Working together for effective natural resource governance? Considering risk and context in the relationship between horizontal and vertical accountability mechanisms.

1. Working together for effective natural
resource governance?
Considering risk and context in the relationship between horizontal and
vertical accountability mechanisms
1. Chinwe Ekene Ezeigbo| PhD Candidate, Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM), Sustainable
Minerals Institute (SMI), The University of Queensland, Australia, c.ezeigbo@uq.edu.au
2. Dr Kathryn Sturman| Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM),
Sustainable Minerals Institute (SMI), The University of Queensland, Australia.

2. • Accountability is an important strategy for reducing corruption in the
extractives sector (Guerzovich and Moses 2016, Carter 2016,
Halloran 2015, Joshi 2014, Fox 2007).
• Accountability involves the obligation of one actor to provide
information about and/or justification for his or her actions in
response to another actor with the power to make those demands
and apply sanctions for noncompliance (Brinkerhoff and Wetterberg
2015:275).
• New research suggests that there is more promise for corruption
prevention in governance when horizontal (government institutional
checks) (HA) and vertical (societal checks) accountability (SA)
mechanisms interact (Fox 2015, Lagunes 2017, Ankamah 2018).
• Scholars have not yet explored how the interactions between
horizontal and social accountability mechanisms can work in practice
in the extractive sector to reduce/prevent corruption.
• This study closes this gap and provides a re-conceptualised
framework for understanding how the interactions between horizontal
and vertical accountability mechanisms can prevent corruption and
improve natural resource governance.
Introduction
#ISSRMPosterPresentation2020[Working together for effective natural resource governance] | [July 2020] 2
[ISSRM Virtual Conference Presentation 2020]
Fig 1. A mapping of accountability
relationships in the Nigerian oil and gas
sector.

3. Case study selection: Why the Nigerian oil and gas sector?
#ISSRMPosterPresentation2020
[Working together for effective natural resource governance] | [July 2020] 3
[ISSRM Virtual Conference Presentation 2020]
13th largest producer of oil in the world (approx. 37.5 bbl crude oil reserves)
10th largest holder of gas in the world (est 185 TCF of proven natural gas
reserves)
60-70% of government revenues, 95% of foreign exchange earnings
Earned about $592 billion from exploration of oil and gas between
1999 and 2014.
Corruption manifests during awards of licenses and contracts, the
exportation of crude and importing refined products
64% of population lives on less than $1.25 per day. (OPML 2018)
Over $400billion lost to corruption in the O&G sector from 1960-1999 (Nnochiri
2012)
[ISSRM Virtual Conference Presentation 2020]

4. • We rely on both theoretical and empirical data to develop this
conceptual framework (Fig 2).
• First, we reviewed 46 articles and books from 1994-2018 on
various concepts including state-society synergy, co-
production, contingency model of collaborative governance
and horizontal and social accountability.
• Seven pilot studies were conducted to confirm or refute the
hypothesis for the research. We conducted 45-60 minute
open-ended interviews with participants working in HA and SA
mechanisms operating in the Nigerian oil and gas sector.
• Finally, we developed a more robust conceptual framework to
understand interactions between HA and SA in the extractives
sector.
Methods
#ISSRMPosterPresentation2020[Working together for effective natural resource governance] | [July 2020] 4
[ISSRM Virtual Conference Presentation 2020]
Fig 2. Conceptual framework development
adapted from Sage Conceptual Framework,
Theories and Models
[ISSRM Virtual Conference Presentation 2020]

5. The research identified the following findings:
1. Much of the literature identified 6 factors as key for interactions between
state (HA) and society (SA) to occur, shown in Fig 3.
2. While the literature showed the critical factors necessary for interactions
to occur, there was less focus on the factors critical to ensure
outcomes for corruption prevention after the interactions have
occurred.
3. Four main areas of interactions occur in the Nigerian oil and gas sector
between horizontal and social accountability mechanisms (a) detection,
investigation and exposure of corruption, (b) prevention, education and
awareness, (c) support of horizontal accountability reputation, political
standing and performance, (d) prosecution of corrupt activities.
4. The risks affecting interactions and outcomes are key factors to be
considered. This is because these risks can either prevent interactions
between HA and SA taking place, thereby affecting the desired outcome
of corruption reduction or prevention in the extractive sector.
5. Finally, the pilot study, as well as the literature, highlighted that context
matters in understanding how the interactions between HA and SA can
aid anti-corruption outcomes in the governance of the extractive sector.
Key findings
#ISSRMPosterPresentation2020[Working together for effective natural resource governance] | [July 2020] 5
[ISSRM Virtual Conference Presentation 2020]
Fig 3. Six critical factors identified key
for interactions between state and
society
[ISSRM Virtual Conference Presentation 2020]

6. • The re-conceptualised framework presented is a result of a
theoretical-empirical exercise focusing on the literature and
pilot interviews conducted with key stakeholders.
• The framework developed (Fig 4) proposes four key
variables as key to understanding how interactions
between horizontal and social accountability institutions
can influence anti-corruption and accountability outcomes
in governance of the extractives sector.
• The variables to consider are: (a) the conditions facilitating
the act or process of interactions to occur (b) the factors
likely to affect outcomes from interactions and (c) the
potential risks affecting/preventing either or both the
process of interactions and the outcomes and (d) the
context underlying (a), (b) and (c).
Conclusion
#ISSRMPosterPresentation2020
[Working together for effective natural resource governance] | [July 2020] 6
[ISSRM Virtual Conference Presentation 2020]
Fig 4. A re-conceptualised framework for
understanding how interactions between
horizontal and vertical (social) accountability
mechanisms can prevent corruption and
improve natural resource governance.
[ISSRM Virtual Conference Presentation 2020]