Environmental Regulatory Bodies and Facilities' Compliance to Environmental Regulations in Minna, Nigeria

Table of Contents

Acknowledgement

Abstract

List of tables

List of figures and plates

List of appendixes

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
1.2 Statement of Research Problem
1.3 Aim and Objectives
1.4 Research Hypotheses
1.5 Scope of the Study
1.6 justification for the Study

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Theoretical Framework
2.3 Review of Similar Studies
2.4 Innovative, Cost-Effective Approaches to Environmental Compliance
2.4.1 Links between government compliance monitoring and self-monitoring by Industries
2.4.2 The role of the public, the courts and market forces in environmental compliance
2.4.3 Benefits of Environmental Compliance and Enforcement
2.5 Techniques of Environmental Audit
2.5.1 Five levels of environmental auditing techniques
2.6 Factors Affecting Environmental Compliance

CHAPTER THREE STUDY AREA AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The Study Area
3.2.1 Location
3.2.2 Climate
3.2.3 Drainage and Geology
3.2.4 Soil and Vegetation
3.2.5 Population
3.2.6 Commerce and Industries
3.2.7 Activities Requiring Compliance to Environmental Regulations in the Study Area
3.3 Methodology
3.3.1 Reconnaissance Survey
3.3.2 Types of Data to be used
3.3.3 Sources of Data
3.3.4 Sample Population and Sampling Techniques
3.3.5 Data Collection Procedure
3.3.6 Method of Data Analysis

CHAPTER FOUR PRESENTATION OF RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Environmental Regulators in Minna
4.3 Facilities Requiring Compliance to Environmental Regulations
4.3.1 Facilities Requiring Compliance to Environmental Regulations
4.3.2 Assessment of Environmental Audit Report
4.3.3 Quality of Audit Report Based on Laid down Procedure
4.3.4 NESREA Accredited Consultant(s) in Minna
4.3.5 Duration Working in the Organizations (NESREA and NISEPA)
4.3.6 Complaints from Public Regarding Environmental Damage
4.4 Compliance of Facilities to Environmental Regulations
4.4.1 Conduct of EIA at Inception of the Facility
4.4.2 Level of Implementation of Environmental Management Plan (EMP)
4.4.3 Sending Request to Facilities for Compliance
4.4.4 Site Visit to the Facilities for Compliance
4.4.5 Assessment of Compliance of Facilities to Environmental Regulations
4.4.6 Time given to Defaulters to comply
4.4.7 Forms of Enlightenment Programme
4.4.8 Synergy between Environmental Regulators
4.5 Enforcement of Environmental Regulations by the Regulatory bodies
4.5.1 Procedure for Enforcement
4.5.2 Assessment of Level of Enforcement of Environmental Regulations
4.5.3 Reason(s) for Conflict in Enforcing Environmental Regulations
4.6 Factors Militating against Environmental Compliance within the Facilities
4.6.1 Sufficient Knowledge of Environmental Legal Requirement of the Facility
4.6.2 Relationship between Facility and Environmental Regulators
4.6.3 Factors Militating against Environmental Compliance
4.6.4 Consultation Prior to new Environmental Regulations
4.6.5 Ways of Tackling Environmental Compliance
4.7 Hypotheses

CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Summary
5.3 Conclusion
5.4 Recommendations

References

LIST OF TABLES

1.1: Regulated Sectors for Compliance in Nigeria

2.1: Environmental Auditing Techniques

2.2: Factors Affecting Environmental Compliance

3.1: Major Facilities and Selected Samples

3.2: Sampled Respondents from the Facilities and Regulators

4.1: Facilities Requiring Environmental Compliance Audit

4.2: Quality of Audit Report Based on laid down Procedure

4.3: Duration Working in the Organization (NESREA and NISEPA)

4.4: Public Complaints of Environmental Damage

4.5: Level of implementation of Environmental Management Plan (EMP)

4.6: Method of Sending Compliance Request

4.7: Site Visit to the Facilities

4.8: Assessment of Compliance of Facilities to Environmental Regulations - - -

4.9: Time given to Defaulters to comply

4.10: Forms of Enlightenment Programme

4.11: Synergy between Environmental Regulators

4.12: Procedure for Enforcement

4.13: Assessment of Level of Enforcement of Environmental Regulations

4.14: Reason(s) for Conflict in Enforcing Environmental Regulations

4.15: Sufficient Knowledge of Environmental Legal Requirement

4.16: Relationship between Facility and Environmental Regulators

4.17: Factors Militating against Environmental Compliance

4.18: Ways of Tackling Environmental Compliance

4.19: Wilcoxon Signed Ranked Test between responses of NESREA and NISEPA on facilities’ compliance to environmental regulations

4.20: Wilcoxon Signed Ranked Test between responses of NESREA and NISEPA on enforcement of environmental regulations within the facilities

Acknowledgement

My profound gratitude goes to Almighty Allah (S.W.A.) the Lord of the universe and his beloved Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H.) for sparing my life and seeing me through up till this moment. Also, my gratitude goes to my supervisors: Prof. A. B. Nabegu and Dr. Binta Abdulkarim whom in spite of their schedules, found time to put me on track whenever I derailed during the course of this research; indeed, I ever remain grateful to them. In addition, my appreciation also goes to all my lecturers in the Department of Geography Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria. The likes of Dr. I.M. Jaro (HOD), Prof. M. Mamman, Prof. E. O. Iguisi, Dr. J. O. Adefila, Dr. B. A. Sawa, Dr. A. I. Abdulhameed, Dr. R.O. Yusuf, Dr. B. Akpu, Dr. Y.Y. Obadaki, Mal. A Jibrin and all other lecturers for their mentoring and guidance which has contributed towards attaining this greater height in my educational pursuit.

Furthermore, I remain indebted to my parents Mal. Abdullahi Chado Salihu and family including my siblings, Mal. Mohammed Abubakar Chado and family, my elder sister Mallama Saddiyah Yahaya and her family, and all other members of the extended family for their financial, moral, and spiritual support throughout my postgraduate study in ABU. May Almighty ALLAH (S.W.A.) continue to bless them endlessly. Finally, my special thanks goes to my friends Audu Zanuwa Mu’azu, Danbaba Goma, Ahmed Haruna Shehu (Captain), Ahmad Audu, Abdullahi Saleh Shugaba (senator), Nnah Pius Moses (Mos. P), Adam I. Yahaya (Pharmacist), Yunusa Amina Mohammed, including all my fellow postgraduate students in the Department of Geography, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.

Abstract

Environmental issues are global and contemporary of the 21th century. The aim of this study is to Evaluate Environmental Regulatory Bodies and Facilities Compliance to Environmental Regulations in Minna, Nigeria. The objectives among others are: identify the facilities that required compliance; examine the level of compliance of the facilities; determine the level of enforcement by regulatory agencies (NESREA and NISEPA); and identify factors militating against compliance within the facilities in the study area. Two hypotheses guided the conduct of this study. Systematic random sampling was used in selecting facilities, while purposive random sampling was adopted in selecting respondents from each facility. Simple random sampling was employed in selecting respondents from the regulatory agencies. The instrument for data collection from the respondents is a semi-structured two sets of questionnaire each for facility and regulators respectively. The questionnaire was administered to one hundred and twenty (120) respondents drawn from eight (8) facilities each from the sectoral groups, while one hundred and sixteen (116) were administered to the regulatory agencies (NESREA and NISEPA). Findings show that 65% of all facilities in the area are minor facilities which require Environmental Management Plan (EMP). Generally, the level of compliance to environmental regulation is average giving the percentage (54.2%) of the respondents that indicated good level of compliance. The level of synergy between NESREA and NISEPA is low considering the percentage (75%) of the respondents that affirmed the level of synergy to be fair. More so, the level of enforcement is below average as substantiated by the percentage (45.8%) of the respondents who indicated that the level of enforcement is good. The challenges militating against compliance to environmental regulations in the area include: the poor relationship between the regulatory agencies and the facility operators as reported by 22.9%, and the singled most influential factor is the lack of awareness of the regulations as reported by 52.5% of the respondents. From the results obtained, inferential statistics (Wilcoxon Signed Ranked Test) was used to test the stated hypotheses at the 0.05 level of significance. The analysis of the two hypotheses showed that Z-critical values was less than the Z-calculated values, hence, no significant differences in the responses between NESREA and NISEPA on facilities’ compliance to environmental regulations, and also on the enforcement of environmental regulations within the facilities in the study area. It was recommended among others that NESREA and NISEPA should ensure fairness and strengthens the credibility of regulatory requirements through a consistent and effective compliance and enforcement mechanisms; and also the facilities should be provided with guidelines on compliance with environmental legislation. A brief sector-specific explaining the responsibilities of facilities (with a reference to relevant legal and reporting requirements) would assist awareness raising efforts.

LIST OF FIGURES AND PLATES

Figure 3.1: Minna Showing Sampling Locations

Plate I: NESREA office at Minna

Plate II: NISEPA office at Minna

Plate III: Compliance officer with the researcher

Plate IV: the researcher in midst of enforcement and compliance officers at NISEPA -63

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix I: Questionnaire for Regulators

Appendix II: Questionnaire for Facility Operators

Appendix III: Functional Environmental Regulations by NESREA in Nigeria

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

Environmental audit is the process of evaluating the performance of an organization in protecting the environment through systematic, documented and functional management procedures (FEPA, 1995; Chukwu, 2005). The aim of environmental audit among others is to facilitate management control of practices that have negative impact on the environment, assessing compliance with organizational policies as well as a systematic examination of interactions between business operations within a surrounding. Environmental audit originated in the United States in the 1970s. It was mainly reactive in focus and control measures were heavily influenced by the need to reduce remediation costs and fines which might stem from industrial accidents, and from the need to manage environmental liabilities (ERM, 1996). Environmental audit spread to the UK and elsewhere mainly by multi-national companies who began to apply the audit procedures corporately and via subsidiaries (horizontally). It was developed for industrial (chemical and manufacturing) applications, but is now being encouraged in the public sector to open up activities to greater public scrutiny (ERM, 1996). This will grow more rapidly as a result of new commitments towards sustainable development of the global environment (DPI, 2012).

Nigeria became proactive on environmental regulations following the dumping of toxic waste in Koko village in Delta State, 1987. Institutional capacities and legislations to address harmful waste as a result of Koko experience, led to the promulgation of Harmful Waste Decree 42 of 1988 guided by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (FEPA). FEPA was charged with the overall responsibility for environmental management and protection. In 1999 the Federal Ministry of Environment was created and in 2007 National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) was established to replace FEPA. NESREA through its accredited consultants are responsible for carrying out environmental audit at interval of three years for facilities and report of such audit to NESREA for approval as specified in National Guidelines for Environmental Audit in Nigeria. Particularly section 8 (k) of the Act that empowers the agency to make regulations, one of which is the regulations S. I No 29, that requires existing industries to undertake environmental audit and submit reports of such every three (3) years. This is to ensure protection and sustainable management of the environment. While NESREA is responsible for enforcing environmental laws in all sectors other than in the oil and gas sector, National Oil Spills Detection and Response Agency (NOSDRA) also a parastatal of the Federal Ministry of Environment is responsible for enforcing environmental laws in oil and gas sector. States in Nigeria have also established environmental agencies that complement the activities of the NESREA. The Niger State Environmental Protection Agency (NISEPA) is saddled with the responsibility of complementing NESREA effort in enforcing compliance to extent environmental regulations in Minna the state capital and Niger State as a whole.

Environmental audit varies in type and scope. The major types of audit include: regulatory compliance audit, environmental management systems audit, process safety audit, product quality audit, product or life cycle audit, occupational health audit, liability audit, management audit, waste audit, energy audit and due diligence audit (NESREA, 2007). The focus of this study is environmental regulatory compliance (ERC) whose process as a tool for evaluating environmental standards criteria for compliance is guided by the Nigeria’s National Policy on Environment, Laws (NESREA Act No 25 of 2007, Environmental Impact Assessment Act Cap. E 12 LFN 2004, Harmful Waste (Special Criminal Provisions) Act Cap. H 1 LFN 2004, Corporate or management policy, Approved Facility Environmental Management Plan, National Environmental Regulations and, Applicable Guidelines & Standards. NESREA has developed 24 functional environmental regulations in Nigeria. (Reference to appendix III) specifically the regulation S1, 3, 8, 11, 12, 18 and 20 are relevant to this study. Sectors in Table 1.1 directly being managed by the Nigeria Association of Chamber of Commerce, Industry, Mines and Agriculture (NACCIMA) and the Manufacturer’s Association of Nigeria (MAN) in the conduct of environmental regulatory compliance audits in Nigeria. The sectors are divided into: manufacturing, infrastructural, agro allied and Servicing. This study has also focused on manufacturing and infrastructural within Minna metropolis, specifically on food beverages and tobacco, chemical and pharmaceuticals, domestic and industrial rubber and foam, construction, quarry/asphalt, telecommunication, and health care facilities. Characteristics of each sector presented in Table 1.1 are among the vital regulated bodies where compliance is mandatory to environmental regulations in Nigeria.

Table 1.1 Regulated Sectors for Compliance in Nigeria

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Source: NESREA, (2007).

1.2 Statement of the Research Problem

The vision 2020:20 reports (2009) in Nigeria reported that environmental issues are global and contemporary issues of the 21thcentury. The report indicated that environmental issues and challenges linked to continuous abuse of the environment and depletion of natural resources, in addition to uncontrolled emissions of toxic gases, wastes and effluents in air, on land and in water. This condition is also being compounded by manufacturing industries and climate change. Environmental impacts by corporations both local and international are now attracting serious concern from the public, governments, businesses, media and other stakeholders. According to Ruth and Eno, (2014) this concern became more alarming when incidents as the Bhopal chemical leak of 1984, the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989, began to attract public attention. Need for changes in environmental legislation and standards began to gain more prominence in public debates. Many environmental pressure groups gradually emerged calling for a healthier environment. Examples of such pressure groups include Green Peace, Friends of the earth who have advocated for change in how organisations manage their business activities. Many international organisations like United National Division for Sustainable Development (UNDSD), United Nation Environment Programme (UNEP), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) are among international organisations currently advocating for better and healthier environmental management.

In Nigeria, the great concern about the quality of the environment and the increasing effects of new technologies and ever-larger development schemes ushered in the formulation of environmental policies, regulations and standards, and application of tools such as Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and Environmental Audit (EA). This is to encourage compliance and promote environmental sustainability. For instance, in a poor legal and judicial system, in which non-compliance and corruption become pervasive and law are not enforced, the respect for the rule of law is lessened, environmental degradation is more likely to occur, and progresses towards sustainable development are weakened (Diarra and Marchand, 2010). Furthermore, in Minna the state of the environmental condition is not far-fetched different from that obtainable in other major cities of Nigeria. This is due to the increase in industrial and non-industrial activities in the town such as agricultural processing industries, plastic manufacturing industries, confectioneries, pharmaceutical and surgical companies. This has led to different environmental problems like air pollution, toxic waste discharge, land degradation, groundwater water contamination, and erosion.

To protect human health and the environment, facilities are used to address laws on environmental impact. Environmental managers use facilities to evaluate their role in environmental compliance, plan actions to solve compliance challenges and keep records of their activities. A tool used to ensure environmental compliance is the Environmental Regulatory Compliance Audit (ERCA). ERCA are specifically designed to test compliance (which covers both legal compliance and corporate compliance) to environmental policies, objectives, laws, by-laws, ordinances, regulations and standards.DPI, (2012) reported that this type of audit include more numerical testing and specific checks on, for example, compliance with requirements in water and air permits and licenses.

Studies on compliance and enforcement to environmental regulations and standards had been carried out in different part of the world, for example, Mohamud, (2013) examined the factors influencing compliance to environment impact assessment/environment audit regulation 2003 in Kenya, a case of Garissa central division. The study used descriptive survey research design. The sample size was 50 developers, 30 lead agencies, 10 District environment officers. Questionnaires and interview schedule were used to collect data for the study. Findings indicated that technical factors and developers’ level of awareness are the major factors that influenced the compliance to the EIA/EA regulations 2003.

Odubela and Omoniyi (1995) worked on compliance monitoring in Nigeria’s industries and found three thousand industrial establishments in Nigeria according to FEPA’s guidelines and standards for environmental pollution control. The inspections employed physical determinations as well as questionnaire. In about 1000 inspections carried out within 3 years (1991-1993) only 18 percent compliance was achieved. But with a remarkable improvement in each succeeding year. The improvement in compliance was due to encouraging the citizen participation in identification of violations and easy reporting procedure to the public compliant unit of the inspectorate, and FEPA’s campaign on moving the economy towards better process and less-polluting technology. Ogbonnaya et al. (2007) assessed the environmental impact auditing of food processing industry in Nigeria (Jos and Ikeja): the case of climate and air quality. The method adopted is the investigative survey research approach (ISRA). The result revealed that food processing industries have negative effects on the environment in form of air pollution on man, plants and animals, aquatic organisms, and materials that humans cherishes.

Atsumbe et al. (2013) conducted an appraisal of occupational safety in manufacturing industries in Kaduna and Niger states of Nigeria. The study was carried out in 30 functional industries spread between Niger and Kaduna States. A descriptive survey research design was adopted for the study. Findings show that some safety equipment and facilities are provided, but management need to show more commitment in providing more facilities. Safety departments in many of the industries are not functional. Not much is done in terms of safety education.

Similarly, Fatokun, (2010) worked on the environmental audit of feed mills in Abeokuta. The researcher used questionnaire administration and oral interview. From the result obtained, it revealed that feed mills activities are one of the sources of air pollution because particulate matter generated from the feed mill industry is very high especially during production compared to the standard. Noise levels of most of the sampled areas also exceeded recommended standard values and may constitute health hazard if adequate attention is not paid to feed mill activities.

From the literature examined (Odubelaand Omoniyi, 1995; Ogbonnaya, Emmanuel, Kolawole and Onemayin (2007); Fatokun, 2010; Atsumbe, Amine, Umar and Salawu (2013); and Mohamud, (2013), issues on environmental compliance and enforcement in industrial and non-industrial sectors are topical. However, this study was set to determine the extent of environmental compliance and enforcement of service facilities in Minna. This is the gap which this study identified as a problem for research. The study sought to address the following research questions:

1. How many facilities require compliance audit in the study area?
2. What is the level of compliance by facilities in the study area?
3. What is the level of enforcement by the regulatory bodies in the study area?
4. What are the factors militating against compliance by facilities in the study area?

1.3 Aim and Objectives

The aim of this study is to appraise facilities compliance to environmental regulations in Minna. This will be achieved through the following objectives; to:

i. identify and characterize the facilities that require compliance in the study area;
ii. examine the level of compliance of facilities in the study area;
iii. determine the level of enforcement by regulatory bodies in the study area;
iv. Identify factors militating against compliance within facilities in the study area.

1.4 Research Hypotheses

HO1: There is no significant difference in the responses between NESREA and NISEPA on facilities’ compliance to environmental regulations in the study area.

HO2: There is no significant difference in the responses between NESREA and NISEPA on enforcement of environmental regulations within the facilities in the study area.

1.5 Scope of the Study

This study is appraisal of facilities compliance to environmental regulations in Minna-Niger State. The spatial scope covers one facility in each sectoral group. They are Dana pharmaceutical company, Access field Nig. Ltd, Abdulraham enterprises Nig. Ltd, Yanaa farms and resort, Enerco construction com. Ltd, Minna general hospital, Airtel company and Bosso dam. The content issues included identification of facilities that require compliance to environmental regulations and the level of compliance by these facilities to environmental regulations. It also includes the nature and level of enforcement of environmental regulations by the regulatory bodies (NESREA and NISEPA) and the factors militating against compliance to environmental regulations by the facilities within the study area. The temporal scope covers from September, 2014 to February, 2016.

1.6 Justification for the Study

It is expected that findings from this study shall be of immense importance not only to the operators of industries/activities that require compliance to environmental regulations on their commitment towards environmental protection, but also to the government parastatals in formulating policies that have direct bearing towards addressing environment related issues. It is also beneficial to institutions in rising environmental awareness, promoting sustainable environmental management and increasing private sector compliance with environmental regulations. It is also hoped that scholars will find it useful for further researches in areas of policies, regulations, compliance, enforcement and environmental sustainability.

The research is envisaged to generate data that will be used by regulatory agencies such as Federal Ministry of Environment, Niger state Ministry of Environment, NISEPA and NESREA for reviews of modalities for monitoring/enforcement as well as to facilitate interactions between the regulatory agencies and the facility managers.

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter is divided into five sections. Section one present theories on environmental compliance and enforcement such as standard theory of rational crime, theories of criminal enforcement, deterrence-based theory and theories of compliance behaviour, with specific reference on theories of compliance behaviour. Section two review related literatures with a view to establish findings of previous scholars on the subject matter, section three concerned the innovative, cost-effective approaches to environmental compliance, section four underscores the techniques of environmental audit with various levels involved, and section five factors affecting compliance to environmental regulations.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

There are various theories underpinning environmental compliance and enforcement. These include standard theory of rational crime, theories of criminal enforcement, deterrence-based enforcement theory and theories of compliance behaviour. The theory of compliance behaviour is explored herein. This theory reflect two different government approaches to achieving compliance, often referred to colloquially in English as the carrot and the stick, which together both encourage and compel behavioral change (INECE, 2009). The carrot (compliance promotion activities) and the stick (the threat of an enforcement action against non-compliers) are based on the rationalists and normative models of behavior. The rationalist theory posits that regulated actors follow the logic of consequence. Put simply, everyone acts to maximize their own self-interest. If it is “cheaper” to violate an environmental requirement, then regulated actors will do so. Therefore, rationalists argue that policies must “deter” this behavior by raising the “costs” of non-compliance. Accordingly, they advocate deterrence-based enforcement.

Generally, for a policy to have a deterrent effect, the individual or organization must believe that: • There is a high probability of being caught. • The response to violations will be swift, certain, and fair. • The punishment will be severe enough to outweigh the benefits of non-compliance. Deterrence may be enhanced either by expanding monitoring activities, improving enforcement capacity to investigate and prosecute violations, raising penalties, or increasing awareness of enforcement. Normative theory posits that regulated actors follow the logic of appropriateness and often act in good faith. Compliance occurs (or does not occur) largely because of the regulated actor’s “capacity” (e.g. knowledge of the rules, and financial and technological ability to comply) and “commitment” (e.g. perception that the rule is fair). Accordingly, this theory calls for more compliance promotion in the form of assistance, incentives, and other activities. The rationalist and normative models represent opposite ends of the spectrum and each provides useful insights into the types of behavior that lead to compliance.

According to INECE, (2009) regulated communities everywhere generally can be divided into three general categories: (1) those who will not comply at all unless they are forced to; (2) those who are “impressionable,” and might comply if presented with incentives, knowledge, or capacity to do so; and (3) those who will cooperate in all circumstances. Which one of these categories predominates will vary from country-to-country and can help inform individual country decisions about what mix of compliance promotion and enforcement activities to stress in efforts to promote the rule of law and the protection of public health and the environment.

2.3 Review of Similar Studies

Global Environmental Change (GEC) is among the most severe challenges facing mankind today. The unprecedented change in our global environment is currently a major concern to scientists and environmental managers. Over the recent decades, changes in the earth system due to population pressure as well as growth in per capita resource exploitation from industrial and non-industrial activities have been alarming. These growing impacts of human activities on the earth and atmosphere at all scales encourage Crutzen and Stoermer (2000) to assign a term ‘anthropocene’ and suggest the advent of a new geological epoch. However, it is against this backdrop that it became imperative to introduce mechanisms of curtailing environmental deterioration, particularly in industries which are seen to have significant potential impact on the environment. The mechanisms of promoting environmental management include environmental impact assessment, environmental management plan and environmental audit. Environmental compliance audit which is periodically carried out to determine the compliance and noncompliance of industries to extent regulations is the focus herein. Therefore, a range of related literature has been reviewed to establish the findings of previous scholars on the subject matter.

Chandan, (2012) conducted a study on environmental compliance of Indian leather industry and its impact on leather exports. The researcher traced few relevant matters of environmental standards imposed on leather industry and the consequential impact on export prospect of Indian leather industry, highlighting on different polluting stages of the industry and examining whether this impact of compliance measure on exports has evidenced ‘Porter’s Hypothesis’ or ‘Pollution Haven Hypothesis ‘or none of these in Indian leather industry. The ‘pollution haven’ hypothesis emphasizes that under free trade the exports of dirty industries increases in the developing countries. Porter and Vander,(1995) found no significant difference between environmental regulations and increase in dirty industries.

Conversely, Sankar, (2006) showed that if a country is required to meet an environmental standard which is higher than that appropriate for the country, the social cost of compliance becomes higher too. More so, Indian leather industry was recognized as the most promising foreign exchange earning sector since early ’70s which accounted for 7% of the total foreign exchange earning sector. This dropped significantly when the first environmental ban was imposed by its major export absorbing country (Germany), and domestic environmental regulations since’90s. However, with transfer of pollution abatement technology it changes the scenario by boosting the export of Indian leather industry. This rising trend in leather exports at the backdrop of successful environmental compliance substantiates the positive association between pollution cleaning efficiency and export level. Hence, increasing rate of adoption of cleaning technology is always expected to raise the level of exports of leather industry for the Indian firms.

In a related study, REMS (2010) conducted environmental audit study of Dhaka terminal and Mongla plant in Bangladash. The methodology adopted for this audit is initial review of the environment management plan and list out the various activities being carried out at the terminal and the plant to check physically weather environmental performance, health and safety aspects etc. are in compliance with guidelines provided in the EMP. The audit result presented in matrix form to check for compliance of each of the environmental, health and safety measures suggested in the EMP. From the result, it indicates that there is in general compliance with most of the measures recommended in the environmental management plan of the EIA approved by the Department of Environment (DoE) for environmental clearance of both the terminal and the plant. The only noncompliance observed is in environment aesthetics (green seeking) of the Mongla plant. This is because no plantation has been initiated as there is no excess land for this. The major recommendation put forward is that the company should conduct audit and monitor the performance of the company on regular basis.

Zephaniah, (2012) conducted a study on the challenges of effective environmental enforcement and compliance in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria and found out that enforcing environmental standards and regulations as an effective channel of controlling the negative impacts of multinational corporation’s activities on the environment and on the lives of inhabitants of host communities. Without an effective environmental enforcement culture, one that is capable of ensuring compliance by big corporations, it is expected that the quality of the environment will be drastically reduced. However, the researcher seeks to offer a credible explanation for the lack of an effective environmental enforcement programme in the Niger Delta Region. Its main argument is that the greatest threat to an effective environmental culture in Nigeria with special focus on oil companies and the negative impact of their activities on the environment is the overwhelming dependence of the government on oil rent as the primary source of revenue. This has hampered greatly the political will of the government to enforce its environmental standard on the oil companies. The recommendation put forth is the need for a policy aimed at diversifying the Nigeria economy as this will greatly enhance environmental enforcement in the region.

Similarly, RAA (2009) conducted audit of industries on compliance to environmental standards in Pasakha and Gomtu of Kingdom of Bhutan. The main objective of the audit was to ascertain the compliances of environmental norms and adequacy of existing compliance assurance and monitoring mechanism instituted at various levels in the industries. The methodologies used for auditing were reviewing of Environmental Acts, relevant rules and regulations, visual inspection, discussions, interviews and review of documents of industries. Further, the team also took note of the expert view from various environmental officials stationed in different industries. From the result, there were however, cases of non-compliances of some of the environmental norms which included inappropriate disposal of wastes, river pollution, air pollution and inadequacies in strict enforcement and monitoring of environmental norms which had both visible and invisible adverse environmental impacts. On the basis of the findings, series of recommendations that are desirable for promoting compliance of environmental standards and norms were made. This could also be relevant and useful while undertaking development of new industrial estates in future.

In another study by Gregory, (2001) on environmental performance auditing of government: the role for an Australian commissioner for the environment. The researcher observed that Commonwealth performance in environmental management can be systematically assessed and reviewed through public sector environmental audits. That Australia’s experiences in public sector environmental audit indicate that its difficulties lie in inadequate available baseline data and vague policy benchmarks. Significant governmental efforts should be made to address the national data problem but not the benchmarks.

Furthermore, in a study by SitiMastura (2006) on compliance audit of safety, health, environment and services at selected ecotourism sites in Malaysia. The researcher aimed to evaluate the compliances on safety, health, environment and services (SHE) parameters in selected ecotourism sites. A number of ecotourism sites in Peninsular Malaysia were chosen randomly for analysis. The success indicators were identified for each parameter and data of evaluation activities were gathered by using a checklist to quantify the performances of 17 selected ecotourism sites. The evaluation focuses on the relevant practices and consistency of the environmental management system towards sustainable ecotourism that was applied on-site. The result shows that in order of performance, the four dominant elements are safety (12%), services (11.48%), environment (9.65%) and health (8.64%). There is 57.60% left as a residue of percentage and this explained most of the operators in ecotourism sites did not fully addressed SHE management issues.

According to Rao, Chonde, Bhosale, Jadhav and Raut, (2011) in their study of environmental audit of sugar factory in Kumbhi Kasari sugar factory, Kuditre, Kolhapur. They identified sugar industry plays a very important role in India’s national economy, and that all stages of sugar production are water intensive and discharging wastewater containing high level of oil, suspended solids, organic matter and chemicals and therefore the sugar industry is one of the most water polluting industries. Hence, conducting ‘Environmental Audit’ in a sugar factory is no longer an option but a sound precaution and a proactive measure in today’s heavily regulated environment. From their findings, the factory has provided and managed a well-equipped effluent treatment plant for handling 1500 M.Cu/day. The plant is based on extended aeration principle and gives the desired results for maintaining effluent parameters within the consented limits stipulated by Maharashtra Pollution Control Board. The treated effluent is utilized on land for irrigation of sugarcane fields. They conclude that this will improve environmental protection for sustainable industrial operations.

Indonesian Center for Environmental Law (ICEL), (2008) carried out assessment of the environmental compliance and enforcement in Indonesia. A survey questionnaire was used to assemble needed information. Findings revealed that typical air-polluting industries in Indonesia are manufacturing, mining, energy, and oil and gas. The manufacturing industries consist of metal smelting, cement, fertilizer, pulp and paper, dry battery, carbon black, paint, consumer goods, electronic, pharmaceutical, sugar refinery, chemical, ceramic and base chemical. Evaluation of compliance with air pollution control regulations by 254 companies indicated that only 103 companies (41%) were assessed as compliant, 147 companies (59%) were assessed as noncompliant and 4 companies (2%) did not generate any emissions from their activities. It was recommended that ministry of environment in cooperation with agencies issuing licenses, should develop guidelines on integrated supervision towards compliance with environmental permitting requirements. These guidelines should define the scope of supervision, role sharing and supervision coordination between license issuers and environmental management institutions.

Mwakio, (2011) conducted environmental audit study of Olkaria III geothermal power plant in Kenya. Environmental concerns were centred around impacts on the Wildlife, the hydrology of Lake Naivasha, the flowers farms, and on the local Maasai community in terms of socio-economic and health. Other concerns are on the loose soils, which are susceptible to erosion, hazards of volcanic eruption and earthquakes, noise emissions during plant operation, changes in the water table, emission of electromagnetic radiation through the high tension power lines, air pollution from H2S and CO2, disposal of spent brines, and dust emissions. Finding revealed that there have not occurred any unforeseen environmental impacts. That the power plant has closely implemented the environmental management plan prepared for the project through environmental audits carried out periodically since establishment. Monitoring of environmental, health and safety issues, as well as of incidents and accidents is adequate, as it is adopted as a continuous activity. It was recommended that regular inspection for malfunctioning systems and structures, and their immediate repair should be continued. The health and safety committee members should continuously receive training and be in a position to train other workers which requires provision of information, instruction, training and supervision necessary to ensure safety and health by employers.

Kenneth, William and Isaac, (2013) carried out a study on water audit of breweries: a case study of a modern brewery in Ghana. It aimed to verify the brewery’s compliance with local and national standards and laws. The methodology for the study was derived from the cleaner production (CP) manual from the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), titled: Environmental Management in the Brewing industry. Results of all effluent parameters measured with the exception of nitrate were significantly higher than the EPA permissible discharge levels for food and beverage processing companies. The mean BOD and COD, concentrations exceeded the EPA permissible value by 36 fold and 11 fold respectively. However, that despite all effluent parameters but nitrate exceeded the permissible discharge levels for the release of effluent into surface water, the brewery is mitigating its impact on surface water through the characterization of its wastewater, construction of segregation drains, installation of an oil separator and appointing an environmental manager to deal with all environmental issues.

Similarly, Prepra Nig. Ltd. (2015) conducted environmental audit of Marpelione Nig. Ltd. plot 6 Challawa industrial estates, Kano. The main activity of Marpelione Nigeria limited is tanning of hides and skins. Tanning industry is a major source of pollution and tannery wastewater in particular, is a potential environmental concern. The environmental audit (EA) was carried based on the guidelines and regulation of the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA). Findings revealed that wastewater effluent is the dominant waste generated and data collected indicated about 400,000 litres is generated at full capacity in Marpelione. The existing methods of waste water disposal presently being followed is by discharging waste water after primary treatment through the rear of the plant to an empty waste land. This method of disposal has its attendant problems. The analysis of wastewater of Marpelione and its comparison with NESREA standard for waste water from tanneries shows clearly it is not fully in compliance. It was recommended that treated waste water discharged from Marpelione should be within the acceptable limit set by NESREA at all times.

From the review in the forgoing paragraphs (Gregory, 2001; SitiMastura, 2006;ICEL, 2008;RAA, 2009;REMS, 2010;Mwakio, 2011;Rao, Chonde, Bhosale, Jadhav and Raut, 2011; Chandan, 2012; Zephaniah, 2012;Kenneth, William and Isaac, 2013 and Prepra Nig. Ltd. (2015), it is quite clear that a lot of studies on environmental compliance and enforcement in industrial and non-industrial sectors have been carried out. This present research is a continuing assessment to determine the extent of environmental compliance and enforcement in facilities within Minna whose activities portend potential threat to environmental quality.

2.4 Innovative, Cost-effective Approaches to Environmental Compliance

In order to attain a higher level of environmental protection in light of the scarce resources of enforcement agencies, it is crucial to identify and apply approaches susceptible to reducing the administrative costs of monitoring and enforcement. Whereas high fines coupled with a low inspection probability appear, on first sight, to be an attractive option for ensuring deterrence and keeping administrative enforcement costs low, an arbitrary increase in fines is not always feasible (due to external, e.g. regulatory limits or affordability) or not desirable (when taking account of risk aversion) GFSD, (2004). High fines may even be counterproductive, as they may induce the regulatees to spend resources on evading liability through, for example, falsification of monitoring reports, hiding of pollution incidences, challenging of enforcement decisions in court, or attempts to bribe officials (Cohen, 1999).

[...]