SOStainabilityWeekly
By Oke Epia, E-mail: sostainability01@gmail.com | WhatsApp: +234 8034000706
Trends and Threads
Sustainability and global supply chains
Behind every product we consume is a vast, complex supply chain stretching across countries and continents. From sourcing raw materials to final delivery, these networks are critical to business success—but they also carry significant environmental and social consequences. Today, they are under growing pressure to evolve.
A sustainable supply chain integrates environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles into every stage of its lifecycle—from raw material extraction to production, transportation, use, and end-of-life disposal. It seeks to minimize negative environmental impact, promote fair labor practices, ensure resource efficiency, and maintain economic viability across all tiers of the network.
Global supply chains and their impact
Global supply chains are networks of entities—suppliers, manufacturers, logistics providers, retailers—that bring products from origin to consumer. Each stage consumes resources and creates waste, emissions, and social risks. Most environmental impacts originate far beyond a company’s own operations.
Historically, supply chains focused on cost reduction and speed. But recent events—from the pandemic to geopolitical tensions—have revealed how fragile and opaque these systems can be. A port delay in Asia can now stall production lines in Europe or empty shelves in Africa.
Green Supply Chain Management (GSCM) redefines the model. It embeds environmental and social considerations across procurement, production, logistics, and waste recovery. As Fangxi Li notes, GSCM balances profitability with ecological responsibility and requires collaboration across all tiers of the chain.Modern supply chains must now deliver both performance and accountability. Transparency, adaptability, and ethical sourcing are becoming non-negotiable.
Why sustainability in supply chains matters
According to an EY Supply Chain Sustainability Report, supply chains account for up to 90 percent of an organization’s carbon emissions and over 50 percent of operational costs. From water use and energy consumption to labor practices and biodiversity loss, the supply chain is where the greatest sustainability risks—and opportunities—exist1.The stakes are high. ESG performance now directly affects stock prices, investor interest, and brand reputation. According to CDP, companies rated poorly on supply chain transparency risk being dropped from procurement lists worth trillions of dollars.It’s also a consumer issue. Millennials and Gen Z—who dominate global spending—prioritize sustainability when choosing brands. Businesses that fail to meet expectations risk becoming irrelevant in the eyes of their market.Sustainability is not a marketing slogan. It’s a resilience strategy, an innovation driver, and increasingly, a legal requirement.
Key challenges insustainable supply chains
Most companies cannot track their supply chain beyond direct suppliers. Yet indirect suppliers, especially in raw materials and subcontracted labor, often present the greatest ESG risks—such as child labor, deforestation, and illegal mining. In addition, second-tier vendors typically go unaudited. To solve this, digital traceability tools like blockchain and smart tagging systems are being adopted. They offer real-time tracking of emissions, sourcing, and compliance.Supply chain functions—procurement, logistics, compliance—often operate in silos. This fragmentation limits accountability and slows sustainability integration.In a study on the Challenges and Opportunities in Sustainable Supply Chains, author Barbosa-Póvoa emphasizes that sustainable supply chains require new modeling and life-cycle analysis tools that cut across departments and decision-making layers.Unified platforms, cloud systems, and ESG-focused dashboards can centralize data and facilitate collaboration across regions and teams.Many companies claim to prioritize sustainability but lack measurable targets. This results in inconsistent execution, poor reporting, and missed market opportunities.Sustainability requires both the right tools and the right people. Yet many firms still rely on manual processes or lack staff trained in cross-disciplinary supply chain management.Natural disasters, pandemics, trade wars—all expose how vulnerable supply chains can be. Delays, shortages, and cost spikes are now the norm.Companies must build flexible networks. That means diversifying suppliers, decentralizing sourcing, and implementing climate risk assessments.Resilience, not just efficiency, is the new supply chain standard.Suppliers are often treated as external entities, managed by audits and contracts. But sustainable transformation requires collaboration, education, and shared values.
Opportunitiesforsustainable supply chains
Despite the challenges, the rewards of sustainability are immense. Companies that invest now gain a competitive edge across several fronts.Green logistics, packaging reduction, and energy-efficient warehousing lower long-term costs. Supply chain decarbonization opens access to climate finance and government incentives.Sustainability also improves brand loyalty. Ethical sourcing and transparency appeal to value-driven consumers. In saturated markets, these factors differentiate leaders from laggards.Digital solutions amplify impact. AI-powered platforms optimize routes and inventory. Blockchain enables trust in material origins. IoT sensors monitor emissions and ensure quality.Circular supply chains—where products are reused, remanufactured, or recycled—are becoming not only sustainable but profitable.And with global frameworks tightening, regulatory compliance becomes a strategic advantage.
Washing and hushing
Sustainability Reporting: Why oil and gas companies must go beyond optics
The oil and gas sector carries a large share of global emissions and an outsized community impact. In Nigeria, expectations are rising since the commencement of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) in 2021, the introduction of the NGX sustainability guidance, and the country’s gradual move toward globally-aligned climate disclosures like the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB).
Having examined sustainability reporting in the banking sector in our previous article, we now turn attention to oil and gas—an industry central to Nigeria’s economy but controversial for its stupendously negative social and environmental footprints. Our team assessed ten operators, including multinationals and indigenous firms, using two key quick scan metrics: whether a sustainability or CSR policy is clearly accessible on their websites, and the recency of their ESG or sustainability reports (where published).
Variable scores on visibility and cadence
The visibility scan reveals that the big players, like the oil majors and their high-heeled indigenous counterparts, are showing up in the publication of policies and reports. Companies such as TotalEnergies, ENI, ExxonMobil, Seplat, and Oando maintain consistent reporting rhythms, publishing sustainability or ESG reports annually with the most recent editions dated between 2024 and 2025. Chevron and Shell also sustain this pattern, with their latest full reports published in 2023.
In contrast, indigenous firms such as the state-owned Nigeria National Petroleum Company (NNPC) Limited,Ardova, and Aiteo (recently rebranded as Nembe E and P) lag. NNPC’s sustainability statement is visible on its website, yet no dedicated or up-to-date report is available online, while Ardova and Aiteo each feature CSR or sustainability pages without measurable or consolidated reports.
This uneven pattern highlights a fundamental finding: while the bigger firms, especially multinationals, appear to have steadied on sustainability reporting as part of their governance culture, others, mostly indigenous operators, still approach the subject matter as a voluntary exercise. The result is a sector where some visibility exists, but transparency remains partial and inconsistent, raising questions about the maturity of sustainability governance within Nigeria’s oil and gas industry.
Raising the right questions
However, visibility of sustainability alone does not tell the full story, especially with the uneven pattern observed. This then begs the question why: Could the stronger showing by multinational oil companies be due to stricter country and continental-level regulations, such as the European Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)? Or the fact of using strict compliance frameworks like the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and ISSB standards that require timely, verifiable reporting? Or does it reflect differences in enforcement appetite and capacity between foreign jurisdictions and Nigeria?
If multinationals are bound by their group-level ESG requirements, what then explains the relative indifference of some operators? Is it a matter of weak enforcement, limited capacity, or lack of pressure from investors and host communities? Or all of these and more?
To what extent are Nigeria’s regulatory bodies, such as the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC), the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), and the Financial Reporting Council (FRC), actively monitoring sustainability disclosure requirements under extant legislations and regulations? And how enforceable are these if they have been fully developed and are being applied?
Is sustainability disclosure in Nigeria’s oil and gas sector more of a function of external accountability than of domestic enforcement?
Why visibility and recency matter
Visibility and recency are valid foundational tests of credible sustainability reporting in Nigeria’s oil and gas space. Stakeholders, from regulators and financiers to host communities, respond not to promises but to proof. Confidence grows when companies publish verifiable data on emissions, flaring, spills, decommissioning, and site restoration, and community trust outcomes.
But on the foundational matter, accessibility matters as much as content. A sustainability hub linked from a company’s homepage communicates openness; burying reports under investor sections tends to send the opposite signal, as a host of other stakeholders tend to be left uninformed.
Our review shows that companies like TotalEnergies, ENI, ExxonMobil, Seplat, and Oando are setting a good example, providing current, easily accessible reports. On the other hand, the absence of a visible report from NNPC, Ardova, or Aiteo (Nembe) suggests a transparency gap that risks further erosion of the low public confidence in the oil and gas sector.
The business case for compliance
When it comes to sustainability compliance, many companies fail to see that it is more than a regulatory duty; it is a business strategy. Compliance creates pathways to competitiveness by attracting investors, lowering operational risks, and improving corporate reputation.
Firms that align with frameworks like ISSB and GRI often find themselves better positioned for partnerships and access to sustainable finance, as global capital increasingly favours transparent and responsible operators. For oil and gas companies in Nigeria, where scrutiny on environmental and governance performance is a constant element, given the often opaque nature of the sector, compliance can distinguish leaders from laggards. It signals discipline, governance maturity, and readiness to operate in a global market that rewards accountability.
Far from being a burden, compliance builds trust with regulators, communities, and investors, turning sustainability reporting into an asset rather than an obligation. As the energy transition accelerates, the companies that internalise compliance as part of their core business practice, rather than a checkbox exercise, will not only meet standards but shape them, gaining both credibility and competitive edge.
What is the path forward?
The path forward must go beyond visibility to verifiability. It is best practice for operators to maintain a single, public sustainability hub consolidating policies, latest reports, key performance indicators, and any assurance statements. For multinational companies relying on group-level reports, a Nigeria-specific annex should outline the local context, targets, actions, and outcomes relevant to operations within the country. In this way, in-country stakeholders like host communities, the media, and civil society can scrutinise and ask the right questions without struggling to access required information.
Sustainability in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry must evolve from statements to substance, from policy to proof. The big players may lead today, but genuine progress requires that all players, especially indigenous firms, rise to the same standard—making sustainability not just visible, but measurable, current, and enforceable. Visibility begins the conversation; verifiability keeps it honest. This page will continue to report on sector-level sustainability reporting on one hand, and a dig into individual company reports on the other hand.
Spotlight
Clean up the mess: A call on TotalEnergies, Shell, others
There is some renewed heat on oil multinationals, especially those that are hurriedly divesting from onshore operations in the Niger Delta region. Last week, a coalition of 100 civil society organisations (CSOs) issued a statement demanding that these companies take responsibility for the cleanup of the environment polluted by decades of their operations.
The call came following the failed deal by TotalEnergies to sell $860 million worth of its shares in the Renaissance Africa Energy Company Joint Venture to Chappal Energies. Raising credible concerns about the capacity of local operators to clean up the contaminated environment in the Delta, the groups warned against using taxpayers’ money for the cleanup. They insist that the oil companies divesting must take responsibility for the cleaning. The CSOs, including prominent national and international groups like HEDA Resource Centre, CISLAC, Oxfam, and Global Rights, have reiterated their call for environmental justice and accountability, central issues in the Niger Delta struggle for many years. Their stance is a strong plea to the divesting oil majors that they must atone for past wrongdoings and cannot escape consequences. “With the collapse of the Total-Chappal deal, the Shell-Renaissance transaction must be reviewed. If NUPRC’s concerns were well-founded, there is a huge risk that the Nigerian people will end up paying for SPDC’s environmental mess,”the organizations stated. They also urged an independent review of the Shell-Renaissance divestment deal and the immediate release of the Environmental Evaluation Studies (EES) for each of these sales. “We call on civil society groups and parliamentarians to ensure that the pollution legacy caused by international oil companies is swiftly cleaned up to meet international standards and that the companies, not Nigerians, bear the cost,” they concluded.
