20 results
16 - Local Content and Sustainable Development in Brazil
- from Part II - Case Studies
- Edited by Damilola S. Olawuyi
-
- Book:
- Local Content and Sustainable Development in Global Energy Markets
- Published online:
- 05 March 2021
- Print publication:
- 04 March 2021, pp 300-319
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
This chapter examines the applicable laws surrounding Brazil’s local content (LC) requirements along with the efficacy of such LC requirements. In doing so, this chapter first examines the history of LC rules through different stages of petroleum production in Brazil, mainly by examining various bid rounds. While not every bid round saw different local content, each round can be grouped into periods, which show a pendular behavior (from less to more stringent regulation). Further, from this background, an analysis of successes and failures of these local content policies is given, including the effects on sustainable development in Brazil.
As with any other country, LC rules in Brazil are a powerful tool to bolster the local economy. Brazil teaches positive and negative lessons concerning local content policies. Positive lessons include an efficient certified system to increase compliance and reduce governmental administration procedures. This increased the development of certain sectors, such as the naval and related industries. Negative lessons include unrealistic parameters and pervasive incentives to bid unrealistic local content terms. Another negative example might be the lack of distinction from small to large projects. Overall, Brazilian local content is devolved but still needs improvements and a strategic long-term plan to better achieve sustainable development goals.
Validation of saliva and urine use and sampling time on the doubly labelled water method to measure energy expenditure, body composition and water turnover in male and female cats
- Camila Goloni, Francine M. Peres, Igor L. S. Senhorello, Ludmilla G. Di Santo, Fernanda S. Mendonça, Bruna A. Loureiro, Karina Pfrimer, Eduardo Ferriolli, Gener T. Pereira, Aulus C. Carciofi
-
- Journal:
- British Journal of Nutrition / Volume 124 / Issue 4 / 28 August 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 March 2020, pp. 457-469
- Print publication:
- 28 August 2020
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Less invasive protocols are necessary to study energy expenditure (EE) of cats living in homes for expressing their normal living conditions. The present study compared sampling times and the use of saliva, urine and blood to measure 2H and 18O to apply the doubly labelled water method. In the first study, four cats were used to evaluate the enrichment (2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 h) and elimination (2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 and 20 d) of 2H and 18O (subcutaneously injected). The maximum enrichment was after 5 h (R2 0·82) of injection, with an Ln linear elimination of both isotopes (P < 0·001; R2 0·99). The results of EE were similar, regardless of the sampling time used (P = 0·999). In the second study, seven male cats and seven female cats were used. Before and after isotope injection (5 h, 7 d, 10 d and 14 d), blood, saliva and urine were collected. Isotope enrichment was lower in urine (P < 0·05) and at the similar level in blood and saliva. Isotope elimination was similar for all fluids (P < 0·473). The EE calculated with blood and saliva was similar but higher for urine (P = 0·015). According to Bland–Altman statistics, blood and saliva presented low bias and high correlation (P < 0·001), but this was not observed for urine (P = 0·096). Higher EE was observed for male cats (384 (se 39) kJ/kg0·67 per d) than for female cats (337 (se 34) kJ/kg0·67 per d; P < 0·05). The sampling time for the method is flexible, and saliva can be used as a substitute for blood.
Appetitive drives for ultra-processed food products and the ability of text warnings to counteract consumption predispositions
- Isabel A David, Laura Krutman, María Carmen Fernández-Santaella, Jéssica R Andrade, Eduardo B Andrade, Leticia Oliveira, Mirtes G Pereira, Fabio S Gomes, Sonia Gleiser, José M Oliveira, Renata L Araújo, Eliane Volchan, Filipe Braga
-
- Journal:
- Public Health Nutrition / Volume 21 / Issue 3 / February 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 27 November 2017, pp. 543-557
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Objective
The present study aimed to (i) assess the appetitive drives evoked by the visual cues of ultra-processed food and drink products and (ii) investigate whether text warnings reduce appetitive drives and consumers’ reported intentions to eat or drink ultra-processed products.
DesignIn Study I, a well-established psychometric tool was applied to estimate the appetitive drives associated with ultra-processed products using sixty-four image representations. Sixteen product types with four exemplars of a given product were included. Pictures from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS) served as controls. The two exemplars of each product type rated as more appetitive were selected for investigation in the second study. Study II assessed the impact of textual warnings on the appetitive drive towards these thirty-two exemplars. Each participant was exposed to two picture exemplars of the same product type preceded by a text warning or a control text. After viewing each displayed picture, the participants reported their emotional reactions and their intention to consume the product.
SettingControlled classroom experiments
SubjectsUndergraduate students (Study I: n 215, 135 women; Study II: n 98, 52 women).
ResultsIn Study I, the pictures of ultra-processed products prompted an appetitive motivation associated with the products’ nutritional content. In Study II, text warnings were effective in reducing the intention to consume and the appetitive drive evoked by ultra-processed products.
ConclusionsThis research provides initial evidence favouring the use of text warnings as a public policy tool to curb the powerful influence of highly appetitive ultra-processed food cues.
The helminth community of a population of Rattus norvegicus from an urban Brazilian slum and the threat of zoonotic diseases
- Ticiana Carvalho-Pereira, Fábio N. Souza, Luana R. N. Santos, Ruth Walker, Arsinoê C. Pertile, Daiana S. de Oliveira, Gabriel G. Pedra, Amanda Minter, Maria Gorete Rodrigues, Thiago C. Bahiense, Mitermayer G. Reis, Peter J. Diggle, Albert I. Ko, James E. Childs, Eduardo M. da Silva, Mike Begon, Federico Costa
-
- Journal:
- Parasitology / Volume 145 / Issue 6 / May 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 08 November 2017, pp. 797-806
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Urban slums provide suitable conditions for infestation by rats, which harbour and shed a wide diversity of zoonotic pathogens including helminths. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with the probability and intensity of infection of helminths of the digestive tract in an urban slum population of Rattus norvegicus. Among 299 rats, eleven species/groups of helminths were identified, of which Strongyloides sp., Nippostrongylus brasiliensis and, the human pathogen, Angiostrongylus cantonensis were the most frequent (97, 41 and 39%, respectively). Sex interactions highlighted behavioural differences between males and females, as eg males were more likely to be infected with N. brasiliensis where rat signs were present, and males presented more intense infections of Strongyloides sp. Moreover, rats in poor body condition had higher intensities of N. brasiliensis. We describe a high global richness of parasites in R. norvegicus, including five species known to cause disease in humans. Among these, A. cantonensis was found in high prevalence and it was ubiquitous in the study area – knowledge which is of public health importance. A variety of environmental, demographic and body condition variables were associated with helminth species infection of rats, suggesting a comparable variety of risk factors for humans.
PART II.B - CONTROL OF OPERATIONS AND EXPENDITURES
- from PART II - SETTING UP A JOA
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 307-308
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
PART I - CONSIDERATIONS PRIOR TO ENTERING INTO A JOA
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 3-4
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Participants in the oil and gas industry oft en operate on a global scale, with each region and each petroleum province having a clearly defined set of requirements and obligations. That being said, the challenges faced by these requirements are similar, and as a result it is straightforward for participants to agree upon and implement similar contracts and avoid lengthy contractual negotiations. This makes it simple to use standard JOA model forms to facilitate the negotiation of that agreement.
While most of oil and gas regions have developed their own JOA model form over time and through experience that addresses their individual needs. Different provinces and regions carry out their activities in different contexts (e.g. onshore or off shore) and are constrained by different legal systems (e.g. civil or common law), so it is thus important to note that, regardless of common threads within JOA model forms, they need to be adapted to the specific characteristics of the region. Nonetheless, all JOA model forms are based on similar principles. Standardised JOA model forms are important; they are a valuable resource for the advancement of oil and gas transactions. However, they oft en cannot comprehensively address the specific demands and factors of each negotiation and therefore a flexible approach to adjustment is key.
Since the introduction of JOAs, the world has changed. The oil and gas industry now has to face ever-increasing costs, more environmental regulation, reduced accessibility of ‘ easy resources ‘, and a greater number of competing companies. JOAs are now more frequently revised and added to because of the increased number of participants, all of whom agree on the variables that need to be addressed. This tends to benefit operations as the greater pool of knowledge and experience creates JOAs that are relevant, practical and enforceable in a given jurisdiction. The original models had few environmental constraints and were not limited by costs, and companies were much freer to explore and exploit oil and gas.
Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016
-
The Joint Operating Agreement (JOA) is widely used in the petroleum industry as a contractual framework for joint ventures across different continents and standards.The first part of this book deals with considerations prior to entering into a JOA, such as compliance with bribery laws; standards, practices and procedures across the petroleum industry; enforceability of JOAs and understanding decommissioning obligations. The second part focusses on key clauses within any JOA covering topics including health and safety considerations; liability and insurance; and control of operations and expenditures.This is a unique publication dedicated to analysing all of these key practical issues faced by oil and gas companies in different parts of the world in negotiating and implementing a JOA in a single book publication.
3 - Unitisation and Unit Operating Agreements
- from PART I - CONSIDERATIONS PRIOR TO ENTERING INTO A JOA
-
- By Eduardo G. Pereira, Adjunct Professor of Energy Law, University of Eastern Finland Law School; attorney/international energy consultant, Giulia Carloni, Senior Consultant, LXL LLP
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 43-60
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
Petroleum resources are typically owned by the host government of the country where these natural resources are located. If an investor has an interest in searching for and producing oil and gas, it is required for them to obtain permission from the relevant host government. Petroleum licences, production sharing agreements (PSAs), service agreements or combinations all exist as established ways to grant this permission, and without them the contracting party has no authority to conduct exploration and production operations.
The host government typically prefers to divest their portfolio of assets/ blocks within different companies and contracts. This is done by way of allocating different contract licence areas and licences to different licence holders. The licence holders then each enter into a separate agreement (i.e. a joint operating agreement) to regulate the relationship between them with respect to how they wish to jointly undertake exploration, development and production activities for that particular licence. However, as is oft en the case, nature does not easily fit within man-made rules. In the petroleum industry, this can be illustrated by oil and gas fields not always conforming to pre-defined property boundaries commonly referred as ‘ contract area ‘. This is because hydrocarbon reserves can oft en ‘ straddle ‘ two or more licences that would have no connection with each other otherwise.
The issue then arises as to how parties to different licences can extract hydrocarbons from these fields, having a commonality of purpose in the sense of maximising their potential and not unnecessarily depleting the field, as well as how they are then to split any revenues arising out of these operations that are to be undertaken under two (or more) different licences, how they are to manage these operations, and how they are to determine the respective licence holders ‘ interests. To address this issue, the oil and gas industry has developed the concept of the ‘ unitisation and unit operating agreement ‘ .
This chapter will look at some of the main features of a typical unitisation agreement, its main purpose, and its interaction with JOAs. It will focus in particular on intra-border unitisation (that is, unitisation of a field straddling two or more licences within the same national boundaries) and not deal with cross-border unitisation (i.e. the unitisation of a field which straddles licences within two or more different countries).
List of Authors
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp xv-xvi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Introduction
-
- By Eduardo G. Pereira, Adjunct Professor of Energy Law, University of Eastern Finland Law School; attorney/international energy consultant
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 1-2
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Typically oil and gas resources belong to the relevant host government and private investors should obtain permission from that government to conduct oil and gas exploration and production activities. This permission is commonly granted through a concession contract, production sharing contract, service contract or a variation on any of the above (host government contracts). Private parties tend to regulate their own relationship in a private document known as a joint operating agreement (JOA). The JOA is one of the most important instruments in the upstream industry, along with the host government contracts.
The JOA is widely used in the petroleum industry across different continents and standards. Several regions prefer to issue a standard model form to speed up the negotiation process and to indicate the accepted practices in that region. Although different regions might have individual particularities, they tend to use similar structures and key provisions in regulating joint ventures.
There are a few publications available that explain what a JOA is, what the main provisions, the views of Non-Operators, and the consequences of a sole risk project. But there is no single publication that analyses and explains key practical concerns related to all JOAs. This book focuses on key practical issues that oil and gas companies might face in different parts of the world whenever they negotiate or implement a JOA.
The first part of this book deals with the enforceability of JOAs and practical issues related to regulatory challenges. This is a critical issue in any JOA, as all parties hope and expect to sign an enforceable agreement. It would be an unpleasant surprise to find out later in court or from the host government that the signed JOA is not enforceable or that it is not fit for purpose. For these reasons the first part of this book will address a variety of issues including but not limited to the challenges in signing a JOA in civil law countries, the considerations and concerns in negotiating a JOA for unconventional operations, the consequences and concerns arising from the interaction between JOAs and host government contracts, and compliance with bribery laws and decommissioning obligations.
Contents
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp v-xii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Frontmatter
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp i-iv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
List of Abbreviations
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp xiii-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
PART II.A - GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
- from PART II - SETTING UP A JOA
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 161-162
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
PART II - SETTING UP A JOA
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 157-160
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Oil and gas resources will almost always be owned by the host government(s) of the country(ies) where these natural resources are located. If a company has an interest in searching for and producing oil and gas, it is necessary for them to obtain permission from the relevant host government. Petroleum licences, production sharing agreements (PSAs), service agreements or combinations of these all exist as established ways to grant this authorisation, and without them the contracting party has no possibility of conducting exploration and production operations.
Oil and gas projects are likely to be technically challenging and capital intensive. There is a long lead-time from initial investment until revenues can be collected. Quite oft en petroleum activities are carried out in harsh and hostile natural environments and remote areas. As a natural consequence, this increases the challenges of finding and agreeing on adequate technical solutions, cost planning and financing, and risk management.
Although it is possible to negotiate and sign a host government contract with a single entity, this is unlikely to happen. The inherent risks in the petroleum industry encourage oil and gas companies to share risks and rewards through joint ventures. This forms the background for the JOA (i.e. unincorporated joint venture), which is basically an instrument to regulate the relationship between JV parties.
Part II of this book is divided into two subsections. The first subsection covers general clauses in the JOA, such as the scope, insurance, transfer of interest, governing law and dispute resolution, exclusive operations, and HSE. The second subsection addresses the control of operations and expenses.
Why two subsections, rather than grouping all of these chapters into only one category? To answer this question it is necessary to understand the basic background of most JOAs.
An operator acts on behalf of each party to the consortium when directing joint operations. This typical relationship formed by the JOA allows one party to conduct and manage the operation of said consortium, but understandably causes non-operators to see this as a primary concern as they will not conduct these operations and all JOA parties will be affected by each operation and desire to control operations.
14 - The Challenges of Implementing an Exclusive Operation
- from PART II.A - GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
-
- By Eduardo G. Pereira, Adjunct Professor of Energy Law, University of Eastern Finland Law School; attorney/international energy consultant
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 293-306
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
At the heart of the JOA lies the concept of operations being undertaken jointly by the parties thereto. However, a risk to the ongoing alignment of the JOA parties ‘ respective interests lies in the variable nature of the characteristics of the parties forming the joint venture. Taylor and Tyne identify that ‘ the companies making up a licence group will oft en differ dramatically in size, financial resources, technical capability and in other important respects ‘. The degree of such characteristics possessed by each of the JOA parties will rarely remain static and it should be expected from the outset of the JOA that the characteristics will evolve as the joint venture progresses. The JOA parties are unlikely to maintain a unified perspective on what constitutes the best way forward for the joint venture. Styles clearly describes this reality in the following terms:
‘In an ideal world there would be unanimous agreement among the members on all significant decisions. In practice, there will from time to time be disagreements among the members and normally these disputes will be resolved within the Opcom by means of decisions taken which secure a pass mark.’
Bearing in mind that in this challenging industry we very rarely find ourselves operating in an ideal world, and that disagreements are a common occurrence in practice, it is crucial to foresee the requirement for flexibility in the JOA. This perspective is noted by Shaw, who mentions that although ‘ a JOA is intended to be comprehensive, it cannot cover all issues and should, therefore, be a flexible, interactive framework that allows for evolution. ‘
The concept of the exclusive operation deals with circumstances in which a proposed joint operation does not secure the necessary pass mark or does not have the support of all the parties at the Joint Operating Committee (Opcom), in that it provides a way forward for the proposed operation without the participation of all the parties to the JOA. In effect, exclusive operations clauses are an example of the practical implementation of the flexibility to which Shaw refers and they tend to be amongst the most complex clauses in a JOA.
4 - Key Issues Relating to JOAs in Civil Law Countries
- from PART I - CONSIDERATIONS PRIOR TO ENTERING INTO A JOA
-
- By Eduardo G. Pereira, Adjunct Professor of Energy Law, University of Eastern Finland Law School; attorney/international energy consultant, Yanal Abul Failat, Associate, LXL LLP
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 61-80
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
Whilst each of these states in which the oil and gas industry operates has its own particular needs and requirements, they tend to share notable similarities deriving from the international nature of the oil and gas industry. Most of the major companies have assets in various jurisdictions, and so influence national governance by applying international practices and sharing expertise under local content requirements. More oft en than not, national regulation takes into account regulatory models and experiences of other jurisdictions so they can improve their own regulatory regime.
The same situation applies for JOAs, a well-established form of private agreement. Despite the fact that many of the oil and gas regions have their own JOA model form to address their specific needs, almost all of such models are based on similar principles and assumptions.
Nevertheless, negotiating, executing and implementing a JOA in a civil law country may generate unexpected legal challenges unless such parties are aware of the differences between the common law and civil law systems. The main difference relates to the primary source of law. In civil law systems, the primary source of law derives from statutes and regulations, whereas in common law jurisdictions the primary source of law is case law (judicial precedents). Therefore, judges in civil law jurisdictions are not empowered to make law but rather to interpret statutory law and to an extent take on the role of an investigator. Some civil law jurisdictions however are moving towards certain rules of legal precedents within their relevant courts (e.g. Brazil). Whilst civil law judges are strictly bound by the country ‘ s constitution, the legal praxis and expert opinions of the scholars are gradually being given greater consideration.
Naturally, all countries have their own special features. In China, for example, judges are bound to the interests of the Chinese Communist Party. In federal countries such as in Russia and Argentina, the legislative power at the provincial level must be acknowledged. Moreover, when parties elect to agree that the JOA is governed by a common law jurisdiction (e.g. English law) in a civil law country, the provisions of the JOA are subject to and therefore need to be harmonised with the host government agreement and any mandatory provisions applicable under local petroleum laws.
7 - Standards and Practices in JOAs across the Petroleum Industry
- from PART I - CONSIDERATIONS PRIOR TO ENTERING INTO A JOA
-
- By Yanal Abul Failat, Associate, LXL LLP, Eduardo G. Pereira, Adjunct Professor of Energy Law, University of Eastern Finland Law School; attorney/international energy consultant
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 109-144
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
Upstream oil and gas operations around the world almost inevitably involve a vertical relationship between:
(i) the state who controls and/or owns the petroleum and wishes to maximise commercial recovery from its resources; and
(ii) an upstream petroleum company (or a joint venture), which is seeking to explore and extract petroleum for profitable commercial production.
This usually involves the state granting the petroleum company the right to explore, exploit, appraise and produce petroleum by way of a licence, a production-sharing contract, a service contract or a combination or variation of any of these instruments (Petroleum Agreement).
A range of factors including regulatory, commercial and practical considerations defines the intricacies of each project and of most importance is the level of technical complexity and financial standing required for each Petroleum Agreement. In cases where a project involves less complex exploration, commonly in shallow depth drilling or onshore petroleum, a petroleum company may hold the Petroleum Agreement solely if it has the technology and the financial capacity to perform the obligations under the agreement on its own.
Most projects, however, involve complex exploration, deep drilling and/ or deep off shore production, raising the need to minimise the high cost and spread of the risks. For this reason, the rights granted under a Petroleum Agreement are hardly ever exercised by a single entity but rather by a number of petroleum companies who have agreed to jointly undertake a project and allocate responsibilities and profits amongst themselves.
This approach has led to the creation of the widespread concept of joint ventures (JVs) since the Petroleum Agreement itself does not deal with the sharing of rights and obligations as between the concessionaires/contractors. Whilst the central idea is to share costs, property and production (if successful) in proportion to their respective percentage interests, the synergistic nature of a JV allows participants to enjoy the financial standing and the skills of their associates.
5 - The Relationship between a JOA and a Host Government Instrument
- from PART I - CONSIDERATIONS PRIOR TO ENTERING INTO A JOA
-
- By Eduardo G. Pereira, Adjunct Professor of Energy Law, University of Eastern Finland Law School; attorney/international energy consultant, Ole Kirkvaag, Head of the international petroleum and natural resources advisory group of Arntzen de Besche
- Edited by Eduardo G. Pereira
-
- Book:
- Understanding Joint Operating Agreements
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 15 December 2017
- Print publication:
- 18 November 2016, pp 81-94
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
A feature of most oil and gas operations is that they are conducted in a hostile environment subject to a number of risks, extending into geological, technical, financial and environmental, and also into political, to mention a few. These risks can particularly affect the exploration phase and, as they can have a marked influence on each project, the oil and gas industry has become renowned for operating with a level of uncertainty.
Most host governments rely on sovereign ownership of the oil and gas reserves situated below their territory or continental shelf. However, they are not usually able to, or interested in, allocating public funds for a risk-laden business such as oil and gas exploration. For this reason most host governments tend to assign these risks by authorising investors to carry out the exploration and production activities.
This authorisation can be granted through a Petroleum Licence, a Production Sharing Agreement (PSA), a Service Agreement or a hybrid form, collectively referred to in the following as Host Government Instruments (HGIs).These instruments serve to provide contracting parties with the necessary rights and duties for exploration and production of oil and gas in a determined location. Without the granting of these instruments, it would not be possible for the contracting party to consider any of these operations.
Therefore, the HGI is the key document that regulates the relationship between the host government and the investors (i.e. licensees/contractors).
The investors in turn do not want to take all these risks alone. A joint venture (JV) is thus an answer to these risks. The uncertainty, in conjunction with the significant costs of each project, means that companies are encouraged and interested to spread these costs and risks. A JV allows companies to have a share and interest in one or numerous different projects, rather than holding 100 % of any particular project. Consequently, if one particular area is not successful, the remaining assets could compensate the company for these other unforeseen losses.
Minimising risk and sharing costs are the fundamental purposes of the JV. Typically a JOA is a private document, as it should serve to regulate the relationship of the JV members. As a natural consequence the JV parties normally are free to negotiate and set up their own relationship.
Contributors
-
- By Rose Teteki Abbey, K. C. Abraham, David Tuesday Adamo, LeRoy H. Aden, Efrain Agosto, Victor Aguilan, Gillian T. W. Ahlgren, Charanjit Kaur AjitSingh, Dorothy B E A Akoto, Giuseppe Alberigo, Daniel E. Albrecht, Ruth Albrecht, Daniel O. Aleshire, Urs Altermatt, Anand Amaladass, Michael Amaladoss, James N. Amanze, Lesley G. Anderson, Thomas C. Anderson, Victor Anderson, Hope S. Antone, María Pilar Aquino, Paula Arai, Victorio Araya Guillén, S. Wesley Ariarajah, Ellen T. Armour, Brett Gregory Armstrong, Atsuhiro Asano, Naim Stifan Ateek, Mahmoud Ayoub, John Alembillah Azumah, Mercedes L. García Bachmann, Irena Backus, J. Wayne Baker, Mieke Bal, Lewis V. Baldwin, William Barbieri, António Barbosa da Silva, David Basinger, Bolaji Olukemi Bateye, Oswald Bayer, Daniel H. Bays, Rosalie Beck, Nancy Elizabeth Bedford, Guy-Thomas Bedouelle, Chorbishop Seely Beggiani, Wolfgang Behringer, Christopher M. Bellitto, Byard Bennett, Harold V. Bennett, Teresa Berger, Miguel A. Bernad, Henley Bernard, Alan E. Bernstein, Jon L. Berquist, Johannes Beutler, Ana María Bidegain, Matthew P. Binkewicz, Jennifer Bird, Joseph Blenkinsopp, Dmytro Bondarenko, Paulo Bonfatti, Riet en Pim Bons-Storm, Jessica A. Boon, Marcus J. Borg, Mark Bosco, Peter C. Bouteneff, François Bovon, William D. Bowman, Paul S. Boyer, David Brakke, Richard E. Brantley, Marcus Braybrooke, Ian Breward, Ênio José da Costa Brito, Jewel Spears Brooker, Johannes Brosseder, Nicholas Canfield Read Brown, Robert F. Brown, Pamela K. Brubaker, Walter Brueggemann, Bishop Colin O. Buchanan, Stanley M. Burgess, Amy Nelson Burnett, J. Patout Burns, David B. Burrell, David Buttrick, James P. Byrd, Lavinia Byrne, Gerado Caetano, Marcos Caldas, Alkiviadis Calivas, William J. Callahan, Salvatore Calomino, Euan K. Cameron, William S. Campbell, Marcelo Ayres Camurça, Daniel F. Caner, Paul E. Capetz, Carlos F. Cardoza-Orlandi, Patrick W. Carey, Barbara Carvill, Hal Cauthron, Subhadra Mitra Channa, Mark D. Chapman, James H. Charlesworth, Kenneth R. Chase, Chen Zemin, Luciano Chianeque, Philip Chia Phin Yin, Francisca H. Chimhanda, Daniel Chiquete, John T. Chirban, Soobin Choi, Robert Choquette, Mita Choudhury, Gerald Christianson, John Chryssavgis, Sejong Chun, Esther Chung-Kim, Charles M. A. Clark, Elizabeth A. Clark, Sathianathan Clarke, Fred Cloud, John B. Cobb, W. Owen Cole, John A Coleman, John J. Collins, Sylvia Collins-Mayo, Paul K. Conkin, Beth A. Conklin, Sean Connolly, Demetrios J. Constantelos, Michael A. Conway, Paula M. Cooey, Austin Cooper, Michael L. Cooper-White, Pamela Cooper-White, L. William Countryman, Sérgio Coutinho, Pamela Couture, Shannon Craigo-Snell, James L. Crenshaw, David Crowner, Humberto Horacio Cucchetti, Lawrence S. Cunningham, Elizabeth Mason Currier, Emmanuel Cutrone, Mary L. Daniel, David D. Daniels, Robert Darden, Rolf Darge, Isaiah Dau, Jeffry C. Davis, Jane Dawson, Valentin Dedji, John W. de Gruchy, Paul DeHart, Wendy J. Deichmann Edwards, Miguel A. De La Torre, George E. Demacopoulos, Thomas de Mayo, Leah DeVun, Beatriz de Vasconcellos Dias, Dennis C. Dickerson, John M. Dillon, Luis Miguel Donatello, Igor Dorfmann-Lazarev, Susanna Drake, Jonathan A. Draper, N. Dreher Martin, Otto Dreydoppel, Angelyn Dries, A. J. Droge, Francis X. D'Sa, Marilyn Dunn, Nicole Wilkinson Duran, Rifaat Ebied, Mark J. Edwards, William H. Edwards, Leonard H. Ehrlich, Nancy L. Eiesland, Martin Elbel, J. Harold Ellens, Stephen Ellingson, Marvin M. Ellison, Robert Ellsberg, Jean Bethke Elshtain, Eldon Jay Epp, Peter C. Erb, Tassilo Erhardt, Maria Erling, Noel Leo Erskine, Gillian R. Evans, Virginia Fabella, Michael A. Fahey, Edward Farley, Margaret A. Farley, Wendy Farley, Robert Fastiggi, Seena Fazel, Duncan S. Ferguson, Helwar Figueroa, Paul Corby Finney, Kyriaki Karidoyanes FitzGerald, Thomas E. FitzGerald, John R. Fitzmier, Marie Therese Flanagan, Sabina Flanagan, Claude Flipo, Ronald B. Flowers, Carole Fontaine, David Ford, Mary Ford, Stephanie A. Ford, Jim Forest, William Franke, Robert M. Franklin, Ruth Franzén, Edward H. Friedman, Samuel Frouisou, Lorelei F. Fuchs, Jojo M. Fung, Inger Furseth, Richard R. Gaillardetz, Brandon Gallaher, China Galland, Mark Galli, Ismael García, Tharscisse Gatwa, Jean-Marie Gaudeul, Luis María Gavilanes del Castillo, Pavel L. Gavrilyuk, Volney P. Gay, Metropolitan Athanasios Geevargis, Kondothra M. George, Mary Gerhart, Simon Gikandi, Maurice Gilbert, Michael J. Gillgannon, Verónica Giménez Beliveau, Terryl Givens, Beth Glazier-McDonald, Philip Gleason, Menghun Goh, Brian Golding, Bishop Hilario M. Gomez, Michelle A. Gonzalez, Donald K. Gorrell, Roy Gottfried, Tamara Grdzelidze, Joel B. Green, Niels Henrik Gregersen, Cristina Grenholm, Herbert Griffiths, Eric W. Gritsch, Erich S. Gruen, Christoffer H. Grundmann, Paul H. Gundani, Jon P. Gunnemann, Petre Guran, Vidar L. Haanes, Jeremiah M. Hackett, Getatchew Haile, Douglas John Hall, Nicholas Hammond, Daphne Hampson, Jehu J. Hanciles, Barry Hankins, Jennifer Haraguchi, Stanley S. Harakas, Anthony John Harding, Conrad L. Harkins, J. William Harmless, Marjory Harper, Amir Harrak, Joel F. Harrington, Mark W. Harris, Susan Ashbrook Harvey, Van A. Harvey, R. Chris Hassel, Jione Havea, Daniel Hawk, Diana L. Hayes, Leslie Hayes, Priscilla Hayner, S. Mark Heim, Simo Heininen, Richard P. Heitzenrater, Eila Helander, David Hempton, Scott H. Hendrix, Jan-Olav Henriksen, Gina Hens-Piazza, Carter Heyward, Nicholas J. Higham, David Hilliard, Norman A. Hjelm, Peter C. Hodgson, Arthur Holder, M. Jan Holton, Dwight N. Hopkins, Ronnie Po-chia Hsia, Po-Ho Huang, James Hudnut-Beumler, Jennifer S. Hughes, Leonard M. Hummel, Mary E. Hunt, Laennec Hurbon, Mark Hutchinson, Susan E. Hylen, Mary Beth Ingham, H. Larry Ingle, Dale T. Irvin, Jon Isaak, Paul John Isaak, Ada María Isasi-Díaz, Hans Raun Iversen, Margaret C. Jacob, Arthur James, Maria Jansdotter-Samuelsson, David Jasper, Werner G. Jeanrond, Renée Jeffery, David Lyle Jeffrey, Theodore W. Jennings, David H. Jensen, Robin Margaret Jensen, David Jobling, Dale A. Johnson, Elizabeth A. Johnson, Maxwell E. Johnson, Sarah Johnson, Mark D. Johnston, F. Stanley Jones, James William Jones, John R. Jones, Alissa Jones Nelson, Inge Jonsson, Jan Joosten, Elizabeth Judd, Mulambya Peggy Kabonde, Robert Kaggwa, Sylvester Kahakwa, Isaac Kalimi, Ogbu U. Kalu, Eunice Kamaara, Wayne C. Kannaday, Musimbi Kanyoro, Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Frank Kaufmann, Léon Nguapitshi Kayongo, Richard Kearney, Alice A. Keefe, Ralph Keen, Catherine Keller, Anthony J. Kelly, Karen Kennelly, Kathi Lynn Kern, Fergus Kerr, Edward Kessler, George Kilcourse, Heup Young Kim, Kim Sung-Hae, Kim Yong-Bock, Kim Yung Suk, Richard King, Thomas M. King, Robert M. Kingdon, Ross Kinsler, Hans G. Kippenberg, Cheryl A. Kirk-Duggan, Clifton Kirkpatrick, Leonid Kishkovsky, Nadieszda Kizenko, Jeffrey Klaiber, Hans-Josef Klauck, Sidney Knight, Samuel Kobia, Robert Kolb, Karla Ann Koll, Heikki Kotila, Donald Kraybill, Philip D. W. Krey, Yves Krumenacker, Jeffrey Kah-Jin Kuan, Simanga R. Kumalo, Peter Kuzmic, Simon Shui-Man Kwan, Kwok Pui-lan, André LaCocque, Stephen E. Lahey, John Tsz Pang Lai, Emiel Lamberts, Armando Lampe, Craig Lampe, Beverly J. Lanzetta, Eve LaPlante, Lizette Larson-Miller, Ariel Bybee Laughton, Leonard Lawlor, Bentley Layton, Robin A. Leaver, Karen Lebacqz, Archie Chi Chung Lee, Marilyn J. Legge, Hervé LeGrand, D. L. LeMahieu, Raymond Lemieux, Bill J. Leonard, Ellen M. Leonard, Outi Leppä, Jean Lesaulnier, Nantawan Boonprasat Lewis, Henrietta Leyser, Alexei Lidov, Bernard Lightman, Paul Chang-Ha Lim, Carter Lindberg, Mark R. Lindsay, James R. Linville, James C. Livingston, Ann Loades, David Loades, Jean-Claude Loba-Mkole, Lo Lung Kwong, Wati Longchar, Eleazar López, David W. Lotz, Andrew Louth, Robin W. Lovin, William Luis, Frank D. Macchia, Diarmaid N. J. MacCulloch, Kirk R. MacGregor, Marjory A. MacLean, Donald MacLeod, Tomas S. Maddela, Inge Mager, Laurenti Magesa, David G. Maillu, Fortunato Mallimaci, Philip Mamalakis, Kä Mana, Ukachukwu Chris Manus, Herbert Robinson Marbury, Reuel Norman Marigza, Jacqueline Mariña, Antti Marjanen, Luiz C. L. Marques, Madipoane Masenya (ngwan'a Mphahlele), Caleb J. D. Maskell, Steve Mason, Thomas Massaro, Fernando Matamoros Ponce, András Máté-Tóth, Odair Pedroso Mateus, Dinis Matsolo, Fumitaka Matsuoka, John D'Arcy May, Yelena Mazour-Matusevich, Theodore Mbazumutima, John S. McClure, Christian McConnell, Lee Martin McDonald, Gary B. McGee, Thomas McGowan, Alister E. McGrath, Richard J. McGregor, John A. McGuckin, Maud Burnett McInerney, Elsie Anne McKee, Mary B. McKinley, James F. McMillan, Ernan McMullin, Kathleen E. McVey, M. Douglas Meeks, Monica Jyotsna Melanchthon, Ilie Melniciuc-Puica, Everett Mendoza, Raymond A. Mentzer, William W. Menzies, Ina Merdjanova, Franziska Metzger, Constant J. Mews, Marvin Meyer, Carol Meyers, Vasile Mihoc, Gunner Bjerg Mikkelsen, Maria Inêz de Castro Millen, Clyde Lee Miller, Bonnie J. Miller-McLemore, Alexander Mirkovic, Paul Misner, Nozomu Miyahira, R. W. L. Moberly, Gerald Moede, Aloo Osotsi Mojola, Sunanda Mongia, Rebeca Montemayor, James Moore, Roger E. Moore, Craig E. Morrison O.Carm, Jeffry H. Morrison, Keith Morrison, Wilson J. Moses, Tefetso Henry Mothibe, Mokgethi Motlhabi, Fulata Moyo, Henry Mugabe, Jesse Ndwiga Kanyua Mugambi, Peggy Mulambya-Kabonde, Robert Bruce Mullin, Pamela Mullins Reaves, Saskia Murk Jansen, Heleen L. Murre-Van den Berg, Augustine Musopole, Isaac M. T. Mwase, Philomena Mwaura, Cecilia Nahnfeldt, Anne Nasimiyu Wasike, Carmiña Navia Velasco, Thulani Ndlazi, Alexander Negrov, James B. Nelson, David G. Newcombe, Carol Newsom, Helen J. Nicholson, George W. E. Nickelsburg, Tatyana Nikolskaya, Damayanthi M. A. Niles, Bertil Nilsson, Nyambura Njoroge, Fidelis Nkomazana, Mary Beth Norton, Christian Nottmeier, Sonene Nyawo, Anthère Nzabatsinda, Edward T. Oakes, Gerald O'Collins, Daniel O'Connell, David W. Odell-Scott, Mercy Amba Oduyoye, Kathleen O'Grady, Oyeronke Olajubu, Thomas O'Loughlin, Dennis T. Olson, J. Steven O'Malley, Cephas N. Omenyo, Muriel Orevillo-Montenegro, César Augusto Ornellas Ramos, Agbonkhianmeghe E. Orobator, Kenan B. Osborne, Carolyn Osiek, Javier Otaola Montagne, Douglas F. Ottati, Anna May Say Pa, Irina Paert, Jerry G. Pankhurst, Aristotle Papanikolaou, Samuele F. Pardini, Stefano Parenti, Peter Paris, Sung Bae Park, Cristián G. Parker, Raquel Pastor, Joseph Pathrapankal, Daniel Patte, W. Brown Patterson, Clive Pearson, Keith F. Pecklers, Nancy Cardoso Pereira, David Horace Perkins, Pheme Perkins, Edward N. Peters, Rebecca Todd Peters, Bishop Yeznik Petrossian, Raymond Pfister, Peter C. Phan, Isabel Apawo Phiri, William S. F. Pickering, Derrick G. Pitard, William Elvis Plata, Zlatko Plese, John Plummer, James Newton Poling, Ronald Popivchak, Andrew Porter, Ute Possekel, James M. Powell, Enos Das Pradhan, Devadasan Premnath, Jaime Adrían Prieto Valladares, Anne Primavesi, Randall Prior, María Alicia Puente Lutteroth, Eduardo Guzmão Quadros, Albert Rabil, Laurent William Ramambason, Apolonio M. Ranche, Vololona Randriamanantena Andriamitandrina, Lawrence R. Rast, Paul L. Redditt, Adele Reinhartz, Rolf Rendtorff, Pål Repstad, James N. Rhodes, John K. Riches, Joerg Rieger, Sharon H. Ringe, Sandra Rios, Tyler Roberts, David M. Robinson, James M. Robinson, Joanne Maguire Robinson, Richard A. H. Robinson, Roy R. Robson, Jack B. Rogers, Maria Roginska, Sidney Rooy, Rev. Garnett Roper, Maria José Fontelas Rosado-Nunes, Andrew C. Ross, Stefan Rossbach, François Rossier, John D. Roth, John K. Roth, Phillip Rothwell, Richard E. Rubenstein, Rosemary Radford Ruether, Markku Ruotsila, John E. Rybolt, Risto Saarinen, John Saillant, Juan Sanchez, Wagner Lopes Sanchez, Hugo N. Santos, Gerhard Sauter, Gloria L. Schaab, Sandra M. Schneiders, Quentin J. Schultze, Fernando F. Segovia, Turid Karlsen Seim, Carsten Selch Jensen, Alan P. F. Sell, Frank C. Senn, Kent Davis Sensenig, Damían Setton, Bal Krishna Sharma, Carolyn J. Sharp, Thomas Sheehan, N. Gerald Shenk, Christian Sheppard, Charles Sherlock, Tabona Shoko, Walter B. Shurden, Marguerite Shuster, B. Mark Sietsema, Batara Sihombing, Neil Silberman, Clodomiro Siller, Samuel Silva-Gotay, Heikki Silvet, John K. Simmons, Hagith Sivan, James C. Skedros, Abraham Smith, Ashley A. Smith, Ted A. Smith, Daud Soesilo, Pia Søltoft, Choan-Seng (C. S.) Song, Kathryn Spink, Bryan Spinks, Eric O. Springsted, Nicolas Standaert, Brian Stanley, Glen H. Stassen, Karel Steenbrink, Stephen J. Stein, Andrea Sterk, Gregory E. Sterling, Columba Stewart, Jacques Stewart, Robert B. Stewart, Cynthia Stokes Brown, Ken Stone, Anne Stott, Elizabeth Stuart, Monya Stubbs, Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki, David Kwang-sun Suh, Scott W. Sunquist, Keith Suter, Douglas Sweeney, Charles H. Talbert, Shawqi N. Talia, Elsa Tamez, Joseph B. Tamney, Jonathan Y. Tan, Yak-Hwee Tan, Kathryn Tanner, Feiya Tao, Elizabeth S. Tapia, Aquiline Tarimo, Claire Taylor, Mark Lewis Taylor, Bishop Abba Samuel Wolde Tekestebirhan, Eugene TeSelle, M. Thomas Thangaraj, David R. Thomas, Andrew Thornley, Scott Thumma, Marcelo Timotheo da Costa, George E. “Tink” Tinker, Ola Tjørhom, Karen Jo Torjesen, Iain R. Torrance, Fernando Torres-Londoño, Archbishop Demetrios [Trakatellis], Marit Trelstad, Christine Trevett, Phyllis Trible, Johannes Tromp, Paul Turner, Robert G. Tuttle, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Peter Tyler, Anders Tyrberg, Justin Ukpong, Javier Ulloa, Camillus Umoh, Kristi Upson-Saia, Martina Urban, Monica Uribe, Elochukwu Eugene Uzukwu, Richard Vaggione, Gabriel Vahanian, Paul Valliere, T. J. Van Bavel, Steven Vanderputten, Peter Van der Veer, Huub Van de Sandt, Louis Van Tongeren, Luke A. Veronis, Noel Villalba, Ramón Vinke, Tim Vivian, David Voas, Elena Volkova, Katharina von Kellenbach, Elina Vuola, Timothy Wadkins, Elaine M. Wainwright, Randi Jones Walker, Dewey D. Wallace, Jerry Walls, Michael J. Walsh, Philip Walters, Janet Walton, Jonathan L. Walton, Wang Xiaochao, Patricia A. Ward, David Harrington Watt, Herold D. Weiss, Laurence L. Welborn, Sharon D. Welch, Timothy Wengert, Traci C. West, Merold Westphal, David Wetherell, Barbara Wheeler, Carolinne White, Jean-Paul Wiest, Frans Wijsen, Terry L. Wilder, Felix Wilfred, Rebecca Wilkin, Daniel H. Williams, D. Newell Williams, Michael A. Williams, Vincent L. Wimbush, Gabriele Winkler, Anders Winroth, Lauri Emílio Wirth, James A. Wiseman, Ebba Witt-Brattström, Teofil Wojciechowski, John Wolffe, Kenman L. Wong, Wong Wai Ching, Linda Woodhead, Wendy M. Wright, Rose Wu, Keith E. Yandell, Gale A. Yee, Viktor Yelensky, Yeo Khiok-Khng, Gustav K. K. Yeung, Angela Yiu, Amos Yong, Yong Ting Jin, You Bin, Youhanna Nessim Youssef, Eliana Yunes, Robert Michael Zaller, Valarie H. Ziegler, Barbara Brown Zikmund, Joyce Ann Zimmerman, Aurora Zlotnik, Zhuo Xinping
- Edited by Daniel Patte, Vanderbilt University, Tennessee
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Dictionary of Christianity
- Published online:
- 05 August 2012
- Print publication:
- 20 September 2010, pp xi-xliv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation