112
8 Participants’ Recommendations for O&G Social Investment
efficacy, trust and reciprocity; create social networks; and galvanise a culture of
openness and learning (Simpson et al., 2003). To scholars concerned with sustainable development, capacity building towards development is a process that inherently focusses on communities’ needs/demands and addresses the social, political
and economic spheres of host communities (Eade, 1997; Simmons et al., 2011;
Simpson et al., 2003). A view of capacity building as focussed on communities’
needs/demands, and foster communities’ sense of efficacy, trust and reciprocity aligns
with working with discourses of social investment.
One example of a participant who positioned capacity building in relation to a
community-centred approach was P7. In the following quote, P7 acknowledged that
social investment in their company was used to meet the demands of the company.
However, s/he talked about a shift that their company made in its social investment
in order to attend to the communities’ needs:
So it [scholarship] doesn’t have to be directly connected to a particular discipline. Originally,
when we had this programme, it used to be connected to courses that sort of related to our
business, so engineering, health and safety courses. But now, we have opened it up so the
students can apply for any of the courses they want and they can do that through the normal
university application process. (P7, social investment expert)
P7 talked about the tension between social investments meeting the O&G industry’s
demands and the communities’ needs. P7 illustrated how the company overcame
this tension by shifting the company’s social investment priorities towards what the
community needed. The reasons behind this shift in the company’s social investment
agenda were justified in the following way:
We moved away from it [giving scholarships that were connected to courses related to O&G
activities] because, first of all, the region we are working in is a very small rural area. It’s got
a population of 9,000 and so actually the number of people who were pursuing engineering
courses were just very low and so therefore, the number of people who under the original
criteria could apply was also low, so we really wanted to spread it out and make it inclusive.
In fact, one of our principles is inclusiveness. (P7)
P7 asserted that her/his company’s shift—from being company-oriented to being
community-oriented—was also linked to principles of inclusiveness. Her/his
company seemed to draw on working with discourses of social investment. For P7,
being inclusive meant structuring the social investment according to the community’s
needs, and not the company’s demands for a workforce.
Other experts also focussed on communities’ needs as a focus of O&G social
investment. P3, for instance, mentioned that social investment should be developed:
“first depending on community strengths and their needs. That should be very much
as their own choice and you need to work in partnership with communities to understand what those needs are”. However, at the same time, P3 also prioritised social
investment that developed local capability as a way of meeting the O&G industry’s
demands, as the following quote indicates:
But [when the company’s] got [a] massive undertaking and where you have made [a] commitment to maximising local content and there is no local capability developed, to participate
in O&G activities then you definitely need to prioritise just your capacity-building efforts
and focus by all means should be on O&G. (P3, O&G)
8 Participants’ Recommendations for O&G Social Investment
efficacy, trust and reciprocity; create social networks; and galvanise a culture of
openness and learning (Simpson et al., 2003). To scholars concerned with sustainable development, capacity building towards development is a process that inherently focusses on communities’ needs/demands and addresses the social, political
and economic spheres of host communities (Eade, 1997; Simmons et al., 2011;
Simpson et al., 2003). A view of capacity building as focussed on communities’
needs/demands, and foster communities’ sense of efficacy, trust and reciprocity aligns
with working with discourses of social investment.
One example of a participant who positioned capacity building in relation to a
community-centred approach was P7. In the following quote, P7 acknowledged that
social investment in their company was used to meet the demands of the company.
However, s/he talked about a shift that their company made in its social investment
in order to attend to the communities’ needs:
So it [scholarship] doesn’t have to be directly connected to a particular discipline. Originally,
when we had this programme, it used to be connected to courses that sort of related to our
business, so engineering, health and safety courses. But now, we have opened it up so the
students can apply for any of the courses they want and they can do that through the normal
university application process. (P7, social investment expert)
P7 talked about the tension between social investments meeting the O&G industry’s
demands and the communities’ needs. P7 illustrated how the company overcame
this tension by shifting the company’s social investment priorities towards what the
community needed. The reasons behind this shift in the company’s social investment
agenda were justified in the following way:
We moved away from it [giving scholarships that were connected to courses related to O&G
activities] because, first of all, the region we are working in is a very small rural area. It’s got
a population of 9,000 and so actually the number of people who were pursuing engineering
courses were just very low and so therefore, the number of people who under the original
criteria could apply was also low, so we really wanted to spread it out and make it inclusive.
In fact, one of our principles is inclusiveness. (P7)
P7 asserted that her/his company’s shift—from being company-oriented to being
community-oriented—was also linked to principles of inclusiveness. Her/his
company seemed to draw on working with discourses of social investment. For P7,
being inclusive meant structuring the social investment according to the community’s
needs, and not the company’s demands for a workforce.
Other experts also focussed on communities’ needs as a focus of O&G social
investment. P3, for instance, mentioned that social investment should be developed:
“first depending on community strengths and their needs. That should be very much
as their own choice and you need to work in partnership with communities to understand what those needs are”. However, at the same time, P3 also prioritised social
investment that developed local capability as a way of meeting the O&G industry’s
demands, as the following quote indicates:
But [when the company’s] got [a] massive undertaking and where you have made [a] commitment to maximising local content and there is no local capability developed, to participate
in O&G activities then you definitely need to prioritise just your capacity-building efforts
and focus by all means should be on O&G. (P3, O&G)