Tinubu’s economic reset and Northern Nigeria’s prospects

As Nigeria navigates one of the most consequential economic transitions in its recent history, Northern Nigeria finds itself at the centre of a difficult but defining moment. The hardship being experienced today is not incidental—it reflects the reality of confronting years of accumulated economic imbalance. Rising pressure at the grassroots now intersects with structural reforms […]

As Nigeria navigates one of the most consequential economic transitions in its recent history, Northern Nigeria finds itself at the centre of a difficult but defining moment. The hardship being experienced today is not incidental—it reflects the reality of confronting years of accumulated economic imbalance. Rising pressure at the grassroots now intersects with structural reforms that are reshaping the country’s long-term economic direction.

 This reflection is therefore not only an assessment, but a measured appeal from Kano State and the wider North—for urgency in delivery, for targeted relief, and for practical steps that ensure reforms translate into visible improvements in everyday life.

 Across the region, the pressures are immediate and deeply felt. Rising food prices, higher transport costs, and persistent insecurity are not policy abstractions—they are daily realities shaping how families eat, work, and survive. In many communities, farmers are unable to fully access their lands, small businesses are struggling to remain viable, and young people face growing uncertainty. These conditions demand not only understanding, but urgency in response. 

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu assumed office at a time when Nigeria’s economy faced deep structural constraints, including fuel subsidy distortions, exchange rate fragmentation, and weak infrastructure. The policy direction taken has been one of correction rather than delay. 

The removal of fuel subsidies and the unification of the foreign exchange market have defined this shift. While both have imposed short-term pressures, they have also expanded fiscal space. Between March 2024 and August 2025, over N2.45 trillion was distributed to states and the Federal Capital Territory, as reflected in Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) disbursement records over the period. These allocations were statutory, arising from improved revenue inflows following key reforms. 

The implication is clear: resources have expanded, but outcomes now depend largely on utilisation. Within Nigeria’s federal structure, this distinction is critical. While the federal government provides policy direction, fiscal resources, and strategic infrastructure, primary responsibility for implementation and service delivery rests with state governments. The effectiveness of reform therefore depends on how efficiently these responsibilities are exercised at the subnational level.

 A more useful lens for evaluating reform is therefore at the state level. Across Northern Nigeria, there are emerging examples—at varying stages—of investments in education, healthcare, infrastructure, and agriculture. However, the pattern remains uneven. Public perception of reform is, therefore, local. Where improvements are visible, reform is understood as purposeful; where they are not, hardship is attributed to federal policy. 

Kano State provides a useful illustration. Efforts to expand access to education, rehabilitate healthcare facilities, improve infrastructure, and support farmers and small businesses reflect attempts to convert public resources into measurable impact. While progress is still evolving, the example reinforces a broader reality: federal reforms may release resources, but the lived experience of citizens is determined by execution at the subnational level. 

The rising cost of fuel remains one of the most visible pressure points. With subsidy removal, domestic pricing is now influenced by global oil markets, exchange rate movements, and supply chain disruptions. Geopolitical tensions affecting key maritime routes have compounded volatility. These factors are not uniquely Nigerian, but their impact is strongly felt locally. 

This reinforces the importance of mitigation. Rather than reversing policy, the focus must shift toward cushioning its effects. One option worth consideration is the structured deployment of a portion of subsidy savings toward targeted interventions in regions where economic vulnerability is most pronounced. Northern Nigeria falls within this category, and carefully designed programmes could help stabilise communities and support livelihoods during this transition.

 The regional development commissions across the North provide an institutional channel for such intervention. These bodies are designed to complement state governments by delivering targeted, federally-backed programmes at the geopolitical level.

In particular, the North West Development Commission (NWDC) must be positioned to play a far more visible and impactful role. As a federal intervention platform, it represents the presence of the federal government at the regional level and is expected to deliver people-focused programmes that respond directly to current realities. While there have been concerns around internal coordination and operational challenges within the Commission, it is important that such issues are resolved promptly in the best interest of the people. At a time when communities are under strain, the Commission must move decisively from structure to action—implementing projects that support livelihoods, strengthen local infrastructure, and provide immediate socio-economic relief.

 Infrastructure remains central to long-term recovery. Projects such as the Abuja–Kaduna–Kano Expressway, the Kano–Maiduguri corridor, and the Ajaokuta–Kaduna–Kano (AKK) gas pipeline carry significant economic implications. Their timely delivery will influence trade, mobility, energy supply, and industrial activity across the region.

 Given the scale and urgency of these projects, there is a compelling case for decisive federal action to accelerate delivery. This should include the consideration of a targeted Executive Order to fast-track priority infrastructure across Northern Nigeria—particularly the Abuja–Kaduna–Kano Expressway, the Kano–Maiduguri corridor, and the Ajaokuta–Kaduna–Kano (AKK) gas pipeline. Such an Executive Order would streamline approvals, enforce inter-agency coordination, and prioritise funding flows, ensuring that projects of national importance are delivered within clear and accelerated timelines.

 At the same time, immediate relief remains essential. Strengthening social safety nets, supporting agriculture, and creating targeted economic support programmes will help ensure that reform does not disproportionately affect vulnerable populations. 

Reform must ultimately be measured by its impact on ordinary citizens. Increased allocations create opportunity, but only disciplined execution, institutional accountability, and effective coordination across all tiers of government will convert that opportunity into real progress.

 The message is both clear and sincere. The direction of reform is understood, and its long-term objectives are acknowledged. However, the present realities require urgent and visible response. There is a strong expectation that federal interventions—through accelerated infrastructure delivery, effective deployment of regional development commissions, and targeted relief programmes—will translate into measurable improvements in the daily lives of the people. The success of reform will not be judged by intention, but by how quickly it restores stability, opportunity, and hope.

 If reform defines the present, then execution will determine the future.

 

Dr Zango, FPSN, is the Founder, Fatah Zango Foundation and resides in Kano