Towards infrastructure development in Nigeria

We sometimes joke about Nigeria’s situation defying all known models and textbook logic but the truth is that most imported ideas will fail where unique or particular national characteristics are not considered in their implementation. As observed repeatedly, the promises of paradigmatic, (optimistic and oversold?) development plans, feasibility and viability studies are seldom met, often resulting in “white elephant” projects that leave us worse off than when we started.

Discernibly, the creed that faultless technology, employed within the boundaries of sound economic and financial reasoning is sufficient to further the cause of infrastructure development and the dividends therefrom, is simply too limiting for Nigeria. This is because Nigeria’s peculiar complexities and proclivities towards lawlessness may make some universally accepted assumptions about societal norms and order impossible to rely on.

For instance, it is safe to expect that any socio-economic framework developed by Americans or Europeans will assume and take for granted the pursuit of maximum employment for its citizens, the sanctity of the common law and effectiveness of law enforcement. In other words, there is a lot of reliance on societal controls in any form of planning and if anomalies and deviant behaviour such as corruption, intellectual fraud and even self loathing to mention a few of the maladies that we are prone to in Nigeria are not dealt with first, it is unlikely that models that are borrowed from others will ever work for us. These imported plans and frameworks will never work here if we cannot make the same broad assumptions that support their implementation in other countries.

Examples of such absolutes from other cultures that may not be taken for granted in Nigeria are that: A dependable system of law enforcement and justice dispensation is in; a sovereign democracy will often (if not always) work in the best interest of its citizens; and that place to uphold shared societal values and control executive impunity; the legislature, judiciary and executive arms of government should always seek alignment in working together to achieve what is best for the greater good of all (and not a few personal interests) – regardless of partisan persuasion.

Because these and other expectations are valid assumptions in many societies, the parameters in their developmental frameworks and equations are fewer, they bear much simpler relationships with each other and make policy development and implementation straightforward and easier. So, it seems that unless a country addresses some very fundamental “givens” that drive its plans, the labours of their heroes past, present and in future might just be in vain.

Could this be why Nigeria’s many development plans are so disreputably unfruitful?

By taking a look at some of the gaps between the current state and preferred (future) state of our infrastructure, this article will draw some attention to a few of the faulty assumptions that lie at the root of our planning and policy implementation and prescribes some steps that may help narrow the gaps.

What are infrastructural facilities?

The definitions for infrastructural facilities have expanded over time, with the expansion of man’s civilisation, leading to slightly different emphases depending on the field of enquiry, a country’s history and strategic intent: Basic services, without which primary, secondary and tertiary productive activities cannot function (Hirschman, 1958); all public services from law and order through education, public health …to transportation, communications & water supply (Mabogunje, 1974); classified into 3: institutional infrastructure, physical infrastructure, social infrastructure, (Kahn, 1979).

 Hirschman encapsulates the link between infrastructural facilities and economic progress, Mabogunje links them to social order and the society’s well-being and Kahn highlights the relationships between infrastructural facilities, government and the governed (society).

Development, described as “… the conscious action by utilizing in a coordinated way the resources available to a given (political) unit…” (Bernstein, 1978) is the enhancement of an existing situation in order to meet present or future requirements. 

Olayiwola and Adeleye (2005) observed that development requires and “implies the desirability of overcoming deprivation and low quality of rural life”. So, do we lack this desire?

Infrastructure includes the set of tangible or intangible assets – (physical, human, intellectual, moral, legal, financial etc.) that work together to provide services for a particular system, activity or outcome.

If we cannot always rely on our transportation infrastructure to transport people, goods or services from one point to another within the country with maximum efficiency, comfort and minimum risk, it means that all is not well with the system. Similar analogies can be drawn on our energy infrastructure and others.

Some invisible but crucial parts form the foundation of most systems e.g. the intellectual property that is applied in the creation of the service assets and the moral rectitude, education and training of the service professionals. Significant faults in any of these must certainly compromise desired outcomes.

Infrastructure development has been and can be used to address socio-economic challenges and to accelerate the achievement of national objectives- the Americans built their vast interstate highway network during the great depression partly to create work and reduce unemployment amongst their people, the Chinese are currently expanding their infrastructure to contribute towards their desire to manufacture for the developed world and enhance their abilities to access natural resources from the developing world.

The value of any development is enhanced by the intellection of what, when, why and who should benefit from the development effort – the host country or community. This must occur without diffidence. It should be approached deliberately and consciously, to serve the society at large and to meet today’s needs including job creation without adversely affecting the ability to meet tomorrow’s.

Basic infrastructure development is best pursued with a common national /regional vision, devoid of partisan (in)sensitivities and should reflect the prioritisation of the region/country’s shared values. In many countries, infrastructure development may even be delayed until maximum local participation is assured.

Nigeria’s infrastructure development should seek to unlock our internal economic potential, maximize safety and convenience for all as well as generate employment and technical skill acquisition for its largely unemployed and underemployed people.

In our developmental context, the key prerequisites for any sort of useful development are: A thorough and honest comprehension of the current state; the reasoned determination of the desired future state; an understanding of the gaps between these, how and why they exist; the knowledge and resolve to close these gaps; The unabashed pursuit of the greater good for all citizens.

• To be continued

Tunde Sodade, PhD