UFO OKEKE-UZODIKE, the executive director of African Heritage Institution (AfriHeritage), a not-for-profit and independent policy think tank, in this interview with Bunmi Bailey, gives a preview on the fourth cycle of its Business Environment and Competitiveness across the Nigerian States (BECANS) project, and how it will shape Nigeria’s business environment.
What inspired the ‘BECANS’ project and when did you launch the first report?
The first of the BECANS reports was published in 2007. The initial inspiration for that report appears to have been associated closely with the profound involvement of AfriHeritage with the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) and State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (SEEDS) programs.
The nation-building task that the programs and their high ethical and moral values entailed, created a mindset that deplored destitution and poverty, which were so prevalent, encrusted, and socially damaging in Nigeria.
Our staff were linking pervasive underdevelopment with penury; and since the country lacked enough financial resources to push for urgent transformative change, the government must promote and support private enterprise as the single way out of the predicament.
However, they deduced that even that would be impossible unless dedicated efforts are made to ensure that the factors necessary for dynamic entrepreneurship and industry are available, such as roads, electrical power, and enabling policies. Basically, good business environments would be required not only nationally but also locally within each state.
Comparing data from the first to the fourth cycle of the BECANS reports, would you say that the Nigerian business environment improved or declined?
The evidence seems to suggest clearly that the business environment in Nigeria has improved significantly. The issue is not so much whether there has been an improvement but if the changes have been significant enough to make the country sufficiently competitive with other countries.
Sadly, evidence from various assessments such as The World Bank’s ‘Doing Business index’; The World Economic Forum’s ‘Global Competitiveness Index; and the Heritage Foundation and Wall Street Journal’s ‘Index of Economic Freedom’ all suggest that Nigeria has continued to fare poorly.
Their reports from 2009 to 2019 or 2020 all agree and rank Nigeria as one of the worst performers globally in terms of its business environment.
How are you able to get a different evaluation from all these other assessments?
In BECANS IV, all states business environment index was 46.0 percent which is lower than BECANS I score of 48.5 percent and BECANS III score of 50.9 percent, although it was a little higher than BECANS II score of 45.4 percent.
South-South moved from the first position in BECANS III with a score of 53.6 percent to the fifth position in BECANS IV with a score of 43.9 percent. South-East slid from the third position in BECANS III with a score of 51.9 percent to the last position in BECANS IV with a score of 37.9 percent.
The South-West maintained its second position in BECANS IV as it did in BECANS III although with a decreased score. The region scored 52.3 percent in BECANS III against 48.1 percent in BECANS IV.
North-Central moved from the fourth position in BECANS III with a score of 51.6 percent to the first position in BECANS IV with a score of 48.7 percent. North-West followed the same upward movement, taking the 3rd position in BECANS IV with a lower score of 45.4 percent when contrasted with BECANS III where it took the fifth position with a score of 48.8 percent.
North-East joined the trend, taking the fourth position in BECANS IV with a score of 44.4 percent while it recorded 6th position in BECANS III with a score of 46.7 percent.
In general, 40.5 percent of the states, representing 15 states (Anambra, Niger, Plateau, Oyo, Ondo, Lagos, Delta, Kaduna, FCT Abuja, Kano, Enugu, Kwara, Edo, Taraba and Katsina) performed above the national average.
The remaining 59.5 percent representing 22 states (Jigawa, Zamfara, Osun, Ogun, Kogi, Nasarawa, Yobe, Adamawa, Imo, Bayelsa, Rivers, Bauchi, Gombe, Kebbi, Borno, Ekiti, Benue, Abia, Akwa Ibom, Cross-River, Ebonyi and Sokoto) performed below the national average.
What would you say are the key challenges faced by businesses in Nigeria and what are your recommendations?
Several major challenges that businesses face in Nigeria range from lack of infrastructure, poor government support and electricity supplies to bad government policies and endemic lack of adequate security.
There is also the matter of non-competitiveness when compared to many other countries. If enabling environments were better, a much larger percentage of businesses in Nigeria will not only thrive competitively and sustainably but also contribute to economic growth, attract new investments, create jobs, and trigger transformative change and development.
Sadly, many states are struggling with basic policy alignments; they lack sensitivity to the elementary issues that impose exceptionally huge burdens on the poor within their publics.
For instance, many states often fail to harmonise their tax policies and to embed protective umbrellas for individuals and families operating at the survival levels. These are often businesses that do not even qualify for the tag of being “micro” sized.
Typically, this results in multiple taxations and the destabilisation, criminalization, and even ruination of claimed offenders who must struggle on a daily basis to purchase basic food products to feed themselves and their families. In this way, many states impose policies that do more harm than good.
Truly, states need internally generated revenues to carry out formal responsibilities owed to their citizens. But they also have legal and moral responsibilities that obligate them to ensure the safety social welfare and security of the same citizens. Where governments lack the ability to provide citizens with social security or welfare benefits, policies should be put in place that draws clear lines on minimum income levels for each income earner’s tax obligation/ responsibilities.
AfriHeritage was previously known as the African Institute for Applied Economics (AIAE). Why was the name changed in 2013?
The institute’s name was changed because of the need to expand its scope and area of coverage. It had become quite clear that economic growth alone was not a sufficient condition for development.
Transformative change and development often require a simultaneous mix of crucial factors such as economic growth, effective institutions, rule of law and security, etc. With the change, AfriHeritage focuses on issues like governance; social and economic policy research; policy advocacy; training; and networking.
We also provide consultancy services to governments, local and international development agencies/ organisations, and firms/ companies within the private sector.
As one of the top players within the think-tanks and research institutes in Africa, can you tell us a little bit about the activities and roles of the Institute?
The primary mission of AfriHeritage is to provide intellectual leadership in helping Africa think through the emerging regional economic renaissance as the continent repositions firmly toward societies that are democratic, prosperous, and major players in the global economy.
Driven by this mission, it has become and has remained, a leading think tank in Africa over the past two decades. This is exemplified in the institute’s choice of activities and projects. For instance, the work on business environment and issues of competitiveness requires an understanding of, and commitment to, identifying the fundamental drivers of employment creation, poverty reduction, and transformative economic growth and development in society.
Over the years, AfriHeritage has made a direct impact through its contributions to governance policies in Nigeria. For instance, it developed the macroeconomic policy framework that has been serving the Nigerian government.
This is despite rigorous efforts to develop an operational and up-to-date macroeconomic model. The institute was also a key driver in the development of NEEDS and SEEDS which were medium-term intervention strategies (2003-2007).
What are your key projects and their impacts on national growth and development?
Since its inception, the institution has executed over 30 projects at national and international levels with strong local and global partnerships.
Some of these projects are Assessment of State Governance Reforms; Evaluation of Openness and Transparency of Federal Government Budget Process; Restructured Economic Framework for Openness Reform and Macroeconomic Stability; A study on the Socio-economic impact of mobile communications in Nigeria; Benchmarking of Business Environment across Nigeria’s 36 States and FCT (otherwise known as BECANS), amongst others.
These projects contributed and still contribute to the development of transformative policies across Nigeria and the provision of data to enhance evidence-based decision-making.
Read also: Nigeria corruption index ranking in charts
Tell us more about your partners or collaborators, both internally and externally?
In the course of fulfilling our mandate, we have collaborated with several international research and knowledge institutions and networks.
These affiliations enable us to share research information, ensure scientific validation and expert review of technical outputs, and apply cutting-edge research methods and practices. For 10 years (2009-2019), we were part of the Think Tank Initiative of the International Development Research Centre (TTI-IDRC) with headquarters in Ottawa. IDRC’s core funding support to AfriHeritage has impacted positively on our institutional development and sustainability.
In your opinion, what do you foresee as the future of think-tanks in Nigeria?
In Nigeria, unlike in many other parts of the world, private think-tanks get zero funding support from the government. This is the situation no matter how good a think-tank is or how supportive it is to official policies or commitments to good governance imperatives.
It is often quite difficult for private think-tanks (without godfathers) to receive serious invites for consultation from government Ministries, Departments, or Agencies. As I alluded to earlier, that was not the case previously for AfriHeritage.
However, with the proliferation of think-tanks in more recent years, it has become easier for private think-tanks to consult, do projects, or receive significant support from international aid agencies of external governments or intergovernmental organisations.
Despite some official discussions on the possibility of private universities and think-tanks being allowed to access local government funding in Nigeria through the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund), we have seen no formal commitment to such an important extension of standard global practice.
Clearly, the future of think-tanks will remain challenging until key stakeholders such as business leaders, governments, scholars and the general public begin to fully understand and appreciate the importance of think-tanks for social transformation and sustainable development in Nigeria (as in other countries).
QUOTE: Where governments lack the ability to provide citizens with social security or welfare benefits, policies should be put in place that draws clear lines on minimum income levels for each income earner’s tax obligation/ responsibilities
