NOUN INAUGURAL LECTURE SERIES
6TH EDITION
WHAT HAS PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION GOT TO DO
WITH IT?
BY
PROFESSOR CHUKS PAUL MADUABUM
Professor of Public Administration
and
Dean, School of Management Sciences
NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA
Delivered on ………………………………………2014
1
Preamble
Mr. Vice-Chancellor Sir, permit me to commence this exercise by sharing my recent experience
about Inaugural Lectures. Precisely, on Wednesday, July 17, 2013, I honoured an invitation to
attend an Inaugural lecture delivered by a friend and Head, Department of Political Science, the
University of Lagos – Professor Solomon OladeleAkinboye. Given my huge responsibilities in
NOUN, the opportunity cost of being in Unilag at that auspicious time was high but I must confess,
it was a very rewarding venture. Professor Akinboye commenced his lecture by addressing a knotty
question of “What is actually an Inaugural Lecture”? Citing Prof. OlajideAluko,he submitted that
there has been a gross misconception of Inaugural Lectures.
Accordingly, he pointed out that the founding fathers designed inaugural lectures for three purposes
which are all academic:
(i)
To provide a veritable avenue for the newly appointed Professor to critically analyze the
state of his specialized discipline;
(ii)
To enable the Professor present a piece of unpublished research upon which he has been
working before his appointment or completed afterward, with a view to displaying his
credentials as a scholar and vindicating his appointment before a cross-section of the
University community and outsiders; and
(iii)
To afford the Professor the opportunity to elaborate the research scheme that he intends
to follow while occupying the Chair.
Two reasons are hereby advanced for the fore-going preamble as follows: first, to place this
discourse in its proper perspective and; secondly, to further spread the “Gospel” of what our
Inaugural Lecture really is. Having alluded to this submission, my lecture is influenced largely by it
as would be discovered later in this presentation.
The couching of the topic of my lecture equally has a historical antecedent thus:
There was a great man who made great impression on me through his writings and publications at
which he reflected on societal values and operations. This man was one of the early recipients of the
2
National Merit Award in Nigeria, indeed the first, going by the Guardian Newspaper publication of
Sunday May 18, 2014. And as is required, he delivered a lecture as part of the Award ceremony
titled: “What has literature got to do with it?” That man was Professor Chinua Achebe who
shortly before he joined his ancestorsin year 2013, released, yet another one titled: “There was a
country”. The title of his lecture kept me wondering what Prof. Achebe, though typical of his
writings was driving at. My investigation led me to another title what has love got to do with by
Tina Turner. Eventually I became fascinated with that title and patiently waited for an opportunity to
adopt that style. That opportunity has just presented itself hence the title of my lecture. “What has
Public Administration got to do with it?”
2.0
INTRODUCTION
Public Administration, although derived from Administration is both a discipline and an
operational process. Hence, we have Administrationists as teachers of administration and
Administrators as operators of the process.
Public Administration, as practiced today,
particularly in Africa is inundated with immense challenges, in that government, in every
nation state, can only operate through this machinery. The question that arises is, how
successful are these African Governments? If we admit that the raison d’être of government,
any government, is the good life of the citizens and that national growth and development is
the progressive creation, proliferation and enhancement of the conditions of the good life for
citizens within the boundaries of a nation, then the question arises,to what extent are these
being reflected among the citizens of the nation states of Africa, particularly Nigeria? These
questions are pertinent, in that the situation currently is that the present governments in most
African countries, Nigeria inclusive, inherited what would aptly be described as a “recurring
decimal”. And that is, the problem of how to develop the society and raise the living
conditions of their individual members. All over Africa, there are low standards of living, a
high level of illiteracy, inadequate shelter, escalating unemployment, low income and
negligible savings. In these circumstances, capital formation and, therefore, investments are
low and the God-given mineral and material resources remain largely untapped.
Confronted with this formidable problem of transforming their natural resources into goods
and services in order to meet the hopes and aspirations of their people, African governments
3
have become increasingly concerned with how to organized and mobilize the productive
forces of the society.
In her chequered history, Nigeria has experienced various forms of government from
colonial, through parliamentary, military and now presidential, all in an effort to get it right.
The present democratically elected government in Nigeria, in an attempt to confront head-on
the challenges of development, is actively engaged in the dynamic process of promoting
socio-economic change which is aimed at eradicating poverty and conquering hunger,
disease, ignorance and squalor.Mr. Vice-Chancellor, Sir, against the foregoing backdrop,
this lecture is arranged as follows:
(i)
Conceptual Clarifications which will enable us identify the significant parameters for
subsequent analysis of the identified situations;
(ii)
Evolution of Public Administration which traces public administration from the
onset;
(iii)
The Nigerian Experience in which the growth of Public Administration is zeroed
to Nigeria;
(iv)
Public Administration versus National Development where an attempt is made to
situate public administration within the context of National Developmental Agenda;
(v)
Challenges faced by the Public Administration and adoption of Reforms as strategies
for coping with such challenges;
3.0
(vi)
Current Assessment and Treatment Variables for ameliorating the situation; and
(vii)
Epilogue
CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATIONS
Ithas been argued repeatedly that public administration, as a subject, better describes the
government of a given state. This position which, of course, is particularly relevant to
students in the field informs a devotion of effort and time to the concept. The point must
however, be made that the world of administration is the world of politics. In order to fully
conceptualize administration, we must understand the concept of politics. This is more so
because, if there is no politics, there would be no administration and vice versa. From the
institutional perspectives, politics refers to those activities or goings-on in the institutions of
4
government. This definition can be adjudged as exclusive because of its focus on the intraorganizational setting.
Politics could equally be defined as the struggle for powerand
influence especially in government. A realistic School of thought feels that the purpose of
interaction among people is the struggle for power. Power as a concept is defined by Bobbit
et al (1978:236) as the ability of one entity (say a person) to influence the behavior of another
entity (e.g. another person). The authors equally define an interrelated concept of “authority”
as legitimate power, that is, the party, which is subjected to the influence-attempt, sees the
power as justifiable or appropriate.“Influence”, they conceptualize as the process of trying to
effect a change in another person. Thus, a person exerting influence has power when he can
influence another, and he has authority when the other person accepts the attempt as
legitimate.
Having perceived the concept of politics, it now becomes imperative to address the concept
of public administration. Public administration as a concept attracts several commentaries
from different authorities.
Omalayo and Arowolaju (1987:366) argue that since
‘administration’ is present in all human organizations, public or private, open or closed, it
becomes necessary to begin the definition of public administration from that of
‘administration’ itself. Accordingly, they define administration as referring to organization
and management of men and materials to achieve the goals of any collectivity of people.
Such collectivity may be social, business, military or public. From this standpoint, the
authors define public administration as administration in the public sector, that is, the means,
arrangements, actions and processes by which the policies, programmes, purposes and goals
of government are realized. This gives credence to an earlier perception byDimock and
Dimock (1969:13) who explain that because public administration is problem solving, it is as
much involved with the formulation of the policies by which agencies are guided, as it is
with the execution of policies through practical, down-to-earth, action-oriented programmes.
Consequently, they opine that public administration is the action, business side of
government, employing more than 90% of all public services and programmes. One name
that is so easily associated with the concept that cannot be easily glossed over is Woodrow
Wilson. In fact, his recognition is in connection with the pioneering workshe did in the field
of public administration. His assertion is that public administration is the most obvious part
5
of government; it is government in action; it is the executive, operative, the most visible side
of government (Wilson, 1887:197-222).
One other concept, which, tends to agitate one’s mind each time public administration is
discussedis private administration. This has become necessary, in that in a given miliue or
modern state are public and private sectors contributing harmoniously together towards the
economic growth of the state/nation. In other words, there are public and private sectors
existing side by side when we talk of economic growth or national development. Whatever
is done in the private sector is ascribed by Balogun (1983:11-12) to business and, to some
extent, management. Hence, we have public administration representing operations of
government with a focus on the public, that is, the public sector, while operations in whatever
private entreprises are essentially business, Again, Omolayo and Arowolaju (1987:306-307)
dichotomise the concepts this way:
“Public administration operates in a somewhat different environnment from
business administration. Public administration is tightly integrated into the
political system with the attendant implication of political involvement, control
and influence. On the other hand, business administration runs in a market
environment in which the main test of efficiency is profit”.
This is in line with the submission of Balogun (op.cit) thus:
“Whereas public administration pursues non-economic and socio-political
goals, business administration embarks on economic goals and is specifically
interested in profit maximization”.
The foregoing definitions further confirm the inextricable linkage between government and
public administration such that there would be no meaningful discussion on one without
recourse to the other. For this purpose, we approached the International Encyclopaedia
of the Social Sciences, and it has this to say about governnance:
6
“The art of exercising of legitimate authority, and protecting and adapting the
community by making and carrying out decisions”. (Sills, 1968: 214-217).
It further explains that ‘community’ here refers to a national autonomous community while
the use of legitimacy entails a sanctioned right to exercise practical monoploy of coercive
powers while carrying out the process of governance in a sovereign state. And, of course, the
body or group of individuals charged with this responsibility, it refers to as governnment.
From the foregoing, it becomes imperative that a government must be established as one of
the characteristics or features of a nation state. This agrees with the conceptualisation of a
modern state as a collection of people in a certain territory having an organised government
and possessing autonomy with respect to other such units. Other features of a state, of
course, emerge from this concept as: people, territory, and sovereignity.
The term ‘government’ is further explained as an instrument of a state by which its existence
is maintained, its functions carried out and its policies and objectives realised.
The
interrelatedness of some of the foregoing ‘terms’ equally makes their demarcation inevitable.
While the term ‘state’ comprises the entire community of people which, of course, embraces
both the government and the governed, government is a mere agency which is constituted by
a very small proportiion of the population of the state. It is, thus, one of the several societal
organisations, though with its own unique characteristics.
By the popular maxim that
“Governnments come and go while the state remains”, the existence of a state as more or less
a permanent entity that survives every governnment is further elucidated. The foregoing
exposition places into proper perspective the subject of government and its modus
operandi;the public administration as well as intricacies contained therein.
Our position is that whereas government makes decisions with regards to the welfare and
other interestsof the citizens on their behalf, public administration is the process of
transmitting these decisions and other welfare facilities to the citizens. This process is being
driven by an Agency referred to as Public Service.
Section 318 (1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 defines Public
Service as, “the service of the Federation in any capacity in respect of …” It proceeds to list
7
a number of officers; Clerk or other staff of the National Assembly; members of staff of the
Courts of Judicature of the Federation and States, members of staff of any Commission or
authority established for the Federation or States; staff of any company or enterprise in
which the Government or its agencies hold a controlling share or interest; members of the
Armed Forces and the Police; staff of a Local Government Council; of a statutory
corporation; education institutions established or principally financed by Government, etc.
We could further distill this definition by observing that in the fifth schedule of the
Constitution, which prescribes a code of conduct for “public officers”, the public officer is
defined as a person holding any of the offices specified in part II of the schedule. The list in
Part II excludes from public office, Chairmen and members of ad hoc commissions,
tribunals; committees; but it goes beyond the definitions of Part IV, Section 318 (1), because
it now includes elective as well as appointive political public offices – The President (and
Vice President), Governors and their Deputies, Ministers and Commissioners, members and
staff of the Legislative Houses, Chairmen, Directors of all Corporations, Companies in which
the State has controlling shares or interest. A delineation is necessary here. First, the
specific officers are governed by the code of conduct and therefore should extend the net
wider than the regular meaning of public office holder. Secondly, the definitions in part IV
define the public service for the purpose of running the office of a State while the fifth
schedule refers to how these specific public officers should conduct themselves in public and
private. This thus, provides a moral basis for judging the performance of the public officers.
In drawing a dichotomy between the Civil Service and Public Service, we make another visit
to Part IV, Section 318 (1) of the Constitution. In this section, the civil service is defined as
the service of the Federation (State) in a civil capacity as staff of the Office of the President,
the Vice President, Ministry or Department of the Government of the Federation (State)
assigned with the responsibility for any business of the Government of the Federation (State).
It is narrower than the public service either as defined in the same part IV or as defined in the
Fifth schedule.
It excludes; Judicial Officers, Board and Officers of the statutory
corporations or companies in which the Government has an interest, however large, members
of the armed forces, the police or other government security agencies established by law. It
therefore follows that all civil servants are public servants but not all public servants are civil
8
servants. Thus, the public service could be said to provide a canopy within which the civil
service is located.
Another important point to note is that in dichotomizing the two services, wide line of
demarcation cannot be established in that there are overlaps and dove-tailings here and there.
For instance, the Armed Forces and Police which are outside the civil service operate within
the guidelines provided by the Ministries of Defence and Police Affairs respectively which
constitute the administrative machinery for running these forces.
Ditto for statutory
corporations or parastatals which are also overseen by their respective ministries. We could
hence say that there is an “umbilical cord” that strongly links the ministries (civil service) to
parastatals.
Another concept that cannot escape the prying eyes of our analysis is Development. On this,
a unanimity of definitions are provided by Olugbemi (1987:431); Soares and Quintella
(2008:105); and Sant’Ana (2008:51) as follow:
(i)
Sustained increase in such aggregate economic indices as Gross Domestic Product
(GDP), Gross National Income (GNI), Per Capita Income (PCI), etc;
(ii)
The reflection of (i) above in the enhanced capacity of citizens to meet their vital daily
commitments while allowing them a comfortable margin to save for the rainy day;
(iii)
The reduction, if not elimination, of inequality, unemployment, poverty, disease and
ignorance;
(iv)
The diffusion of influence and the guarantee of basic freedoms, including the freedom
to participate meaningfully in the political process; and
(v)
The assurance of a stable and peaceful political order essential for sustained
productive activities and a guarantee of the safety of lives and property.
The foregoing conceptualization of development accord very significantly with the
developmental objectives of Nigeria which were declared in 1970 and re-echoed by the 1999
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and aimed at achieving:
(a) A united, strong and self-reliant nation;
9
(b) A just and egalitarian society;
(c) A great and dynamic economy;
(d) A land of full and bright opportunities for all citizens; and
(e) A free and democratic society.
Against this backdrop, development can be seen as being much more than economic growth.
It is the creation, the sustenance and the maximization of opportunities – including economic
opportunities – requisite for the attainment of full and satisfying life for every citizen. It is
similarly not a piece meal or a once-and-for-all process; rather, it is a continuous and
cumulative conscious endeavour every turn of which should result in some attainment of or
combination of the conditions earlier listed. Furthermore, the pursuit of development is not,
and should not be, the responsibility of government alone.
The fact that government,
especially in the developing countries, had assumed the role of prime movers of development
is attributable to the manifest incapacities of these societies and peoples.
Having established the parameters and working definitions, the central theme of the next
section is the evolution of public administration.
4.0
IN THE BEGINNING
As a discipline, the study of public administration could be traced to the late 18th and early
19th centuries. Its prominence emerged from the technology that generated the Industrial
Revolution. Consequently, its earliest development occured in Great Britain and later spread
to the United States of America. In fact, the first degree in public administration at the
Master’s level was awarded in 1926 at the Maxwell School of Public Administratiion,
Syracuse University, New York. Yet, it is to Woodrow Wilson, who later became the
President of the United States of America, that we must attribute more positive contributions
through academic articles on the subject; for, in 1882, he wrote his now classic essay on The
Study of Administration, in which he pleaded for a most business-like efficiency in
government.
He insisted that a dichotomy must exist between politics and public
administration. This was clearly a reaction to the era of “spoils system” which existed at the
time. The spoils system refers to the practice of appointing civil servants through political
party patronage, a system institutionalised and rationalised by President Andrew Jackson.
10
Wilson’s argument was that politics was associated with corruption which should not in any
way infitrate the civil service. One of the consequences of Woodrow’s constributions was
the passing of the Pendleton Act by Congress in 1883.
In 1910, Frank Goodnow wrote a book titled:“Politics and Administration” in which he
supported Woodrow’s view that politics should be seperated from administratiion. In his
perception, government has two distinct functions:
(a)
Politics, which has to do with policies or expression of the will of the state; and
(b)
Administration, which is the execution of those policies.
In his own book titled:“The Study of Public Administration” and published in 1926, Leonard
White made the following summary:
(a)
Politics should not intrude into administration;
(b)
Management can be studied scientifically;
(c)Public Administration can become a ‘value-free’ science as a separate discipline; and
(d)
The role of administration is economy and efficiency.
Leonard White thus succeeded in strengthening the separation of politics from
administratiion.
In addition, he explained that business administration and public
administration are similar, in that both can be studied scientifically. In other words, there are
certain principles of management applicable to both disciplines.
For instance, the
POSDCORB (Planning, Organizing, Staffing, Directing, Co-ordinatiing, Reporting and
Budgeting) espoused by Urwick and Gullick are management principles applicable to both
disciplines.
In 1927, W. F. Willoughby wrote another book titled, “Principles of Public Administration” in
which he maintained that:
(a) Certain principles of administration existed;
(b) These principles could be discovered;
11
(c)Administrators would be efficient in their work if they learned how to apply these
principles.
Other early contributors in the field include: Urwick and Gullick who wrote papers on public
academic in the 1930s; Chester Barnard , Functions of the Executive, 1938; Herbert Simon,
Administrative Behaviour, 1947.
5.0
THE NIGERIANVERSION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Public Administration in Nigeria of today is a product of shaping and reshaping stages of
metamorphosis and the like. The question is: How did it all begin? Our submission is that it
would appear that the influence of colonialism in our national discourse is gradually
becoming an overbeaten path, yet it will equally appear fallacious or, should we say, an
academic suicide for any discussion to be undertaken on the history of public administration
in Nigeria without recourse to the influence of colonialism. Simply put, Nigeria’s colonial
experience laid the foundation for economic and political underdevelopment of the country.
The structural deformities and contradictions inherited in 1960 have continued to militate
directly or indirectly against possibilities for growth, stability and development. Political
initiatives and regime initiatives have had to contend with structurally determined and
conditioned crises and contradictions while making it possible for new problems to emerge
and fetter. The post-colonial alignment and realignment of class forces in Nigeria have
operated within the overall deformities and distortions introduced and nurtured by the
colonial state and the colonial elite.
Political independence which Nigeria earned in 1960 without splitting any blood, introduced
novel institutions, political forces and patterns into the political terrain of the country.
However, in spite of the alignment and realignment of political and social forces, it would
appear that Nigeria’s political terrain has seen very limited progress. Indeed, it does not
seem as yet to be addressing the conditions of backwardness, underdevelopment, foreign
domination, economic mismanagement, mass poverty, and marginalization in the global
division of labour-conditions which continue to militate against effective development and
strengthening of political institutions and processes. The Nigerian social formation, state and
dominant elites appear to have failed woefully in extricating themselves from the imposed
12
distortions, forms of domination, unequal exchange and subservience to foreign tastes,
values, relations, exchange and inability to be creative and productive.
The scenario is summarized by Ihonvbere, (2002: 112) as follows:
(i)
the creation of a weak, repressive, and non-hegemonic state;
(ii)
the development of indigenous elites and their marginalization in the internal
production and exchange systems;
(iii)
the promotion and accentuationof primordial loyalties through the ‘divide and rule’
politics and the use of resource allocation to divide the people along primordial lines;
(iv)
the unequal distribution of social and other amenities and the use of bureaucratic
manipulation to slow down developments in the North and to pitch the North against
the South;
(v)
foreign domination of the local economy and the incorporation of the emerging elites
into the structures and systems of the metropolitan elites as junior partners, agents,
advisers, representatives, etc.
(vi)
through economic, educational, fiscal and administrative policies, the reduction, as
much as possible, of contacts between the North and the South;
(vii)
the encouragement of a culture of repression and violence through the creation of a
very violent and ruthless security and police force to collect taxes, depose traditional
rulers, impose cash crops and obtain forced labour from communities;
(viii)
the manipulation of the politics of decolonization to heighten the differences between
the emerging elites;
(ix)
the looting of the resources of Nigeria, discouragement of relevant and
comprehensive education, the failure to create useful and democratic institutions, and
the failure to build infrastructure that would facilitate mobility and contact amongst
peoples; and
(x)
the structured incorporation of the Nigerian social formation into an exploitative and
unequal international division of labour thus, concretizing its marginalization,
vulnerability and dependence, a condition which affects the ability of local elites to
13
run the economy in an autonomous manner beneficial to the local economy and
society in the first instance.
The consequence of the foregoing is that Nigeria is yet to recover from that experience.
Many of the leaders in contemporary Nigeria were creations of the colonial system. Many of
the officers in the bureaucracy were recruited and trained under the colonial system. Several
officers in the army, itself originally a colonial creation, were recruited and trained under the
colonial system. The educational and agricultural policies, even legal forms and patterns are
structured after those of the British who ab initio, had no positive designs for Nigeria as a
colony.
We therefore posit that one of the main predicaments of Nigeria today is the weakness and
fragility of civil society.
The fragmentation of people along ethnic, class, gender,
communal, religious, regional and other lines has militated against the ability to insist on
accountability, democracy, empowerment, the provision of basic needs and good governance.
In addition, the fragmentation of civil society has made it vulnerable to predatory rule,
corruption, mismanagement, indiscipline, military coups and counter-coups, the arrogance of
power, the appropriation of the state and its resources by a handful of wealthy individuals or
particular military rulers, and the total disrespect for law and order, social justice, democracy,
and human rights. The number of civil liberty and voluntary organizations, trade and other
unions, their autonomy and the guarantee of basic freedoms; and the quality, vision,
patriotism and determination of leadership, are, of course, measures of political development.
Indeed, the ability of the leadership to promote respect for law and order, the courts, the
constitution and due process; the ability to contain the prevalence of random violence; the
ability of the people, through democratic means, to hold their leaders accountable, get them
to respect the wishes of the people, to seek periodic mandates from the people to continue in
power; and the ability to initiate and implement policies or introduce novel major policies
and programmes, are also measures of either political development or political stagnation,
political confusion and decay.
14
Having examined Nigeria’s historical antecedents and their influences on the country’s polity
which in effect influences public administration,we seek to identify and analyze other factors
that play similar roles in patterning public administrative practicesin Nigeria.
Environmental Factors that influences Public Administration in Nigeria
Some of the factors identified as environmental are not peculiar to the Nigeria’s microsystem as they are also found to be characteristics of other developing countries in Africa.
These factors are discussed hereunder:
(i)
Social Factor: The consequences of these are enormous. They in fact, continue to
shape and reshape the practice of public administration in Nigeria and have tended to
erode the national consciousness of Nigerians.
This is because, within the Nigerian
society, we find that family, local, state and ethnic loyalty compete with, and often take
precedence over, loyalty to the Nation. This is so deeply rooted that it creates problems
in public administration practice, particularly with the attendant nepotism in all its
facets. The consequence is that supervision and control, as management functions, are
difficult to exercise. Directly related to this is corruption which has also eaten deep into
the nation’s fabrics such that Transparency International, the globally renowned anticorruption body, has continuously rated Nigeria, as one of the most corrupt nations in
the world despite efforts being made by the government to fight the manace. The
tendency to see the national wealth, or benefits accruing therefrom, as “national cake”
that should be sliced from as much as possible, is rife. The situation is even worsened
by the recognition accorded officials who have corruptly enriched themselves within the
society. They are often welcomed with such recognition as the conferment on them of
chieftaincy titles and the like. This group of persons is found among the various
segments of the society, particularly the “political class” which appears to be the final
point of abode due to the concomitant protection enjoyed within that class.
The truth of the matter is that one can hardly penetrate this class unless he is very rich. Yet,
we find retired military officers, other public officers and professionals, within the rank and
file of the political class. This trend has also exposed the insincerity embedded in the
practice of public administration as espoused by the “received wisdom” in the field.
15
Otherwise, how else can one explain the widely held view, that political appointment in a
democratic dispensation is an opportunity to recoup electoral expenses rather than to render
services to the people in particular, and the nation in general? Put differently, how else can a
retired government official or successful businessman who sold all his prime properties both
at home and abroad in order to penetrate the political class, got nominated by his political
party, contest and win an election as a “Local Government Chairman” be helped to recoup
his expenses? Another example is a situation where corruptly enriched public officials
findtheir way into the political class to escape being investigated since such immunity is
enjoyed by the political class and consequently succeed in being elected or appointed into
public offices where they can use their new positions to frustrate any move to investigate
their past deeds? Cases abound of “sharp practices” in various forms which influence the
practice of public administration in Nigeria.
(ii)
The Educational System:
This evolved from a colonially imposed elitist system of
education with its focus on liberal arts. As severally argued, the colonial masters were not
interested in educating their colonial subjects, yet they required interpreters who would assist
them in relating with the natives, hence the emphasis on reading and writing only. This
patterned what in later years became popular, first, preference for the arts and social sciences
to the detriment of core science and technology, and secondly, too much emphasis on “paper
qualification” rather than acquisition of skills”. Such paper qualifications acquired in liberal
arts guaranteed Nigerians the much-sought-after “white-collar” jobs. The result is that today,
students’ enrolment in tertiary institutions is more in favour of these liberal arts than science
and technology. This encourages “generalists” as against “specialists” in the public service.
As strong apostles of Lord Fulton’s dictum that “the cult of generalists is obsolete at all
levels and in all parts of the service”, we canvass support for the promotion of science and
technology which, we do know constitutes a “passport” to economic development all over
the world. It is a fact that any country which de-emphasizes science and technology when
the interests of students in quest of advanced knowledge are taken into consideration (as
demonstrated by the enrolment figures in tertiary institutions in Nigeria), cannot be said to be
seriously pursuing economic development. The class segmentation in the public service in
terms of power and prestige, is not only undemocratic in spirit but also an obstacle to
efficient management.
16
The nation’s educational system seems to favour this elitist philosophy that crowns the most
worthy with “success” certified by diplomas and degrees, and rejects the less worthy as
“failures”. Hence the common phenomenon of superior and inferior cadres in the service.
About this, we had severally pronounced that “bogus certificates do not necessarily make
competent officers”. This is interpreted to mean that possession of chains of degrees and
certificates is not an indication of ability to perform because, certificates cannot do the job. It
can only be effectively done through a demonstration by the individual of his acquired
competences and skills. Akin to this is the lack of congruity between the quality of products
of our educational system and the economic direction of the nation as demonstrated by the
industrial sector which ought to absorb and utilize these products. The result appears to be
widespread unemployment among educationally qualified Nigerians.
These in a nutshell reflect the public administration adopted wittingly or otherwise in Nigeria
today.
6.0
What of the Drivers of this Process – the Public Service?
The Drivers of this process called public administration as earlier espoused, constitute the
central bureaucracy called the public service. Our submission is that the evolution and
convolution of this bureaucracy has similar experience as had earlier been elucidated in that,
the Nigerian Public Service of today has its remote origin in the amalgamation of the colony
and protectorates of Northern and Southern Nigeria to form the colony and protectorate of
Nigeria in 1914. The appointment of Sir Frederick Lugard as the Governor-General of the
amalgamated territories on that date compelled the institution of a central bureaucracy to
assist him in the administration of the whole territory. Yet, it is to Sir Hugh Clifford, who
succeeded Lugard as Governor-General in 1922, that we must attribute the institution of a
structured and purposeful central administration for Nigeria in those early days.
For
according to available evidence, including one from a key participant in that administration,
“It was Clifford and his chief helper, Cameron, not Lugard, who had the herculean task of
cleaning out an Augean stable of administrative chaos, after 8 years of one-man rule without
any proper central machinery of government (Nicolson, 1969:218).
The emergent
administration called the Nigerian Public Service was small in size and simple in structure, in
17
consonance with the limited responsibility of government, essentially the maintenance of
“law and order” for the purpose of promoting progress.
In obvious reference to the above arrangement and justification of same, Okigbo (1986:9)
argues that the Nigerian colonial public service was not modelled on the British home public
service, that it could not have been so modelled because the British Public Service was not
colonial. According to him, the overseas public service had to be created and fashioned out
to suit the peculiar circumstances of ruling subject peoples often held in contempt by the
ruling power, and considered valuable only for what they have to contribute to the
metropolitan country. He further stated that to govern Nigeria, thousands of miles away, in
an age of slow communication, a country large, populous and garrulous, it was necessary to
create two forces on the spot: a military force to hold down the subjects in order and in fear;
and a small cadre of dedicated loyal servants to maintain that order and fear of the British
power.
In terms of structure, the hub of the service was the secretariat with five senior officers: a
Chief Secretary, a Deputy Chief Secretary, a Principal Assistant Secretary and two Senior
Assistant Secretaries.
Around this were grafted specialized departmental organizational
structures like the Treasury, Public Works, Education, Health, Agriculture, etc. designed to
undertake and maintain a modicum of infrastructural services considered essential for the
comfort of government functionaries and the administration of major governmental purposes.
By 1920, there were in all, some four hundred officers on the administrative list.
In the area of personnel, a significant characteristic of that service was the pre-dominance of
its upper and middle reaches by expatriate personnel drawn essentially from Britain and other
British dependencies while Africans, particularly Nigerians, were confined to the menial jobs
of administration, regardless of their educational qualifications and skills. This could be
traced to 1890 when the colonial government discarded the policy of equal opportunity for
Africans and Europeans within the administration of West Africa and adopted a racial
discriminatory attitude towards the African public servants. Since then, a particular trend
had evolved in which the Nigerian public servant was left a completely disenchanted worker.
Olusanya (1975:4) observes that in 1909, G. Strachey, in a memorandum, observed that as
18
long as British administration remained firmly established in West Africa, no native could be
expected to be appointed to any but subordinate posts.
Merit and ability no longer counted as the criteria for appointment; rather, the overriding
factor was the colour of one’s skin. This development ushered in frustration for the African
public servants, most of whom had no option but to leave the public service. Those who
chose to stay were alienated from the scheme of things, and never had a say in decisions on
issues that affected them as well as administration of their own country. Infact, they were
rendered completely passive and hence highly demotivated.
This inculcated into the
Nigerian public servant the non-chalant and indifferent attitude to work since he then saw the
job as that of the ‘white man’ who took all the benefits that accrued from the collective
efforts of both of them. This trend continued unabated even after independence; a significant
legacy left behind in Nigeria by the colonial administration.
Another legacy inherited from the colonial administration which patterned the non-chalant
attitude to work by the Nigerian public servant was the dichotomy of senior and junior staff
which existed even after the departure of the Europeans. This structure is described by
Adedeji (1970:16) as wasp-waisted, like an hour-glass, broad at the bottom, narrow in the
middle and broad again at the top. Inherited along with this structure were the benefits and
privileges enjoyed by the ‘whites’ who occupied the senior posts. The Nigerian senior public
servants of later years imbibed and practiced exactly all the facets of the former European
senior public servants. They, as a result, turned themselves into virtually ‘white men’ and
never took cognizance of the peculiar environment and cultural values of their country.
Thus, a case of a ‘white man’ in ‘black man’s skin –so says Augustus Adebayo (1981). A
more vivid picture of this situation is however painted by Olugbemi (1987). According to
him:
“The civil servant – at least the senior management cadre with responsibility
for policy advancement and implementation are psychologically and socially
removed from the bulk of the society they are employed to serve both in terms
of their abode and the perquisites of their office (official cars, vehicle loans
from the public treasury, telephone facilities, assured electricity supply,
19
domestic servants on the public payroll, high pay etc). Most civil servants on
GL. 12 and above lived in fully-furnished official quarters in the exclusive
areas of the cities in which they work. In Lagos for instance, they were to be
found in such choice areas as Ikoyi, Victoria Island, Apapa, Ikeja etc. where
the basic necessities of life are taken for granted. They hop in official cars
from the house to their offices unscratched by the ordeals of interminable
traffic jam, congested buses, dirty rail coaches, long-waiting at bus stops….
Thus removed and endowed, the average top Nigerian civil servant cannot
appreciate the problems which confront his fellow country man resident in
such sub-urban areas of Lagos as Ajegunle, Mushin, Somolu, Bariga, Agege,
etc. Talkless of the vast majority in the more distant rural areas”.
Another legacy is the long drawn battle between the Generalist Administrators and the
Professionals. Perhaps, a recourse to the genesis of this conflict and controversy is fit and
proper. As earlier stated, the early service comprised a small administrative set-up around
which was grafted departments staffed and manned by professionals. For instance, the
Accountants manned the Treasury, Engineers and technicians manned the Public Works,
Educationists manned the Education Department, Medical and allied officers manned the
Health Department. Before the H.M. Foot’s (Lord Caraden’s) commission in 1948, which
recommended the training of Nigerians to man the various cadres of the Nigerian Public
Service, the higher public service was made up of predominantly officers of British origin.
Since the service was not set up for development administration, the professional corps was
very weak and consisted mostly of British officials. Then, the professional corps were
distinct from the administrative class and were organized in different departments and
branches. There was mutual respect between the two groups and there was no attempt for
one to lord it over the other. With the rapid Nigerianization process which followed the rapid
constitutional changes of the 1950’s, the originally calm co-existence of the two classes was
continuously tampered with and finally distorted.
By 1954, the British model of public service had undergone changes and modifications, but
remained “basically a class and closed service” based on the recommendations of the
20
Gorsuch Commission of 1954 for the establishment of four broad classes corresponding to
the general educational standard of the time (Gorsuch, 1956). These were:
(i)
the sub-clerical and manipulative;
(ii)
clerical and technical;
(iii)
executive and high technical; and
(iv)
administrative and professional classes each of which consisted of cadres e.g.
engineering, accountancy, law etc.
These were organized along two parallel hierarchies of professional and administrative
classes in the departments and the secretariat which were merged under the 1954 –
ministerial system. This is represented in the diagram below:
MINISTER
Director of Technical Service
(1)
Deputy Director (1)
Permanent Secretary
Deputy Permanent
Secretary
Parliamentary Secretary
Private Secretary
Director of Technical
Service (2)
Director of Technical
Service (3)
Deputy Director (2)
Deputy Director
(3)
Fig. 1: A Typical Ministerial Organisation showing dual hierarchies prior to Newn’s Integration of
1959.
Under the new ministerial system, the secretariat at the Headquarters, consisting of the
Permanent Secretary and his administrative staff, were responsible for policy formulation and
planning while the departmental heads were in charge of technical execution of policies. The
21
merger was of conflict dimension and could, infact, be viewed as an implementation of a
British-style bureaucratic hegemony into the Nigerian civil service.
By 1959, Mr. A.F.F.P. Newns (the then Secretary to the Governor-General and Council of
Ministers) integration Commission merged the professional departments with the
administrative division, with the Permanent secretary given an edge over his professional
counterparts. And this can be regarded as the genesis of the professional/administrator
dichotomy.
Under the colonial administration, the departmental heads were also the
“accounting officers” of their respective departments. When ministerial government was
introduced under the immediate independence constitution, the “ministries” were simply
super-imposed on an existing departmental structure.
The retention by the Permanent
Secretary of the responsibility of “accounting officer” after this merger was therefore, “either
an act of honest over-sight or a deliberate colonial design to circumscribe the authority and
freedom of the nascent indigenous Ministers (Onosede, 1988). The Permanent secretary was
a former officer of the Governor’s Secretariat and was so addressed because he was a
“Permanent Assistant” to the Governor/Minister. This nomenclature had persisted in the
defunct civil service despite the change in roles of the two.
By the Newns integration, the Permanent Secretary was given the power of general
supervision of the ministry’s functions and was the link between the Minister and the
Ministry but the Heads of departments were allowed access to the minister. This was
gradually phased-out and the position has since changed considerably from what it was when
we met it in the 1960s and 1970s. Infact, just before the civil service reforms of 1988, the
Permanent Secretary was the Accounting Officer of his Ministry. By this nomenclature,
administrative officers who were normally recruited as assistant Secretaries were
inadvertently nominated “heir-apparent” to the throne of Permanent Secretary (Accounting
Officer).
Administrators charged with policy matters and general supervision of the
ministry’s functions gradually manipulated themselves into an enviable position in the
ministry at the expense of the professionals (Udoji Commission, 1974).
This privileged position attained ‘class’ or ‘cult’ dimension which was jealously guarded by
the least Assistant Secretary. The implication was to the extent that even junior Assistant
22
Secretaries became virtually immuned from disciplinary actions by their heads of line
departments. The psychological argument to this under-privilege position for professionals
was de-motivating to the professionals who were by their calling charged with the
responsibility of executing technical or developmental policies”.
In the conduct of Government Business, the average public servant is sometimes referred to
as the input manager. This is because, for too long, the public servants have concentrated
mainly on the ‘input’ rather than the ‘output’ side of human resources-minuting files, writing
memos and treating matters that may come before them. The input manager operates within
his own sectional system without bothering about overall corporate goal of his
organization,talk less of appreciating the broad outlines of the National Development or
Rolling Plans.
Such input managers, though useful in maintenance of law and order
administration, cannot cope with the demands and requirements of development
administration. Perhaps to fully appreciate the magnitude and direction of Development
Administration, it might be necessary to explain its evolution and convolution.
7.0
THE EVOLUTION OF CONSCIOUS DEVELOPMENTAL EFFORTS IN NIGERIA
It would be recalled that the incidence of colonialism was a common experience of the
majority of third world countries. All the colonizing countries had strong capitalist traditions
founded on the notion of liberal democracy and the laissez-faire, economic doctrine, a
philosophy popularized by classical economists like Adam Smith and Riccardo.
The
philosophy advocated that “government was the best which governed the least” and, as
Thomas Paine argued that “society in every state is a blessing but government even in its best
state is but a necessary evil” (Balogun, 1982:72). It was felt at the time that the general
societal welfare would be best served by individuals who would rationally seek their
objectively measured advantages in an open competitive market economy. Government’s
intervention in economic activity was therefore considered an aberration and up-setting to the
good sense of the national economic man. By this orientation, colonial governments were
pre-occupied with maintaining law and order, preserving the status-quo, preventing a breakdown of the administrative machinery and guarding against mistakes. Their activities were
therefore confined to “policing and security”, protecting the life and property of the citizenry
and protecting the territorial integrity of the country.
23
Where government partook of
economic activities, its role was rather marginal, i.e., the safe-guarding of industrial contracts
and the supervision of relations among competing actors in the economic arena. Government
in the colonial past therefore performed only purely regulatory functions and had no drive
towards socio-economic change.
With the attainment of independence, the “regulatory” state gave way to what has been called
the “positive” state. Confronted with the big challenge of development and of transforming
its natural resources into goods and services in order to meet the hopes and aspirations of
their people, the governments of developing economies became concerned with how to
organize and mobilize the productive forces of these economies and also with a genuine
search for what, in actual fact, should be the role of the state in the development process.
The political and bureaucratic elite had to search for an alternative economic model of
development that would take into cognizance, the peculiar circumstances of newly
independent countries.
In conducting the search for a more viable socio-economic
philosophy, this power elite was conscious of the fact that natural and man-induced disasters
e.g. recurrent epidemics and the two world wars, had shaken the very foundation of the
laissez-faire doctrine and that the failures of the free market system in the mother countries
had made a reality, state intervention in production activity, through the instrumentality of
the public sector.
The justification for state intervention in commercial activity in the western world can be
summarized as follows:
(i)
the inability or unwillingness of private enterprise, in view of the financial
profitability implications, to be involved in the production of certain goods and
services which, in the view of the state, are considered to be socially desirable;
(ii)
the inability of private enterprise to engage in ventures with long term gestation
periods and by implication, long-term benefits over investment;
(iii)
the pressure of international competition in the home or external market.
From the foregoing philosophical under-pinnings of public sector intervention in the
developed economies, a few logical inferences can be made for the developing economies:
24
that if public sector in those countries became an inevitable governmental outfit
forrectifying the failures of an imperfect market situation, then for the developing
economies,public sector should be the ‘standard production mode” having regard
to the socio-economic realities of these countries;
Having regard to the socio-economic circumstances of most third world countries; a school
of thought has suggested massive state intervention in enterprise as the solution. This school
argues that:
“the theoretical supremacy of public sector as a model of production organization
should be taken for granted, as implicitly justified by the very character of the
existing state of under-development……..”(Aboyade, 1974).
The proponents of state intervention further claim that the moral superiority of establishing
public sector or enterprises is unassailable in the face of the abject poverty and social
deprivation which the capitalist philosophy could generate. State intervention in economic
activity is therefore claimed to guarantee economic growth coupled with social equity.
Hence it is claimed that:
“the public sector is at once an instrument or the opportunity for re-allocating
economic power relations in any society that claims to be progressive”. (Aboyade,
Ibid).
In addition, public sector organizations play a useful role in the political economy of
developing countries in view of the fact that:
(i)
they aid plan implementation process by providing an institutional base through
which the state could dictate, control, monitor and predict national economic trends,
and therefore “accord legitimacy to government as an instrument of national
development in post-colonial era”;
25
(ii)
they assist in social stability by dismantling the neo-colonial economic relations that
characterize newly independent countries;
(iii)
they provide the instrumentality through which the social benefits of government
investments, e.g. provision of goods and services in uneconomic terms are made
available to the people.
The creation of Nigeria as a socio-political entity was itself the foundation of state
intervention in theeconomy.
The very amalgamation of the Northern and Southern
protectorates in 1914 was for politicalexpediency as well as an economic necessity.
Professor Aboyade captured the picture vividly when hesaid:
“in the very event(amalgamation) was to be found the philosophical genesis of the
intervention role of the State in the Nigerian Development process. Forced to
depend substantially on its administrative costs, the colonial government could not
afford just to keep the ring as a passive referee for the capitalist operators. It had
thus acquired a direct stake in their prosperity and orderly expansion”.
A major component of the public sector is public enterprises which in Nigeria is a postWorld War II phenomenon. Before the establishment of public enterprises in Nigeria, the
colonial government had addressed its mind to the use of Local Government as a strategy for
development. In this connection, the Colonial Development and Welfare Act of 1940 was
drafted following the Report of the Royal Commission on the West Indies in 1938-39. This
Act was a major turning point in the conversion of Colonial administration from ‘quiet,
uneventful progress’ to conscious development administration. The British colonial policy at
this juncture was influenced by the effects of the Second World War. In this connection, by
1947, the Local Government system had been mooted as “a cardinal focus for development
in the colonies” and by the early 1950’s the British system of Local Government had been
imported to Nigeria. However, the new Local Government system failed because it neither
achieved the results expected by its British mentors nor did it satisfy the local aspirations of
Nigerians. Augustus Adebayo, (1981) discussed some of the reasons for the failure as
follows:
26
(a) lack of re-alignment of central-local relations;
(b) error of judgment in importing the English model;
(c) over-dramatization of the element of government and opposition;
(d) adverse effects of the multi-tier system;
(e) insurmountable obstacles in staff recruitment; and
(f) expectation of too many different radical results from the same policy action.
The fore-going development strategy did not yield the expected results as nationalist
activities gathered momentum and self –government was subsequently attained. Besides,
with the attainment of self-government and the monumental change in government
philosophy, some extra-ministerial departments were converted into corporations. Their
establishment was accentuated from independence to reflect the desires of government to
foster and guide and sometimes, to directly control economic and social development.
For many reasons, the government believed that public capitalism was the answer to the
evident inability of private enterprise alone to assume the key role of championing
development.
The government was therefore desirous to get away from its traditional
caretaker and regulatory functions and move into an era of active participation in the
productive sector. At the same time, it was felt that the civil service was inherently incapable
of
meeting the
entrepreneurial
requirements
for
managing development-oriented
organizations. This is because:
(a) the normal government machine does not lend itself to the speedy decisions so essential
for commercial operations;
(b) the government system of accounts is designed to facilitate close expenditure control by
the Legislature and not necessarily to promote operational efficiency;
(c) commercial undertakings tend to generate an atmosphere of initiative and release greater
energy on the part of the operational personnel;
(d) it is necessary to minimize political pressure and partisan influence in some sensitive
social institutions (such as the Nigeria Broadcasting Corporation), in order to sustain
public confidence in their policies and programmes; and
27
(e) it is doubtful whether private enterprise will sustain the magnitude of investment needed
in certain vital areas of development which may not satisfy the canons of private
profitability. (See page 75 of Second National Development Plan, 1970-74).
Thus it was felt that the civil services are attuned to maintaining precedents and ensuring
continuity and fairness of decisions and operations than searching out opportunities and
taking risks which is, or should be, the attribute of an enterprising management. In addition,
heavy strains and stresses were already placed on the civil services by the demands and
challenges of the late 1950s and early and mid-1960s and these dictated that it was not
expedient for them to assume yet more and quite different responsibilities. Hence, many of
the early public enterprises in Nigeria were created from the Civil Service, e.g. Nigeria Coal
Corporation, Electricity Corporation of Nigeria, Nigerian Ports Authority, Nigerian Railway
Corporation, to free them from such supposed restraints of bureaucracy.
These enterprises have become independent legal entities based on specific legislation and
they constitute the “business wing” of government.
The magnitude of government
involvement in the social, commercial and industrial fabric of the society is amply indicated
in the 1974 report of the Public Service Review Commission, headed by Chief Jerome Udoji,
which states that:
“Today the public services …………….. are involved in affairs beyond the imagination of our
civil servants 15 years ago. We are now selling insurance and minting coins; we
are sailing ships and refining oil; we are communicating all over the world and
throughout the federation; we are banking and building ……………. All this is in
addition to the regular work of government that itself has continued to expand
along with all these new dimensions”.
This submission was re-echoed in 1980 by Mrs. F. Y. Emmanuel, the then Permanent
Secretary, Federal Ministry of Health, when she noted:
“We are operating in Nigeria today, modern big government which in addition to performing
its traditional role of guaranteeing public order is also the dominant force in
economic and social development”.
28
The reality of our situation then was that the Nigerian public services operated in diverse field
of activities that the first generation of civil servants would have thought impossible. Forging
steel, mining and refining oil, producing fertilizers, running civil aviation, and brewing beer,
etc., are those new dimensions of public administration which are essentially different
activities from delivering mail, collecting taxes, stamping passports and writing minutes. The
strategy of Government with regard to the scope of public enterprises in Nigeria is summed up
most clearly and unambiguously in the Chapter on “National Objectives and Priorities” of the
Second National development Plan (1970-74):
“The aim of Development Planning in Nigeria is that economic growth should be
accompanied by general development. In other words, the benefits of economic
advancement should be distributed as widely as possible over the entire society.
Government, as the most single institution for ensuring the translation of growth
into development through the provision of economic and social services, must
have at its disposal resources sufficient for achieving these goals of society.
Today, industry and mining are the fastest growing sectors of the economy and
are therefore likely to be important generators of resources for future
development. It follows that government must play a leading role in these two
sectors in order to harness the fruits of economic growth for the overall
development of the Nigerian society. Government investment activities will no
longer be limited to public corporation and “dying industries” in which no
private company can thrive, whilst leaving the virile, expensive and profitable
industries to private enterprise. Private investors will however, continue to be
welcome in Nigeria as partners in progress led by the public sector”.
In summary, the roles of public sector through its major component – the public enterprises
include:
(i)
incursion into essential socio-economic areas where the private enterprise is reluctant
or incapable of operating due to:
(a) the enormity of the initial capital outlay;
29
(b) the long gestation period;
(c) low profitability; and
(d) Security element arisingtherefrom.
8.0
(ii)
promotion of employment and skill for maintaining stability in depressed areas;
(iii)
fair distribution of community needs; and
(iv)
economic catalyst.
NIGERIA’S MARCH TO GREATNESS
The Nigeria’s quest for growth and greatness is weaved around ‘Development’ the baseline
of which is improved life of the citizens. If a restatement is desirable, we posit development
as the creation, the sustenance and the maximization of opportunities-requisite for the
attainment of full and satisfying life for every citizen. The evolution in this quest is traceable
to 1948 when there was a break from the British exploitative tendencies in Nigeria. A
combination of international pressures and electoral fortunes and/or misfortunes on British
domestic scene resulted in changes in policy towards its colonies. The first indication of the
new attitude was the directive from “white hall” to British Colonial Governors in Africa to
expand the tasks of government to include the reform of local government as a means of
mobilizing native human and material resources for socio-economic and political
development. The second was the launching of the first Ten-years Colonial Development
and Welfare programme as an earnestness of Britain’s new resolve to assist the development
of the colonies.
It is needless to say that Nigeria and Nigerians benefited tremendously from the creation and
diffusion of opportunities-economic, social and political- which accompanied the
implementation of the two schemes. What is more, the successor indigenous political elites
came to accept and adopt the culture of development planning explicit in the colonial plan of
1948 as a valued strategy in the management of public affairs. This paradigm shift led to:
(i)
The developmental objectives of Nigeria which were declared in 1970 and aimed at
achieving:
(a) a united, strong and self-reliant nation;
30
(b) a just and egalitarian society;
(c) a great and dynamic economy;
(d) a land of full and bright opportunities for all citizens; and
(e) a free and democratic society.
(ii) The various National development Plans:
First National Development Plan
- 1962
Second National Development Plan -1970
Third National Development Plan
-
68
-
74
- 1975 -
80
Fourth National Development Plan - 1981
- 85
TheRolling Plans etc.
The question may be asked, of what use are all these to the citizens if indeed development is
all about improvement of their welfare? About this, we restate that the raison d’être` of
government, any government, is the good life for citizens (the greatest happiness of the
greatest number). Government therefore demonstrates its responsibility to the citizens by its
responsiveness to their needs. These needs are expressed by the citizens themselves through
their demands made via various channels which of course include community leaders,
opinion leaders or opinion polls and opportunities created when prospective political leaders
canvass for their support or votes for whatever purpose.
These Needs/Demands are
schematically representedbelow:
Demand
for Health
Demand
for
Educatio
n
Demand
for
Shelter
Demand
for
Security
Deman
d for
food
Deman
d for
Roads
Governme
nt
Demand for
Transportatio
n
Deman
d for
Power
31
Demand for
Infrastructur
e
Deman
d for
Water
Fig. 2: Schematic Representation of Citizens Demands on Government.
The above schema presents what could aptly be referred to as Government – Citizens
Demand Model. The model itself further points up some unwritten contractual agreements
reached between the government and the citizens particularly during electioneering
campaigns as presumably articulated in the“Political Party Manifesto”.At one end of a
continuum is a small group of people called Government who were elected to pilot the affairs
of the nation.
At the other end are the citizens who elected this group based on the
aforementioned agreement, call it electoral promises if you like. But the point must be made
that first, this small group emerged from among the citizens, so they are no strangers; far
from it, government of the citizens.
Secondly, they were elected by the citizens –
government by the citizens, and thirdly they were elected to fulfill the yawnings of the
citizens expressed through their demands – government for the citizens. This expression is
commonly referred to as Government of the people by the people and for the people.
Mr. Vice-Chancellor Sir, this model throws up the question being asked ab initio – what
has Public Administration got to do will all these? As earlier posited, government and the
citizens are at opposite ends of a continuum, in between these ends is a process through
which government can reach out to the citizens with a view to meeting their demands. That
process is public administration and the public service constitutes the engine and driver of
that process. An agitating issue that must be quickly addressed is the place of the legislature
as a tier of government. Indeed the legislature as representative of the citizens is very close
to the citizens although, sometimes far removed from their demands.
However, the
assumption is that these demands are conjured into bills and laws that are passed to the
executive arm of government for implementation.
Again, the process of specifically
identifying which demands to be injected into the bill document and that of actually putting
the bill together is public administration and the public service constitute the engine and
driverof the process.
32
8.1
The Nigeria’s Developmental Agenda
Thecitizen’s demand on government is articulated within a policy framework referred to as
developmental agenda. Againa recourse to history is fit and proper.The evolution in this
direction has been steady although it eventually took a re-engineering dimension since 1999
with the arrival of yet another democratically elected government. The situation as of today
is that whatever Developmental Agenda enunciated in Nigeria was presumably weaved
around the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) constitute a strategic Agenda for the
governance of 189 countries of the world that pledged their commitment to those goals in the
year 2000. Emergence of the goals was informed by a genuine concern by both developing
and advanced countries to ensure a meaningful development outcome. There has thus, been
a concerted approach to managing sustainable human development with these countries
reaching a consensus on how best to tackle abject poverty and other human miseries such as
illiteracy, gender inequality, infant and maternal mortality, HIV and Aids, malaria, squalor
and environmental degradation. In consonance with the Declaration, developed countries
renewed their commitment to raise resources for financing development with a promise to
ensure that 0.7 percent of their Gross National Income is made available through Official
Development Assistance (ODA) to developing countries while the developing countries also
vouched their commitment to improved governance.
The Millennium declaration has been translated into eight goals christened, The Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs). The MDGs, which use 1999 as the base year, aim to achieve
the following by 2015:
Goal 1: eradicate extreme poverty and hunger;
Goal 2: achieve universal primary education;
Goal 3: promote gender equality;
Goal 4: reduce child mortality;
Goal 5: improve maternal health;
Goal 6: combat HIV & AIDS, malaria and other diseases;
Goal 7: ensure environmental sustainable; and
33
Goal 8: develop a global partnership for development.
To ensure effective translation of these goals into concrete development outcomes, the eighttime bound goals have been transformed into 18 targets and 48 indicators. This is to ensure
that development activities are better targeted and their implementation is thoroughly
monitored and evaluated. Since 2000, the MDGs have become the global framework for
setting development agenda for developing countries. The development aspirations of such
countries have been built around this framework. Developing countries’ development plans
and strategies have therefore become the building blocks and tools for implementing the
MDGs.
Nigeria, as a signatory to the Millennium Declaration, is committed to achieving the MDGs
by 2015. This commitment was demonstrated by the then President of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo (GCFR), when he launched the National Economic
Empowerment Development Strategy (NEEDS).
NEEDS is a comprehensive socio-
economic reform compact, that interprets the MDGs within the context of the Nigerian
milieu. Prior to institutionalization of the reform agenda, the President emphasized:
“The reforms being introduced will be all encompassing and all embracing ……….. no
community, no individual or group would be left out in the reform ………. In the
process of that reform, if some people are hurt, we have no apology. We will do
what has to be done to make Nigeria move forward, to make it what I believe, God
has created it to be, a land flowing with “Milk and Honey”, a country to be
respected within the comity of nations, a land of glory; a land of prosperity, a land
of what is right and not a land of anything can go”.
Within the framework of the reform are the strategies of National Economic Empowerment
Development Strategy (NEEDS), 7-Point Agenda and the Transformation Agenda all of
which are adopted by the same political party in power but three (3) different drivers as Chief
Executives of the Nation at different periods from 2004 to date. Given the parlous state of
the economy, an integrated and coordinated development approach was adopted, with the
sub-national government’s, development plans:
34
State Economic Empowerment and
Development Strategy (SEEDS), and Local Economic Empowerment and Development
Strategy (LEEDS). The conceptual issues on NEEDS/SEEDS/LEEDS are based on four
goals:

poverty reduction;

wealth creation;

employment generation: and

value re-orientation.
These development strategy documents span 2004-2011. NEEDS was premised on three
pillars: empowering the people in the form of social charter; promoting private enterprise
(via creation of competitive private sector, promoting result-oriented sectoral strategy and
ensuring regional integration); and changing the way government does its work (by creating
an efficient and responsible public sector, promoting transparency and accountability and
improving security and administration of justice).
Mr. Vice-Chancellor Sir, the assessment of these developmental Agenda/Reforms instigated a
number of studies as follows:
(i) A Study visit to Mexico and Brazil
It will be recalled that an Expert Group was put together by the Federal Government to
study the implementation of MDGs in Countries identified and adjudged as adopting best
practices in governance and administration. As a member of this group, I took part in the
study of Mexico and Brazil in year 2009. Our findings from this study revealed that as at
2009, these countries had accomplished particularly the first five (5) goals and had gone
ahead to set new goals/ targets in this direction.
A point to note however, is a similarity
between Nigeria and Brazil (one of the countries studied) in the area of long period of
military interregnum or should I say disturbances. This study constituted a stimulant for
carrying out similar studies back home in Nigeria.
(ii) Assessment of NEEDS
35
The framework for actualization the goals of NEEDSas earlier stated, is anchored on three pillars:

Empowering people and improving social delivery;

Fostering private sector led growth through creating the appropriate enabling environment;
and

Enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of government, by changing the way government
does its work.
It will be recalled that NEEDS I and II span the period between 2004 and 2011. Assessment of
NEEDS reflects targeted dates. The targets and actual accomplishments are indicated in the table
below:
TABLE 1: NEEDS TARGETS AND LEVEL OF ACHIEVEMENT
2008
2009
2010
2011
TARGET
ACTUAL
TARGET
ACTUAL
TARGET
ACTUAL
TARGET
ACTUAL
Growth in real GDP (%)
10.20
10.20
5.00
6.10
6.0
6.51
6.00
5.67
Growth in oil sector (%)
23.0
23.9
0.0
3.3
0.0
0.5
0.0
-4.5
Growth in Non-oil sector
3.3
4.5
7.3
7.5
8.5
8.2
8.3
8.9
Reduction in poverty incidence
5.0
-
5.0
-
-
-
5.0
-
-
-
4.08
3.08
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.0
0.69
-
-
-
-
11.0
14.0
10.0
15.0
9.5
11.6
9.5
8.5
Growth in Agriculture sector (%) 7.0
6.5
6.0
4.11
6.0
7.0
6.0
7.17
Growth in Manufacturing sector
-
5.7
7.0
6.17
7.0
7.0
9.5
53.0
45.6
>53.0
45.0
-
-
-
-
-
-2.8
-30.0
-1.7
3.0
>3.0
3.0
>3.0
MACROECONOMIC
VARIABLES
(%)
Growth in Real Private
Consumption (%)
Growth in Real Private
Consumption per capita (%)
Inflation rate (%)
SECTORAL VARIABLES
(%)
Manufacturing Sector Capacity
Utilization
FISCAL VARIABLES
MAXIMUM Public Deficit
(% of GDP)
36
Total Expenditure (% of
25.1
17.0
23.5
16.7
Recurrent Expenditure (% of total 70.0
80.3
65.0
77.2
60.0
-
60.0
-
30.0
19.7
35.0
22.8
40.0
-
40.0
-
Reserves ($ millions)
7.18
7.46
7.68
17.26
8.69
28.61
9.68
43.0
Imports Growth (%)
-
3.5
15.0
8.68
18.0
-
25.0
-
Exports Growth (%)
-
55.3
10.0
7.51
20.0
-
25.0
-
Earnings from Non-oil exports
<5.0
3.2
>5.0
3.6
>5.0
-
>5.0
-
GDP)
budget)
Capital Expenditure (% of total
budget)
EXTERNAL
Sources: *Targets from NEEDS and **Actual from Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Annual Report
and Statement of Accounts, 2012.
As indicated in table 1 above, there has been tremendous and consistent improvement in the
performance of the economy since the inception of NEEDS in 2004.

Real GDP annual growth rate averaged 6.6% (2009-2011) as against the annual target of
6.0%;

Oil sector annual growth rate average – 0.23% as against 0.0% targeted (2009 -2011);

Non-oil sector average annual growth rate; 8.2% as against the NEEDS target of 8.0%;

Inflation rate on the average, is 10.03%, (2009 -2011);

Reduction of fiscal deficits to less than 3% of the GDP;

Stable exchange rate (convergences of parallel exchange rates):

External reserves grew by an annual average rate of about 230%; from US$7.68 billion in
2009 to US$43 billion at the end of 2011 as against 12.2 percent (2008 and 2011);

Favourable external balance as reflected in increasing value of non-oil exports:

Phenomenal growth in the net in-flow of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and portfolio
investment, particularly in the banking and telecommunications sectors; FDI rose from
US$1.866b in 2009 to US$2.3b and US$4.8b in 2010 and 2011 respectively;

Reduction in external debt stock from over US$30 billion to less than US$5 billion; and

Favourable rating of Nigeria by International Credit rating agencies.
37
The general price level as measured by the composite Consumer Price Index (CPI) has trended
downwards during the NEEDS implementation period. The inflation rate on year on year basis
declined from 15.0% in 2009 to 8.5% in December 2011. It declined further to 8% in January
2012. The moving average inflation rate has also moved in the same direction during the period.
The NEEDS single digit inflation target of 9.5% has been met and even surpassed since 2011.
(iii)Assessment of SEEDS – The National Planning Commission (NPC) in collaboration with
development partners in Nigeria carried out SEEDs Benchmarking exercise. The NPC
and States deliberated in a 3-day joint consultative workshop and agreed on the
framework for the joint assessment of SEEDS. The Benchmarks were developed to
measure four areas of States performances using certain identifiable indicators. For each
of the measures, several indicators spelled out in detail what evidence a State may
produce to show what appropriate actions have been taken to develop and implement
SEEDS. The Benchmark areas and their measures are as follows:
Benchmark I: Policy
Measure A:
This measure seeks to ensure that State Government produces a SEEDS
document (or equivalent) which defines policy priority targets in areas such
as primary health care, basic education, pro-poor growth, women
empowerment and gender equality, and provides a reasoned and fully costed
strategy of how they will be achieved.
Measure B:
Under this measure, a State is required to provide evidence to show that a
participatory process has been undertaken, and that men and women across
the State have been involved in developing the SEEDS.
Measure C:This measure, requires that the SEEDS document (or equivalent) is published
and widely available in the form of political commitment from the State’s
Executive Governor to men and women in the state’s.
Benchmark 2: Budget and Fiscal Management
Measure A:
This measure seeks to ensure that the State Government has a fiscal strategy
and sets budgets that are a reliable guide to actual spending.
38
Measure B:
This measure requires that the budget demonstrates a clear link between
resource allocation and the poverty reduction strategies defined in SEEDS.
Measure C:
This measure assesses the timeliness and scrutiny of the budget formulation
process.
Measure D:
Under this measure, the State is required to set realistic budgets of internally
generated revenue based on historical collection patterns.
Measure E: This measure assesses whether the state has robust procedures for management
of debt.
Measure F:
This measure requires that budget allocations are released on schedule and
there is timely and accurate reporting and dissemination of in-year budget
execution.
Measure H:
This measure assesses actions taken to eliminate payroll fraud.
Benchmark 3: Service Delivery
Measure A:
Under this measure, the State Government is required to have a consistent
policy on delivery of services informed by an effective system of data
collection, processing and dissemination, which is established, maintained
and used to inform policy decisions.
Measure B:
This measure requires that service delivery strategies in key sectors take due
account of policies of other service providers, including other tiers of
Government and the Civil Service has been re-aligned towards service
delivery priorities.
Measure C:
This measure requires that services delivered are tailored to the needs of
citizens and citizens have a mechanism to measure service quality.
Measure D:
This measure seeks to ensure that the State Government delivers services
through planned and completed projects and programmes, with balanced
spread in senatorial districts, in key areas of electricity, water, roads,
education, and health.
Benchmark 4: Communication and Transparency
39
Measure A:
This measure assesses plans to ensure that “due process”, particularly in
procurement procedures are developed and positively assessed against
Federal Government’s due process standards as well as punish corrupt acts.
Measure B:
This measure seeks to ensure that men and women across the state have the
opportunity to publicly question their leaders about performance, sector by
sector and there is public accessibility to key fiscal information.
States performance for two consecutive years (2007 and 2010) based on points scored on indicators
from the foregoing are displayed in tables 2 and 3below:
Table 2: SEEDS Benchmarking Results 2007
S/N
STATE
ZONE
POLICY
BUDGETS &
FISCAL MGT.
SERVICE
DELIVERY
COMMUNICATION
& TRANSPARENCY
TOTAL
SCORE
POSITION
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
Ebonyi
Anambra
FCT
Kwara
C/River
Jigawa
Kaduna
Ondo
Delta
A/Ibom
Abia
Imo
River
Kebbi
Lagos
Kano
Osun
Adamawa
Oyo
Plateau
Sokoto
Niger
Bayelsa
Kogi
Benue
Gombe
Ekiti
Katsina
Bauchi
Yobe
Edo
SE
SE
9.0
8.7
9.7
7.2
6.2
10.7
6.3
6.3
7.3
10.2
9.5
5.5
8.6
7.9
5.4
8.7
4.5
9.0
6.7
6.2
7.4
5.5
4.2
6.3
8.0
5.8
5.5
3.0
6.9
4.0
4.5
10.15
5.95
8.3
14.35
16.75
12.1
16.5
12.25
9.1
12.0
8.85
11.6
7.5
12.0
10.5
9.95
9.05
11.25
9.5
7.75
9.25
10.3
9.0
6.7
3.8
9.75
6.05
6.0
3.0
4.0
3.8
14.0
8.0
9.0
6.0
7.0
9.0
4.25
7.75
9.0
4.5
9.0
8.0
6.0
6.0
10.0
7.0
10.0
0.0
6.0
6.0
2.0
3.5
5.5
1.0
4.0
7.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
3.0
7.0
9.3
6.0
10.55
8.75
6.0
2.3
6.8
7.33
7.8
5.5
5.3
6.8
9.75
5.55
4.0
3.3
4.8
8.05
5.8
4.05
4.8
2.5
4.0
7.2
5.3
3.25
2.75
5.3
4.25
8.5
2.8
42.18
38.65
37.05
36.30
35.95
43.10
33.85
33.20
33.20
32.20
32.16
31.90
31.85
31.45
30.90
28.95
28.35
28.30
28.0
24.0
23.45
21.80
22.7
21.20
21.1
20.80
20.30
20.30
20.15
19.50
18.10
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
7th
8th
9th
10th
11th
12th
13th
14th
15th
16th
17th
18th
19th
20th
21st
22nd
23rd
24th
25th
26th
27th
28th
29th
30th
31st.
NC
SS
NW
NW
SW
SS
SS
SE
SE
SS
NW
SW
NW
SW
NE
SW
NC
NW
NC
SS
NC
NC
NE
SW
NW
NE
NE
SS
40
32.
33.
34.
Taraba
Zamfara
Nasarawa
NE
NW
NC
6.9
4.7
5.6
4.2
4.25
4.7
2.0
2.0
3.0
3.5
3.5
0.8
16.60
14.50
14.10
32nd.
33rd.
34th.
Note: Three States, Borno, Enugu and Ogun are not included due to unavailability of data.
Source: Federal Republic of Nigeria (2008) SEEDS Benchmarking 2008Report (Abuja: National
Planning Commission).
The latest Benchmarking Study on the Performance of SEEDS was undertaken in 2010. The Results
are indicated in table 3 below:
Table 3: SEEDS BENCHMARKING RESULTS 2010
S/N
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
STATE
FCT
Lagos
Ondo
Enugu
Oyo
Ogun
Kaduna
Kwara
Osun
Ekiti
Rivers
Kano
Cross River
Imo
Nasarawa
Delta
Edo
Niger
Plateau
Kogi
Adamawa
Katsina
Benue
Bauchi
Borno
Anambra
Akwa-Ibom
Jigawa
Sokoto
Ebonyi
ZONE
TOTAL SCORE
61.55
57.45
53.55
52.75
52.15
51.45
51.5
48.85
48.85
48.45
48.2
48.0
47.5
46.8
46.7
46.25
46.15
46.0
45.55
45.4
45.15
44.95
44.3
44.25
44.25
44.25
42.75
42.2
41.5
41.15
41
POSITION
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
7th
8th
9th
10th
11th
12th
13th
14th
15th
16th
17th
18th
19th
20th
21st
22nd
23rd
24th
25th
26th
27th
28th
29th
30th
31. Gombe
40.9
32. Yobe
38.15
33. Abia
37.15
34. Taraba
36.05
35. Kebbi
35.8
36. Bayelsa
33.25
37. Zamfara
32.75
Source: Federal Republic of Nigeria (2010) SEEDS Benchmark Report 2010
31st
32nd
33rd
34th
35th
36th
37th
(Abuja: National
Planning Commissio
A comparative analysis of tables 2 and 3 reveals that between 2007 and 2010, ten (10) states
recorded improvement, thirty two (32) states and FCT recorded improved performances on at least
one out of the four (4) benchmarks. Similarly eighteen (18) states show improved performance in
Infrastructure and Utilities, twenty two (22) on Regulatory Services, nine (9) on Business
Development Support and Investment Promotion and only six (6) on Security.
(iv) Assessment of LEEDS
Successful implementation of LEEDS, we aver, will make the greatest impact in Nigeria since
greater proportion of the citizens is concentrated at that grassroots level.
Hence, we
undertook an empirical study of the implementation of LEEDS in 2010.
Methodology
The method adopted for this study was collection of relevant data with the aid of structured and
unstructured interview techniques. The structured interview questions were derived from the
outcome of a 3-day workshop organized by the National Planning Commission (NPC) for the
36 States of the Federation on the framework for joint assessment of SEEDS. These, were
adopted in this study for assessment of LEEDS. Using the purposive sampling procedure,
twelve (12) out of the thirty six (36) States of Nigeria covering the six (6) geo-political zones
were identified. Two (2) states were isolated in each of the six (6) geo-political zones. Within
each of the two (2) states, some local government areas (LGAs) were randomly selected. The
total number of LGAs per State, informed the number selected in that State for the study to
ensure fair distribution.
The field exercise was carried out by three (3), Research Assistants in each of the states isolated for
the study and for a period of eight days in year 2010. Functionaries in each state such as
42
Secretary to the State Government, Head of Civil Service of the State, Honourable
Commissioner in charge of Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs and some Permanent
Secretaries were interviewed using unstructured interview technique designed from the outcome
of the 3-day workshop mentioned earlier. The purpose was to uncover the policy objectives and
direction of the state government with regards to the design and application of SEEDS and
LEEDS. Armed with the emerging information, we approached a subsequent target group, this
time, the local government officials, Community Leaders and Village Heads as well as
beneficiaries of local government services, with structured interview technique. The emerging
data were further explained with the aid of tabular analysis. Table 4 below is a summary of the
areas covered by the study.
Table 4: Local Government Areas covered per State per Geo-Political zone in Nigeria
Geo-Political
Zone
North West
Sample State
1. Kaduna
2. katsina
North East
1. Taraba
2. Gombe
North Central
1. Niger
2. Nasarawa
South West
1. Oyo
2. Ondo
South East
1. Enugu
2. Anambra
South South
1. Cross River
2. Delta
Source: Field Survey, 2010.
Total No.
LGAs
23
34
16
11
25
13
33
18
17
21
18
25
of No. of LGAs % Coverage
Covered
6
26.0
12
35.2
10
62.5
4
36.4
8
32.0
8
61.5
14
42.4
8
44.4
6
33.3
6
28.6
5
27.8
9
36.0
The above table indicates a wider coverage in the North-East Geo-Political zone where 62.5% and
36.4% of LGAs were covered in Taraba and Gombe States respectively. Similar wide coverage is
noticed in Nasarawa State with 61.5% LGAs covered. However, Cross River (27.0%) and Kaduna
(26.0%) States took the rear.
RESULTS
The scope of the survey and results emerging therefrom are arranged in the table below:
43
Table 5: Results from States and Local Government Areas (LGAs)
Geo-Political
Zones
North West
states
1. Kaduna
Local Government Results
Areas
i. Makarfi
i. LEEDS document has not been produced by the Local
ii. Giwa
Government Councils in Kaduna State.
iii. Zaria
iv. Kajuru
ii. The Local Government Councils’ routine and statutory
v. Kagarko
functions are geared towards poverty eradication and
vi. Kachia
improving the standards of living of the rural populace.
Total = 6 LGAs
iii. Centres for continuous education and skills acquisition as
well as centres for nomadic education exist at the local
council level.
2. Katsina
i.
Batagarawa
i. The Local Government Economic Empowerment and
ii. Batsari
Development Strategy (LEEDS) is yet to take off at the
iii. Charanchi
local government level. Although the local government
iv. Danja
councils have their own Poverty Alleviation Programme
v.
which are already adopted as LEEDS.
Daura
vi. Jibia
ii.The development programmes running at the local
vii. Katsina
government level presently have improved the welfare of
viii. Kusado
the people at the grassroot.
ix. Malunfashi
x.
iii. The State’s Economic Empowerment Development
Musawa
Strategy (SEEDS) has greatly reduced the crime rate in
xi. Kankika
the State through the provision of job opportunities for
xii. Rimi
the abled, disabled, youth and adults in the State.
Total = 12 LGAs
iv. Almost all the local government councils have multipurpose/Women Development Centres but they are either
under-utilized or under-developed for the citizens to acquire
qualitative skills.
44
North East
1. Taraba
i.
Zing
i. None of the sixteen (16) LGAs in Taraba State has good
ii. Jalingo
road network thereby hampering transportation of farm
iii. Gassol
produce to the nearby markets. The farmers face the wrath
iv. Lar
of middle men who seized the opportunity to exploit them.
v.
Takum
vi. Ussa
ii. Inaccessibility of the common man to health facilities.
vii. Donga
viii. Ibi
iii. Development projects are highly concentrated at the
ix. Lau
state’s headquarters in Jalingo thereby depriving the
x.
rural communities accessibility to government
KarimLambo
programmes.
Total = 10 LGAs
iv. The SEEDs did not address the problems of
unemployment, job opportunities nor creation of wealth,
which the common man might benefit from.
v. Economic activities at the grassroots were poor and highly
exploitative.
2. Gombe
i. Shongom
i. LEEDS is yet to take off in the State
ii. Biliri
iii. Kwami
iv. Funakaye
ii. There is an appreciable level of awareness of the
government programmes among public officers in the
state.
Total = 4 LGAs
North Central
1. Niger
i.
Minna
ii.
Lapai
i. The major thrust of the SEEDS policy in Niger State is the
revitalization of the economy through people
iii. Bosso
empowerment, provision of basic infrastructure and
iv. Agaie
repositioning of the private sector as the engine of growth
v.
and development with the overall objective of creating
Bida
vi. Gurara
wealth and improving the standard of living of the
vii. GawuBabangid
populace.
a
viii. Shiroro
ii. Empowerment of people was to be achieved through:
(a) empowerment generation in agriculture and other sectors;
45
Total = 8 LGAs
(b) Poverty alleviation through skills acquisition, micro
credit financing and abundant food production; (c)
provision of relevant, qualitative, accessible and
affordable primary health care to the urban poor and rural
dwellers including sustained awareness campaign on
HIV/AIDs scourge; (d) provision of qualitative education;
(e) emphasis on gender issues, adult literacy and youth
development.
2. Nassara
i.
Awe
wa
ii.
Doma
i. Some of the local government areas are aware of the
SEEDS/LEEDS programme.
iii. Wamba
iv. Farin-Ruwa
v.
Akwanga
vi. West Akun
ii. Most of the local government areas however have various
programmes/projects aimed at poverty alleviation and
improving the standard of living of the populace.
vii. Karu
viii. Karshi
iii. Projects like Primary Health Care Centres, construction
and renovation of roads and buildings, renovation of
Total = 8 LGAs
Local Government Secretariat etc, have either been
completed or are ongoing.
South West
1. Oyo
i. OnaAra
ii. Oriire
i. Programmes are at various stages of implementation in the
Local government Areas visited (i.e. SEEDS and LEEDs).
iii. Ibadan
iv. Iseyin
v. Ogbomosho
South
ii. The Local Governments do not have any document on
LEEDS. However, the objectives of LEEDS are being
pursued.
vi. Itesiwaju
vii. Saki East
iii. Lack of awareness about NEEDS/SEEDS. Most of the
viii. Oyo West
state and local government officials have little or no
ix. Atiba
knowledge about SEEDS/LEEDS. However, the
x.
programmes of the Governments are in line with the
Ido
xi. Ibarapa Central
principles of LEEDS.
46
xii. Irepo
xiii. OgoOluwa
xiv. Ori Ire
iv. The Oyo State Government Established Small and
Medium Scale Industries in local communities so as to
discourage Rural-Urban migration and to alleviate
Total = 14 LGAs
2. Ondo
South East
1. Enugu
poverty among the toiling masses.
i.
Owo
i. LEEDS is not in existence in the local government areas of
ii.
Akure South
Ondo State rather, developmental projects were being
iii.
Akure North
implemented by the local governments without reference
iv.
Ose
to the LEEDS programmes.
v.
Ilaje
vi.
Irele
The implication of the above statements is that no local
vii. Odigbo
government council has any LEEDS document in place in
viii. Ose
Ondo State let alone carrying out projects based on its
Total = 8 LGAs
policies.
i.
Ezeagu
i. Local Government Chairmen and their respective
ii.
Nkanu West
iii.
Igbo Etiti
iv.
Uzouwani
- in collecting requests from communities and providing
v.
Oji River
support to communities in project preparations;
vi.
Udi
Community Development Officers (CDOs) assist:
- in ensuring that the requests are in line with the state
Total = 6 LGAs
and local government project plans;
- in sensitizing requests and forwarding them to the CDOs
Secretariat within one week after the CDOs
inaugurations in the respective LGAS;
- in constituting counterpart funds for respective projects;
ii. Unique features of the Community Development (CD)
Strategy are as follows:
- specifically targeted at rural communities (beneficiary
participation);
- communities involved in design and implementation;
47
- communities contribute financially, in kind or labour;
- communities manage and maintain projects on a
sustainable basis;
- projects belong to the community.
iii. funding of CD projects is jointly provided by:
The State Government – 50%
The Local Government – 25%
Communities
- 25%
Communities may also contribute materials and labour.
Among the many communities that have benefitted under
this programme are:
(a) ISU AWAA Community Development Council;
(b) OPATU Town is enjoying electricity
(c) OjebeOgene LGA, Enugu – 30,000 gallons of
concrete water reservoir was constructed
(d) EHA AMUFU – Cottage Hospital.
2. Anambr
a
i. Awka North
ii. DunuKofia
iii. Aguata
i. The State Government is fully aware of SEEDS and
LEEDS but adopted MDGs as its strategic Agenda.
ii. Schools are being renovated and new ones built in order to
iv. Idemilli North
accommodate the upsurge of pupils for the free Universal
v. Ihiala
Basic Education;
iii. Construction of Hospitals and equipping of same is in top
Total = 6 LGAs
gear.
iv. Network of roads is being constructed within the LGAs.
These are however undertaken at the initiative of the
State Government.
48
South South
1. Cross
i. Ogoja
i. The Local Governments have adopted the SEEDS which is
River
ii. Obudu
domesticated as LEEDS. The Local Governments
iii. Calabar south
however have not yet formalized the LEEDS programme
iv. Obubra
due to the process of consultation with intended
v. Ikom
beneficiaries;
ii. The State Government has identified Tourism and
Total = 5 LGAs
Agriculture as the major growth drivers of the economy
and it has begun to vigorously develop these areas;
iii. On Agriculture, major efforts are being made to raise
agriculture from a subsistence level to commercial level
for the generality of the citizens whose main occupation
is farming.
iv. On business enterprise, the government has adopted a
strategic approach of leveraging other sectors of the
economy in the development of the tourism sector.
Worthy of note is the development of a business resort
called TINAPA – an International shopping area with all
sorts of facilities for entertainment, etc.
2. Delta
i.
Warri South
ii. Warri North
i. The SEEDS programme is being implemented in all the
LGAs visited in the three senatorial districts of the State;
iii. Ughelli North
iv. Ughelli South
v.
Bomadi
ii. The State Government links up the numerous
communities through the construction of bridges across
vi. Ukwani
swamps and rivers as a poverty reduction and wealth
vii. Aniocha North
creation strategy;
viii. Patani
ix. Oshimilli
South
iii. The establishment of a Public Complaint Desk by the
State Government rekindled the interest of the populace
in government public performance as it relates to
Total = 9 LGAs
transparency and accountability.
Source: Field Survey, 2010
49
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
1. There is virtually a uniformity of performance across the ninety-six (96) LGAs studied.
2. Whereas in a few states like Delta, Cross River and Anambra, awareness of Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) and States Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy
(SEEDS) instigated a focus in whatever development programmes/projects there were, thus
the domestication of SEEDS to Local Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy
(LEEDS). In most other states, the awareness of the MDGs and SEEDS/LEEDS were still in
a very low ebb.
3. There were dotted developments here and there although outstanding in very few states such
as Cross River through Tourism and Agriculture.
4. In some Northern States such as Taraba and Gombe, lack of awareness has militated against
the adoption of SEEDS/LEEDS thus leading to little, if any, development. In Taraba for
instance, development has been haphazard, often concentrating on the state capital i.e.
Jalingo alone. The same could however not be said about Kaduna, Katsina, Niger and
Nasarawa States where SEEDS has taken firm root.
5. In the South Western States (Oyo and Ondo), although there was absence of documents on
SEEDS/LEEDS,haphazard developments are going on which could be in line with the
principles of LEEDS. For instance, in Oyo State, the government established Small and
Medium Scale Industries in the local communities in order to discourage rural/urban
migratiion, in addition to alleviating poverty.
6. An overall assessment however reveals a far cry from the MDGs and SEEDS/LEEDS targets.
In fact, non of the MDGs was consciously and seriously being addressed hence there were:
glaring poverty all over the place; increase in crime rate largely due to unemployment;
mortality rates due to little attention paid to health related issues; despite so much campaigns
and jingles, cases of HIV/AIDS were in the increase.
50
7. Leadership at the local government and community levels appeared confused with regards to
MDGs’ guided development. There was absence of MDGs offices in virtually all the LGAs
studied hence the minimal development observed were haphazard and at the whims and
caprices of particular leaders. The communities were, in most cases, left to bear the brunt of
developing their communities through self-help efforts.
8. Politicization of developmental issues at the local level and the jurisdictional buck-passing
between the state and local governments gave much room for corrupt tendencies much to the
disadvantage of the communities.
NATIONAL DEVELOPMENTAL AGENDA: AN ASSESSMENT
The inextricable linkage between the Yar`adua’s 7-point Agenda and Jonathan’s Transformation
Agenda is captured within the context of National Developmental Agenda. Adoption of Monitoring
and Evaluation strategy by government institutions and agencies which is referred to as Score-Card,
aided the assessment of progress made so far. This is articulated hereunder on a sector-by-sector basis.
HEALTH SECTOR
With respect to affordable healthcare, the 6 most relevant Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are: life
expectancy
(47.9%);
infant
mortality
rate
(138/1,000);
births/maternal
mortality
rate
(800/100.000);percentage of population with access to affordable essential drugs on a sustainable basis
(80.13%); number of hospital beds per 10,000 (3beds); and percentage of population with National
Health Insurance (NHIS) coverage (3%). It can therefore be concluded that the healthcare targets were
met to a large extent.
EDUCATION SECTOR
The performance of the education sectorbetween 2008 and 2010 period indicates an increase in
primary school enrolment from 18,519,733 to 20,291,709 representing a 9.6% increase. Also, while
there were increases in tertiary education enrolment (polytechnics and universities), there was a
decrease in monotechnics enrolment as a result of decreasing interest in monotechnics and increasing
desire for polytechnics and university education. When the actual value of 2010 is compared with the
2008 baseline value, it can be concluded that only a marginal percentage of the population is accessing
education. For 2009, there is a worrying decrease in the number of enrolment versus number of
51
graduates for that year, for example, 1,079,720 were enrolled into Colleges of Education, while only
66,824 graduated in the same year.
JOB CREATION
There was a decline in the number of jobs createdfrom 200,809 in 2009 to 95,997 in 2010. This is a
serious trend, bearing in mind that the Nigerian population increases annually. The situation is further
compounded by the increase in total man/days lost from 483,530 in 2009 to 593,530 in 2010. This
decline can translate into decreased productivity and eventual decline in economic activities. Up-todate data is required for employment and labour market information and this is not manifest in the
submissions from government Agencies. The Federal Ministry of Labour and Productivity would
need to partner with the private sector for accelerated performance of its set targets by 2013.
INTERNAL SECURITY
With respect to internal security, the Ministry of Police Affairs and its agencies, recorded a marginal
increase in the overall crime rate from 6.67 per 10,000 population in 2009 to 7 per 10,000 population
in 2010. The targets set for 2011-2013were due to the expectation of increase in criminal cases as a
result of the 2011 election. A survey conducted in 2009 by an independent body, “Clean Foundation”
reported that the percentage of respondents who felt safe in their neighborhoods decreased from 90%
in 2009 to 61.10% in 2010. This may be attributed to religious crises in some parts of the country and
bombings also witnessed in some other areas of the country. In addition, the number of criminal cases
successfully prosecuted decreased from 57,695 in 2009 to 24,971 in 2010. The figure however
increased to 40,000 and 35,000 in 2011 and 2012 respectively.
The police response time to
emergencies was 25-30 minutes in 2009 and 2010 in line with the targets set, while the target set for
2011 and 2012 was 25 and 20 minutes respectively. Another achievement of the Ministry was the
commencement of the implementation of the Financial Component of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF)
Reform Programme in 2010.
The Planning Research and Statistics Unit of the NPF was also
developed and managed to sustain the current tempo of information generation.
EXTERNAL SECURITY
On external security, the level of engagement in international fora by the Ministry of Defence
improved remarkably as Nigeria was the 4th World’s ranking contributor to peace support operations
in 2010. The survey to determine the public confidence in the military is yet to be carried out but is
52
being noted for future attention. Other Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to measure the percentage
mobilization within timing requirement and armament incidents could not be obtained as they were
regarded as classified information. Other notable achievements of the Ministry in 2010 include the
ability to meet international obligations to peace operations, assisting internal security with military
aids and improved interoperationability in joint operation exercises.
INFRASTRUCTURE
For quality infrastructure, the available power supply generated increased from 3.700 Maga Watt
(MW) in 2009 to 4000 MW in 2010. This was achieved through rehabilitation of existing assets.
Although there was an increase, it fell short of the 8,000 MW target for 2010. The percentage of
power generated capacity utilization also rose from 78.4% in 2009 to 82% in 2010 thus signifying a
reduction in transmission loss. The reduction was as a result of increase in power transmission
capacity following the construction of transmission lines and procurement of transformers.
TRANSPORTATION
With respect to transportation, the total stock of roads in good condition was put at thirty percent
(30%) in 2009. As at the end of 2010, this only increased by 1%, making total number of roads in
good condition to be only 31%. This fell short of the 12% target for recovery of bad roads in 2010.
In the rail sector, about 28.8% of the existing 3,500 railway lines have been rehabilitated. The
rehabilitaed lines increased by 632km that is, from 378km in 2009 to 1,010km in 2010. In this
regard, the rehabilitation of the km 0 – km 488 (Lagos – Jebba) narrow gauge rail line as well as
82% of km 488 – km 1125 (Jebba – Kano) narrow gauge rail line were completed. In the Air
transport sector, available information showed that passenger traffic grew from 12,553,438 persons
in 2009 to 13,720,000 in 2010. Aircraft traffic also witnessed a growth from 220,625 aircrafts in
2009 to 241,373 in 2010. There was also increase in air freight tonnage which grew from 170,282
tonnes in 2009 to 178,306 tonnes in 2010. However, incidents of air disasters/crashes belie the
efforts made in this direction.
WOMEN AFFAIRS
A lot was achieved in the women affairsKPls, especially in the areas of political awareness of
women and support for women aspirants towards the 2011 Nigeria general election, such as creating
a database of women political aspirants and setting up a women political trust fund. Government’s
53
intervention activities saw marked improvement in gender mainstreaming between 2007 and 2010 as
the percentage of women in the Senate and House of Representatives respectively, increased from
3.1% to 7.5%. Also the percentage of women in the State Houses of Assembly increased from 9.6%
to 14.0% and the number of women as Deputy Governors increased from 2 to 6. More women
sought Senatorial (from 5 to 11) and Gubernatorial (from 3 to 6) positions in 2010. The implications
of these were increased proportion of women occupying decision making positions in Nigeria and
the progress made towards achieving the MDGs target by 2015.
(Note: The figures used in the foregoing analyses were computed from the Records of various
Ministries and Agencies that are driving the sectors).
ASSESSMENT OF THE ACHIEVEMENT OF THE MDGs IN NIGERIA
In spite of the foregoing efforts, verdict on Nigeria’s performance towards the MDGs is returned by
two umpires:
(i)
The Federal Government: The Federal Government set up a Presidential Committee to
monitor and assess the country’s performance on MDGs. An assessment of year 2008
and 2013 respectively is undertaken as follows:
(ii)
(a) In year 2008, the Committee returned a verdict referred to as “Nigeria MDGs Report
Card”. This is displayed in table 6below:
Table 6:
Summary of Nigeria’s MDGs Report Card, 2008
S/N
GOALS
VERDICT
1.
Eradicate Extreme Poverty
Current efforts need to be intensified if Nigeria is to achieve the target by
and Hunger
2015
Achieve Universal Primary
UBE has achieved marked improvement but needs to accelerate action
Education (UBE)
towards completion rates and gender equality.
2.
There should be
improvement in quality learning outcomes to achieve the goal by 2015.
3.
Promote Gender Equality
Girls and Women missed 2005 gender parity target. Concrete steps and
and Empower Women
democratic processes of the country should be undertaken to reverse the
54
trend.
4.
Reduce Child Mortality
Unacceptable rates of child mortality prevail and are preventable. Urgent
actions are required by all tiers of government to put Nigeria back on track.
5.
Improve Maternal Health
Maternal mortality is now a national emergency; current rates are
unacceptable and must be reversed, so says Mr. President.
6.
Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria Scaled up efforts are required to sustain gains made to achieve the targets.
and other Diseases
7.
8.
Ensure Environmental
On-going concerted efforts to be enhanced towards attaining the
Sustainability
environmental sustainability target by 2015.
Develop a Global
Global Partnerships showed marked improvement with genuine efforts to
Partnership for
assist Nigeria in its quest for Debt Relief. There is need for substantial and
Development
urgent scaling up of development assistance to finance the MDGs.
Source: Federal Government of Nigeria, Millennium Development Goals (MDGs, Information Kit,
2009). Federal Ministry of National Planning, Abuja.
(b)
The Committee’s Report of 2013 indicated hereunder, is the 6th in the series of such reports
since year 2004:
Table 7: Summary of Nigeria’s MDGs Report Card, 2013
S/N
GOALS
VERDICT
1.
Eradicate Extreme Poverty
Progress here has been low with regards to the target of halving the USD 1
and Hunger
a day poverty prevalence. With poverty at 62.60%, it is not likely that the
2015 target of 21.40% will be met.
2.
Achieve Universal Primary
Nigeria is on track to meet the 2015 targets. The country has achieved at
Education
least 80.0% in all the three indicators-net enrolment rate, gross enrolment
rate and primary six completion rate.
Both the federal and state
governments are currently intensifying collaborative efforts to promote
access to basic education through targeted local interventions for
enhancing primary school enrolment and retention.
3.
Promote Gender Equality The trends and status (ratio of girls to boys in primary enrolment – 90.0%)
55
and Empower Women
indicate that the country is on track to achieving gender parity in primary
and secondary enrolment by 2015.
4.
Reduce Child Mortality
At 61 deaths per 1000 live births, infant mortality lags behind the 2015
target of 30.3 per 1000 live births. Similarly, at 94 deaths per 1000 live
births in 2012, the under-five mortality rate (USMR) lags behind the 2015
target of 63.7 per 1000 live births.
5.
Improve Maternal Health
The maternal mortality rates is 350 per 100,000 live births against the
target of 250 per, 100,000 live births. The proportion of births attended by
skilled health personnel is currently 53.60% as against the target of 100.0%
and antenatal care coverage (at least one visit) is currently 67.70%.
6.
Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria At the national level, HIV/AIDS prevalence has stabilized at around
and other Diseases
4.10%. Infact the country has begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS
although there are gender disparities and large variations in prevalence
rates across states.
 The Ebola Scare of 2014 that claimed a few lives in Nigeria has been
effectively curtailed and stamped out while it is still ravaging countries
like Sierra-Leone, Liberia and Guinea. Kudos to the Federal Ministry
of Health in particular and the Jonathan’s Administration in general.
7.
Ensure Environmental
At 57.40% Nigeria falls short of the 2015 target of 77.0% on access to
Sustainability
clean water. Access to improved sanitation, currently at 33.70% against
the 2015 target of 70.0% remains a significant challenge. Similarly, about
42.60% of Nigerians had access to improved toilets/latrine facilitates in
2010, as against the 2015 target of 70.0%.
Deforestation and Gas flaring continue to pose major risks to
environmental sustainability as does the growing urban slum population.
8.
Develop a Global
Official Development Assistance (ODA) per capita has doubled since the
Partnership for
early 2000s. Debt service as a proportion of exports of goods and services
Development
has declined remarkably from over 10.0% in the early 2000s to 0.39% in
2011. Nigeria’s progress in accessing information and communication
technology has been phenomenal.
56
The growth in cellular phone
subscribers per 100 persons has been globally outstanding and teledensity
has increased sharply to the current high of 68.49%
Source: Federal Government of Nigeria (2014) “Nigeria 2013 MDGs Report” (Abuja: National
Planning Commission).
** Statementon Ebola Scourge is mine.
Table 7 reveals that:
(a) Nigeria is not likely to meet the 2015 target with regards to MDGs 1 (Eradicate Extreme
Poverty and Hunger) and 7 (Ensure Environmental Sustainability);
(b) Nigeria is likely to meet the 2015 target in Goals 2 (Achieve Universal Primary Education), 5
(Improve Maternal Health), and 8 (Develop a Global Partnership for Development); and
(c) Although the Country is not likely to meet the 2015 target with regards to Goals 3 (Promote
Gender Equality and Empower Women), 4 (Reduce Child Mortality) and 6 (Combat
HIV/AIDS, Malaria and Other Diseases) remarkably progress was made in that direction.
(iii)
Assessment by Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
In its own assessment undertaken under the aegis of Civil Society in year 2009, the nongovernmental organizations returned a verdict titled: “Civil Society Score-Card,” which
we articulate hereunder:
(a) 53.6% of Nigerians are still living in abject poverty;
(b) 8 Million school-aged children are not in school;
(c) Over 43% of Nigerians cannot read or write (60% are women);
(d) One out of 100 Nigerian Children die before the age of five;
(e) 704 out of 100,000 Nigerian women die during child birth;
(f) 75 Million people in Nigeria have at least one episode of malaria annually; and
(g) 72 Million Nigerians have no access to safe drinking water;
Source:
This Day Newspaper, Wednesday August 1, 2009.
57
(iv)
A corroboration of the foregoing was made by Professor Ibrahim Gambari on
17thJanuary, 2014 thus:
-
68% of Nigerians live below the poverty line of less than $1.25 as defined by UNDP and
World Bank, in terms of income poverty;
-
The multidimensional poverty headcount is at 54%, the difference between the income and
multidimensional poverty, being non-income related resources available to Nigerians in the
latter category; (As you know we Nigerians know how to manage our wahala with the
support of friends and family);
-
143 out of 1000 Nigerians die before the age of 5 years old;
-
Maternal mortality ratio is 630 – meaning 630 women out of 100,000 die at child birth;
-
Adult literacy is at 61% and only 51% of school aged Nigerians, (that is from primary
school to tertiary institutions) are enrolled;
-
Primary school enrolment dropped from 103% in 2005 to 83% in 2010 (primary school
enrolment data can be higher than 100% due to enrolment to primary school);
-
The primary school situation is alarming because if Nigeria continues on this course, the
literacy level would even drop further in the coming years due to the drop of enrolment in
primary school;
-
All these put Nigeria at 153 among countries on the HDI at 0.471, the higest since the HDI
was introduced in 1990 and lower than the Sub-Saharan Africa average of 0.475;
-
Thus, with all our wealth, Nigeria belongs to the low human development category where
its 2012 HDI (0.471) is higher than the global average value of that category of 0.466, but
lower as noted than the Sub-Saharan Africa average;
-
Nigeria is ranked 16th on the Fund forPeace Index of Failed States with 5-year trend
showing that the situation is deteriorating; and
-
Transparency International ranks Nigeria 144 (out of 175) on its 2013 corruption index.
(Gambari, 2014: 13-14).
(v)
An umpire – The Food and Agricultural Organization, an agency of the United Nations
Organizations through its Director-General – Mr. Graziano da Silva made a pronouncement
precisely in June, 2013 to the effect that 38 countries have already met internationally –set
hunger eradication targets set for 2015 to halve the percentage of hungry people. According
58
to him, these countries have met part of the first MDG (i.e. Goal No. I) which calls on
member states to halve by 2015 the proportion of people who suffer from hunger. Mr. ViceChancellor Sir, Nigeria, along with seven (7) other African countries (Algeria; Angola;
Benin; Cameroon; Malawi; Niger; and Togo) made the list (Source: United Nations News
Centre, http://www. Un.org/apps/news/story.asp//reallife/html/story.asp).
(v) A rather conflicting pronouncement was made precisely on Tuesday, 12th November, 2013 by the
World Bank’s (another United Nations Agency) CountryDirector for Nigeria-Francoise
Marie-Nelly at the bank’s Country Programme Review (Portfolio Review) in Enugu.
According to her, “1.2 billion people live in destitution out of which 100 million are
Nigerians”. (AmaefuleEveresty, 2013:32).
(vi)
It will be recalled that in September 2010, the world gathered in New York for the United
Nations Special Review Summit on the Millennium Development Goals (also known as the
MDGs +10 summit).The Nigerian government and the civil society were strongly
represented. Reports emerging from that event indicated that the country was on track to
achieve most of the goals. Whereas significant improvement was indicated with regards to
MDGs 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 relating to universal primary education, gender and women’s
empowerment, reducing child mortality, combating HIV/AIDS and other diseases; and global
partnership for developments,the same could not be said of goals 1, 5 and 7 which indicated a
poor performance with regards to reduction of extreme poverty and hunger, maternal health
and environmental sustainability, which, ofcourse, agrees with our observation on table 7
earlier referred to..
In addition, TijalBaltonAkpan (2011: 16)observes that in the past few years, we have seen growth in
Gross Domestic Product, but this has not been accompanied by any significant development
outcomes for the majority of Nigerians. He emphasizes that jobs are critical to poverty
reduction but they cannot be created in aneconomy that lacks the critical infrastructure to
support business.
In year 2014, Nigeria’s Honourable Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy
Dr. (Mrs.) NgoziOkonjo-Iweala raised Nigeria’s hopes and optimism when she pronounced
59
precisely during the Democracy Day Celebration that the Nigerian economy is the fastest growing
economy in the world. She supported the position with the following statistics:
(i) At 6.5 percent growth rate, the economy is the fastest in the world;
(ii) The exchange rate has stablised at between N155 and N160 to the dollar;
(iii) Inflation which was 12.4 percent in 2011 is now 9 percent;
(iv) The external reserve which was $32 billion in 2012 is now (2014) $50 billion;
(v) Over $75 billion debt was paid off this year (2014).
Soon after this pronouncement, the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) through its President, Comrade
Abdulwahed Omar in a communiqué issued at the end of its National Executive Committee (NEC)
meeting countered the claims. He stated:
“Although the economy is said to have recorded a growth rate of about 7 percent, it has
created few or no job; leading to an all-time high unemployment records. Whereas official
figures put unemployment at 24 percent, there are indicators to believe that the actual
estimate could be as high as 60 percent or higher. Nearly all our employable youths remain
unemployed constituting a veritable army of the hungry, disillusioned and angry with great
potential for undermining the peace and security of the nation”.
The foregoingshowcase both conflicting and not too impressive reports particularly as it relates to
Goal No. I.For instance, in September 2010, the report was a poor performance; in June, 2013, FAO
pronounced that Nigeria had met internationally-set hunger eradication targets; in the same year,
November 2013, the World Bank pronounced Nigeria as housing 100million destitutes. Of all the 8
goals, destitution is mostly related to goal No. I.
If indeed, out of a population of about 160 million, 100 million, representing 62.5% are destitutes, it
clearly shows that nearly 15 years afterinstitutionalizingthe MDGs as a policy guide, the situation
remains a far cry from the set target on this goal (No. 1). And in May, 2014 Nigeria’s Coordinating
Minister for the Economy raised the hopes of Nigerians with regards to improved economy, only to
be countered by the NLC President. Interestingly both of them brandished statistics to support the
conflicting claims.
60
Mr. Vice-Chancellor Sir, these conflicting stories, controversies and contradictions constitute a
stimulant for an empirical study. In response, we undertook a pilot study. This study was made
possible by Dr.(Mrs.)NnekaChibogwu,the NOUN Centre Director,Awka, who enabled me regain
the confidence i lost in my home state due to security challenges. The study was conducted in 8
villages that make up the Ojoto town in Anambra State. The villages are: (i) Ezieke; (ii) Umuchem
(iii) Ire; (iv) Enugo; (v) Indiabo; (vi) Ezema; (vii) Umuezema; and (viii)Ojo And the study further
strengthened our testing instrument by guaranteeing its validity and reliability. The outcome of this
pilot study has instigated another study that will encompass the 6 geo-political zones in Nigeria. The
focus this time will be MDG No. I on eradication of extreme poverty and hunger.The study will
however be enhanced where and when a Research Grant is secured.
9.0
CHALLENGES
Remote and immediate challenges to the quest for development in Nigeria could be
categorized as follows:
9.1
Political Instability
Experience has shown that political instability in whatever form it occurs either on
account of leadership tussle or frequent changes in government and the like,unleashes
disastrousconsequences on the citizenry. What meaningful development one may
ask, has Borno State in particular witnessed in the last three (3) years? Simply put,
the distractive tendencies of these unfortunate occurrences are enormous as resources
that would have been channeled for developmental purposes are diverted for
curtailing disturbances arising from such instability.
As of today, our political
leadership is tired of observing ‘one minute silence’ because it has become one, too
many. Yet, the killings, bombings etc. continue. Infact the situation has degenerated
to a full-scale war. The Nigerian Civil War of the 1960’s and its aftermath is not
easily forgotten. Who are normally the victims of this state of affairs? - the citizens.
What is more annoying is that once, the situation gets out of hand, the political
gladiators and their families escape abroad in quest of “imaginarya medical checkup”.
General T. Y. Danjuma once stated that no country in history witnessed
twocivilwars and remained intact.
61
9.2
Policy Inconsistencies and Summersaults
Professor Gambari’s observation in this direction is instructive thus:
“Nigeria’s development efforts have over the years been characterized by lack
of continuity, consistency and commitment (3Cs) to agreed policies,
programmes and projects as well as an absence of a long-term perspective.
The culminating effect has been growth and development of the Nigerian
Economy without a concomitant improvement in the overall welfare of
Nigerian citizens”.
We therefore posit that policy enunciation and implementation is a sine quanon for
any government which is desirousof protecting the interests of its citizens.
Observableand envisaged challenges in this direction in Nigeria are articulated below:
(a) Enunciation of policies at the strategic level in accordance with political party
agenda as articulated in the party’s manifesto is sometimes bedeviled by
distortions on account of selfish interests and corrupt tendencies – the result is,
policy implementation that may not serve the public interest. This was very
evident during the numerous years of military administration.
(b) Akin to (a) above, is conflict or disagreement among members of the political
class with regards to policy priority. At the centre stage of this controversy are
the executive and the legislature in the passing of bills (by the legislature) and
vetoing of such bills (by the Executive). Although this is one of the common
features of the democratic process, they would be reduced to their barest
minimum if the political class could close ranks and get their priorities right.
(c) The non-involvement of relevant stakeholders, particularly the eventual
beneficiaries of a given policy, at the initiation and formulation stages, is a
62
common feature.
The result is often the rejection of such policies by the
stakeholders particularly at the implementation stage.
(d) It is one thing to enunciate a policy and another thing entirely to adequately
implement such a policy. A lot of things go wrong at the overlapping and
dovetailing points of policy formulation and policy implementation. Perhaps a
neater arrangement of where one stops and the other starts along the continuum
would provide the much-needed succour. The point being made is that members
of the political class hardly allow the career officials and professionals to fully
implement enunciated policies.
Too many political interferences end up
detracting from the achievement of policy objectives.
(e) The too many political hangers-on who cluster around each member of the
political class are, sometimes, for want of something to do, inadvertently assigned
policy implementation tasks for which they do not possess the required
professional and technical competences and/or administrative experience.The
result is poor or haphazard implementation of polices, programmes and projects.
(f) It is a truism that the bureaucratic class should provide adequate information and
advice to the political class based on technical competence and professional
experience. It is, however, a common knowledge that most members of the
political class hardly accept this information and/or advice. Yet, the same career
officials are usually blamed for failures in policy implementation.
(g) Disruption and distortion of ongoing policy implementation following changes in
government remain the bane of the developmental process in Nigeria. In addition,
non-adherence to provisions of the budget, which is regarded worldwide as a
“policy implementation control mechanism”, has often been referred to as
“budget indiscipline” which subverts the policy implementation process. Hence,
cases of either abandoned or uncompleted projects have become a common
phenomenon in Nigeria.
63
To redress the situation, the present government in Nigeria has recently established a Policy
Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Agency. This is located in the Presidency with a
clear mandate to strictly monitor and report back on the implementation of all government
policies, programmes and projects.
This is with a view to modifying, adjusting,
discontinuing or reversing such policies, programmes, and projects as appropriate. This, we
see as a sure way forward.
9.3
Bureaucratization
One of the examination questions I was confronted with in my Master of Public
Administration (MPA) Degree Programme class at the University of Lagos many
years ago was: “Bureaucracy is dead.Whatit requires is a decent Burial, Discuss”
(Professor S. O. Olugbemi). Our beloved Professor consequently left the class with
the task of identifying an equally befitting cemetery for such a celebrated burial. The
consequences of the ills of bureaucracy may have led Professor Olugbemi to draw
such a conclusion. The students of Public Administration ought to have discovered
that the Western-brand of bureaucracy otherwise, referred to as the Weberian model
is being referred to here, yet, it remains a sumountable obstacle to our quest. About
this concept, P.N.C. Okigbo has this to say:
“Bureaucracy exists everywhere in the Civil and Public Service as well as in the
large organized private sector. Derived from the French word “Bureau”
meaning a writing table. It was indeed coined in the 19th century by the
French encyclopedists as a term of contempt.
Today, it retains the
perjorativeflavour and is flung at the civil service to denote a slow, clumsy,
inefficient and cumbersome machine that grinds down every decision,
obstructs action and perverts policy (Okigbo, 1986: 6).
By the foregoing, Okigbo attempts to expose the ills of bureaucracy with regards to its
applicability in the Nigerian Mileau. Administrators who occupy Policy implementation and
Decision-implementation positions in Government establishments cash-in on this weakness
to scuttle efforts directed at development as defined by this lecture. Hence, despite the
apparently perceived neat arrangement for an efficient and effective organization as provided
64
by the Weberian Model of Bureaucracy, it serves a negative purpose. In fact, an exposure of
the negative tendencies of bureaucracy emerged following the lack of positive
correlationship between the mental construct of Weber and practical realities as discovered
through other studies. As explained elsewhere, interpersonal relationship among officials in a
bureaucratic set-up, most of the time, resultin conflicts and inability to effectively pursue and
achieve organizational objectives owing to influences of bureaucratic principles.
For
instance, Hicks and Gullet (1982: 144-152) x-ray the ills of bureaucracy as they affect formal
organizations and said they were possible causes of inability of superior
officers to
appreciate contributions made by their subordinates, especially where such contributions are
seen as innovative and hence do not strictly accord with role expectations of the
subordinates. According to the authors, “Formal organizations may have built into their
designs the seeds for many non-productive, dysfunctional, energy-consuming activities at all
levels which tend to result in organizational rigidity, organizational defensiveness, and
intergroup conflict, as well as less effective decision-making process.
Rigidity, as highlighted by Hicks and Gullet, appears to be one of the most dysfunctional
elements of bureaucracy. Here, it is seen as non-adaptive and thus is in conflict with the
basic adaptability laws of nature. It leads to strict adherence to regulations which, in the
author’s words, produces ‘timidity’, ‘conservatism’ and ‘technicism’. In an earlier work,
Downs (1967: 100) explained that superior officers resort to being rigid in a bureaucratic setup for fear of loosing power, prestige and their income. This is because, they occupy
positions in which decisions can prove to be wrong, unpopular or both. Superior officers in
such bureaucratic organizations, therefore, tend to be avoiders who try to escape
responsibility for making decisions. However, since it is inevitable that they make decisions,
they resort to rigidly applying the rules of procedure promulgated by higher authorities.
Many superior officers generally eschew even the slightest deviation from written procedures
unless they obtain approval from higher authority. Thus, rigid and strict adherence to rules
and regulations becomes a shield that protects officers from being blamed for their mistakes
by the authority. This attitude of rigidity and its attendant problems, which include delays in
obtaining official rulings for unusual situations, leads to stereotyped conditions which Downs
refers to as ‘bureaucratic mentality’ and ‘red tape’.
65
The rigidity in roles occasioned by strict adherence to rules and regulations often creates a
situation where officers perform their jobs without any emotional attachment, particularly
where subordinates come up with official problems. This is another ill of bureaucratic
organizations highlighted by Hicks and Gullet and referred to by Thompson (1975; 3-23) as
“impersonality” in the performance of official responsibilities. In fact, Thompson in his
earlier book, Modern Organisation, (1961:152-177), referred to the ills of bureaucratic
organisation as “bureaupathology”, a disease of bureaucracy which he further suggested are
those dysfunctions which are produced by “bureaupathicbehaviour”.
However, the central
theme of his later book “WithoutSympathy or Enthusiasm”, is the impersonality of the
modern complex bureaucratic organization and the search for objectivity at the
administrative level in the process of decision-making.
In that book, Thompson explains the cause of a personal promise made to an individual,
which was not fulfilled. The question that emerged therefrom is whether institutions could
make and honour personal promises made on their behalf by employees. This stimulated the
most widely distributed and deeply held sociological theory of bureaucracy, the notion that
bureaucrats invest the means of administration with more value than they do the ends – the
“inversion of means and ends” or the “displacement of goals”. Administration has therefore
been defined as the triumph of technique over purpose or objectives. Here, therefore, is the
critical dilemma of an individual who has a personal problem to be resolved by bureaucratic
organization, yet the organization is lost in a complex maze of rules and regulations that
prescribe processes and procedures for arriving at a particular decision, albeit, without
sympathy or empathy, just because the bureaucratic organization is consistently striving to
maintain objectivity and impersonality in its quest for rational decision-making.
It is sometimes argued that a number of similar demands are made on the system and, in
consequence, administrators are likely to attract blame by taking a decision that will
eventually not satisfy the particularistic or personal criteria and personal values. As a result,
they end up being blamed by all concerned for lack of needed particularistic attachment.
Thompson however insists that the impersonal, objective, institutional approach to action,
while demanded by the norms of an industrial society, is somewhat at war with the basic
socio-psychological needs of individuals, most of who have been socialized in primary
66
groups where personal loyalty and action are stressed. Hence, issues requiring attention by
subordinate officers should be attended to.
In summing up the above arguments, Hicks and Gullet posit that bureaucracy has many
unintended consequences or dysfunctions. They further describe bureaucracy as a “machine
model” that is non-adaptive and impersonal. Its rigidity, they opine, leads to its failure to
account adequately for many important human characteristics. They contend that it offers
numerous opportunities for members to displace objectives and to work for personal or
subunit goals, which may not contribute adequately to the overall objectives of the
organization. In their views, bureaucratic officials see innovative ideas as disturbances to an
otherwise ordered situation. Such ideas are therefore never seen as necessary life giving
elements to an evolving, adaptive organization.
These dysfunctional tendencies of bureaucracy as x-rayed in the foregoing constitute
stumbling blocks to the quest of development.
9.4
Corruption
Most scholars and public commentators on the Instrument of Governance (the Nigeria Public
Service) agree that corruption and abuse of office by political office holders are fallout of the
breakdown of moral values and ethical standards in the country. Corruption has also been
identified as one of the major problems confronting the nation today. The Guardian of
March 1, 1999 puts it this way: “Corruption is largely responsible for the seeming collapse
of everything we hold dear”. Public offices are now seen as avenues for self-enrichment
rather than service. Words like ‘Kola’, ‘upfront payment’, ‘brown envelope’, ‘settlement’,
‘roger’, ‘Nigerian factor’, etc., have been added to our infamous national vocabulary. Public
officers now gleefully tell anyone who cares to listen that “na where man dey work nathere
himdey chop’. Important public institutions and parastatals like PHCN (defunct) NNPC,
WAEC, JAMB, the Police, the Universities, etc., have all collapsed because of the pervasive
nature of corruption in our public service.
Nigeria has gradually become a country where no service could be rendered without money
exchanging hands. Thank God, they have not started demanding money for the air we
67
breathe. The fact that a public officer is paid monthly to render services to the public does
not make any impression on him/her. You will be told in no unmistakable language that
“you either find something for the boys or look elsewhere for services’. Even when you
summon enough courage to report such acts of indiscretion to a higher authority, you are
likely to be advised, “for your own good and in order to save time, you had better comply
with whatever request that is being made of you”. The effects of this complete breakdown of
morality in the system on both the citizenry and the society at large are better imagined. For
proponents of humanism and for those who pride themselves as custodians of the African
culture, of being one’s brothers’ keeper, such themes have no place in the decadent Nigerian
public service.
The system has brought out the bestial underpinnings of the human nature. There is a
deliberate attempt by everybody to outdo the next person in corrupt practices.
If you
proclaim righteousness or holiness as a public officer, you stand a chance of becoming an
endangeredspecie. The more daring and innovative you are in this vice, i.e. corruption, the
more you earn public recognition through chieftaincy titles, honourary doctorate degrees
while many women queue up to join your harem. The economic effect on the country is even
more far-reaching. Nigerians the world over are regarded as dubious people and scam artists.
Holders of the green – white –green passports are often and routinely humiliated at different
airports of the world. Even respected people in our country are not exempted from the
discriminatory search often conducted on our nationals at different capitals of the world.
Businessmen are afraid to bring funds to Nigeria because of the monstrous system we have
created. This picture is vividly portrayed in the Guardian of March 18, 1999 in the following
words: “visiting foreigners are openly asked for bribe in the nation’s ports”. Year after year,
Nigeria is listed as one of the most corrupt nations in the world. Not too long ago, the former
President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, made the following
pronouncement:
Public offices are the shopping floors of government business.
Regrettably,
Nigerians have for too long been feeling shortchanged by the quality of
service delivery by which decisions are not made without undue outside
68
influence, and files do not move without being pushed with inducements.
Our public offices have for too long been showcases for the combined evils
of inefficiency and corruption, whilst being impediments to effective
implementation of government policies. Nigerians deserve better. And we
will ensure that they get what is better. (Part of an Address presented by
Mr. President while inaugurating the National Assembly in June, 2003).
The scenario is better demonstrated via the report of Transparency International as displayed
in the table below.
Table 8: TI’s Corruption Perception Index Ranking of Nigeria (1996-2009)
Year
Rank out of a No. of Countries
1996
54 out of 54
1997
52 out of 52
1998
81 out of 85
1999
98 out of 99
2000
90 out of 90
2001
90 out of 91
2002
101 out of 102
2003
132 out of 133
2004
144 out of 146
2005
152 out of 158
2006
150 out of 163
2007
-
2008
121 out of 180
2009
130 out of 180
Source: Compiled from the Annual Corruption perception index of Transparency International.
This Day Newspaper (Online), November, 2009.
Mr. Vice-Chancellor Sir,from the above table, it is clear that for over 11 years (1996-2006),
Nigeria was adjudged the most corrupt nation on earth thrice, 1996, 1997 and 2000; and was ranked
last but one, four times, in 1999, 2001, 2002, and 2003. There is hardly any other country that has
69
such a dismal showing so consistently. There is no doubt that corruption (and fraud) is a huge
incremental or unbudgeted cost of doing business in Nigeria. Because it imposes an ethical (moral)
dilemma on the investor, this in itself is a disincentive to business and development, it poses a
culture shock to many foreign investors (Okojie, 2008). The latest ranking (2013) however puts
Nigeria at 144th out of 175 countries which ofcourse is an improvement, at least Nigeria has been
able to overtake about 30 countries.
A World Bank Survey identified specifically the level of corruption in some organizations in
Nigeriawhich we display in table 9below:
Table9: ComparativeAssessments of Levels of Corruption in Nigerian Institutions (Scale 1-5)
Institution/Agency
Rank
2004
2005
2006
4.9
Police
1
4.8
4.7
Political Parties
2
4.5
4.5
4.5
Customs
3
4.0
4.2
4.2
Legislature
4
4.2
4.1
4.1
Education
5
3.8
3.8
4.3
Judiciary
6
3.8
3.8 4.1
Military
7
3.9
3.8 3.7
Utilities (PHCN, etc)
8
3.5
3.6 3.8
Tax Revenue
9
3.8
3.6 3.5
Business/Private sector
10
3.4
3.2
3.7
Registry &licensing (CAC, etc)
11
3.3
3.1
3.3
Medical Services
12
3.1
3.0
3.4
Media
13
3.0
2.8
3.2
NGOs
14
2.7
2.5
3.0
Religious Bodies15
2.4
2.3
3.0
Source: Compiled from World Bank Governance and Integrity Study (2004-2006).
Table 9 above shows that on a scale of 1-5 with 5 representing extreme or total corruption and 1
signifying minimal or low level of corruption, government departments and agencies led by the
70
Nigeria Police were consistently ranked the most corrupt, with the police on an average score of 4.8
over the three-year survey period. Furthermore, it is disheartening to note that for 2006, none of the
organizations in the survey received a score less than 3, even for religious bodies. This is how
despicable and corrupt we have become as a nation (Okojie, 2008).
Mr. Vice-Chancellor Sir, the question thrown-up earlier is still hunting us, and that is what has
public administration got to do with all these? If we may recall, Nigeria was governed by a certain
gentleman, General Yakubu Gowon (RTD) at the most trying period (1966 – 1975) of her chaquered
history. General Gowon’s “body language” then earned some interpretations. One of the public
administration experts Dr. M.J. Balogun referred to the practice then as the era of Administocracy.
It was commonly referred to as the era of “Super Permanent Secretaries”. It was an era when the
government recognized and related with the career or professional Administrators over and above
their political bosses. Recalling an interesting scenario here, may be fit and proper. Augustus
Adebayo recounted:
“The Supreme Military Council with all its ‘supremeness’ could not change policy
formulated by a Permanent Secretary and already agreed with the Head of State. It is
the awareness of the influence of Permanent Secretary over policy or decision-making
that made Military Governors during Gowon’s regime leave their domain and spendthe
evening with some of the Permanent Secretariesat their residences at Ikoyi, lobbying for
their support over matters that might in due course come before the Supreme Military
Council, the Federal Executive Council or even directly before the Head of State
(Adebayo 1981: 85-86).
The point being made is that at a time in the evolution of Nigeria, the higher civil servantsPermanent Secretaries did not only take their seats as members of the highest policy or decision
making body but even made policy statements because they were more relied upon by the Gowon’s
administration.About this, we noted elsewhere:
“That Gowon’s Administration relied almost entirely on the higher civil servants was
not a mere coincidence, but a determination to survive in that onerous responsibility.
That this crop of civil servants rose up to the challenge and acquitted themselves
71
creditably may have motivated Gowon’s Administration to hang on to the civil servants
even after that administration had fully settled down. The civil service should therefore
share the credit of assisting in keeping the country united, stronger and more developed
infrastructurally (Maduabum, 2001: 119).
10.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Vice-Chancellor Sir,distinguished ladies and gentlemen,permit me to submit here that,
the political will to confront these challenges head-on is a desideratum if any progress will
be made in this direction. The question is, how can we do this? What with the pervasiveness
andubiquitousness of the recasitrant, cantankerous, cacophonic, unrepentant political bosses
who require immense psychological study to understand how to deal with them lest one is
caught-up in the web of “if you can’t beat them, you join them”. Resisting the temptation of
doing a journal Article titled:
“Dilemma of the Chief Executive” is equally highly
challenging to me due to my closeness with various chief executives I had the providence to
work with at one time or the other. If we take the education sector for instance, where
leaders of yesterday, today and tomorrow are moulded, the main drivers of the school system
continuously receive batterings and ill treatments of all sorts, such that PNC Okigbo (1992)
once stated that “the disdain, with which the society treats the teachers, reduces teachers at
all levels to self pity”.
When a renownedProfessor at the University of Nigeria Nsukka, offered me Banana and
Groundnut as lunch after travelling all the way from Badagry, Lagos, to meet him at
Nsukka for an official assignment, I needed no other suit-sayer to convince me that this
categoric group of supposedly top class Nigerians are, indeed, very poor. What is more, the
Professor was proudly announcing to his bewildered visitor that what I met him eating was
his normal lunch and in the office too. And,of course, his rickety504 peogueotsaloon car was
parked outside the office at an age when even 505peogueotsaloon car was no longer in
vogue. After all, didn’t Professor AttahiruJega, then ASUU President, of the “September 3,
1992 Agreement” fame prove to the whole world after an academically sound comparative
analysis that the University Professor or Lecturer in Nigeria was the least paid in the world?
We must not forget that while a professor is having a lunch of banana and groundnut in his
office, a legislator who probably was his student at the undergraduate class or even
72
secondary school is equally having his lunch of a three-course meal at the Transcorp Hilton
hotel Abuja or an equivalent 5 – star Hotel within a state capital. Little wonder that some
“fortunate” Professors just like their Civil Servant counterparts run hither and thither at the
‘beck and call’ of the politicians and congratulate themselves for picking the crumbs that fall
from the Politician’s table. Oh, what a country?.
Some say a no-nonsense leader in the mould of Murtala Ramat Mohammed, nonlaughingBuhari-Idiagbon, SanniAbacha and his “Enough is Enough” Syndrome and to a
large extent Olusegun Obasanjo of “it is no longer Business as Usual”may deliver the already
capturedand embridled nation. Some even canvass a revolution – sighting the successes of
Jerry Rawlings style of revolution in Ghana. Wait a minute, the speed with which Ghana
overtook Nigeria in development may be an eloquent testimony to the effect that the ‘Jerry
Rawlings’ model of revolution really worked for Ghana. Yet, our leaders at whatever level
troop to advanced countries year in and year out to manage “Estacode” or siphon ill-gotten
money while pretending to study best practices in an environment that is asymmetrical to the
Nigerian environment. If a comparison is necessary, Ghana has a more similar environment
with Nigeria than Britain, France, U. S.A., China and the like.
Wouldn’t the Ghana
revolution be a more likely, “best practice” that Nigeria and Nigerians, both leaders and the
led, old and young, rich and poor need to study carefully and apply? Is Nigeria not among
the blessed countries in the world? What with the endowment of rich human and material
resources. We must recall that the then President,Chief Obasanjo was so convinced about the
wealth of this Nation that he referred to the Nation as a land flowing with “milk and honey”.
A student of any of the management science disciplines will easily address his mind to a
comparison between adequate utilization, inadequate utilization or mal-utilization of
resources, albeit, managing or damaging of resources.
Mr. Vice-Chancellor Sir, are we still asking the question what has Public Administration
got to do with it? Put differently, does Public Administration really got anything to do with
it? Just like Professor Chinue Achebe in his usual “Epilogue” I leave the answer to this
highly respectable Audience.
11.0
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
73
All honour and glory go to God Almighty for sustaining us thereby, making it possible for us
to see this day. On a more personal note, I make bold to state that Divine providence granted
me the privilege of coming across individuals and institutions through whom, God in his
infinite mercies impacted immensely on my career life. These individuals and institutions
are too many to mention. The limitation inspired by space-constraint would only permit me
to mention just a few of them as follows:
(i)
Professor Vincent Ado Tenebe the current Vice-Chancellor of NOUN who threw up
the challenge to all Professors in NOUN to fulfill the Academic obligation of
delivering an Inaugural Lecture. Perhaps, but for that challenge I probably couldn’t
have been on the hot seat at this moment.
(ii)
Professor Sheikh Abdullah (OON) the then Director-General of ASCON and
formerHonourable Minister of Agriculture as well as an astute Professor of Public
Finance. From those capacities emerged learning experiences, purposeful leadership
and a conducive environment that posed immense challenges for the pursuit of greater
heights in my chosen career, the result of which is my current status. It must be
recalled that as Chief Executive of ASCON, Professor Abdullah nominated me for
the Productivity Merit Award of the Federal Government – the only ASCON staff
in history to be so recognized.
(iii)
Professor Ali D. Yahaya (OFR), former Director-General of ASCON, and later
Political Adviser to the then Vice-President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Professor Yahaya saw to my steady but meritorious career progression in ASCON
during which there was, indeed, an explosion in the acquisition of knowledge, skills
and experience. These provided the foundation for my current height.
(iv)
Professor Oluwole S. Olugbemi, (now late) was my academic father. An outstanding
Professor of Public Administration, he was completely responsible for nurturing me
academically when it mattered most, from master’s through doctoral degree
programmes and beyond.
Whatever knowledge I acquired academically is
74
attributable mostly to late Professor Olugbemi. His memory remains evergreen in my
mind.
(v)
My late father, Chief (Hon) P. O. Maduabum. He was a “bundle of wisdom”; little
wonder he foresaw, early enough, the benefit of education while in an environment in
which education was minimally emphasized. He thus invested a lot in seeing me
through early formative education, thereby providing the basic foundation upon
which my current academic and, by implication, career height, is attained.
(vi)
Dr. I. B. Mmuobosi, (now late) provided the mentoring needed in ASCON when it
mattered most.
(vii)
My No. 1 constituency – the Administrative Staff College of Nigeria (ASCON), small
as it appears provides the platform for a serious minded person to progress in
whatever desired direction. What with its library acknowledged as the biggest and
best management library in Africa. Interactions in that institution brought me closer
to Professor Adele Jinadu the then Director-General, whom I had earlier met in
Unilagduring my student days,; Deacon A. A. Peters, the current Director-General, a
friend and my mate at ASCON, my other Ogas – late Mike Durodola, Mr. B. O.
Oshionebo, Dr. M. J. Balogun (former Director-General), then contemporaries Dr.
Jimmy Chijioke, Alhaji Ahmed Musa etc.
(viii)
The University of Lagos (another constituency) through the Department of Political
Science invited me soon after earning a Ph.D degree in Public Administration in 1990
to assist it run the Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree programme. I had
served in the capacity of Adjunct Academic Staff ever since and rose to the position
of Adjunct Professor. During this period, I interacted with ProfessorsOyeOyediran,
MuyibiAmoda (CosmorgenicDemurje), S. O. Olugbemi (late), RemiAnifowose,
TundeBabawale(erstwhile CEBAAC Director-General) Tomori, Solomon Akinboye
(current HOD, Political Science Department and my Boss), Makanju former Dean,
Social Science Faculty; Drs. BrowneOnuoha, DerinOlogbenla, my Ph.D classmates –
Professor Iyaboolojede, Dr. JideOluwajuitan, Dr. M. M Fadakinte etc. My products
75
at the same institution include Dr. Augustine Eneanya, Dr. (Mrs.) OmolaraQuadri,
Dr. BiodunAkinwande, Dr. Joseph Awosika, Dr. Isuwa B. Dogo etc. thenof course
my current MPA students – all impacted positively on my career life.
(ix)
My spiritual family – the Knights of St. Mulumba (FESTAC Subcouncil);
Archbishop of Lagos Archdiocese (His Lordship Dr. Adewale Martins; Rev. Fathers
Jude Onyeka, Greg Anosike, Tobia’setc.
11.1THE TRUMPET
Mr. Vice-Chancellor, Sir, please permit me to blow a little trumpet.
I was fortunate to run into Professor OlugbemiroJegede, the immediate past ViceChancellor of NOUN at the recently concluded Pan Commonwealth Forum (PCF 7) at
Abuja . Infact, I was meeting him for the first time since he left NOUN. He demonstrated
his passion and concerns about the growth of the institution (NOUN) which he pioneered
from birth. I never knew he will recognize me because as I was joining NOUN, he was
leaving and we met only once before he left. After a brief exchange of pleasantries he
stated and I quote – “I learnt that you have turned around the School of Business, keep it
up”. Mr. Vice-Chancellor Sir, if there was any turn-around of that school, it was
collectively done by the staff of School of Management Sciences (SMS) whom I regard as
my immediate family in NOUN. One or two evidence will suffice.
(i) Establishment of a functional School’s Library to among others aid the writing of course
materials, setting TMAs and Exam questions, research and publications etc. In the last
two years, we have been receiving commendations some of which came from the
University Librarian
Mr.
IgweUkoha;
the
then
DVC
(Academic)
Professor
MbaOkoronkwo (OON); some members of the NUC Accreditation Team and lately
requests from University of Lagos, Lagos State University and Covenant University
through the External examiners from those institutions – Professor Akinboye, Professor
Bello, Professor Ogundeleto the effect that their graduate students be allowed to make
76
use of the SMS Library. The man at the helm of affairs in that Library who also doubles
as the Head of the team on Research Projects is Dr.Timothy Ishola.
(ii) Restructuring of the entire school and rationalization of the programmes such that the
non-viable ones were dropped and the more viable ones introduced. In addition, from an
initial inherited 158 unwritten course materials in the last two and the half years to a zero
No. of such category.
(iii)The initiation and eventual appointment by the Vice-Chancellor of Adjunct Professors
and Lecturers and the completion of unwritten course materials particularly in such
technical areas as Hotel and Catering, Tourism and Cooperative Management.
(iv) In 2012, the school presented its four (4) programmesforNUC’s Accreditation Exercise
and secured full Accreditation in three (3) and interim Accredition in one. For the
records, of the 31 programmes presented by NOUN, only four (4) had full Accreditation
and SMS alone accounted for 3 out of the 4. The Chairperson of the Accreditation
Committee of SMS was Dr. (Mrs.) A. O. Fagbemi. The Coordinators of the three (3)
programmes were (i) Mrs. Carol Aturu-Aghedo, for Entrepreneurial and Business
Management; (ii) Mrs. Eunice Adegbola for Cooperative Management; and (iii) Mrs.
Faith Onyebueyi, for Hotel and Catering Management.Few months later, SMS was
again called upon to present its MBA and MPA programmes for an accreditation
exercise. We secured full Accreditation in MPA with 91.5% - one of the highest, if not
the highest to be so earned by any programme in any Nigerian University. For MBA, it
was interim Accreditation. The man who headed the Accreditation Committee in SMS
then was Dr. Clement I. Okekeand the Coordinator of that MPA programme that
brought such a pride to SMS was Mrs. Martha Oruku.My experience during the two (2)
Accreditation exercises which I fully participated in shows that Study Centresplayed
significant role in whatever grades earned by programmes being accredited. To this end,
I must acknowledge the following Study Centresthat madesignificant contributions to our
earning a full accreditation status in our programmes.
77
(a) Enugu Study Centre headed then by Professor Patrick Eyamade such a contribution
with regards to full accreditation in two of our programmes namely: Entrepreneurial
and Business Management; and Cooperative Management;
(b) Kaduna Study Centre headed by Dr. GarbaNuhuand the beautifully laid out and
excellently maintained campus under the leadership of Dr. (Mrs.) Saratu B. DikkoAudumade similar contribution with regards to Hotel and Catering Management.
Professor Israel Adurepresented the Vice-Chancellor and, by implication, the
NOUN headquarters at that centre. His role then is equally highly acknowledged.
(c) Abuja Study Centre headed then by Dr. Akale Matt.similarly contributed to our
earning full accreditation in Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree
programme.
(v) Institutionalization of a journal named: “NOUN Journal of Management and International
Development” in 2012. The second edition of that Journal is currently in circulation. The
presence of this Journal, on the bookshelvesamong others, earned NOUN some points
during the NUC’s Resource Assessment Exercise at the Enugu Study Centre in June,
2013. The Editor of the Journal is Dr. (Mrs.) A. O. Fagbemiand the Secretary is Mr.
Julius Enyanuku.
(vi) Other staff that must be mentioned are Professor KayodeOguntuashewho is in charge
of Adjunct Staff; AbdullahiAraga –incharge of Post-graduate Diploma Programmes;
Dr.Ibrahim Idrisu, in-charge of Undergraduate Programmes; Dr. MandeSamaila who
operates at CLL but assists in overseeing CEMBA/CEMPA Programmes;Dr.
OnyemachiOnwe who is in charge of approval of Research Project Topics and
Supervisors as well as appointment of Facilitators;Mrs. DayoAkinbowale, in charge of
the Administrative organ of the school; and Mrs. CarolynAjon the School’s Confidential
Secretary who had the singular task of typing the initial Draft of this entire lecture.
Infact, this inaugural lecture is dedicated to the entire staff of the School of Management
Sciences.
78
11.2
(i)
The Entire staff of NOUN among whom are friends, “my persons”, and
“my personal persons” – They know themselves and the category to which they
belong;
(iv)
My respect goes to the Principal Officers of NOUN on the one hand and in particular
Professors Israel Adu, Femi Peters, FemiOgunlale etc. on the other.
11.3
Finally, a towering figure who I refer to as my “Precious Marble of Inestimable Value”
(Chief Obafemi Awolowo) – A certain Mrs. Ijeoma Carol Maduabum currently a
Comptroller of Nigeria Immigration Services; The “Apple of my Eyes” Adamma – the baby
of the house; her elder brothers are all out either in quest of advanced academic
degrees/knowledge or daily bread.
R EF E R E N C E S
Aboyade, O. (1974) “Nigerian Public Enterprises as an Organizational Dilemma” Public
Enterprises in Nigeria: Proceedings of the 1973 Annual Conference of the
Nigerian Economic Society, (Ibadan: University of Ibadan Press).
Adebayo, A. (1981) Principles and Practices of Public Administration in Nigeria.(Ibadan
Spectrum Books Ltd).
Adedeji, A. (1998) “The Evolution of Public Service in Africa”. The Courier, No. 109
May - June.
Akinboye, S. O. (2013) “Beautiful Abroad but Ugly at Home: Issues and Contradictions
In Nigeria’s Foreign Policy”, Inaugural Lecture Series 2013 (Lagos: University of
LagosPress).
Akpan, T. B. (2011) “MDGs: Playing the Ostrich”, The Punch Newspaper May, p.16
Amaefule E, (2013) “100 Million Nigerians live in Destitution” – the World Bank,“Business
and Economy, the Punch Newspaper, November p. 31.
Balogun, M. J. (1983) Public Administration in Nigeria: A Developmental Approach
(London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.).
Bobbitt, R. H. (Jr) et al (1978) Organizational Behaviour: Understanding and Prediction
79
(2nd Ed) (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc).
Dimock, M. and Dimock, G. (1969) Politics and Administration, (Illinois: The Doyen
Press).
Downs, A. (1967) Inside Bureaucracy (Boston: Little Brown and Company).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1968) First National Development Plan (1962 – 1968)
(Lagos: Federal Ministry of Information).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1970) Second National Development Plan (1970 – 1974)
(Lagos: Federal Ministry of Information).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1974) Third National Development Plan (1975 – 1980)
(Lagos: Federal Ministry of Information).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1980) Fourth National Development Plan (1981 – 1985)
(Lagos: Federal Ministry of Information).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1968) Report of working Party on Statutory Corporation
andState-owned Companies in Nigeria (Lagos: Federal Ministry of Information).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1974) Main Report of the Public Service. Review
Commission(Lagos: Federal Ministry of Information).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999) Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999)
(Lagos: Federal Government Press).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2001) Report of Presidential Committee on the Review of
the1999 Constitution, Vol. 1, Main Report (Abuja: Federal Government Printing
Press).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1997) Vision 2010 Document, Abuja
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004) National Economic Empowerment and development
Strategy (NEEDS) (Abuja: NEEDS Secretariat).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2008; and 2013) National Planning Commission, Federal
Secretariat, Abuja.
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004) “Delivering Service in Nigeria. Documents for the
Special Presidential Retreat on Service Delivery” State Banquet Hall,
Abuja,March 19 – 24.
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2006) StatesEconomic Empowerment and Development
Strategy (SEEDS) Benchmarking 2005 Report (Abuja: National Planning
Commission).
80
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2006) SEEDS Benchmarking 2006 Report (Abuja: National
Planning Commission).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2007) Nigeria’s 2006 Millennium Development Goals Report
(Abuja: National Planning Commission).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2008) Nigeria’s 2008 Millennium Development Goals Report
(Abuja: National Planning Commission).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2014) Nigeria’s 2013 Millennium Development Goals Report
(Abuja: National Planning Commission).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2007) Landmarks: Achievements of the OlusegunObasanjo
Administration (Abuja: National Planning Commission).
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2012) Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Annual Report and
Statement of Accounts.
Gambari,A. (2014) “Open and Distance Education for Development, Unity and Democratic
Transformation of Nigeria”, A Pre-Convocation Lecture delivered at the 3rd
Convocation Ceremony of the National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN),
National Theater, Iganmu, Lagos. 17th January, 2014.
Hicks, H. G. and Gullet R.C. (1982) Organizations: Theory and Behaviour. (Tokyo: McGraw –
Hill International Book Company).
Ihonvbere, J.O. (2002) “Economic Crisis, Civil Society and Democratization: The case of
Zambia”.
Maduabum, C.P. (1996) Management of Training in the Nigerian Public Service (19141993) (Badagry: ASCON Press).
Maduabum C.P. (1998) Perspectives on Manpower Planning and Development in Nigeria: Text
and Cases (Badagry: ASCON Press).
Maduabum C.P. (2001) Capacity Building and Utilization in Nigeria (Lagos: Teitlords
Publishers Ltd).
Maduabum C.P. (2001) “The Civil Service under Military Rule”, in FasekeModupeola, The Civil
Service in Nigeria: A Historical Perspective (Ibadan. Rex Charles Publications in
Association with Connell Publications).
Maduabum C.P. (2002) “Transition and the Nigerian Civil Service” in Browne Onuoha and
81
M.M Fadakinte (Eds): Transition Politics in Nigeria, (1970-1999) (Lagos:
Malthouse Press Limited).
Maduabum C.P. (Ed) (2004) Contemporary Issues on Public Policy Analysis in Nigeria
(Badagry: ASCON Press).
Maduabum C.P. (2003) “Repositioning the Professional for the Economic Development in
Nigeria, “The Certified National Accountant,Vol. 2, No I, January – March.
Maduabum C.P. (2006) Reforming Government Bureaucracies in Nigeria: The Journey
So Far (Badagry: ASCON Press).
Maduabum C.P. (2008) The Mechanics of Public Administration in Nigeria (Lagos:
Concept Publication).
Maduabum C.P. (2011) “Building a Partnership between the public and private sectors for
improved service delivery and sustainable development in Nigeria: A Myth or a
Reality?” Nigerian Management Review, Vol. 19, No I, January – June.
Maduabum C.P. (2012) “The Role of Effective Leadership and Governance in the
Achievement of MDGs by Local Governments in Nigeria”, NOUN Journal of
Management and International Development, Vol.I, No I., August.
Maduabum C.P. (2013) “The Millennium Development Goals (MDGS) Framework and the
Nigeria Developmental Agenda: How Congruent?” International Journal of
Emerging Knowledge, Vol.I, No. 6 (October).
Maduabum, C.P. (2014) “Bureaucracy: A Tool for Scuttling Application of Innovative Ideas in the
Nigerian Public Service”, International Journal of Public Administration and
Management Research (IJPAMR), Vol. 2, No. 2.
Nicolson, I.F. (1969) The Administration of Nigeria (1900 – 1960: Men, Methods and
Myths) (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Obasanjo O. (2004) “Speech” Delivered at the Opening of the Special Presidential Retreat on
Service Delivery, Abuja, March 19 – 21.
Okigbo, P.N.C. (1986) “In the Public Service”, Anambra State Public Service Lecture
Service, No 5, Enugu.
Okigbo, P.N.C. (1992) “Crisis in the Temple”, 30th Anniversary Public Lecture, University of
Lagos, 5th March.
Okojie, J. (2008) “Investments and Strategies for Human Capacity Development”, in S.O
82
Akande and Ade S. Olomola, Strategies and Implementation of the Seven-point
Agenda (Ibadan: Nigerian Institute of Social and Economic Research (NISER).
Olugbemi, S.O. (1987) “The Nigerian Civil Service and National Development”, in Olugbemi,
S.O (Ed) Alternative Political Futures for Nigeria (Lagos: The Nigerian Political
Science Association).
Olusanya, G.O. (1978) “The Evolution of the Nigerian Civil Service 1861 – 1960: The
Problems of Nigerianization (Lagos: University of Lagos Press).
Omolayo, O.S. and Arowolaye, B. (1987) Elements of Government: An Introductory
College Text on Political Science (Lagos: Friends Foundation Publishers Ltd).
Onosode, G. O. (1988) “The Civil Service – Its Roles and Relevance in the Developing
Process”.Public Service Lecture Services.
Sills, L.D. (Ed) (1968) International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Vol. 5 and 6
(New York: The MacMillan Company and the Free Press).
Seethe Guardian Newspaper (1999) March 1 and 18, 1999.
See the Guardian Newspaper (2014) May 18.
See the New Age (2004) “Reforms: We have no Apologies” Vol. 2, No 395. Monday,
August 16.
See ThisDay Newspaper, (2009) “Assessment of MDGS in Nigeria by the Civil Society”
Vol. 4, No. 1913, Wednesday, August.
See also ThisDay Newspaper (2009) Annual Corruption Perception Index of
Transparency International, Online, November.
Thompson, V. (1961) Modern Organization (New York: Knopf).
Thompson, V. (1975) Without Sympathy or Enthusiasm: The Problem of
Administrative Comparison (Alabama: The University of Alabama Press).
United Nations News Centre (2013) “United Nations Food Agency”
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp/realfile/html/story.asp?
Wilson, W. (1887) “The Study of Administration”, Political Science Quarterly, 56, December.
World Bank (2006) World Bank Governance and Integrity Study (2004 – 2006).
Web References
83
Amaefule E. (2013) 100 million Nigerians live in Destitution: Punch Newspaper November 12,
2013
http://www.punching.com/news/100-million-nigerians-live-in-destitution-
world-bank.
Francoise Marie-Nelly (2014) World Bank Lifts Nigerian’s MSME Financing with & 500m.28
September
2014.
http://ngrguardiannews.com/business/180950-world-bank-lifts-
nigeria-s-msme-financing-with-500m.
Grraziano Da Silva (2013) Nigeria, 37 others Bag UN Award for Meeting MDGs Hunger Target. 18
June 2013. This Day Live http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/nigeria-37-others-bagun-award-for -meeting-mdgs-hunger-target.11507341.
Okonjo-Iweala,
N.
(2014)
Nigeria’s
Fastest
Growing
Economic.The
World
News
II.http://www.tribune.com.ng/news2014/mdex.plip. May 30, 2014.
Sant’Ana, M (2008) “The Evolution of Concept of Development: from Economic Growth to Human
Development” Belgian Science Policy Working Paper-PAI VI/06-FDI/HD-6
http://www.cpdr.ucl.ac.be.
Soares (Jr.) J. and Quintella H. R. (2008) An Analysis of Concepts, Measurement and Indicators.
Brazilian Administration Review, Curitiba, Vol. 5, No.2, article 2, p. 104124.http://www.anpad.org.br/barr.
The
World
Bank
of
Corrupt
Institution
in
Nigeria
1998-2007.
IEG
World
Bank
IFC/MIGA.http://www.oecd.org/countries/nigeria/47886664.pdf.
Tijal B. A. (2011) Coalition of Civil Society Organizations for PIB Campaign, Abuja,
Nigeria.www.aneej.org/new/wpdmact=process4did=MTcuarG906Gluaw.
United Nations Non-Governmental Liaison Service (NGLS) (2013) NGOs Assess the Millennium
Development Goals. Round up 105: July 2013.
84