This is only a forerunner of a 239-page book by Professor Ladipo Adamolekun, NNOM, titled, Reflections on Governance and Development in Nigeria, published in April 2025, by Caligata Publishing Company Limited, Ibadan. The book will be launched tomorrow, Thursday, April 24, 2025, in Akure, Ondo State. A more detailed review will follow the book launch later.
It is important to recall that Professor Adamolekun is an Oxford-trained expert in public administration and development and had a nearly 20-year stint at the World Bank, after meritorious service as Dean of the Faculty of Administration, University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University), Ile-Ife, Nigeria. His expansive scholarship, typified by the publication of many books, monographs, and journal articles on administration and development earned him the award of the Nigerian National Order of Merit (NNOM) twenty years ago. Yet, he never slowed down. The present book is the latest testimony.
In his elaboration on the first two questions, Adamolekun delved into the six central issues featured prominently in the development literature, namely, (1) electoral legitimacy; (2) rule of law; (3) civil liberties (to which human rights is central); (4) accountability and transparency (including anti-corruption measures; (5) administrative competence; and (6) development-oriented leadership. These issues are discussed in relation to the Nigerian situation but also set within African and international contexts, where necessary. These issues recur in various discussions on governance and development throughout the book.
In addition, Adamolekun also raised a seventh issue, bearing in mind the peculiarities of the Nigerian federation—the issue of a devolved federation as a key macro-governance issue. This issue would later feature prominently in his recommendations discussed briefly below.
After teasing out these issues in several chapters, he goes on to provide answers to the third question. In order to fully appreciate his recommendations, Adamolekun sets Nigeria’s performance records since 1999 against similar data in African countries, using the Mo Ibrahim Index of African Governance. Nigeria never reached 50% score in the years data were available, nor did it rank higher than the bottom 20 poor performers every year, except in 2018 when it was ranked in the bottom 25, despite its biggest size and highest GDP. Adamolekun’s conclusion is not surprising: “The verdict is clear and unambiguous, the quality of governance in Nigeria is poor.”
Although solutions to poor governance and development problems are embedded in several discussions throughout the book, Adamolekun brought the recommendations together in the book’s concluding chapter, titled, Path to achieving improved governance and good development performance. The recommendations are made with particular reference to Nigeria.
Unsurprisingly, the recommendations centre on improvements on the central issues in the development literature elaborated upon at the beginning of the book and foregrounded in the third paragraph of this essay. Rather than summarize the recommendations here, I leave it to readers to read them in full and make their own judgement.
Nevertheless, I find it necessary to provide my own assessment, especially since Adamolekun and I agreed that only a devolved federation could aid good governance, channel necessary development, and provide self-fulfillment to Nigerians. This convergence of opinion has different roots. Adamolekun came to this conclusion from the perspectives of administration and development and I from the perspectives of linguistics and anthropology.
We both recognize that Nigeria is a multilingual, multiethnic, and multi-religious state. Atop these primordial divisions are geographical and administrative groupings—North vs South; Zone vs Zone; State vs State; and Local Government vs Local Government, each in competition with the other.
Of course, the divisions are not neat as they are either colonial or military creations for administrative convenience. True, Muslims are concentrated in the North and Christians in the South, but they are both found in every region or state, each with its own base of traditional religion. Similarly, many ethnic groups find themselves scattered across regional, state, or even local government boundaries.
• the existing six geopolitical zones as federating units instead of the existing 36 states, many of which are not viable;
• the assignment of functions between the central government and the federating units, using the same principle of subsidiarity as in the 1963 Constitution;
• the allocation of resources consistent with the imperative of fiscal federalism and increased functions for sub-national governments.
I agree with Adamolekun that “A devolved federation is a necessity, not a choice,” and that “only a devolved Nigerian federation can become a well-performing state that is capable of achieving good development performance.” It is no wonder then that Adamolekun ranked it over his other recommendations.
The issue of how to get there has been a major clog, despite several attempts at moving forward on devolution. We have had two major national deliberations, the 2005 National Political Reform Conference and the 2014 National Conference. However, their far-reaching recommendations were either selectively appropriated for selfish political agenda or totally ignored.
I have always argued that, if a one-off comprehensive approach is not feasible for political reasons, a gradualist approach could be adopted to achieve the same result over time. It is within this context that the bill on state police now before the National Assembly should be expedited to combat insecurity. It may well be a first step toward a devolved security structure and the allocation of required resources for that purpose.
But whatever “convenience” was meant to be achieved by the geographical or administrative divisions never came to fruition, partly because of the lopsidedness in the creation of the geographical or administrative divisions. For example, Lagos and Kano have comparable populations (Lagos is even believed to be more populated), but Lagos has only 20 Local Governments, whereas Kano has 44! By the same token, Ondo has only 18 Local Governments, whereas Osun has 30; yet, both states have comparable populations.
Yet another source of lopsidedness is the over-concentration of powers and resource allocation in the central government. This has had two damning consequences for governance and development. First, the powers of the central government make it the locus of fierce competitions for political power. In the process, electoral legitimacy and the rule of law are undermined or believed to be so.
Second, the central government has been the locus of corruption since the attainment of independence. Corruption was institutionalized by military dictators and escalated since return to civilian rule in 1999. Even while corruption is also rampant in the states, protests are often directed at the federal government because of its perceived powers. Similarly, separatist agitations are directed at the central government, because it is viewed as the locus of injustice and inequity.
It is within the above contexts that a devolved federation is recommended as panacea to Nigeria’s governance and development problems. Adamolekun prescribed the following characteristics of the desirable devolved federation for Nigeria:
But make no mistake about it. A devolved federation should happen sooner than later, if good governance and development were to be achieved, including a successful outcome of ongoing economic reforms.
Credit:The Nation