The row over Nigeria’s space programme

The story was that Nigeria’s space programme had received from the British government some £300m of a supposedly £1.14bn in foreign aid earmarked for it over five years. The news understandably rubbed on the wrong side of many Britons who are facing economic woes of their own. A member of the UK Independence Party MEP […]

The story was that Nigeria’s space programme had received from the British government some £300m of a supposedly £1.14bn in foreign aid earmarked for it over five years. The news understandably rubbed on the wrong side of many Britons who are facing economic woes of their own. A member of the UK Independence Party MEP Godfrey Bloom, for instance, said it was folly to give billions in aid to ‘Bongo Bongo land’. In British English Bongo Bongo Land (or Bongo-bongo land) is a derogatory reference to developing countries, particularly Africa, perhaps as a look-down reference to the bongo drums played by the natives.
Though the idea that Britain funds the country’s space programme has since been debunked by both the National Space Research and Development Agency (NASRDA) in Abuja and First Secretary, Science, Innovation and Climate Change of the British High Commission, Mr. David Woolf, with the former clarifying that a UK-based satellite company, SSTL, only went into a commercial partnership with NASRDA in 2002 for the building and launching of Nigeriasat-1, Nigeriasat-2 and Nigeriasat-X, there are important lessons for the country resulting from that row.  For one, the row should or ought to be a bold reminder to the leadership of African countries of the lack of respect, if not contempt, for which Britain and perhaps much of the developed world hold the continent. Ordinary Africans expect that sort of insult to fire a certain zeal in their leaders to get things right.
The row also puts the Nigeria’s space programme on the spotlight.  The crucial questions here are: what are really the benefits of a space programme? Should a space programme be one of the country’s priorities at this point in time when the country seemingly faces numerous and perhaps more pressing challenges?
Space programmes all over the world often face the challenge of justifying their existence largely because they are usually very expensive and funded by the government. The politics surrounding space programmes – like most expensive public programmes – often beclouds their obvious benefits. For instance, not many people know that the artificial heart resulted from experiments on the space shuttle and a partnership with renowned heart surgeon, Dr Michael Debakey. Again the hand-held Jaws of Life used to save victims from car wrecks also originated from the system used to separate the space shuttle from its booster rockets. In the same vein, the cell-phone camera developed by Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) resulted from efforts to create cameras that are small enough to fit on spacecraft while maintaining scientific quality. Even the much maligned Nigeria’s NASDRA has recorded its own achievements. For example, the security images from its three earth observation satellites on the extent of damage caused by the military intervention in Baga, Borno State, were able to raise fundamental questions about the imagery released by Human Rights Watch (HRW). In essence, the potential benefits of Nigeria’s space programme are enormous – even though such benefits have not been properly articulated by the country’s space agencies.  
Just like other countries that have space programmes did not wait to solve all the problems of poverty and social inequality in their countries before embarking on such ventures, there is no reason why Nigeria should not join the race into the outer space – despite our other challenges.
However, while the idea of a space programme for the country should be encouraged,  both the national satellite operator, Nigcomsat, and its big brother, the national space agency NASRDA, need to urgently address lingering public concerns over their competence and whether the public is getting value for money. For instance, after the unfortunate failure of its first satellite in 2008, Nigcomsat was once again in July 2013 called a “national shame” after it failed to install a functional electronic platform for lawmakers voting on the constitution. Similarly, NASRDA was under fire back in March 2013 following allegations that it could not produce images from its earth observation satellites, leading citizens to question why Nigeria continues to invest in supposedly hi-tech institutions that one commentator described as “barely functional.”
What appears to be urgently required at this time is a cost-benefit analysis of the country’s entire space programme with a view to focusing on those aspects of the programme  where the country has the relevant competence and which can yield or likely to yield good value for money.