NES #21: Population management and border control policies as key inputs into Nigeria’s economic growth policy

The 21st Nigerian Economic Summit has come and gone with various far-reaching recommendations to government on policy direction and implementation strategies. A notable highlight of the summit was the appearance of the vice president, on the first two days of the programme, giving valuable insight into the economic programmes of the present administration, with its cardinal points of anti-corruption, good governance and infrastructure development also, highlighting the progress made so far.

The vice president’s announcement of a social investment programme which focuses on cash transfers to citizens at the bottom of the pyramid is of major significance. The policy includes but is not limited to; a meal a day programme for school children across the federation, one year continuous allowance post NYSC completion and social security payments to the poor. These policies are quite laudable and would increase consumer spending, lubricate the economy and improve the standard of living of Nigerians living below the poverty line while, ensuring a high enrolment in our primary schools.

Various commentaries about a new beginning, repositioning the economy and sustainability of economic policies with the objective of making Nigeria a competitive 21st century economy were discussed.

However, of concern to this writer are two important and related issues which were not adequately addressed in the ‘implementation plan’ suggested in the Medium Term Economic Framework which the vice president referred to as a crux of the economic plan of this government and which was later presented by the executive secretary of the National Planning Commission.

References were made to the social and economic changes achieved in Georgia, a small Eurasian country with a population of 3.75 million people. The other notable example was the Chinese revolution which began with the Tiananmen Square revolts of 1989. Lessons learnt from these two case studies are being implemented with the exception of the two concerns discussed here: (i) a population management policy and (ii) an effective border control system.

McKinsey Global Institute projects Nigeria’s population to be in the region of 273 million by the year 2030 if the population which is estimated to be 183 million today continues to grow at the cumulative average annual growth rate of 2.7 percent. By 2050, the figure will be 465 million. One of the major policies put in place after the Chinese revolution was a population management policy which restricted the number of children a couple could have to only one. China’s population with a land mass of 9.569 million kilometre square is currently 1.4 billion indicating a per capita landmass of 0.0059 square kilometre. China is the second-largest economy in the world today. The largest economy remains the United States of America with a population of 325.8 million  and a land mass of 9.161 million square kilometres indicating a per capita landmass of 0.0281 square kilometre.

Using an average of USA and China, the indicative ideal population for Nigeria will be 154.5 million based on Nigeria’s landmass of 910,678 square kilometres. Can this be the optimal population for Nigeria and should this figure be the targeted optimal population of Nigeria as part of a population management policy? If so, we have outstripped the ideal. Economic development factors which need to be considered include; GDP per capita, budget spending per capita, income per capita, etc. These measures of economic development as we know has the population figure as the numerator.

Secondly is the issue of an effective border control system. One of the major policy issues in the United States of America’s 2016 presidential campaign is the issue of building a wall across the border with Mexico. Why is this? The USA’s neighbour on the southern side supplies the highest number of economic migrants to the USA. The attraction for Mexicans remains a better standard of living and better future prospects. This has become a problem to the USA which needs to be tackled to ensure a sustainable standard of living for US citizens.

Nigeria has witnessed similar challenges with the petroleum subsidy regime. A significant percentage of Nigerian subsidized petrol finds its way to neighbouring countries through our porous borders. The suspicion is that once the social investment policy is implemented, it will attract economic migrants from our poorer neighbours who are seeking access to the social investments benefits. Unfortunately, Nigeria does not have a reliable citizens database which can be used for control purposes.

The two concerns expressed above; lack of a population management policy and an effective border management system, if not checked with appropriate policies, could lead to an astronomical increase in population which would continually weaken the development economic metrics of GDP per capita, budget spending per capita, income per capita etc.

In this scenario, the battery of “change” economic policies the new government is putting in place without a control of population and its international borders may be akin to trying to shoot a moving target.

Toyin Ayoade