supplying the vehicles and CONCAWE the fuels,
commenced mid-2004 and is still ongoing; the final
report is due in 2006.
Further projects will be identified in accordance
with key EU issues and partners’ interests, and with the
particular capabilities of the partnership.
Conclusions and lessons learned
A successful partnership requires commitment from all
partners, specific objectives and deliverables supported
by a well-structured organization, and a clear
distribution of tasks, as well as allocation of sufficient
technical expertise and financial resources to achieve
and deliver the results on schedule.
Commitment can only be obtained when the
objectives are relevant to all partners. This cooperative
action was slow to start, partly because this was not
quite the case at the beginning. The relationship is now
firmly established and has proven capable of delivering
high-quality results. To quote Neville Thompson, an
official member of the Supervisory Board, ‘the small
acorn has taken time to mature but is now becoming a
solid oak tree’.
Finally, this type of partnership provides an
opportunity to enhance the credibility and the impact
of the studies, directly by incorporating the views and
knowledge of more parties and indirectly by
improving the perception of the results as cooperative
and consensual.
For more information see www.concawe.org
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
58
The Oro Community DevelopmentTrust in Coastal Nigeria
Nexen, in partnership with Pro-Natura International (Nigeria), is
working with five Local Government Areas in the Oron region of
coastal Nigeria towards replication of a sustainable model of
participatory community development.
Background
Nigeria has significant oil revenues and significant
social problems. Distribution of oil revenues has been
at the heart of numerous community conflicts,
especially in the Niger Delta. The traditional approach
of petroleum companies designating specific ‘host
communities’ as recipients of community development
assistance has often exacerbated these conflicts. A key
challenge for petroleum companies doing business in
the Niger Delta region is to find a more equitable and
transparent approach to community support that will
foster sustainable improvements in the well-being of
communities in this region.
In 2000, Nexen was approached by a prominent
NGO, Pro-Natura International (Nigeria), to support a
feasibility study on a community development
initiative in Bayelsa State, adjacent to one of the oil
company’s offshore drilling prospects. In partnership
with other petroleum operators, Pro-Natura had
achieved notable success in Akassa, Nigeria, where
community-owned and managed institutions (for
example vocational training centre, medical laboratory,
ferry, micro-credit scheme) have been sustained for
more than 10 years. The feasibility study demonstrated
the potential for replicating the Akassa programme in
several communities across the Niger Delta region.
The Oro Community Development Trust
In early 2004, Nexen, as the operating partner for an
indigenous Nigerian company, Oriental Energy,
commenced sponsorship of a new Pro-Natura project,
the Oro Community Development Trust (OCODET), in
Akwa Ibom State, adjacent to an offshore exploration
block. The Trust receives and evaluates project proposals
and funds sustainable community development projects
aimed at improving the circumstances of disadvantaged
people in particular and the local community in general.
The Oron region has quickly adapted the Akassa
model to fit its particular cultural circumstances. A
Board of Trustees, transparent governance system and
bank account have been established and are
functioning, though are facing constraints in their
operation. Nexen has provided start-up funding for the
Trust and for its first ‘confidence-building’ project—a
30-passenger water ferry from Oron to Calabar across
the Cross River delta.
To date, the ferry has been a successful commercial
venture. It has provided safe passage to more than
7,500 people, and the community is examining the
feasibility of expanding the operation to include a
charter service. The Trust is also using the seed funding
and ferry revenue to support other capacity-building
initiatives such as institutional development workshops
and agricultural expansion support programmes.
Lessons learned about participatorycommunity development
A neutral and trusted third party such as Pro-Natura is an
essential intermediary between the petroleum operator
and the community. Anger and resentment among the
Niger Delta communities against the industry and the
government have often reached the boiling point and
have led at best to confrontation and mischief and at
worst to outright violence. An arm’s-length relationship
is the best approach, at least initially, for the long
journey towards trust-based working relationships.
In its years as the catalyst and neutral broker for
participatory community development programmes in
the Niger Delta region, Pro-Natura has learned that
effectively instilling community ownership requires the
following:
■ participatory needs analysis, planning, decision
making and programme implementation;
■ inclusion of all community members and all groups
within the community—in particular, women and
youth—with strong efforts to engage the ‘poorest
of the poor’;
■ capacity building of individuals and institutions
within the community; and
■ building of trust and confidence by starting with
modest projects, with some needed and properly
constructed infrastructure to supplement the
capacity building.
Key partners
• Nexen (on behalf ofOriental Energy)
• Oro CommunityDevelopment Trust
• Pro-NaturaInternational (Nigeria)
KEYWORDS: NGO intermediary; participatory model; capacity building; transferable model
59
Villagers trained through participating in previous
programmes can serve as teachers in ‘living
universities’, both for replicating programmes and for
educating others in government, industry and other
sectors.
Lessons learned about partnership
The partnership has benefited from many of the
lessons, some of them hard and painful, that
Pro-Natura has learned over at least the past decade of
nurturing the participatory community development
model in the Niger Delta. The most significant ‘take-
aways’ include the following:
1. The participatory community development model
is far superior to the host community adoption
approach, not only for cost-effectiveness but also
for superiority of tangible and sustainable
community outcomes, as well as minimization of
business interruptions. In the words of Richard
Owens, Nexen’s managing director in Nigeria, ‘self-
sustaining enterprises lead to peaceful communities
and no disruption to our operations. That’s a
valuable commodity.’
2. An open and transparent governance process for
partnerships of this nature is vital for long-term
success. All participants, especially the receiving
communities, need to be able to clearly see that
not only are their most pressing needs being
addressed, but also that the available funds are
being expended in accordance with technically
sound project proposals. Corporate, community-
based organizations such as those created for the
Akassa and the Oron communities seem to be the
most effective model.
3. A broad base of industry and other support (for
example government, EU, World Bank, various
charitable foundations) is needed for community
programmes of this nature. Multiple partners help
ensure financial and institutional support over the
long term and broaden trust relationships. Also,
with more partners, particularly if government is
included, the oil industry can more easily leave the
centre stage of community development and
concentrate on what it does best, producing oil,
and when the time (inevitably) comes, exit the
stage completely.
The OCODET project offered additional lessons:
■ Although some oil companies operate under severe
time constrains, ample time must be allocated to
community participation and awareness
programmes to overcome suspicion and mistrust.
■ To protect their reputation for effective facilitation,
partnering NGOs must be certain that an enabling
environment, notably adequate time and sustained
funding, exists for their work.
■ Volunteerism is a hardship in poor communities
and can result in disproportionate and insufficient
participation by ‘elites’ and those living outside the
community. Paid key positions in community
institutions are critical.
■ Managing the expectations of community
members is a continuing constraint.
■ Bureaucratic procedures of the government, other
institutions and industry can create excessive
delays, with lasting and widespread impact.
Conclusions
The partnership with Pro-Natura has provided Nexen
with excellent opportunities to test its capabilities to
put its corporate social responsibility principles into
practice in a conflict-torn area of West Africa.
By all accounts, this modest experiment has been a
success so far, giving Nexen and Pro-Natura
encouragement to seek other opportunities to apply
the ‘participatory community development’ model
elsewhere.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Community development
PARTNERS: NGO • O&G • COM
LEVEL: local
LOCATION: Africa
Oron to Calabar ferrydedication ceremonies
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
60
Vocational training and sustainable livelihoods for women in Pakistan
BHP Billiton, the Canadian International Development Agency, the
Child Development Organization and the Women Skills Development
Organization have facilitated a process for promoting women’s
empowerment through income generation and socio-economic
development in southern Pakistan since 2001; the partnership work
has benefited the wider community.
Background
Income-earning opportunities are few and far
between for the poor of Dadu district in southern
Pakistan. Agriculture is the main source of income, but
unreliable rainfall, particularly during the drought of
the past years, and an inadequate irrigation system
mean that most people are unable to survive on
agriculture alone. Most families have come to rely on
men migrating for seasonal labour work in towns
nearby or cities further afield.
Women often seek additional income through
selling handicrafts or rope made from local materials,
but lack proper linkages to market these products. The
severe economic pressures on families are a major
constraint to improving their health and sending their
children to school.
Through its community development
programme, BHP Billiton has worked closely with its
partners and local communities in contributing to
sustainable development in the district of Dadu. The
programme aims to empower local people through
social mobilization and institution building. It
provides access to the basic facilities of life, and
targets specific problems in the four areas of health,
education, livelihood support and provision of basic
infrastructure.
The ‘Sartiyoon Silai Karhai Markaz’Vocational Training Centre and theSustainable Livelihoods for the Women ofJohi Project
In 2000, BHP Billiton established a relationship with a
small local NGO, the Child Development Organization
(CDO), as an implementing partner for its projects in
the Dadu district. In 2001, the partnership set up the
‘Sartiyoon Silai Karhai Markaz’ Vocational Training
Centre in the town of Johi, to encourage women to
learn such skills as embroidery, sewing and tailoring for
income generation.
A participatory review of the vocational training
centre in 2003 identified that some of the women
attending the courses had the potential to take their
income-generating activities to a higher level, given
the appropriate training and support. To broaden
partnership participation in the initiative and increase
international stakeholder engagement in the area, BHP
Billiton signed a partnership agreement with the
Canadian international Development Agency’s (CIDA)
Program for the Advancement of Gender Equity. In
2004, the partners initiated the Sustainable Livelihoods
for the Women of Johi Project. The objectives of the
project are to:
■ enable women to earn an independent income;
■ improve the standard of living for women’s families;
■ improve the status of women within their
households and the wider society; and
■ enhance the economic and social well-being of the
community.
Key partners
• BHP Billiton
• Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency(CIDA)
• Child DevelopmentOrganization (CDO)
• Women SkillsDevelopmentOrganization(WSDO)
KEYWORDS: participatory model; women’s empowerment; vocational training
The Sustainable Livelihoods for theWomen of Johi Project has broughtopportunities for greatly improvedstandards of living, and economic andsocial well-being of the community.
61
Progress and lessons learned
Women have expanded their income-generating
activities at the vocational training centre. So far,
around 270 women have attended the centre to
upgrade their sewing and tailoring skills, enabling
them to make clothes either for their families’ use or
for sale.
The progress and impact of the centre mobilized a
group of women in Dadu who wanted to take up the
struggle to change the quality of women’s lives. They
formed the Women Skills Development Organization
(WSDO), an independent NGO with an all-women
governing body, which took responsibility for
management and policy making. In the process, a fresh
and wholly independent, community-owned identity
for the ‘Sustainable Livelihoods’ project was created.
Through the ‘Sustainable Livelihoods’ project,
women running businesses, or interested in starting
businesses, can receive business training, apply for
micro-credit and link up with handicraft exhibitions to
sell their products. So far, 200 women have received
training through the project, with 30 selected to
receive intensive enterprise development support as
part of an ongoing pilot project. Groups of women,
families and individual women have set up small-scale
enterprises after the training. For instance, a number of
women have opened shops selling clothes and
cosmetics in their villages.
Challenges have been thrown up by the partnership
projects, but equally strong learnings shared. It is clear
that to attain maximum value from development work,
the corporate sector and civil society need to work hand
in hand. Working together has been the most significant
challenge for all four partners.
In terms of lessons learned, from the outset
partners need to:
■ understand each other’s values, objectives,
strengths and weaknesses, so that they can build
on success and, despite their diversity, work
towards a common purpose;
■ maintain constant dialogue, not just with each
other but with key stakeholders—specifically local
communities, government agencies and other
development organizations; and
■ fully comprehend their immediate roles and
responsibilities in creating a conducive working
environment for the achievement of sustainable
community development.
The role of NGOs is integral in participatory
community development, as they can act as a mediator
between the local community and the corporate sector.
Finally, a key lesson for BHP Billiton is that it
cannot fulfil all the expectations and requirements of
the local communities where it operates. Therefore, it
is important to work closely with donor organizations
in assisting them to play their part in development of
the area.
Conclusions
The livelihood projects resulting from the BHP Billiton,
CDO, CIDA and WSDO partnerships have improved
access to livelihood opportunities for local households,
and to income-generating activities for women in
particular.
Given the prevailing cultural norms that limit
women’s role to the domestic sphere, it was a
significant challenge to encourage women to expand
their earning capacities by attending the training
programmes on offer, and even more of a challenge to
create an all-women NGO. That both initiatives have
succeeded without creating social conflict is extremely
encouraging and has promising implications for the
future. Awareness of women’s rights and capabilities is
increasing among the local communities as they
experience the projects’ positive effects.
For BHP Billiton, the partnership work has helped
establish the tenets for a stronger local economy,
resulting in a better educated, better equipped
workforce.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Community development
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO
LEVEL: local/provincial
LOCATION: Southern Asia
So far, the TrainingCentre at Johi hasprovided training to 270women in thedevelopment of a varietyof skills including sewingand handicrafts.TheSustainable Livelihoodsproject has providedbusiness-related trainingand support to 200women, already leadingto the establishment of20 small-scaleenterprises.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
62
The Bhit Rural Support Projectin Pakistan
Eni Pakistan and Thardeep Rural Development Programme have
been working together since 2002 on a project to improve the quality
of life of the communities in and near Eni’s concession areas in the
Dadu district of Pakistan.
Background
Eni Pakistan has been carrying out community
development activities in the Bhit Development and
Production (D&P) lease area for several years. In 2002,
to pursue a more holistic approach to community
development, Eni Pakistan entered into a partnership
with a local NGO—Thardeep Rural Development
Programme (TRDP)—to form the Bhit Rural Support
Project (BRSP) in the Dadu district.
TRDP emerged as an independent NGO in 1998
when Save the Children UK wound up its operations in
the Thar Desert. The NGO, which has 400 employees,
has internationally recognized expertise in social
mobilization and grass-roots community development
in arid areas. TRDP’s headquarters are in Mithi, and it
has 40 offices around Sindh province, with an office for
BRSP in Jhangara, the closest town to Eni Pakistan’s
Bhit gas field.
The Bhit Rural Support Project (BRSP)
The underlying philosophy of BRSP is to socially
mobilize local communities and build capacity in
specific areas. Social mobilization is a carefully planned
and controlled effort to mobilize a community, or
groups within a community, to solve their specific
problems. In this project, Eni Pakistan and TRDP are
using social mobilization in combination with
sustainable community development for the first time.
A TRDP team of specialists, recruited from the local
communities and trained in social mobilization,
constitutes the BRSP staff. The team organizes
communities by encouraging them to establish village
development organizations (VDOs). Once the VDOs are
formed, their capacity is built up through coaching and
training. A network of 313 VDOs has already been
developed, with 121 of the VDOs led by women which,
in a feudal and male-dominated culture, is a notable
achievement. Another critical function of the VDOs is
capital formation; so far, all VDOs have been active in
this area as well.
One of the key objectives of Eni Pakistan was to
attract other mainstream national and international
donors actively working on poverty alleviation in
Pakistan. As the social arm of Eni Pakistan, TRDP has been
successful in developing partnerships with Save the
Children, the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP), the Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund, the
World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Food
Programme. All these donors have contributed
significantly to projects which directly benefit the local
population. This work has become possible only
because the communities are now organized, trained
and ready to improve their living conditions.
The BRSP initiatives
BRSP has mostly invested in health, education, water
resources development and income generation, which
includes micro-credit. It now also incorporates small-
scale communication infrastructure in its programmes.
HealthOwing to the high rates of maternal and infant
mortality as documented in a 1997 survey by the Aga
Khan University Hospital, the partners decided to
establish the Mother & Child Health Center (MCH
Center) in Jhangara. Equipped with a pathology
laboratory and an ambulance, the centre has a
professional team of health staff including a female
doctor, two trained midwives and two laboratory
technicians.
In 2003–04, BRSP constructed an eight-room
building for the MCH Center at a cost of US$50,000, on
land donated by the Jhangara community. The MCH
Center has provided a range of health services to more
than 26,000 people since it opened. Around 95 mobile
clinics have also visited the more remote villages,
benefiting an additional 3,000 patients.
In a separate initiative, three outreach community
health centres (CHCs) are functioning in Kai, Naing and
Tando Rahim Khan villages, benefiting more than
10,000 patients in the 2002–04 period. A fourth CHC
building has been constructed at Bhit and should be
operational soon.
Key partners
• Eni Pakistan
• Thardeep RuralDevelopmentProgramme (TRDP)
• Network of villagedevelopmentorganizations
KEYWORDS: income generation; capacity building; health; education; water resources
63
The communities have actively contributed to
constructing the MCH Center and the CHCs by
donating plots and bearing the labour and in some
cases the material costs of these projects.
In addition to the infrastructure development,
$38,000 is spent annually to meet the recurrent costs of
these health facilities which, since 2002, have served
94,000 people.
EducationBRSP operates eight primary schools, one computer
training centre in Jhangara, one boat-building school
for Manchar Lake residents and two female vocational
schools in the villages of Chhinni and Tando Rahim
Khan. Eni Pakistan has spent $16,000 on infrastructure
development of these projects and has also provided
furniture, equipment and educational materials.
Eni Pakistan spends $15,000 annually on running
these schools.
Water resources developmentThe eight-year dry spell in the Bhit and Bhadra
mountains and valleys compelled Eni Pakistan to spend
substantially on developing water resources for the
local communities during 2003–04. Three drinking-
water supply schemes, which included tube wells, a
water supply network and pumping machines, were
provided at a cost of $180,000. In addition, 96 hand
pumps were installed in villages in the region, giving
locals potable water resources at their doorstep.
Another good indicator of the success of the projects
is that all of them have been handed over to the local
communities for them to run. These communities are
also bearing the ongoing fuel costs for the tube wells.
The VDOs have already developed a mechanism for
sustaining projects with self-help and volunteers.
Income generationAs part of their income generation activities, in 2003
Eni Pakistan and TRDP started a micro-credit scheme
in the Kirthar area with seed funding of $17,000.
Through TRDP and the network of VDOs, Save the
Children and the Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund
have also started micro-credit schemes in Eni
Pakistan’s concession areas. TRDP has disbursed an
additional $19,000 on these schemes.
The borrowers took small loans for small
enterprises, agriculture and livestock development. To
date, the beneficiaries total 107 people, including 21
women. The loan recovery rate is 98 per cent, and the
recovered funds will remain rolling to benefit
additional people during the Bhit project lifecycle.
Conclusion
The social mobilization, capital formation and capacity
building of the village development organizations have
empowered the local population at the grassroots
level. Their participation in decision making and BRSP’s
provision of opportunities for improving their quality of
life are paving the way to sustainable economic and
social development.
BRSP is moving towards becoming an independent
NGO with partnerships with key bilateral donors and
NGOs, and the synergies are being explored and
strengthened.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Community development
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO • O&G
LEVEL: local
LOCATION: Southern Asia
Water resourcesdevelopment under theBhit Rural SupportProgramme
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
64
An education and rural development programme in Patagonia
Repsol YPF and the Cruzada Patagónica Foundation joined forces to
provide education and development opportunities to families living in
poor rural communities in western Patagonia.
Background
Repsol YPF is an oil company with operations in the
Argentine Patagonia region, mainly in northern
Neuquén province. The predominantly rural province is
home to a large number of people, most of them of
Mapuche origin, the indigenous population in that part
of Patagonia. Many of these people have unmet basic
needs and few development possibilities. The region
has been experiencing social unrest; social investments
from the private and public sectors in the past decades
have generated few positive changes.
In 2001, Repsol YPF formed a partnership with the
Cruzada Patagónica Foundation, to support a
comprehensive education and sustainable
development programme aimed at the communities in
the region where the oil company operates. Repsol YPF
is strongly committed to the region and recognized
that the foundation’s work was producing excellent
results in the western part of the province.
The Cruzada Patagónica Foundation brought to the
partnership 25 years of successful work and solid links
with the local communities. The foundation also
contributes awareness of, and respect for, the vision
and customs of the people it works with. In turn,
Repsol YPF provides knowledge of northern Neuquén
and its social problems, funding for specific projects
and consultancy on construction safety issues.
The partnership programme
The partnership programme works in three key areas:
education, rural development and institutional capacity
building.
EducationThe education work is based in the San Ignacio
Integral Education Centre in the village of Junín de los
Andes. The San Ignacio Centre is not a traditional rural
school: it offers not just secondary education and
professional training in electrical installation,
carpentry and other areas, but also primary education
for part-time adult students, plus vocational training in
forestry and agriculture.
The pupils come from families where the parents
are often illiterate and have few resources. Some come
from as far away as 500 km because there is no other
secondary school in the region with an agrarian-
technical orientation. The centre provides lodging and
daily transportation for students who need them.
Recognizing that education is the cornerstone of
development, the partnership allocates 60 per cent of its
budget to this aspect of the programme. The education
project offers scholarships for youngsters and adults
from rural communities, and funds the maintenance of
buildings, teaching materials and equipment.
Rural developmentTo complement the educational task and to expand the
development possibilities, a second project provides
technical assistance to implement family and
community micro-enterprises in marginal rural areas.
The rural development project helps in skill building
and in diversifying agricultural production.
The project includes the installation of greenhouses;
the monitoring, design and construction of water
distribution systems; the establishment of pastures and
water delivery in remote communities; and the recovery
of lakeshores and riverbanks through reforestation. It
receives 30 per cent of the programme budget.
Institutional capacity building A third project is institutional capacity building. The
partnership provides funds to strengthen the Cruzada
Patagónica Foundation, as well as community
organizations and public institutions in the region. In
Key partners
• Cruzada PatagónicaFoundation
• Repsol YPF,Argentina
• San Ignacio IntegralEducation Centre,Junín de los Andes,Neuquén province
KEYWORDS: community economic development; education
Diversifying agriculturalproduction
65
the process this also serves to strengthen the local
communities.
The institutional capacity building entails forming
alliances with other social organizations and
companies; developing training programmes; offering
advice; and working on public policies on education
and rural development. The partnership allocates
10 per cent of its budget to this work.
Progress
Since its start, the education project has funded more
than 400 students and almost 60 teachers, with 95 per
cent of graduates finding employment or developing
productive enterprises in their own communities, and
some of them even going on to university.
The rural development project has reached around
3,200 rural inhabitants, and the institutional capacity-
building project has run workshops for around 400
leaders and members of social organizations and public
institutions from all provinces in Patagonia.
The partners have collaborated for five years on the
education and sustainable development work, which is
a significant achievement. Effective two-way
communication between the partners is the strongest
element of the partnership. In addition, the mutual
trust that the partners have built is of particular value
in programme planning and execution.
Challenges and lessons learned
In developing and implementing the three
programmes, the partners have faced a number of
challenges. One challenge was managing their
different approaches to time. In addition, in the early
stages, Cruzada Patagónica was uncomfortable at the
prospect of working with an oil company.
Overcoming the challenges led to lessons that the
partners have capitalized on to deepen and expand the
desired programme outcomes. For example, the parties
have undergone a mutual training period to better
develop projects that meet the needs of all
stakeholders. Also, a key learning is that, in social
programmes, results take time. Nothing can be
achieved ‘in 10 minutes’.
It has often been necessary to go back and adjust
the programme to meet new requirements. For
example when more company staff became involved in
the programme, they asked the foundation to upgrade
the safety features of the San Ignacio Centre where the
students live and study. Responding to this need
required that adjustments be made to the budget.
A willingness to work together and adapt to the
other partners’ different ways of working has enabled
the partnership to evolve, strengthen the relationships
with the beneficiaries and fundamentally ensure real
and lasting changes.
The work carried out by the divisions within
Repsol YPF and by the Cruzada Patagónica Foundation
has resulted in local appropriation of the programme.
In this specific case, the partnership approach was a
different way of reaching the indigenous people in
rural communities with whom the oil company had
historically experienced conflict.
Conclusion
The development of a region like Patagonia results
from the commitment and the work of all the sectors:
■ the private sector, which offers investment and
knowledge transfer to all members of society;
■ the public sector, which provides a wide reach and
a general overview; and
■ the social sector, which contributes sensitivity and
a commitment to service.
The Repsol–Cruzada Patagónica Foundation is an
example of the positive changes that can result when
different sectors work together for sustainable
development.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Community development
PARTNERS: NGO
LEVEL: local/provincial
LOCATION: South America (Argentina)
The education project hasfunded more than 400students.
The rural development programme has reached around3,200 rural inhabitants.
Greenhouses installedunder the ruraldevelopment project
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
66
Rural electrification in Morocco
Energy companies Total,Tenesol and Electricité de France set up the
Temasol company to operate a country-wide rural electrification
programme in Morocco.
Background
Today, more than 1.5 billion people on the planet,
many of them living rurally, have no access to
electricity. Moreover, in rural areas, a grid connection
is much more expensive than a connection to a
decentralized electricity supply.
The Rural Energy Services Company (RESCO)
concept, a viable, sustainable and replicable model, has
been developed to set up decentralized electricity
projects in various African countries. Total and its
partners, Tenesol and Electricité de France (EDF), have
used this model in Mali, South Africa and Morocco. The
partnership programme described here is the one set
up in Morocco.
In 1994, the Moroccan government launched a
national rural electrification programme, under which
virtually all rural households should have a power
supply by 2007, with 91 per cent connected to the grid
and 7 per cent receiving decentralized electrification,
mainly via solar energy. The scope of the programme
is challenging, as the target recipients are
geographically isolated, lack resources and have a low
standard of living.
Given the limited resources of the populations
involved, the Moroccan government identified the
need to establish a legal framework to define the local
operator’s mission. It also supplied financial support to
make the programme viable for the operator.
The Moroccan National Electricity Office (ONE)
began the electrification programme at experimental
level with a small number of villages. It soon became
aware of the need to scale up the programme and to
find innovative solutions to meet operating costs,
especially with regard to fee recovery. This is why it
looked for private partners.
Total is a company working on energy issues, with five
years’ experience on projects promoting access to energy
for rural populations in developing countries. When
ONE started looking for an operator to take over the
electrification programme, Total’s participation in such a
programme seemed logical.
The Temasol Partnership Programme
In 2002, the three partners, Total, Tenesol and EDF,
created a company, Temasol, to implement the next
phase of the electrification programme, ensure the
reliability of the systems and guarantee the quality of
the service provided. The total investment budget is
US$35.5 million. The project is financed mainly by the
ONE’s Electrification Programme (whose main funding
supports are: the German KfW bank, the French
Development Agency, the French Fund for the
Environment), with Temasol, local authorities and
customers providing the remainder.
The partnership’s primary objective is to provide
domestic electricity to 400,000 people, in order to
improve local living conditions. A second objective,
which was added to the programme in 2004, is to
provide drinkable water to people living in rural areas.
The partners also have specific objectives:
■ EDF—to provide access to energy to people who
are usually excluded from electrification
programmes. EDF has extensive knowledge of
photovoltaic energy and is willing to share it.
■ The Moroccan National Electricity Office (ONE)—to
provide access to electricity to all Moroccan
inhabitants, as a public service.
■ Total—to enable people to have access to (and also
to sell) energy.
Key partners
• Electricité de France
• French DevelopmentAgency
• French Fund for theEnvironment
• KfW Bank, Germany
• Moroccan NationalElectricity Office
• Temasol, Morocco
• Tenesol (previouslyTotal Energie)
• Total
KEYWORDS: rural electrification; transferable model
© T
otal
/M. D
ufou
r
Temasol techniciansand customer
67
Temasol is aiming to sell domestic energy services
to 58,500 households, which receive photovoltaic kits
that the households pay for over a 10-year period. The
company is in charge of the technical and financial
management, maintenance, equipment replacement
and fee recovery.
Progress
By the end of 2005, 20,000 households had already
benefited from the electrification programme operated
by Temasol. A further 38,500 households will have
access to electricity by 2008.
The programme has significantly improved people’s
lives in rural areas:
■ Households have easier access to communication
tools (radio, television and telephone) and benefit
from electric lights at night.
■ Children now have more facilities to do their
homework at night.
■ Safety in the home is improved as families no longer
use oil and paraffin lamps, candles and small petrol
generators, thus reducing the risk of accidents.
■ The electric lights are healthier, as they do not
damage the eyes.
■ Families are less inclined to overly restrict their use
of energy than they were when using candles
because the monthly fee for the electricity (which
is derived mainly from solar energy) is fixed,
regardless of the amount used.
By maintaining an informative marketing and
sales presence at local weekly markets, Temasol has
strengthened its contact with existing and potential
customers.
Since July 2004, Temasol has also been in charge of
the installation and management of solar pumping
equipment to provide drinking water. For the time being,
the programme is experimental and entails only 15
pumps serving 15 villages with around 5,800 inhabitants.
The benefits of partnering and lessons learned
Temasol For Temasol, the partnership is extremely positive.
Being Total’s partner gives credibility to the company,
strengthens its power of influence and facilitates its
access to bank credit.
The quality of the network implemented locally is a
key element in the success of the programme. Temasol
has a network of 22 agencies around the country and
extends its reach by attending the weekly markets.
TotalTotal views the partnership as constructive and the
partners as complementary. The programme was
successful in putting into practice a conceptual model.
It also allowed the creation of jobs (Temasol has 120
employees) and stimulated the local economy.
The most effective public-private partnerships are
those implementing projects and programmes rooted
locally and promoting the right balance between the
project/programme’s capacity for action and
innovation and an administrative framework that sets
the rules of the game and the goals to be achieved.
EDFEDF believes that the organization of such a
programme should be pragmatic, professional and
locally rooted. Such an approach ensures ongoing
technical maintenance, efficient fee recovery over the
long term, and programme ownership by the local
population and local public authorities.
If the beneficiaries do not participate financially, they
do not feel involved and responsible. Even if they are
poor, their contribution is important. It is also necessary
to pay attention to meeting the real and realistic needs of
the local population, and not to propose services that
people do not need and cannot pay for.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Community development
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO • B&I
LEVEL: national
LOCATION: Africa
© T
emas
ol
© T
emas
ol
Electrification foreducation
Douar in the Khemisset region
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
Florida’s first hydrogen energy station
Chevron is working with a state agency and a public utility to
develop Florida’s first hydrogen energy station, which will fuel a
small fleet of hydrogen-powered shuttle buses at Orlando
International Airport.
Background
To spur the development of clean energy technologies,
the state of Florida in the United States is working to
establish itself as a leader in the emerging hydrogen
industry. As of March 2005, Florida had more than 15
mobile and stationary hydrogen technology
demonstration projects under way, with another 13 in
the planning stage.
In early 2004, the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (Florida DEP) contacted
Chevron about opportunities to work together on
advancing hydrogen technology. Chevron is committed
to developing clean, next-generation forms of energy.
Through its affiliate, Chevron Hydrogen Company, the
company has been accelerating innovation in the
production of hydrogen fuel from a variety of sources
and the development of a hydrogen infrastructure to
deliver that fuel. Chevron is exploring a number of
potential pathways to a hydrogen economy, including
applications in both
transportation and distributed
power generation. In the
transportation sector, Chevron is
concentrating on collaborative
demonstrations of fleet
applications, which the US
Department of Energy has
identified as an important mid-
term technology.
Florida DEP also invited
Progress Energy Florida, a utility
company, to take part in these
discussions. Progress Energy
supports innovative ways to use
and conserve energy sources
that protect the environment.
The company has participated in
a number of hydrogen-related initiatives in Florida,
including hydrogen-fuelled vehicle demonstrations and
the construction of fuelling stations.
As talks among the three parties continued over
several months, it became clear that they shared a
similar outlook. ‘We learned we were really on each
other’s wavelength,’ says Allan Bedwell, Florida DEP’s
deputy secretary for regulatory programmes and
energy at the time of the discussions. The three
potential partners recognized that they shared a zeal
for original problem solving and technical excellence.
Most importantly, they agreed on their overriding
strategic objective: to evaluate potential pathways and
challenges to the emergence of hydrogen as a
promising new fuel.
One of the projects under discussion was
developing a hydrogen energy station to fuel a fleet of
shuttle buses powered by internal combustion engines
(ICEs) that are designed to run on hydrogen fuel
instead of gasoline. Whereas fuel cells require that the
fuel be 99.999% pure hydrogen, hydrogen-powered
ICEs typically require a lower minimum level of
hydrogen. Supplying hydrogen which meets the purity
specification required by fuel cells is significantly more
expensive. The near-zero emissions from hydrogen-
fuelled ICEs deliver most but not all of the
environmental benefits of a hydrogen fuel cell. The
partners wanted to capture hard data that would allow
a careful cost-benefit analysis of the use of hydrogen
fuel in the two types of power trains.
The fleet of hydrogen-powered shuttle buses—
among the first of its kind—is anticipated to begin
transporting visitors at Orlando International Airport in
late 2006. Florida DEP sees the new hydrogen energy
station as the foundation for a ‘hydrogen hub’ in the
central part of the state. This network of fuelling
stations will serve growing numbers of demonstration
hydrogen fleets in the area, helping to validate and
commercialize the technology.
Progress and lessons learned
Because the partners in this public-private
collaboration had developed a strong working
relationship, they moved quickly on the energy station
project. Acting within an extremely tight time frame,
they selected a site at a Progress Energy Florida
Key partners
• Chevron TechnologyVentures
• Florida Departmentof EnvironmentalProtection (Florida DEP)
• Progress EnergyFlorida
KEYWORDS: demonstration project; transportation; hydrogen technology; energy efficiency
Hydrogen stands readyto fuel the fleet at a sisterstation in California
69
location, met with state representatives and local
officials, held numerous meetings with residents and
invited all interested parties to the ground-breaking
ceremony in February 2005. Thanks to the cooperation
among the partners, the outreach phase of the project
was a success.
The participants continue to cooperate as the
project moves into the implementation phase. Team
members schedule weekly telephone calls, and the
entire project team participates in a monthly
conference call. Upcoming challenges include locating
the facility at the site, obtaining the necessary permits,
handling liability questions and dealing with the
construction itself.
To date, the participants have learned or confirmed
the following lessons about how to build a successful
collaboration:
Agree on the main objectiveIdentify a mutually aligned strategic objective, which
acts as the collaboration’s compass and keeps the
project moving in a clear direction.
Rely on each partner’s strengthsSeek complementary but not overlapping skill sets. For
instance, Chevron develops and integrates the
hydrogen technology; Florida DEP guides the state’s
environmental and fuels policies; and Progress Energy
Florida brings a clear understanding of its customers’
energy needs.
Trust and learn from each otherStart from a position of trust. Understand and respect
each partner’s positions, limitations, decision-making
processes and organizational culture. Learn from the
other partners’ past experiences with similar projects.
Be flexibleBe open to a better way to do something. Stay focused
on the main objective, and adjust expectations if the
project does not unfold as anticipated.
Gather strong political supportInvolve high-level people within each organization
who are responsible for delivering results and have the
authority to make decisions quickly.
Share risks and resourcesEnsure that each participant has invested in the project
and is accountable for helping it succeed.
Get off to a good startIdentify potential flash points at the beginning, and act
to address them.
CommunicateEncourage candid discussions among team members. If
an issue develops, pick up the phone to resolve it,
rather than relying on broadcast e-mails. And have all
participants review external communications before
release.
Conclusions
Although all of the participants have participated in
similar collaborations, they claim that this has been a
model arrangement, based on trust, honesty and
open, straightforward communication. Going forward,
they feel confident about handling the challenges,
which have included the transfer of a pivotal member
off the team and the need to quickly begin working
with his replacement.
John Masiello, who is responsible for researching
and developing Progress Energy Florida’s programmes
in energy efficiency and alternative energy, says, ‘If you
go forward without this kind of information, you could
make mistakes that could be difficult to recover from.’
The long-term relationships that the partners are
building with each other and with the community are
essential in the next step to commercialization—the
broader adoption of the technologies. ‘In many respects,
the strategic relationships we are forming are as
important as the technologies,’ says Jeffrey Jacobs,
manager of strategy, planning and business
development for Chevron Technology Ventures’
hydrogen business unit.
The partnership’s experience to date serves as an
invaluable roadmap for others that intend to pursue
similar projects.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Fuels and transportation
PARTNERS: GOV • B&I
LEVEL: national
LOCATION: USA
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
70
Strengthening the hydrocarbon road transport sector in Madagascar
Total and its partners are increasing the professionalism of
hydrocarbon transport companies in Madagascar, improving road safety
practices and stimulating economic development.
Background
The hydrocarbon transport sector in Madagascar is
facing difficulties in running efficiently and according
to international industry standards. An ageing vehicle
fleet, high accident rates and lack of training as well as
poor road conditions and lack of regulation have been
identified as the main weaknesses of this economic sector.
In 2003, Total carried out a safety audit of the
sector. This led to the establishment of a steering
committee—in partnership with government agencies,
industry associations, and local and international
organizations—to further assess the issues.
As a first step, the steering committee conducted
an assessment of the hydrocarbon transport sector in
February 2004. The assessment revealed a crucial lack
of training, and of an organizational, safety and
inspection framework. The assessment covered 500
trucks, 500 drivers and 500 co-drivers. Enhancing the
professionalism of transport companies and tanker
drivers appeared vital in view of the risks involved in
transporting hazardous materials by road.
Following the assessment, the steering committee
appointed an operational team to implement a large-
scale partnership programme, known as PATH, for
developing the capacity of small and medium enterprises
(SMEs) in the hydrogen transport sector in Madagascar.
The PATH programme
The PATH programme is dedicated to improving
Madagascar’s hydrocarbon road transport sector. It also
aims to facilitate economic development in Madagascar
in accordance with the 10 principles of the United
Nations Global Compact. The programme operates
within the framework of the Growing Sustainable
Business (GSB) initiative, for which Total has agreed to
play the lead role in Madagascar and Cambodia. The
GSB initiative is brokered by UNDP and a national GSB
committee has been set up by UNDP local office.
The partners presented the PATH programme to the
Malagasy government, which had set transport as one
of its priorities, in particular with regard to improving
the country’s rail and road infrastructure. The
programme received government approval to proceed.
At the preliminary meetings the steering
committee defined four priorities, which aim to:
1. enhance the managerial skills of the SMEs
operating in the sector;
2. improve the professionalism of drivers and mechanics;
3. promote the modernization and maintenance of
the vehicle fleet; and
4. establish a formal regulatory framework (training,
hazardous materials driver’s licences, safety
regulations, inspections).
To this end, the steering committee proposed a
process to:
■ adapt the standards of the European Agreement
concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous
Goods by Road (ADR) to the local context;
■ appoint trainers, and train them in the methods of
the Association for the Prevention of the risks
related to Transport of Hydrocarbons
(APTH-France—the French association for
hydrocarbon transport risk prevention), so they
could go on to train drivers and co-drivers;
■ develop a managerial training programme for the
heads of road transport SMEs;
■ arrange for VOARISOA, a local NGO, to hold
environmental awareness seminars with company
managers; and
■ identify a local body able to take over PATH and
build on it over the longer term.
Key partners
• Agence universitairede la Francophonie
• Association for thePrevention of the risksrelated to Transport ofHydrocarbons(APTH-France)
• APTH-Madagascar
• Groupement desEntreprises deMadagascar
• Logistique Pétrolière,Madagascar
• Ministry ofTransportation,Madagascar
• Syndicat des Industriesde Madagascar
• Total Madgasikara
• United NationsDevelopmentProgramme (UNDP)
• VOARISOA (local NGO)
KEYWORDS: transport safety standards; economic development; training; global compact
Antananarivo city center
© T
otal
71
Progress
After receiving training in France, a team of six trainers
began training drivers and co-drivers in Madagascar.
More than 700 drivers and 300 co-drivers have
received training in several regions of the country
since October 2004.
At the outset, company managers were reluctant to
let their drivers miss five days of work for training in
the safety aspects of hazardous materials transport. But
after the managers had undertaken the training
themselves they became convinced that the request
was well-founded.
Given the success of the training programme, and at
the request of local authorities, training was extended
to include traffic police and private contractors. To date,
570 traffic policemen, as well as around 100 other
individuals, have also received awareness training in the
risks of hydrocarbon transport. Training for the national
police force is under consideration.
Over the same period, managerial skills training
was given to around 115 people from 58 transport
companies, representing the better part of
Madagascar’s hydrocarbon transport fleet.
Benefits and challenges
The benefits expected from the multi-sector
partnership include the following:
■ For the country: improvements in transport safety,
product quality, procedures and regulations, and
transparency of the transport sector conditions.
■ For hydrocarbon road transport companies:
improvements in efficiency, profitability, working
conditions and image.
■ For oil companies: improvements in efficiency and
in awareness and reduction of transport-related risks.
All partners see the benefit of the partnership work
in strengthening the sector; new and higher-quality
employment is being encouraged and a healthy
economy is being developed, contributing to the
development of the country overall.
The president of APTH-Madagascar, the local
syndicate of hazardous materials transporters, confirmed
the merits of the training and its members’ satisfaction
with it. VOARISOA is pleased with its participation in the
PATH programme and the accomplishments to date. The
Government of Madagascar views the initiative as
productive and valuable and welcomes the support of
international organizations in promoting the
development of this large island.
However, a number of institutional measures planned
to support the training programme have been slow to
see the light of day. One example is the local Ministry
of Transportation’s adaptation of the European ADR
regulations on hazardous materials transport. The
regulations were expected by the end of 2005. The ‘official’
recognition of the value of the training programme
should help to consolidate the regulatory process.
In a similar vein, the banking sector, which has a
favourable view of the initiative, judging it a ‘formative’
step for the sector, is showing interest in the SMEs as
clients, but is seeking interest rates close to the base
rate plus one or two points. Alternatives will need to be
found to facilitate access to credit by the SMEs, which
require funds to upgrade their substandard vehicle
safety equipment and replace their aging tanker trucks.
Finally, the local bodies identified as candidates for
taking over PATH have not (thus far) confirmed their
initial expression of interest.
Next steps
Ensuring the continuation of the partnership beyond
the PATH programme will require the formation of an
association of all the oil companies operating in the
country. Such an organization would oversee the
training for the hydrocarbon transport SMEs, as well as
solicit the participation of other companies involved in
road transport. Lobbying the authorities to secure the
implementation of a formal regulatory framework will
also be fundamental.
This successful experience may be adapted and
duplicated in other countries.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Fuels and transportation
PARTNERS: GOV • IGO • B&I • RI
LEVEL: global/national
LOCATION: Africa
Road under repair
Main road fromAntananarivoto Toamasina
© T
otal
© T
otal
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
72
The Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles
Launched at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development,
the global Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles assisted sub-
Saharan Africa countries in phasing out leaded gasoline by 2005 and
is aiming for global elimination of leaded gasoline by 2008.
Background
Many developing countries experience serious air
pollution, especially in their urban centres, and
emission sources usually include the transportation
sector. In 2000 nearly 100 countries were still using
leaded gasoline which perpetuates emissions by
precluding vehicle emission controls.
In early 2001 IPIECA made a unilateral decision to
support global phase out of leaded gasoline and to work
with governments to promote quick action. In mid-2001
IPIECA joined with the World Bank, the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) and several NGOs to
convene a conference in Dakar where 25 sub-Saharan
African governments agreed, in the ‘Declaration of
Dakar’, to phase-out leaded gasoline by 2005.
In mid-2002, with the World Summit on
Sustainable Development (WSSD) only a few months
away, it appeared that several partnership initiatives
might be launched at that Summit to focus on the
phase out of leaded gasoline, and potentially other fuel
qualities, on a regional and global basis.
While these initiatives would broaden existing
individual efforts, a single global partnership was
clearly desirable.
Through a process of intense negotiation, the
individual parties agreed to band together under the
UN umbrella to form the Partnership for Clean Fuels
and Vehicles (PCFV).
The Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles
The PCFV was launched at the September 2002 WSSD
as a public-private collaborative effort to help
developing countries reduce emissions by eliminating
lead in gasoline, reducing sulphur in transportation
fuels and introducing cleaner vehicles. The United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) hosts the
partnership, and the partners comprise governments,
industry, international organizations, NGOs and
academic institutions.
To provide advice and support to these countries,
the partnership holds regional, sub-regional and in-
country planning and technical workshops, produces
guidance documents and engages with government
decision makers.
From each stakeholder’s point of view, the PCFV
offered a means to advance goals that could not be
achieved individually:
■ With UNEP and World Bank encouragement, the
governments would provide the necessary
implementation of rules and specifications for the
phase-out process. The situation in sub-Saharan
Africa is particularly complex, as in many African
countries the fuel refining and distribution
infrastructure is partially or wholly state-owned.
■ IPIECA would explain gasoline refining and logistics
impacts to governments and communicate that
lower octane unleaded gasoline could be used in
place of leaded. The auto industry would
communicate that governments could go
immediately to unleaded gasoline without harming
in-use vehicles.
■ Other stakeholders, such as the United States
Environmental Protection Agency and various
NGOs, would play a critical role in facilitating the
partnership process and in giving a voice to
community organizations.
Challenges
Apart from the intense negotiations to form the single
partnership, several events challenged the PCFV in its
early stages, not least of which was the difficulty in
agreeing on a mission statement. Three years on, with
many of the initial objectives achieved or in sight, there
is an ongoing debate about revisiting the partnership
mission statement to re-validate the initiative.
As the partnership has grown to include more than
80 members, managing input and the work programme
in a structured way continues to be an issue. Despite a
clear vision for the inclusion of, for example, commercial
interests, the expansion of the partnership has raised
practical problems over the representation of smaller
Key partners1
More than 80 national andinternational agencies andorganizations, includingthe following who wereparticularly active in leadphase out in Africa:
Governments:• Democratic Republic
of Congo• Ghana• Mozambique• The Netherlands• Nigeria• South Africa• United States
of America
Industry:• Alliance of
AutomobileManufacturers
• InternationalPetroleum IndustryEnvironmentalConservationAssociation (IPIECA)
• Manufacturers ofEmission ControlAssociation
• National Associationof AutomobileManufacturers ofSouth Africa
• Petroleum Industry of East Africa
Internationalorganizations:• UN DESA• United Nations
EnvironmentProgramme (UNEP)
• The World Bank (not an officialmember of PCFV)
NGOs:• Natural Resources
Defense Council• Trust for Lead
Poisoning Prevention
KEYWORDS: air quality; vehicle emission controls; gasoline and fuel quality; UN umbrella
1 For a full list of partners in the PCFV, see www.unep.org/pcfv
73
states and the multiplicity of NGOs. These entities need
representation; however, arranging it in a practical way
through an advisory group has been challenging.
Some partners consider that setting more
concrete objectives within the broader partnership
aims would have been helpful for benchmarking the
partnership’s progress. Other partners suggest that,
at the start, the PCFV should have discussed a
timeline and also an exit strategy.
Lessons learned
The experience of establishing and maintaining the PCFV
has shown that voluntary partnerships can be an effective
way to implement environmental and health initiatives.
Oil and gas industry participants familiar with the
partnership see the following factors as key to the
success of the PCFV:
■ A strong motivation for working in partnership. The
partnering organizations recognized that none of
them could individually bring about cleaner fuels
and vehicles in developing countries.
■ Clear, well-defined, shared goals. The PCFV has
been most effective when the partners have strong
consensus on a goal and the means of attaining it
(e.g. eliminating lead from gasoline) and somewhat
less effective when no consensus exists on the best
way forward (e.g. reducing sulphur levels).
■ A simple yet definitive set of governance rules and
principles, agreed early on by all. The agreement
should ensure the balanced representation of
partners and include a process for resolving
disputes and handling commercial interests.
■ The establishment of a secretariat, preferably on
‘neutral ground’, to take the lead in organizing the
partnership and implementing its activities. UNEP’s
diplomatic skills and its role as a neutral partnership
facilitator have been invaluable to the PCFV.
■ Flexibility from all the partners and willingness to
seek compromise.
■ Use of the ‘Chatham House Rule of Confidentiality’
at PCFV meetings, to enable partners to openly
offer ideas and share information anonymously. For
meetings conducted under this rule:
(a) neither the identity nor the affiliation of the
speakers, nor that of any other participant at
that meeting may be revealed; and
(b) it may not be divulged that the information
was received at that meeting.
Conclusions
The partnership’s most notable success has been in
helping countries in sub-Saharan Africa phase out
leaded gasoline by the December 2005 deadline
envisaged in the 2001 ‘Declaration of Dakar’. Meeting
the deadline has only been possible through combined
efforts of the partners in the technical, political and
social arenas, in conjunction with national governments.
Although the emphasis has been on sub-Saharan
Africa, the partnership has also engaged with other
structures in Eastern Europe, Latin America and Asia. In
December 2005 the PCFV launched a new initiative to
eliminate leaded gasoline worldwide by 2008 in the 30
countries still using it.
UNEP’s executive director, Klaus Töpfer, has called
the PCFV ‘the most successful partnership emerging from
the WSSD’.
For more information on PCFV activities see
www.unep.org/pcfv
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Fuels and transportation
PARTNERS: GOV • IGO • NGO • O&G • B&I
LEVEL: global
LOCATION: Africa
Keynote speakers at the‘Dakar+2’ meeting ofthe partnership, held inNairobi in May, 2004
unle
aded
gas
olin
e av
aila
ble
(%)
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
0
25
50
75
100
leaded gasoline
leaded and unleaded gasoline
unleaded gasoline
June 2001 September 2002
September 2003
November 2004
January 2006
Lead phase-out progressin sub-Saharan Africa:per cent of unleadedgasoline available
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
74
The Alliance Program’s Safe Tank Alliance
The American Petroleum Institute and the National Fire Protection
Association are working with the US Occupational Safety and
Health Administration to help advance safe working practices in the
petroleum industry and, in the process, build a foundation for
continued collaboration.
Background
In March 2002, the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) established the ‘Alliance
Program’ as an addition to its suite of Cooperative
Program initiatives. The Alliance Program’s aim was for
participants to work collaboratively and to leverage
resources in reaching and educating the nation’s
workforce in advancing safety initiatives. As primarily a
regulatory and enforcement US federal agency, OSHA
saw the programme as a way to break down some of
the institutional and cultural barriers to the public and
private sectors working in unison to help advance
workplace safety.
Under the traditional compliance enforcement
model, the regulated community was reluctant to share
information or work with OSHA for fear of its
enforcement powers. As a result, an adversarial
environment has existed between OSHA and American
business since the Occupational Health and Safety Act
was enacted in 1972, thus preventing the sharing of
best practices and new approaches, and hampering
progress towards an accident-free workforce. To
address this situation, the Alliance Program separated
the compliance enforcement and the cooperative
outreach programs within OSHA.
Groups forming an alliance with OSHA include
employers, labour unions, trade and professional groups,
government agencies and educational institutions.
Participants sign a two-year agreement, which can be
renewed after the term expires. The Alliance Program is
funded by the organizations involved.
Since the Alliance Program’s inception, OSHA has
formed more than 400 alliances with such
organizations as the American Foundry Society, the
Industrial Trucking Association, the Shipbuilders
Council of America and the International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers. The Safe Tank Alliance is one
such alliance.
The Safe Tank Alliance
In March 2004, the American Petroleum Institute (API)
joined into the ‘Safe Tank Alliance’ with OSHA and the
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). All three
organizations agreed to work together on education
and outreach efforts to promote safe work practices
relating to petroleum storage tanks. Three elements
guide the Safe Tank Alliance: (1) training and
education; (2) outreach and communication; and
(3) promotion of the National Dialogue on Workplace
Safety and Health in the USA.
Each organization in the Safe Tank Alliance takes its
turn in funding approved projects, and also takes
ownership of and leads the project. For example, the
NFPA proposed and funded a project to develop pocket
brochures on safe welding and safe entry into
petroleum storage tanks.
Benefits and outcomes of the partnership
Although collaboration may sound simple, it took time
for the public and private sectors to fully realize its
benefit. Differences of approach were readily apparent.
The private sector tends to reward safe work
behaviours through bonus compensation programmes,
whereas the public sector relies on training and
education. Through the Alliance Program, it was
recognized that both approaches provide a
comprehensive solution to achieving a common goal.
The benefits of working together on making
workplace safety a priority are far reaching for all
parties. For example, businesses can experience the
following advantages:
■ be recognized as leaders in their industry;
■ be able to attract and retain highly qualified
workers;
■ maximize productivity as a result of a healthy
workforce, minimal production downtime and a
more positive work environment; and
■ reduce costs for workers’ compensation, regulatory
compliance and associated legal services.
The Safe Tank Alliance has already produced an
impressive suite of products and services. Product
Key partners
• American PetroleumInstitute
• National FireProtection Association
• Occupational Safety and HealthAdministration
KEYWORDS: safe work practices; cooperative regulatory environment; education; outreach
75
examples are the development of pamphlets on safe
hot work practices, safe tank entry, and fall protection
on tanks. In April 2005, Chevron hosted the Safe Tank
Seminar at its refinery in Richmond, California. The
seminar brought together more than 80 tank safety
professionals to share lessons learned and best
practices and to network. In addition, OSHA personnel
had a tour of the storage tank maintenance and repair
operations at the refinery.
In 2005/06, OSHA has proposed and is funding the
development of a ‘Confined Space E-Tool’. The E-Tool is a
multimedia interactive training device that can be
accessed though the OSHA website for information on
safely entering and working in a petroleum storage tank.
The E-Tool will contain a primer on the petroleum
industry and storage tank operations. It will also provide
up-to-date information on safe confined work, including
industry practice and OSHA regulatory guidance.
Due to the success of the Safe Tank Alliance in its
first two years, the initiative is expected to be renewed
for a further two years in 2006.
Conclusions
Perhaps the most important success of the Alliance
Program, and the Safe Tank Alliance, is the paradigm
shift in how the relationship between industry and
government is perceived and is being recast as a model
of partnership and collaboration. Slowly, the
adversarial mindset is being replaced with a culture of
cooperation, where all parties realize the immense
benefits of working together to advance workplace
safety and health. This shift has become evident in the
way the petroleum industry engages with OSHA. In the
past, it was not uncommon to have an industry
member sit on one side of the table and OSHA on the
other, with each group’s attorneys present to protect
their client’s rights. There was little open dialogue and
both parties shared only information relevant to the
issue at hand.
The OSHA Alliance Program has knocked down
those barriers. Alliance Program meetings are open and
informal, with no lawyers present. There is an honest
and open sharing of lessons and experiences that each
party can take back and incorporate into their
standards of operations.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Health
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO • O&G
LEVEL: national
LOCATION: USA
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
76
The prevention of mother-to-child transmission ofHIV/AIDS in the Republic of Congo
Eni and the University of Genoa’s Infectious Diseases Department
are developing a project for the prevention of mother-to-child
transmission of HIV/AIDS in the Kouilou region of the Republic
of Congo.
Background
HIV/AIDS represents a devastating emergency,
particularly in Africa, where the epidemic increasingly
affects young adults, the most productive section of
the population, and so is ravaging national economies.
An increasing number of infected children are also
being registered, with most cases resulting from the
transmission of the virus from their mothers during
pregnancy, delivery and breastfeeding.
Operating in many of the countries hardest hit by
HIV/AIDS, Eni has promoted a number of programmes
aimed at halting the spread of the disease. The oil
company also networks with other players to share
experiences and improve the effectiveness of their
actions. The initiatives are part of Eni’s policy of
protecting the health of its employees and their
families, its contractors and its customers, as well as
improving the primary health of the communities in
the areas where it operates.
Eni Congo has operated in the Republic of Congo
for more than 30 years, and has actively cooperated
with local public health authorities on several
initiatives, with the restructuring of Talangaï Hospital in
Brazzaville being the most significant.
The prevention of mother-to-child transmission
(PMTCT) of HIV/AIDS has become a major priority for
many governments and international agencies in Africa.
It is consistent not only with the broader goals of
HIV/AIDS prevention, but also with the commitment to
improving children’s health and promoting their survival.
In 2004, Eni Congo began the development of a
project for the PMTCT of HIV/AIDS in Pointe-Noire in
the Kouilou region, in collaboration with the Infectious
Diseases Department of the University of Genoa in
Italy, which had already undertaken a number of
HIV/AIDS-related initiatives in the republic. The Kouilou
Health Department is the official partner in the project,
which has been included in the Congolese National
Health Plan to address HIV/AIDS.
The Project for the PMTCT of HIV/AIDS
The project for the PMTCT of HIV/AIDS is being carried
out at the Regional Hospital of the Army, one of the
main health structures in the town of Pointe-Noire. The
project provides free and confidential antenatal,
delivery and post-partum assistance to women and
their babies.
The project’s focal point is a molecular biology and
serology laboratory, located at the hospital, for the
diagnosis of HIV/AIDS infection in pregnant women.
Eni Congo financed and equipped the laboratory to
international standards. In addition to the supply of
advanced equipment, the hospital premises were
reorganized and a number of wards created. Local
medical personnel have also received training on the
different aspects of PMTCT.
The laboratory, which began operating in May
2005, has the potential to screen 100,000 patients in a
three-year period and can support the follow-up of
500 patients who are in treatment. The project aims to
test 3,000 pregnant women and treat 175 patients
during 2006.
The project also offers the following services:
■ voluntary and confidential pre- and postnatal
counselling services;
■ highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) for
pregnant seropositive women; and
■ prophylaxis for newborns during their first six
months of life.
An offshoot of the project is the improvement of
prenatal counselling at selected integrated health
centres in the region. The integrated health centres are
peripheral facilities that women can easily access
without being subjected to segregation or stigma.
As HIV/AIDS is both an immediate and a long-term
concern, complicated by individual culture and social
behaviour, the project also promotes community
awareness and action. Providing accurate information
on the practical aspects of the disease is crucial, since
many Congolese women ignore their HIV/AIDS-positive
status, and general knowledge on the transmission
risks of HIV/AIDS is low. The women are also mistrustful
Key partners
• Eni Congo
• Kouilou HealthDepartment, Republicof Congo
• National Program forAIDS Control
• Regional Hospital ofthe Army, Pointe-Noire, Republic ofCongo
• University of Genoa,Infectious DiseasesDepartment
KEYWORDS: maternal and child health; community education; capacity building
The project’s focal pointis a molecular biologyand serology laboratory.
77
of both caesarean section and bottle-feeding, which
are perceived as unnatural practices. Information is
being widely disseminated via training sessions at the
integrated health centres, as well as briefings, reports,
local television presentations and sensitization
meetings with local NGOs.
Challenges and lessons learned
The partnership faced a number of challenges right
from the start of the project.
1. At the country level, particular attention was paid
to identifying the local bodies and individuals that
could play a role in the project, with a view to
avoiding ambivalent relationships with local groups
and any unwanted external pressure.
2. The partners had substantially different values. So
that they could adequately fulfil their obligations,
the first step was the development of shared
working practices using a business approach. The
partners created a management plan for the
project’s human, financial and technical resources,
as well as a set of performance indicators to check
the project progress and results. Planning for the
project’s components and for the partnership roles
also helped mitigate the difficulties.
3. The project’s Steering Committee and its Scientific
Committee regularly monitor the project’s progress.
Members of Eni Congo’s Health Department also
make on-site visits to review the results. The regular
checks give the partners the opportunity to consult
with each other.
4. Adopting an effective approach is fundamental in
gaining the trust of the target population. The
University of Genoa plays a key role in addressing
the social and cultural barriers to HIV/AIDS
prevention, as its medical personnel have
experience from fighting HIV/AIDS in the republic
and so combine scientific knowledge with
familiarity with the local culture and habits, and
can effectively undertake the communication and
sensitization activities.
Conclusions
The capability to diagnose mother-to-child
transmission of HIV/AIDS and to properly manage
antiretroviral therapy is critical for sustaining families
and communities. As a result of the synergies among
the partners, the project will give pregnant women and
newborns greater access to affordable and high-quality
prevention and treatment.
In addition, training local healthcare personnel is a
prerequisite for capacity building and for long-term
sustainability of the project. Once the project is
transferred to the community, the laboratory will
continue to provide those services—still beyond the
reach of most developing countries—that substantially
reduce morbidity and mortality.
Moreover, the partnership’s lessons learned, results
obtained and skills acquired form a ‘package’ that could
be easily replicated in other contexts, where local
healthcare services have neither the resources nor the
capacity to implement their own antiretroviral therapy
programmes.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Health
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO • RI
LEVEL: national
LOCATION: Africa
Regional Hospital ofthe Army, PointeNoire, Congo
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
78
The use of insecticide-treated mosquito bednets in malaria prevention in sub-Saharan Africa
In partnership, ExxonMobil and NetMark have worked to distribute
affordable insecticide-treated bednets and to promote their use as an
effective malaria prevention measure.
Background
Sub-Saharan Africa is an area of significant growth for
the oil and gas industry. Tragically, the malaria
epidemic kills more than one million people a year in
sub-Saharan Africa. Every year, at least 300 million
acute cases of malaria are suffered globally, resulting in
more than 1.2 million deaths. Nine of 10 malaria deaths
occur in sub-Saharan Africa, mostly in young children
and pregnant women. In fact, an African child dies from
malaria every 30 seconds.
Economists report that malaria reduces economic
growth in many African countries. Health
improvements are a prerequisite for broader economic
and social development and are high on the agenda of
host governments. Although there are proven and
effective interventions in the fight against malaria, the
reality is that the disease has become increasingly
resistant to previously effective medicines, requiring an
even greater emphasis on prevention.
With petroleum production, retail marketing and
distribution in many African countries, ExxonMobil is
keenly aware of malaria’s devastating impact and is
working with others to combat this preventable disease.
The oil company has specific interest and expertise in
community malaria control. Since 2000, ExxonMobil’s
anti-malaria programme has expanded from a strong
workplace programme to its broader Africa Health
Initiative focused on drug research and development;
advocacy of increased international awareness and
resources; and community-based projects on malaria
prevention, education and treatment.
The Help Us Help programme
One of the simplest and most cost-effective means of
malaria prevention in Africa is the insecticide-treated
bednet, which protects people from mosquito bites.
NetMark, a project of the Academy for Education
Development (AED), operates in multiple countries to
increase the supply and demand of insecticide-treated
bednets. NetMark receives United States Agency for
International Development (USAID) funding for its
work, which also includes conducting health cause-
related marketing and malaria prevention education,
accessing transnational distribution and promotion
networks, and expanding the capacity and product
quality of African-based bednet manufacturers.
In 2002, the ExxonMobil Africa Fuels Marketing
Group teamed with AED/NetMark to set up the Help Us
Help programme. The programme seeks to reduce the
burden of malaria in sub-Saharan Africa by increasing
the commercial supply of and public demand for
insecticide-treated bednets. The focus of the programme
is on communicating the necessity of behavioural
change, providing health education information and
conducting related promotional activities.
The programme has mounted a series of campaigns,
beginning with a pilot ‘Help Us Help’ campaign in
Zambia in 2003. After the successful pilot in Zambia, the
campaign approach was improved and campaigns were
run in Ghana in 2004 and Nigeria in 2005. Zambia and
Ghana ran second Help Us Help campaigns in 2005, and
Cameroon will soon start a campaign.
Key partners
• Academy forEducationDevelopment/NetMark
• ExxonMobil AfricaFuels MarketingGroup
• United States Agencyfor InternationalDevelopment(USAID)
KEYWORDS: community health; education and outreach; product distribution
The promotional bannerof the ‘Help Us Help’programme
Children at an African orphanage in receipt ofHelp Us Help funds
79
In the campaigns, coupons for the purchase of
bednets are distributed to local residents, including
pregnant women, at area medical clinics and antenatal
clinics. The coupons can then be redeemed at service
stations in ExxonMobil’s retail network to purchase
discounted insecticide-treated bednets. The service
stations also donate a portion of gasoline sales to
provide free bednets for local orphanages.
About 80 per cent of the coupons distributed in
Zambia and Ghana were redeemed for bednets,
demonstrating the success of this approach in getting
nets to people who need them.
Outcomes and benefits of the partnership
The ‘Help Us Help’ programme draws on ExxonMobil’s
experience in developing and implementing large-
scale public-private partnerships.
The NetMark concept uses public-private
partnerships to build a sustainable commercial market
for better quality insecticide-treated bednets while also
delivering free or subsidized products to the most
vulnerable populations.
David McGuire, NetMark Project Director, states,
‘ExxonMobil’s participation in the partnership served as a
catalyst in terms of both programme impact and
corporate social responsibility. Public health results were
achieved by the partners in improving insecticide-treated
bednet production, distribution and promotion at the
country and global level. Both AED/NetMark and
ExxonMobil benefited from this joint initiative.’
Lessons learned
Successful public-private partnerships like this one
ensure that they do the following:
■ Recognize and utilize participant core
competencies and attributes. For example, the
programme makes effective use of ExxonMobil’s
downstream retail network to educate
communities on malaria and the use of bednets to
minimize risk.
■ Help to capture value and provide mutually
competitive advantages for each participant.
■ Identify and allow for individual participant
incentives and benefits.
■ Create project goals that are a composite of the
participant incentives and benefits.
Among the lessons learned is that partnerships
entail built-in shared risk, joint participation and shared
returns. Therefore, it is critical to do the following:
■ Define a formalized partnership governance
structure and equitable, mutually agreed-on
ground rules from the outset.
■ Formulate realistic and achievable objectives at the
beginning. The partnership used a focused scope of
work, deliverables and clear metrics to measure
programme success.
■ Maintain participant flexibility and adaptability to
meet evolving circumstances and mutual
requirements during the programme’s operation.
For example, flexibility in implementation may be
needed to address local Ministry of Health
priorities. The partners found that the programme
worked best where NetMark had established
strong ties with the Ministry of Health and had
aligned its priorities with those of the national
malaria control centre.
Conclusions
Although there are proven and effective interventions
in the fight against malaria, the disease still devastates
the health of African people. This partnership
represents just one of many approaches to address the
needs of at-risk people, particularly women and
children, in reducing the impact of the disease.
The success of the AED/NetMark–ExxonMobil
partnership in Africa is a testament to the value of
combined organizational core competencies and social
responsibility efforts in making a positive difference in
developing countries.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Health
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO
LEVEL: regional
LOCATION: Africa
A Cashier in a MobilService Station On TheRun convenience storeexplaining the voucherredemption process toDr Awa Coll-Seck,Executive Director of RollBack Malaria. Looking onare Vinand Nantulya,Senior Advisor–GlobalFund, and LocalRepresentative ofNetmark.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
80
The Bioko Island Malaria Control Project
Marathon Oil and its corporate, university, government and other
partners have developed an ambitious plan to eliminate malaria from
Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea,West Africa.
Background
When Marathon Oil first entered Equatorial Guinea in
2002, it quickly identified the malaria parasite
(Plasmodium falciparum) as a significant health threat
facing its employees and the local communities on
Bioko Island. Malaria on Bioko Island was endemic, with
one of the highest transmission rates in sub-Saharan
Africa. It was also the cause of approximately 40 per
cent of all mortalities and a major contributor to a
17 per cent mortality rate for children under five years
of age (20 times higher than the childhood mortality
rate in the USA).
To meet this critical threat head-on, Marathon and
its business partners teamed up with the Equatorial
Guinean government and health specialists to design a
comprehensive malaria eradication project for Bioko
Island. The partnership worked collaboratively and
rapidly to roll out the ‘Bioko Island Malaria Control
Project’ (BIMCP).
The Bioko Island Malaria Control Project
The project has three main objectives:
1. Terminate transmission of the malaria parasite
through control programmes and improved
preventive measures at the household and
community levels.
2. Improve the healthcare delivery system for malaria
cases through centres using standardized protocols
for diagnosis and treatment.
3. Upgrade monitoring and operational research.
Steve Hinchman, Marathon’s senior vice-president
of worldwide production, was instrumental in setting
the project objectives. ‘Besides extracting oil and gas,’ he
emphasized, ‘we want Marathon to leave a positive,
sustainable mark on Bioko Island.’ The malaria project
presented a unique opportunity.
The BIMCP was also designed so that the Ministry
of Health and Social Well-being (MoH) in Equatorial
Guinea could build the necessary capacity to sustain
the project via a continuing and progressive transfer of
responsibility over five years. Thus, all activities have
been closely planned with the MoH and integrated
within existing systems; a detailed integration strategy
was introduced in the second year of the initiative.
Key to the capacity building aspect of the project is
local community involvement and cooperation, which
the partnership recognizes as being crucial to the
project’s ultimate success. Dr Justino Obama Nve,
Minister of Health and Social Well-being, remarked: ‘The
community’s cooperation and involvement in the fight
against malaria are critical to ensure preventive measures,
early diagnosis, and prompt and effective treatment of this
disease. Marathon’s partnership in this effort has greatly
strengthened our local capabilities.’
The five-year project was initiated in 2003 with the
first round of indoor residual spraying (IRS) completed
in 2004. Synchronized with the spraying has been the
project’s case management component, focused primarily
on children under 15 and pregnant women. The work
has entailed training healthcare providers, supplying
health centres with diagnostic kits and medicines, and
conducting community education and communication
programmes. Distribution of treatment drugs is
ongoing. In addition, the surveillance programme
completed a baseline study in February 2004.
Monitoring and research continue around the island.
Progress
After the first round of indoor residual spraying of the
vertical surfaces of 100,000 structures on Bioko, the
number of mosquitoes infected with the malaria
parasite was reduced by 80 per cent. This reduction
translated to a 30 per cent drop in the presence of
malaria parasites in children on the island. The lowest-
income households have also received particular
benefits, with the cost burden for malaria treatment
dropping from an average of 10 per cent of household
income to around 4 per cent.
While some rebound is expected, successive rounds
of IRS are projected to continue a downward trend,
leading to a dramatic reduction in malaria transmission
on the island.
Key partners
Companies:
• GEPetrol
• Marathon OilCorporation
• Noble Energy
• Sonagas
Technical and researchorganizations:
• Harvard School ofPublic Health
• Medical CareDevelopmentInternational
• Medical ResearchCouncil of SouthAfrica
• One WorldDevelopment Group
Government:
• Ministry of Healthand Social Well-being,Equatorial Guinea
KEYWORDS: community health; capacity building; sustainability assurance
Community cooperationand involvement are keyto the project’s success.
81
In regard to capacity building, the project has
trained 80 Equato-guineans as sprayers and
supervisors. Others are monitoring window traps at
representative sites around the island.
‘This project has been one of the most successful and
smoothest ventures we’ve been involved in,’ says Chris
Schwabe of Medical Care Development International
and BIMCP’s project manager. ‘Working in these kinds
of environments is extremely challenging, but Marathon’s
connections in Equatorial Guinea, and at all levels within
the government and the community, eliminated the
typically slow build-up period. We’ve been able to
implement it at an unparalleled rate compared with
other projects.’
MoH’s Dr Obama Nve affirms the project’s
achievements: ‘I am delighted by the early successes. By
aligning the project objectives with our national strategy
to fight malaria, and integrating ministry staff in all
phases of the project, we are building the foundation for a
sustainable programme.’ MoH is becoming well
positioned to assume full responsibility for the
programme at the end of the five years.
Lessons learned
As Joseph Carter, director of Medical Care Development
International, has said, ‘the multi-stakeholder
partnership brings together the resources and capacities
of the private sector, the government, research
institutions and civil society.’ Carter has also indicated
that BIMCP is different from many such programmes
for several reasons, among which is ‘the early and
concerted commitment of the BIMCP to an integration
strategy designed to enhance the likelihood of long-term
sustainability. The excellent early results suggest that
sustainable success is achievable.’
The partners identified some key success factors in
the partnering process:
■ Multi-stakeholder partnership—full private-public
sector collaboration, with government support and
technical and research organization participation.
The project was fully a ‘team’ effort.
■ Well-integrated, multi-year plan—flexible and
detailed, with a strategy for programme
continuance for the five years.
■ Community involvement—especially important for
local health resource personnel responsible for case
management (diagnosis and new treatment
protocols), as well as for the indoor residual
spraying component.
■ Education and communications—at local levels,
using multiple languages and multiple methods.
■ Sustainability assurance—ensures local acceptance
and buy-in, as well as sustainability beyond the
five-year plan. In addition, the positive results have
enabled the government to expand the project
concepts and elements to the mainland via Global
Fund financial support.
Conclusions
With two successful spraying campaigns completed by
the end of 2005, as BIMCP enters into its third year of
implementation, the relationships have been
strengthened and all participants remain excited and
optimistic about the progress and path ahead. The
ambitious goal of malaria eradication from Bioko Island
seems attainable. As Marathon’s Hinchman says, ‘It is
very gratifying to be involved in a project that shows such
promise to benefit the lives of thousands of people.’
Marathon and its partners remain firm in their
commitment to the BIMCP and recognize the early
programme successes provide a springboard for future
partnerships.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Health
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO • O&G • RI
LEVEL: local
LOCATION: Africa
before spraying after spraying0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
before spraying after spraying0
10
20
30
40
50
30%
80%
Results from the 2005parasitemia and prevalencesurveys following the firstround of spraying onBioko Island
Mosquito and malaria parasite statistics before and after the first round of spraying
a) average number of infected mosquitoscaught in the home
b) percentage of children with malariaparasites in their blood
A health specialist at work
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
82
The Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights
Launched in 2000, the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human
Rights is an international tripartite initiative designed to assist energy
and extractive companies in maintaining the security of their
operations globally while ensuring respect for human rights.
Background
In early 2000, the US and UK governments, a number of
extractive and energy companies and several
international human rights NGOs initiated a year-long,
multi-stakeholder process to address security and
human rights concerns. The participants customized
human rights guidelines for the extractive and energy
sectors that address security issues and provide
practical guidance on implementation. Officially
announced in December 2000, the Voluntary Principles
on Security and Human Rights (Voluntary Principles)
cover three key areas: (1) conducting a comprehensive
risk assessment of security and human rights issues,
with criteria designed to build accountability;
(2) engaging with public security forces (military and
police); and (3) engaging with private security forces.
The Voluntary Principles initiative illustrates the
opportunities and challenges of a tripartite approach, as
well as the strengths and legitimacy that each partner
brings to the process. Companies offer the experience of
working on the ground and the reality of implementing
at an operational level. Home governments are able to
convene diverse stakeholders around mutual goals and
provide diplomatic channels to engage host
governments. NGOs bring an expertise in human rights
issues, including knowledge of local civil society in the
regions where companies operate. NGOs also see their
role as challenging the process and its members to build
momentum and drive the process forward.
Progress and lessons learned
The Voluntary Principles have gained support from the
private, public and civil sectors globally since their
launch five years ago. In addition to the current 27
official members, a number of other companies have
adopted and implemented the Voluntary Principles.
Moreover, multilateral institutions such as the
International Finance Corporation and the Organization
for Economic Co-operation and Development are now
referencing the Voluntary Principles in their guidelines
and standards.
Each of the 16 official company members has
approached implementation of the Voluntary
Principles in a different way, and their progress has
also varied. However, companies on the whole have
achieved significant milestones in the initiative’s first
five years. Specifically, all companies include the
Voluntary Principles in at least some of their contracts;
most companies have a process for anonymously
reporting human rights abuses and offer ‘whistle-
blower’ protection; many companies believe the
Voluntary Principles have increased awareness of
human rights and security issues among their staff;
and a number of companies have conducted Voluntary
Principles-related training for public and private
security, and company staff.
Partners have found the greatest implementation
challenge to be engagement with host governments
regarding public security. The members have
attempted to overcome the challenge by leveraging
the multi-stakeholder nature of the initiative and
taking a coordinated approach using ‘in-country
Key partners
Companies:
• Anglo American
• BG Group
• BHP Billiton
• BP
• Chevron
• ConocoPhillips
• ExxonMobil
• Freeport McMoRan
• Hess
• Marathon Oil
• Newmont Mining
• Norsk Hydro
• Occidental Petroleum
• Rio Tinto
• Shell
• Statoil
Governments:
• The Netherlands
• Norway
• United Kingdom
• United States of America
NGOs:
• Amnesty International
• The Fund for Peace
• Human Rights First
• Human Rights Watch
• International Alert
• Pax Christi
Observer:
• InternationalCommittee of theRed Cross
• IPIECA
KEYWORDS: voluntary guidelines; risk assessment; in-country working groups
A number of companies have conducted VoluntaryPrinciples-related training.
83
working groups’, comprising various companies from
the energy and extractives sectors along with home
government members. This coordinated approach
reduces the exposure of any one company and
increases the likelihood of progress. In-country
processes have already been established in Indonesia
and Colombia. Several companies in the Indonesian
process have signed memorandums of agreement with
regional police forces, and the Colombian process
drafted best-practice guidelines for risk assessment and
initiated ongoing best-practice exchange workshops.
However, a common challenge for both of these in-
country processes has been a lack of NGO involvement,
which both groups continue to address. Companies
have also called for increased support from home
government partners in their role as a diplomatic
channel. Partners have discussed the value of offering
official membership in the Voluntary Principles to host
country governments, as well as private security firms
and multilateral organizations, although a number of
concerns would need to be addressed first.
In addition to implementation challenges, the
Voluntary Principles process itself has identified the
need to increase transparency, including regular
reporting, to maintain and increase the initiative’s
legitimacy, credibility and integrity. Members feel
pressured to demonstrate results, or at a minimum to
detail their implementation efforts and prove that they
are doing more than just endorsing the Voluntary
Principles brand. To date, the Voluntary Principles
process has not mandated any formal public reporting
of implementation efforts by process participants.
However, an informal information-gathering exercise in
2005 captured company implementation efforts, and
some companies now report their implementation
efforts in their annual social responsibility reports.
The original governance criteria stated that
companies could only formally join the Voluntary
Principles process if their home country government
also joins the process. This requirement has now been
removed and any company may now submit a formal
request, via the Secretariat, to participate in the
process; however, home governments will also be
strongly encouraged to participate. Meanwhile current
participants, through a working group, continue to
review the existing governance language and will
release revised participation criteria by the end of 2006.
Conclusions
The Voluntary Principles process involves a diverse set
of stakeholders, often in opposition to one another,
who have been able to identify common interests and
work together constructively. As expected, such a
process is extraordinarily difficult to manage and
requires delicate finessing to balance the different
stakeholder interests. As with most initiatives of this
nature, building trust between such diverse partners
has been slow and hard-won. Trust has improved over
the past five years as the partners better understand
each other and their goals.
The Voluntary Principles initiative demonstrates
that a tripartite partnership can begin to address issues
that may be impossible for any single actor to attempt
to resolve alone.
For more information on the Voluntary Principles see
www.voluntaryprinciples.org
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Human rights
PARTNERS: NGO • COM
LEVEL: global
LOCATION: global
Security guards on duty in Indonesia
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
84
Human rights training of Sharia judges in Nigeria
The three-year partnership between Statoil and the Legal Defence
and Assistance Project is introducing Sharia judges in northern
Nigeria to human rights issues and legislation.
Background
Statoil has been active within oil exploration in Nigeria
since 1992 and has supported corporate social
responsibility (CSR) projects in the county since 1996.
Statoil’s CSR projects entail partnerships with either
NGOs or UN organizations. The company does not have
its own field staff for these projects, instead choosing
to focus on its area of expertise—exploring for oil and
gas—while its partners implement the selected CSR
projects.
After years of undemocratic leadership and neglect,
and numerous breaches of human rights, Nigeria had
turned its attention to addressing the issues. In 2001,
Statoil decided to support organizations working on
human rights issues in the country. This support would
be in addition to the award-winning Akassa community
development project and some less extensive support
of other NGO projects.
When Statoil’s management granted US$100,000
for support of human rights work in the country for
2002, the search started for suitable projects. Splitting
the grant into four smaller grants of $25,000 each, the
company looked for low-profile, Nigeria-based human
rights organizations and not branches of large,
international human rights organizations.
In Nigeria, hundreds of NGOs work on human
rights issues, and Statoil was aware of some NGOs
being set up solely to ‘milk’ contributors. To avoid
becoming the victim of a scam, the company spent
significant time and effort screening potential
cooperation partners.
Meeting with its shortlist of 10 organizations,
Statoil asked for proposals for projects that could be
implemented within one year. The company also stated
its intention to establish a long-term partnership after
the first year if both parties saw the value. From the
proposals submitted, Statoil selected those from three
organizations: the Legal Defence and Assistance Project
(LEDAP), the Civil Liberties Organization and the
Prisoners Welfare and Rehabilitation Action.
The text below reports on the project that was set
up to train Sharia judges on human rights principles.
The Sharia judge training project
Established in 1996, LEDAP is an NGO with
headquarters in Lagos and branch offices in five states.
LEDAP’s members are lawyers or others with
professional legal training. The organization
disseminates legal knowledge and insight about
human rights and good governance within Nigeria.
The LEDAP proposal that Statoil agreed to fund was
to teach and train Sharia judges from a number of
northern states that have implemented Sharia, or
Islamic law. Sharia judges at local level often have
limited formal legal insight and training. Some might
even be illiterate. They are mainly religious leaders and
make their judgements drawing on Islamic teachings
and guidelines from the Koran. Many of the judges are
unaware of Nigeria’s position regarding the UN
‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ and other
human rights resolutions.
LEDAP developed and delivered two-day training
seminars for the Sharia judges on the following:
■ human rights principles;
■ women’s rights;
■ just interrogation principles and their integration
into the administration of Islamic law; and
■ legal procedures and administration.
Progress
The three years of training have given 450 Sharia
judges from 7 northern states an insight into human
rights questions. This amounts to approximately
20 per cent of the total number of Sharia judges in
the country.
At the start, the partners had questions about what
might result. For example:
■ Would Statoil’s enabling of LEDAP through project
financing (and selection) involve the oil company in
one of the currently ‘hot’ political questions in
Nigeria: the unilateral introduction of Sharia
legislation in some of the Islam-dominated
northern states?
Key partners
• Legal Defence andAssistance Project,Nigeria
• Statoil, Norway
KEYWORDS: human rights; legal training
85
■ How would the governors and the political leaders
in those states respond to the human rights
training focus on Sharia judges only (and not an
offer to all judges)?
■ Would the Sharia judges accept training on human
rights thinking from lawyers representing the
‘British law’ system?
After three years, both Statoil and LEDAP report
that their experiences have been positive and their
concerns unfounded. Specifically, Statoil has had no
accusations from government officials or observers of
interference in the country’s political processes.
Moreover, administrators in some states have
established links to LEDAP and, from time to time, use
its staff as legal consultants and advisers.
Most importantly, the training has been popular
and well received by the Sharia judges. For instance, in
the evaluations of two seminars in 2004, all
participants stated that the training had given them
knowledge that was directly applicable to their daily
work as Sharia judges.
From sponsorship to partnership
A significant reputation risk of operating in Nigeria is
the expansion of the Sharia legal system, which might
become a major threat to the stability of the Nigerian
federation and hence to international companies doing
business in the country. As a way to understand the
expansion and its implications, Statoil established a
dialogue with LEDAP so that the oil company might
draw on the NGO’s special insight into questions of
Islamic law.
Statoil has also used representatives from LEDAP as
presenters in the company’s staff seminars on ‘Nigeria
awareness’.
The relationship has gradually developed from one
which provides support to an NGO ‘working on a good
cause’ into a partnership which involves consultations
on questions of strategic significance.
Lessons learned
The experience with the Statoil–LEDAP partnership to
date has led to the following learnings:
■ Be bold when picking partners and projects.
According to some observers, selecting human
rights, partnering with LEDAP and training Sharia
judges were bold actions.
■ Spend time evaluating potential partners and
selecting partners.
■ Build relations also with people, not only with
organizations.
■ Spend time on mutual understanding of project
tasks and expectation levels.
■ Set up a simple but clear partnership contract. Be
sure to build in start and end dates.
■ Establish a tight dialoguing and monitoring system.
■ Release funds based on milestones and reporting.
■ Ensure that the funder has a way to exit the
partnership so that the ending of the funding will
not harm the project.
Conclusion
Statoil considers the reputation risk in setting up an
NGO human rights partnership in Nigeria to be high,
and the reward to be limited. On the other hand, this
type of human rights partnership is at the core of the
company’s CSR strategy and is why it has undertaken
this and similar initiatives.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Human rights
PARTNERS: NGO
LEVEL: national
LOCATION: Africa
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
86
Action on oil spills: the IMO/IPIECA Global Initiative
Formally launched in 1996, the Global Initiative is an umbrella
programme under which the International Maritime Organization
(IMO), the oil industry (through IPIECA) and other partners are
working together to encourage and facilitate the development and
implementation of oil spill contingency plans and increase the
ratification of oil spill-related international conventions.
Background
Major oil spills are unfortunate events that can have
high impact on the surrounding environment and
nearby communities. Short- and long-term effects of
the resulting pollution can greatly distress the local
socio-economic structure as well as the environmental
integrity of the impacted area.
Although ongoing work on preventative measures
within IMO and other organizations is driving down the
number of major spills, the risk cannot be reduced to
zero. The reality is that events beyond the scope of
human control (such as extreme weather conditions)
will always remain.
Against this background, the oil and shipping
industry has become increasingly conscious of a need
to improve its capacity to respond to spills through the
development and implementation of sustainable oil
spill preparedness and response systems. The
realization is also growing that capacity building
requires a joint effort by key stakeholders such as local
industry, governments and non-governmental
organizations, particularly if plans are to accommodate
and respond to local conditions. To this end, IMO and
IPIECA work closely to encourage and facilitate
cooperation between the relevant authorities and the
oil industry at national and regional levels.
A brief history of the Global Initiative
The IMO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
that aims to improve the safety and security of
international shipping and prevent marine pollution
from ships. The International Convention on Oil
Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation,
1990 (more commonly known as the OPRC
Convention) designates the IMO as responsible for
improving effective and sustainable preparedness
measures to ensure timely and efficient response to oil
pollution around the world through education,
training and technical assistance, and also explicitly
recognizes the role of the oil and shipping industry in
addressing this area.
Wishing to respond positively to the objectives of
the OPRC Convention, the oil industry requested IPIECA
to develop a basis for cooperative action with the IMO.
The IMO’s skills and expertise complement the
technical knowledge, oil spill experience and ability to
engage local industry that IPIECA, its industry
constituents and its technical partners (for example the
International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation)
bring to the relationship.
At a workshop in Cape Town, South Africa in 1996,
the Global Initiative (GI) was formally launched, with
the aim of encouraging and facilitating the
development and implementation of national, regional
and sub-regional oil spill contingency plans
(particularly in developing countries) and increasing
the ratification of relevant international conventions.
Although also active in the Caribbean, the
Mediterranean, Caspian and Black Seas, and South Asia,
Key partners
• International MaritimeOrganization (IMO)
• InternationalPetroleum IndustryEnvironmentalConservationAssociation (IPIECA)
KEYWORDS: contingency planning; regional cooperation; international conventions
Beach boom deployment
Speakers at the regionaloil spill workshop inAngola, in November2000, organized byIMO and IPIECA
87
much of the early GI effort focused on the West and
Central African (WACAF) region. Technical missions and
training workshops/courses resulted in a substantial
increase in African nations’ ratification of relevant
conventions between 1996 and 2003. It became
apparent, however, that more needed to be done in
terms of technical assistance to complement the
activities implemented in the region since 1996 in
order to ensure that all of the 21 WACAF countries had
an acceptable state of preparedness and operational
national contingency plans in place. A reassessment of
the process underlined the limitations of the initial
approach, which consisted primarily of a series of
technical missions, in building sustainable local
capacity. The GI has therefore modified its approach to
a planned, budgeted process supported by IMO and
industry business units in targeted countries to
facilitate cooperation between government authorities
and the oil industry. This realignment to a nationally
and regionally based model puts local stakeholders,
rather than London-based staff and secretariats, at the
heart of the process.
Progress and lessons learned
Successful partnerships can be defined in many ways,
but most are underpinned by mutual trust,
understanding and respect; shared vision and goals; a
shared responsibility; and a willingness to work
together on equal terms. For the GI, success has
certainly been built on these characteristics, but also
on mutual recognition of each partner’s strengths and
weaknesses and an adaptive approach that reinforces
positive progress and facilitates sustainable
engagement with relevant policy makers. Throughout
the journey, the partners have been faced with a range
of challenges and opportunities. From these have come
some key lessons:
The level of commitment of each partner can bedifficult to quantifyThere is no standard ‘currency’ for commitment. When
partners are channelling different types of equity into a
partnership (for example ‘sweat equity’, funding and in-
kind support), ensuring that the commitment of each
partner is, and is perceived as, equivalent can be a
substantial challenge. Real or apparent imbalances in
the commitment of each partner can undermine the
trust and respect necessary for a healthy working
relationship. The GI change to a budgeted regional
focus should reduce the relative significance of the less
easily quantified forms of equity.
External factors beyond the partners’ control canaffect progressThe IMO Integrated Technical Co-operation Programme
(ITCP), under which GI activities are coordinated, aims
at assisting countries in building up their human and
institutional capacities for uniform and effective
implementation of IMO’s regulatory framework. Some
of the Programme elements may be subject to re-
shaping or reforms due to insufficient funding or a shift
in priorities internally, which can also affect the
partnership programme of activities. On the
government side the assignment of resources—
particularly limited in developing countries—may not
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Oil spill response
PARTNERS: IGO • O&G
LEVEL: global
LOCATION: global
The IMO/IPIECAworkshop in Angolabrought together delegatesfrom government andindustry in 22 countriesparty to the Conventionfor Co-operation in theProtection andDevelopment of theMarine and CoastalEnvironment of the Westand Central AfricanRegion (WACAF orAbidjan Convention).
An oil spill responseteam makes readytheir equipment afterbeing called out toan equipmentdeployment exercise.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
88
align well (or at all) with the requirements of the
partnership. Equally, on the industry side, the
availability of staff can change at short notice, for
example if they are called to respond to an oil spill
incident. These external factors can cause frustration
for the partners. The GI has addressed the issue in part
by erring on the side of caution in planning events and
activities, but the partners acknowledge the need for,
and have engaged into, improved organizational and
timetabling aspects within these external constraints.
The scope of each partner’s interest is likely todevelop over time Interests may diverge somewhat, with one partner
wishing to push progress on a specific topic or in a
particular region, while other partners have less
interest in, or reasons for, doing so. In the case of the
GI, a ‘collective’ of industry groups is required to
effectively address the broad range of activities that
IMO wishes to pursue; where one industry group has
little interest or expertise, another must take the lead.
Inherent differences in institutional culture requiremutual understanding from the partnersCross-sector partnerships, by their nature, bring
together organizations with different structures,
mandates and operational capabilities. This is the case
for IMO and IPIECA. Under these circumstances working
together can require adjustments and reciprocal
understanding to achieve the effective implementation
of a joint programme of activities. Partners need to
integrate their strengths and be realistic about their
differences to avoid frustration. This has been the
approach followed by the GI partners.
Managing knowledge and information can reducethe impacts of staff changesStaff turnover and staff availability have been issues for
both the IMO and IPIECA. Staff change requires lessons
to be relearned and working relationships to be
developed again. Staff shortages or reduced staff
availability can also deter the rate of progress and the
vibrancy of the working relationship. Even if staff
turnover is expected to be low, a formal process of
capturing and managing knowledge from the outset is
essential. In the case of the GI, the production of case
study materials, country-by-country assessments and a
formal process for documenting outcomes have helped
to manage knowledge and information, and to reduce
the impacts of staff changes and shortages.
Sustaining interest in the issue that thepartnership is addressing can be a challengeThe financial resources available from industry have
been constrained by a failure to internally
communicate ongoing risk to those assigning
corporate budgets. The implementation of best
practice and early successes in reducing spills has
resulted in oil spills being regarded as a ‘mature’ and
effectively-managed issue at the company level, in turn
weakening business unit support for external, industry
wide actions. Ongoing communication to corporate
staff on the potential negative business and
environmental impacts of oil spills is required to ensure
sustained financial support.
Conclusions
Clear progress has been witnessed in a number of areas
such as designation of Governmental Responsible
Authorities, development of national legislation and
ratification and effective implementation of relevant
IMO conventions by the recipient countries. However,
more efforts need to be made by partners to increase
the countries’ capacity in oil spill preparedness and
response, and to enhance national and regional
cooperation between government and industry. In this
respect, it is important to recognize that GI is a long-
term process and that the results attained so far in
some countries represent good examples which can be
replicated elsewhere. Looking to the future, it is hoped
that the regionalization of the programme will drive
progress more rapidly and deliver effective and
sustainable contingency plans in a reasonable time
frame, overcoming some of the obstacles of the past 10
years. In order that the changeover to a regional
approach does not result in a loss of strategic
perspective, it is likely that a core role for IMO and
IPIECA will be required.
For more information on the Global Initiative see the
IPIECA website at www.ipieca.org
Action on oil spills: the IMO/IPIECA Global Initiative(continued)
The deployment ofbooms is the focus ofthis equipmentdeployment exercise inthe Philippines.
THEME: Oil spill response
PARTNERS: GOV • IGO • O&G
LEVEL: regional
LOCATION: Caribbean
89
Background
Clean Caribbean & Americas (CCA) is a non-profit
emergency oil spill response organization and an
international Tier 3 response centre covering the
Caribbean, and North, Central and South America. CCA
works extensively with a number of international
organizations, as well as national coast guards,
environmental ministries and local authorities.
A Tier 3 response operation entails crossing
international borders with equipment and personnel. It
requires coordination of strategic decision making,
logistics, and customs and immigration formalities.
Ideally, these mechanisms exist in a National
Contingency Plan and are exercised periodically.
One such exercise is the CCA International
Mobilization, Preparedness and Response Exercise
(MOBEX), which has been conducted every three years
since 1995. In January 2005, CCA conducted the fourth
and most ambitious MOBEX near the island of
Martinique, in the French Antilles, in conjunction with
the French government exercise of its National
Contingency Plan, POLMAR (POLlution MARitime), and
La Société Anonyme de la Raffinerie des Antilles, the
local refinery in Martinique.
MOBEX/POLMAR 2005
CCA and the Prefecture of Martinique signed a
Memorandum of Agreement for the MOBEX/POLMAR
exercise. The French government was the lead
authority, with CCA filling an integrated support role.
The joint exercise had three main goals:
■ To test the efficiency of the cooperation among
government agencies in Martinique and
international organizations.
■ To evaluate the capabilities of response teams and
equipment in an actual situation.
■ To raise government, industry, public and
international observers’ awareness of oil spill
response capabilities and limitations.
The theme of MOBEX/POLMAR 2005 was ‘Towards
Integrated & Scientific Preparedness & Response’. The
exercise had three phases:
1. The POLMAR command-and-control exercise under
the command of French authorities.
2. Equipment mobilization, deployment and training
under the leadership of CCA.
3. An oil spill response conference, attended by
approximately 100 observers from 20 countries.
The exercise differed from previous exercises in its
scope. A simulated spill of 150 cubic metres of oil from a
tanker off the south-east coast of Martinique required
an initial response and deployment of equipment by
the local fire brigade, with CCA support, to protect the
environmentally sensitive coastal mangrove areas and
the fisheries. During the exercise, POLMAR emergency
response plans and actions were tested, from the initial
notification and reporting of the oil spill, to response
actions to combat the spill and minimise environmental
damage and social and economic impact.
Lessons learned
MOBEX/POLMAR 2005 was an opportunity to address
all aspects of emergency response, including
administrative and logistical problems, issues in the
transport and clearance of equipment across
international borders, and the integration of CCA
resources into locally and nationally organized and
directed response operations.
All aspects of the response exercise were conducted
with the aim of reviewing and improving POLMAR and
CCA response capabilities. The exercise demonstrated
that CCA’s resources and technical expertise are
integrated into national and local systems of response.
The exercise also provided an operational model for how
CCA will support spill response operations in the 34
countries in its area of responsibility.
International observers left Martinique with a
better appreciation of the resources and actions
required for an effective oil spill response, as well as the
science and concepts to improve preparedness in their
own countries and companies.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
Oil spill response exercise in Martinique
The coordinated efforts of the multiple
participants in the January 2005 MOBEX/
POLMAR exercise helped raise awareness and
improve capabilities for responding rapidly and
effectively to marine oil spills.
Key partners
Multiple local, nationaland internationalorganizations andagencies, including:
• Asociación Regionalde Empresas dePetróleo y Gas Naturalen Latinoamérica y elCaribe
• Clean Caribbean &Americas (CCA)
• French Navy (MarinaNationale)
• International MaritimeOrganization (IMO)
• International TankerOwners PollutionFederation (ITOPF)
• IPIECA
• Prefecture ofMartinique (LaPréfecture de laRégion Martinique)
• La Société Anonymede la Raffinerie desAntilles
• United NationsEnvironmentProgramme (UNEP)
Monsieur Le Prefet de laRegion Martinique aboardan observation vessel inFort de France harbour isinterviewed by local mediaabout the exercise.
KEYWORDS: international exercise; global initiative; awareness raising and capacity building
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
90
The National Oil Spill Control and Contingency Plan in Malaysia
PETRONAS and the Petroleum Industry of Malaysia Mutual Aid
Group have been working in partnership with Malaysia’s Department
of Environment on oil spill management and response capability since
the early 1990s.
Background
The Straits of Malacca is a strategic navigation channel
and one of the busiest waterways in the world.
Annually, approximately 63,600 ships pass through the
Straits from Europe and the Middle East to the Pacific
Ocean and Asia, carrying 30 per cent of the world’s
trade as well as 50 per cent of the world’s oil.
With such a volume of traffic, the likelihood of an
oil spill is a concern for the littoral states of Malaysia,
Singapore and Indonesia. Indeed, 75 shipping incidents
in the Straits were reported between 1975 and 1993,
with 54 of them resulting in oil spills. Malaysia alone
spent US$34 million to clean up 30 oil spills between
1984 and 1997, and this figure excludes compensation
for loss of income, equipment and stocks to affected
fishermen and aquaculture farmers.
The projected impacts of a large oil spill in the
Straits have prompted several national and regional
initiatives to establish oil spill response and
preparedness capabilities. It was in this spirit that
PETRONAS spearheaded the formation of the
Petroleum Industry of Malaysia Mutual Aid Group
(PIMMAG) in December 1993. Open to all companies
involved in upstream and downstream activities in
Malaysia, PIMMAG’s aims are to provide the capability
to manage, maintain and operate oil spill response
resources, and to complement government efforts in
the control and clean-up of oil spills. By virtue of its
status as the national oil company, PETRONAS has been
contributing to all activities under this cooperation.
The National Oil Spill Control andContingency Plan
The premier procedural reference in managing oil spill
incidence in Malaysia is the ‘National Oil Spill Control
and Contingency Plan’ published by the country’s
Department of Environment. Governance of this
national plan is the onus of the National Oil Spill
Control Committee (NOSCC), which comprises
government agencies such as the Department of
Environment, the Marine Department, Royal Navy
Malaysia, the Maritime Enforcement Coordination
Centre, Marine Police and the Fire Brigade
Department, as well as PETRONAS and PIMMAG.
The Nagasaki Spirit incident in the Straits of
Malacca in 1992, when the tanker collided with a
container ship and spilled 13,000 tonnes of crude oil,
revealed some weaknesses in the communications
and coordination arrangements in the national plan.
The Malaysian government decided a review was
necessary, and the task was given to the Department
of Environment. To ensure the review resulted in a
comprehensive and well-tested plan, the government
also sought input and expertise from PETRONAS and
PIMMAG.
It was envisaged that the review would equip
Malaysia with not only a comprehensive oil spill
contingency plan, but also a stockpile of oil spill
response equipment at strategic locations along the
Straits of Malacca and on the east coast of Peninsular
Malaysia, as well as Sabah and Sarawak.
Following the review of the national plan, a
three-tier approach was adopted to combat oil spills.
Local authorities and local oil companies handle
Tier 1 responses on site, and regional councils
administer Tier 2 responses involving larger areas. In
more serious cases, the NOSCC is responsible for
mobilizing and coordinating Tier 3 responses, which
include containment efforts on sea and remedial
measures on land.
Since its establishment in 1976, the National Oil
Spill Control and Contingency Plan has also been
tested and improved through a number of exercises.
Most recently, both PETRONAS and PIMMAG helped
prepare for and implement the national oil spill
exercises in 2000 and 2005.
National oil spill exercise in Kuantan, 2000
The 2000 national oil spill exercise was conducted in
Kuantan, Pahang, located on the east coat of
Peninsular Malaysia on the South China Sea. The
objectives of this exercise were to assess the
participants’ preparedness for the following:
Key partners
• Department ofEnvironment, Malaysia
• Petroleum Industry ofMalaysia Mutual AidGroup (PIMMAG)
• PETRONAS
KEYWORDS: oil spill training and exercises; national planning and international cooperation
91
■ Tier 1 oil spill response at Kuantan Port;
■ Tier 2 oil spill response at the Pahang State level; and
■ coastal clean-up of oil spills at the Pahang State level.
The exercise was a success in terms of
communication and coordination among various
agencies, and feedback and improvements were
incorporated in the national plan.
‘Oil Combat 2005’ exercise and lessonslearned
An exercise on oil spill response was held in the
southern waters of Malaysia in July 2005. The three-day
exercise, hosted by the Department of Environment in
partnership with PETRONAS and PIMMAG, was
attended by 300 officers from various government
agencies and private sector organizations. It was aimed
at testing the level of readiness and the effectiveness of
the ‘Standard Operating Procedure for Oil Spill Control
in the Straits of Melaka’ and the Malaysian National Oil
Spill Control and Contingency Plan. PETRONAS and
PIMMAG also lent support by furnishing the equipment
and trained personnel for the exercise.
The oil spill exercise was deemed as successful,
with a number of key factors identified during the
implementation of the oil spill contingency plan:
■ Effective emergency communication and working
relationships established prior to and during the oil
spill incident, which contributed significantly to
managing the incident efficiently.
■ Properly maintained and easily accessible PIMMAG
oil spill response equipment that was deployed on-
site, as well as the group’s highly trained oil spill
responders.
■ Excellent manpower and equipment support,
for example trucks, boats, beach clean-up vehicles
and heavy machinery, from government agencies
such as the Fire Brigade and the Marine and
Fisheries departments.
Conclusion
In a critical situation such as an oil spill, early and
coordinated intervention measures will prevent oil
slicks from encroaching on larger areas. The 2000 and
2005 exercises clearly demonstrate that the success of
the National Oil Spill Control and Contingency Plan is
primarily dependent on a strong partnership,
established communication and clear understanding
among government authorities and private sector
organizations.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Oil spill response
PARTNERS: GOV • O&G
LEVEL: regional
LOCATION: Southern Asia
Oil Combat Exercise,2005
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
92
The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
Proposed by UK Prime Minister Tony Blair in 2002 and endorsed
by the G8 countries, the multi-stakeholder Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative supports improved governance in resource-rich
countries through publication and verification of company payments
and government revenues from oil, gas and mining.
Background
In 2002, the UK government launched the Extractive
Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) at the World
Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.
It was motivated by issues of energy security—the
realization that growing amounts of hydrocarbons
would be reaching the UK from ‘new’ areas such as West
Africa and the Caspian region—as well as by NGOs’
efforts to highlight the specific issue of revenue
management in resource-rich emerging societies.
Subsequently, delegates from multiple countries,
companies, associations and organizations at a
founding conference in London in June 2003 agreed a
‘Statement of Principles and Agreed Actions’, and
endorsed the voluntary nature of the initiative. The 12
EITI principles provide the cornerstone of the initiative.
They affirm that natural resources management is the
domain of sovereign governments, that resource
extraction benefits accrue over many years and are
often price-dependent, that the achievement of greater
transparency must respect laws and contracts, and that
a broadly consistent and workable approach to the
disclosure of payments and revenues is required.
Delegates at a second conference in March 2005
agreed on criteria, guidelines and a sourcebook for
implementing countries and participating companies,
and authorized the establishment of an EITI Secretariat,
now based in the UK Department for International
Development (DFID).
At the start of 2006, EITI remained in a ‘pilot phase’.
An International Advisory Group (IAG), set up
following the 2005 conference, is discussing the
initiative’s future. Led by Peter Eigen, chairman of
Transparency International, the IAG will recommend to
the next EITI international conference (scheduled for
late 2006) how to monitor and validate the EITI
process and reward nations and companies that fully
implement the initiative.
Progress and lessons learned
So far, EITI has proved successful to a degree that has
surprised many participants. Underlying differences
between the various parties have been finessed,
agreement has been reached on some sensitive core
issues, new countries are being encouraged to take
part and a majority of independent oil, gas and mining
companies are included.
Much of this success is down to four factors. First, EITI
is voluntary. It is unlikely that it would have progressed
this far on any other basis. Second, it’s focus is
narrow—all it does is require companies and states to
report what money is paid to host governments. Third,
it is driven by resource-rich countries rather than by the
UK government, or companies or NGOs. Fourth, it is
flexible—no two countries are the same and their
motives for participating differ, yet the EITI guidelines
encompass incentives to meet these varying motivations.
Several key oil-producing countries led by
Azerbaijan and Nigeria are already making serious
efforts to comply with the EITI criteria. In Azerbaijan, a
commission was set up to implement the initiative, and
the country’s first EITI report was published in March
2005. (For more information on the Azerbaijan work,
see the BP-EITI case study on page 94.) In Nigeria, EITI
has been the catalyst for a comprehensive effort
backed by the president to ‘break the blame cycle’
Key partners1
Multiple countries,companies, associationsand organizations,including the following:
Countries (activeimplementers or endorsers):
• Azerbaijan• Nigeria• Peru• Trinidad & Tobago
Countries (donors):
• France• Holland• UK• USA
Oil and gas companies:
•BP • Chevron• Eni• ExxonMobil• Hess • Marathon • Repsol • Shell • Statoil • Talisman Energy • Total • Woodside
Industry associations:
• American PetroleumInstitute
• InternationalAssociation of Oil &Gas Producers
NGOs:
• Catholic Agency forOverseas Development
• Global Witness • Publish What You Pay
coalition • Transparency
International
KEYWORDS: revenue management; reporting and validation; voluntary initiative
1 For a full list of participants in EITI, see www.eitransparency.org
93
around the oil industry. All official receipts from oil and
gas developments going back five years are being
audited, a value-for-money process review is under
way inside government and a lively nationwide
communications exercise has been launched to explain
what is happening.
The various parties to EITI are learning some distinct
lessons. On the company side, participants have been
pleasantly surprised by the extent to which their
concerns, especially about commercial confidentiality,
have been heard and acted on. ‘We’re realizing that these
tripartite initiatives can work provided you focus on what
you agree on. Then you can move an initiative forward. If
you focus on the differences, all you do is argue,’ observes
one oil industry executive involved in EITI.
Differences do exist among companies, most
importantly about whether disclosure of tax and
revenue payments to governments should be on a
disaggregated (individual company) basis or
aggregated (collective) basis.
Although NGOs were committed initially to
mandatory EITI reporting requirements and ‘quite
aggressive and clear transparency goals’, they decided
early on to stay involved despite the voluntary nature of
the initiative. Two years down the line, EITI is seen as a
useful tool in empowering local societies, protecting
human rights and advancing democratic accountability.
Both companies and NGO participants comment
favourably on the role played by DFID and, more
recently, the EITI Secretariat. In particular, a sharp
increase in expertise and personnel since 2003 wins
wide praise. For its part, the Secretariat increasingly sees
its role as a ‘matchmaker’, putting countries, companies
or NGOs in touch with the right people, and as a
‘knowledge bank’, sharing information and stimulating
better governance, in particular before big money
comes in from large hydrocarbon and mining projects
and makes altering the status quo more difficult.
Conclusions
Remaining issues include the sincerity and capacity of
some countries wanting to sign up to the initiative; the
future structure and funding of the EITI Secretariat; the
participation of state-owned companies in such places
as Russia, China, Brazil, India and Malaysia; the
minimum levels of monitoring and validation needed
to ensure the initiative’s continued credibility; its
geographic spread; and the implications of the large
revenue increases being experienced in many oil- and
gas-rich states.
Against that, experience has taught those involved
with EITI not to expect linear progression. Less than
four years after the launch of the initiative there is wide
acceptance that knowing what governments receive,
verified by what companies pay, is a critical first step to
holding decision makers accountable for the use of
those revenues. In this sense, EITI has already justified
itself as part of a wider drive for better governance that
may in time ensure that revenues from hydrocarbon
and mineral projects contribute more directly to
poverty reduction and development.
For more information on EITI activities, visit
www.eitransparency.org
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
endorsing countries
implementing countries
THEME: Transparency
PARTNERS: GOV • NGO • O&G
LEVEL: global
LOCATION: global
SIGN UP• Government makes public statement
• Stakeholders identified—government, civil society, all extractive companies• Initiating conference held
SET UP• Multi-stakeholder committee formed
• Basic procedure for EITI agreed and workplan developed
PROCESS DEVELOPMENT• Technical assistance needs identified and secure financing and support found
• Select independent administrator to reconcile figures tointernational audit standards
DISCLOSURE AND PUBLICATION• Design reporting template
• Companies and government submit data to administrator• Ensure data is to international standards
PUBLIC DISSEMINATION AND DISCUSSION• EITI Report published, identifying any discrepancies
• Administrator makes recommendations to improve process• Stakeholders review data
REVIEW• Review process and make improvements
• Workplan reviewed• Regular reporting continues
The ‘EITI Process’
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
94
Revenue transparencyin Azerbaijan
BP has been involved with the Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative since its launch in Johannesburg in 2002, mostly in
Azerbaijan and also in Angola, and Trinidad and Tobago.
Background
In 1997, BP sponsored a social impact assessment in
Angola—the first ever undertaken on its behalf. The
assessment indicated that a key issue for BP was the
host government’s use of revenues received from the
company’s oil exploration and development activities
in the country. As BP expanded its operations in
Azerbaijan and the Caucasus region, revenue
transparency was again highlighted as an issue with
implications for the company’s reputation.
As oil prices recovered from a low of $10 a barrel in
1998 to rise above $50 a barrel in 2005, the issue of
revenue transparency attracted wider interest. An
investigation by Oxfam America and the launch in 2002
of a ‘Publish What You Pay’ campaign by the Open
Society Institute and a coalition of NGOs gave the topic
worldwide prominence. For its part, BP calculated that
over the next 30–40 years the government of
Azerbaijan might receive revenues of $40–187 billion,
dependent primarily on the price of oil. Angola—as
well as Indonesia and Trinidad and Tobago (other
countries in which BP is building a commercial
presence)—could achieve similar revenues.
From the outset BP has not regarded the Extractive
Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) as a panacea.
Any transparency that EITI achieves ‘is a means to the
end—and not the end in itself’ in the words of Richard
Paniguian, BP’s group vice president for Africa, Middle
East, Russia and the Caspian Region. In BP’s view,
achieving the core purpose of transparency—
promotion of better governance, less corruption, fewer
conflicts and reduced poverty—ultimately depends on
the capacity of host country governments. No
company, however large, can achieve much by itself.
But BP also accepts that there are valuable things
companies can do in this area by working in
partnership with others.
BP is one of two energy companies (Chevron is the
other) who represent the wider oil and gas industry’s
views in the EITI’s International Advisory Group (IAG).
The IAG is to make recommendations at the 2006 EITI
international summit in Oslo on how to validate
implementation of EITI and how to organize the
initiative in future.
The Azerbaijan experience
Following BP’s commitment to support EITI, and the
endorsement of EITI principles by the government of
Azerbaijan and the country’s Oil Fund in November
2004, a commission was set up to implement EITI in
Azerbaijan. BP, along with 21 other foreign oil
companies in the country and a coalition of 32 local
NGOs, took part in this effort and played a lead
organizational role among the companies.
Subsequently, an aggregator was appointed to
audit the host government’s annual report of revenues
received from foreign oil companies and the
companies’ individual reports of revenues paid to the
Key partners
• BP Azerbaijan, BPAngola, BP Trinidad& Tobago
• Other members ofconsortia and jointventures partneringBP in these countries
• Governments ofAzerbaijan andTrinidad & Tobago(EITI implementers)and Angola (EITIendorser)
• Department forInternationalDevelopment, UKgovernment
KEYWORDS: revenue management and transparency; consensus decision making; EITI
Welders at work onpipeline installationat SangachalTerminal,Azerbaijan
A platform topsides under construction at an offshore oildevelopment in the Caspian Sea
95
government. The aggregator compares the totals,
checks for obvious errors and publishes the reports.
Azerbaijan’s first EITI report was published in March
2005. At present, BP is one of two international
companies represented in Azerbaijan (Statoil of
Norway is the other) to publish individual data (in its
Azerbaijan Sustainability Report 2004 available on the
bp.com website).
Progress and lessons learned
David Woodward, associate president of BP, welcomed
the publication of the reports for Azerbaijan in 2005 as
a world first. BP, he said, was satisfied with the
aggregator’s independent process while recognizing
there are ways the EITI process could be improved. In
particular, BP has sought individual tax and revenue
disclosure from other foreign companies associated
with it in various consortia in Azerbaijan, including the
Azerbaijan International Operating Company and the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Company. Itochu of Japan has
indicated its willingness to follow BP and Statoil’s lead.
An advance especially welcomed by BP has been
the Azerbaijan president’s decision to give government
signing authority for EITI agreements to the head of the
country’s Oil Fund. This move not only enhanced the
Oil Fund’s authority within the governing structure, but
also made it easier for oil company-government
negotiations to move ahead.
Azerbaijani authorities, including the president of
the state oil company SOCAR and the head of the Oil
Fund, have hailed publication of the EITI reports in
2005 as evidence of the authorities’ commitment to
transparent management of revenues accruing from
the extractive sector. Local NGOs have hailed the
publication of the report as ‘a significant step forward.’
Nevertheless, in important ways the EITI remains
work-in-progress:
■ It stands outside oil companies’ licence agreements
with host governments and can be revoked at any
time. One suggestion is to incorporate EITI provisions
in project lending terms, so allowing financing to
be withheld if EITI commitments are not met.
■ Validation of the initiative—devising an
independent process to ensure countries and
companies are proceeding with implementation
consistent with the EITI principles and agreed
criteria—is still under discussion in the IAG.
■ Protection of the EITI ‘brand’ to stop countries and
companies falsely claiming to be endorsing or
implementing the initiative, is a key issue being
addressed by the IAG.
■ A new administrative structure will be necessary
once the UK’s sponsoring agency, the Department
for International Development, relinquishes its
central role. Again, the IAG is developing options.
■ Revenue management in Azerbaijan remains an
issue and the country continues to feature
prominently on Transparency International’s
Corruption Perception Index.
■ A majority of oil and gas companies operating in
Azerbaijan are opposed to individual company tax
payment and revenue disclosure. Most prefer to
report collectively.
Conclusions
EITI would never have started except on a voluntary
basis. Within this limitation it has achieved much in the
three years since its inception, particularly in
Azerbaijan and Nigeria (where BP is not represented).
BP has particularly welcomed the development of
minimum criteria for EITI implementation and the way
the initiative has mobilized and legitimized the role of
civil society in a sensitive area for governments.
A strong sense exists, however, that the real test of
EITI lies ahead both in Azerbaijan when oil revenues
soar in 2006 and beyond, and further afield as more
countries sign up.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
THEME: Transparency
PARTNERS: GOV • O&G
LEVEL: global national
LOCATION: Caspian
Installing offshore platforms at the giant Azeri-Chirag-Gunashli offshore complex in the Caspian
An oilfield supplyvessel at work in theCaspian Sea
A guide to resources
Further reading
■ The oil and gas industry—technology cooperation
and capacity building, contributing to Agenda 21.
IPIECA/UNEP, 1994.
■ The oil and gas industry: from Rio to Johannesburg
and beyond. OGP/IPIECA ‘WSSD report’, 2002.
■ The Partnering Toolbook. (Available in more than
15 languages.) The International Business Leaders
Forum (IBLF) and the Global Alliance for Improved
Nutrition (GAIN), 2003.
■ Partnership briefing paper.
IPIECA, 2004.
■ The Case Study Toolbook.
Published in 2006 by IBLF on behalf of
The Partnering Initiative.
For more resources on cross-sector partnering
please see www.ThePartneringInitiative.org
Acknowledgement
This publication is the work product of the IPIECA
Partnership Task Force. The Task Force was convened under
the auspices of the IPIECA Strategic Issues Assessment
Forum. Case studies were provided by IPIECA company and
association members. Eva Halper from the Partnering
Initiative (a collaborative venture between the Prince of
Wales Business Leaders Forum (IBLF) and the University of
Cambridge Programme for Industry), provided invaluable
insight and expertise; Michael Warner, Programme Director
at the Overseas Development Institute, brought his
knowledge of partnerships and the oil and gas industry.
Partnership Task Force members included:
Garry Mann (Nexen)
Helen Sullivan, Chair (Shell)
Dominique Chauvin (Total)
Karen Tyrone (ExxonMobil)
Eva Halper (The Partnering Initiative)
Sophie Depraz / Hannah Buckley (IPIECA)
The case studies were edited by Sue McManus.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
97
Please also visit the IPIECA Partnership Portal
The partnership portal can be accessed via the IPIECAwebsite at www.ipieca.org, and includes furtherresources on multi-stakeholder partnerships in addition toeach individual case study featured in this publication.
A search function enables users to search case studies viathemes, keywords, region, partner or company involved.
P a r t n e r s h i p s i n t h e O i l a n d G a s I n d u s t r y • A n I P I E C A p u b l i c a t i o n
Company members
BHP Billiton Ltd
BG Group
BP
Chevron
CNOOC
ConocoPhillips
ENI SpA
ExxonMobil
Hess Corporation
Hunt Oil Company
Hydro
Kuwait Petroleum Corporation
Mærsk Olie og Gas
Marathon Oil
Nexen Inc
NOC Libya
Petroleum Development Oman
Petronas
Petrotrin
PTTEP
Repsol YPF
Saudi Aramco
Shell International Ltd
Statoil
TNK-BP
Total
Woodside Energy Ltd
Association members
AIP (Australian Institute of Petroleum)
API (American Petroleum Institute)
ARPEL (Regional Association of Oil & Natural Gas
Companies in Latin America and the Caribbean)
CAPP (Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers)
CPPI (Canadian Petroleum Products Institute)
CONCAWE (Oil Companies European Association for
Environment, Health and Safety)
EUROPIA (European Petroleum Industry Association)
IFP (Institut Français du Pétrol)
OGP (International Association of Oil and Gas
Producers)
PAJ (Petroleum Association of Japan)
SAPIA (South African Petroleum Industry Association)
WPC (World Petroleum Congress)
98
The International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) is comprised
of oil and gas companies and associations from around the world. Founded in 1974 following the
establishment of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), IPIECA provides one of the
industry’s principal channels of communication with the United Nations. IPIECA is the single global
association representing both the upstream and downstream oil and gas industry on key global
environmental and social issues including: oil spill preparedness and response; global climate
change; health; fuel quality; biodiversity; social responsibility and sustainability reporting.
5th Floor, 209–215 Blackfriars Road, London, SE1 8NL, United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 (0)20 7633 2388 Facsimile: +44 (0)20 7633 2389
E-mail: info@ipieca.org Internet: www.ipieca.org
Please also visit the IPIECA Partnership Portal
The partnership portal can be accessed via the IPIECAwebsite at www.ipieca.org, and includes furtherresources on multi-stakeholder partnerships in addition toeach individual case study featured in this publication.
A search function enables users to search case studies viathemes, keywords, region, partner or company involved.
www.ipieca.org