Sustainable Development and Corporate Social Responsibility under the 2018 Petroleum Host and Impacted Communities Development Trust Bill: Is Nigeria Rehashing Past Mistakes?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The 2018 Petroleum Host and Impacted Communities Development Trust Bill before the Nigerian National Assembly was proposed to foster sustainable development (SD) and embed corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the oil and gas corporate activities within host communities. From the backdrop of SD and CSR as regulatory concepts, this article scrutinizes the Bill for its viability to realize its objectives in its current form. It raises concerns about: (i) perceived negligence by the government to provide social services and public goods, seeming to outsource such responsibilities to the business community; (ii) the reduction of CSR to capital or community development projects; and (iii) the absence of useful delimitation criteria to determine host and impacted communities. The article argues that past mistakes are being rehashed and queries the capacity of the Bill to live up to stakeholders’ expectations. Using the normative contributions of global templates such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the article recommends policy and regulatory changes to the Bill’s governance structure towards embedding effective CSR and engendering SD in the Nigerian oil and gas industry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".