New Year Reflections on Nigeria

There comes a time in the life of any nation desirous of change, progress and development that certain difficult choices and decisions have to be made. As we enter a new year, this definitely is the time for us in Nigeria. But that choice or decision is not for the government or the leadership alone […]

New Year Reflections on Nigeria
New Year Reflections on Nigeria

There comes a time in the life of any nation desirous of change, progress and development that certain difficult choices and decisions have to be made. As we enter a new year, this definitely is the time for us in Nigeria. But that choice or decision is not for the government or the leadership alone to make. While the buck may stop at the desk of the leader, whatever choice or decision he makes in the final analysis is still subject to citizens’ approval and support. For us in Nigeria, the challenge is not just of economic dimension, even though it seems most manifest in the macroeconomic indices of productivity, employment, savings, investment and consumption. 

Our real challenge can be located within the structure of our polity which invariably determines the colour of our politics, dictates the nature of our governance and affects the stability of our economy.    The combination of the structure of our polity, colour of our politics and fibre of our governance has so far been dictating how various stakeholders within and outside government support, validate and implement reform projects and policies in the country. The issue is: we have not outlived the politics of prebendalism in our land. This combination qualifies the aggregation of the elites, the bureaucrats and technocrats, the labour movement, the mass media and other interest groups on policy issues we have to address as a nation. 

However, does this address the foundational elements that are only manifesting in the economic realm? Not really. Evidently, we still grapple with foundational elements of nation building crisis as the agitations of many interest groups are pointers to the weakness of our national cohesion, when the dominant themes of discourses in the press and the airwaves have been national restructuring, marginalization, corruption and other negativities that compromise national growth and development. This being so and whenever any reform project is to be embarked upon, our nation is usually constrained by the constituent of participants, the sincerity of advisers, the range and rationality of choices and alternatives  and the quality and acceptability of decision. In this scenario in the process of decision making on any reform initiative, the initiative will still be a victim of circumstance, no matter how sincere or well intentioned a leader or government may be. In this context, we need to raise a dozen questions germane to achieving success in our reform projects. 

What development must INSPIRE our government? Our experiences at policy and reform projects since the end of the civil war in 1970 suggest that we are almost always responding to crises as the structure and forms of governments that have dominated our history have largely being dictated by emergencies and political misadventures. Therefore, our policies and programmes, even if they were genuine, were not enduring. Today, we are certainly in another economic emergency. The logic here is if emergency management has not yielded for us sustainability, we must return to long-term and long range planning. My take on this is that for every reform project in our country, we must draw inspiration from countries with similar national experiences and best practices in governance. Brazil, India and China are good case studies for us just as we have some fine lessons in reforms from Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore. The National Economic Recovery & Growth Plan fits into this context and everything must be done to assure its deliverability.

What policies must we INITIATE? At any point in time and in every situation, our concern must be delivering policies and programmes that ensure the greatest good for the greatest number of people, with least compliance lethargy. This entails rigorous identification and analysis of issues and problems, real, extant or potential. Again, this demands foresight and sensitivity from the government. Therefore, we must be interested in the likely responses to reform initiatives by employing all rational and behavioural analytic tools in our predictions on outcomes.

Who must we INVOLVE? Critical to the success of any reform project is the support and legitimacy of all stakeholders and interest groups, beneficiaries or victims. Without consultation, engagement and collaboration with those to be affected, programmes and reform initiatives are justifiably misconstrued, opposed and rejected or they suffer apathy and indifference even from the intended beneficiaries. Strategic communication, wide consultation and close collaboration are necessary to carry all along and at best limit obstacles to pushing through.

 What framework must we INSTITUTE?  In consideration of reform initiatives, experts and officials are bordered by how well or how soon a programme will yield the desired result. Such result is measured by the efficiency, effectiveness, economy and the impact of the tools and strategies adopted in the implementation process to push through the reform project. Since most reforms are bitter, painful and unusual, they are necessarily prone to rejection.  Therefore, the framework that is best suited to preventing policy shock and glut is one that gives room for learning, coping and adjustment by those likely to be affected and those implementing the policies as realities on the field may alter projections in the plan. Denoted as incrementalism, such framework gives room for manoeuvring and building on experience to correct mistakes. On the strength of these questions, we can probe further other specific questions that should guide our reform and transformation agenda. 

To be continued…

Solanke wrote this piece from Lagos