Reforming corruption out of Nigerian oil? Part one: Mapping corruption risks in oil sector governance
French version: Réformer la corruption de l'or noir nigérian ? Première partie : Cartographie des risques de corruption dans la gouvernance de la filière pétrole
Oil dominates the Nigerian economy and generates the vast majority of government revenues. At the same time, Nigeria is perceived as one of the world's most corrupt countries, and significant levels of corruption are said to exist within its oil sector. The complex and largely opaque operations of the oil industry make it difficult to establish exactly how, when and to what extent corruption takes place. This U4 Brief attempts to shed light on how public sector institutions governing the Nigerian oil sector permit the existence of corruption. Six areas of corruption risk are addressed: the awarding of licenses; the awarding of contracts; bottlenecks and inefficiencies; the role of bunkering; the exportation of crude; and importing refined products. The Brief is the first in a two-part series, the second of which addresses policies and programs that aim to stem corrupt practices in the Nigerian oil sector.
See the theme pages on the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre.
Shadow Value Chains: Tracing the link between corruption, illicit activity and lootable natural resources from West Africa
Åse Gilje Østensen, Mats Stridsman
The global participation backlash: Implications for natural resource initiatives
Trading in corruption: Evidence and mitigation measures for corruption in the trading of oil and minerals
Olivier Longchamp, Nathalie Perrot
Digitizing the landscape: Technology to improve integrity in natural resource management
Kendra Dupuy,Per Aarvik
Integrity based approaches: combining rewards and sanctions works best
Guillaume Nicaise, David Jackson, Matthew Jenkins
Provincial variations and entrepreneurialism in the development of China’s Distant Water Fisheries (2011–2020)
U4 Director: “How I think when I talk about anti-corruption: porridge and berries, priors and biases”
Peter J. Evans