Contaminated land management policy transfer: drivers and barriers within the Nigerian context

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

32 Downloads (Pure)


Barriers to successful transfer of contaminated land management policy from one country to another include socio-cultural, economic and environmental differences. While weak contaminated land management regimes desire effective legislation and make efforts to transfer policies from established regimes, contextual differences or characteristics between the two countries involved is a key challenge. These differing characteristics include social values, economic strength, governance structure, and technical know-how. An investigation was conducted through workshop and interviews to determine core social values that are impacted due to contaminated land by oil spills in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. Workshop was undertaken for participants involving community groups (N=35), while interviews involved contaminated land management regulator (N=8), experts in contaminated land management in the Niger Delta (N=6), and operators in the oil exploration industry (N=7). Water quality, soil quality for agriculture, farming and fishing, and health/wellbeing indicated core social values that influence contaminated land management decisions while stakeholders expressed long-term concern about economic losses, clean-up, environmental degradation and public engagement. It is proposed that policymakers should consider unique conditions and country-specific characteristics in the event of policy adaptation for contaminated land management. An alternative approach to improving contaminated land management is recommended that will account for core social values and accommodate varying perceptions of stakeholders.
Original languageEnglish
Article number60B2AA169641
Pages (from-to)320-334
Number of pages15
JournalAfrican Journal of Environmental Science and Technology
Issue number9
Publication statusPublished - 30 Sept 2022


  • Socio-economic values
  • stakeholder participation
  • livelihood
  • drinking water
  • oil spills
  • stakeholders’ perception

Cite this